Any time you have to preface a statement with "If so and so does so and so for the next 8 years", it's just not a conversation worth having at that point, in my opinion. Maybe in five years it'll be a reasonable discussion, but right now there's more players than you can count who, if they keep their production up for the better part of the next decade, could qualify for this conversation. Most won't.
Humdinger wrote:The 2005 White Sox had the best winning percentage of any team in post-season history--> name me a better team in the history of baseball who had a more dominant playoff?
I'm just saying, given his accomplishments thus far, and another 100-130 wins or so over the next 8-10 years he has to be considered a HOF type player. He obviously isn't there yet, but getting there is easily in the realm of possibility.
I dont see how, I bet he gets good numbers... but would you consider him one of, if not the best pitcher of his time?
my ridiculous scenario: one game on the line who do you pick? Buehrle or... Santana, Halladay, Webb, Clemens, Carpenter, Oswalt, Pedro, Johnson ect... id take over him (over his career on average) how about guys like CC, Lincecum, Haren...idunno. I know
Id put him in the tier below that. Hes a very good player and any team would be glad to have him, but hes not even the top of the top of his generation (much less all time)
thejusman1 wrote:He pitched a great game yesterday. Let him have his moment without exaggerating his accomplishment...
Amen to that. Let him enjoy the moment, and lets not get carried away with it. This is a debate for many years in the future.
That White Sox team was very good, but to say the best ever is definitely getting carried away again. So they dominated the post season, that could have as much to do with there not being much competition that year... Point is, it doesn't even belong in this conversation.