chadxor wrote:Mack Daddy 281 wrote:chadxor wrote:whatever. hindsight is everything. it's ridiculous you're all acting like clemens should have been considered a lock prior to this year. it's even more insane you're suggesting you expected these numbers
there were too many questions surrounding clemens this season. he wasn't as dominant as, say, randy, which hurt his stock. he also played for a team we knew would be horrible, not to mention there was talk of retirement
TWO years ago he was already written off. forget that? he was simply average two years in a row and one season wasn't going to change my opinion of that
and, oh yeah, he's turnin forty freakin three in under 2 months.
personally, no regrets not picking him up. he always went too high for my tastes and i still feel people are asking unfair value. sure, he's a workhorse, but what if he gets a mild injury? any other pitcher would be out for two-three weeks while clemens would be considering early retirement
Are you talking about 2002, that would be 3 years ago, where he had 13 wins and an ERA over 4, thats the only *down* year I see recently. 2003 he was 17-9 with a 3.91 ERA and 1.21 WHIP. He followed that up with a studly year last year, going 18-4, 2.98 ERA and 1.16 WHIP. So your telling me that somehow, a *bad* year, 3 years ago, followed by 2 good/great years is going to make people write him off.
Yes players start to fade, but he only seems to be getting stronger, at worst if he isn't getting stronger, he is still a horse of a pitcher who delivers. Not sure where you get the "drop off" part, or "drop off trend".
As far as age, Bonds has been going strong minus this year, and he gets drafted even higher, age shouldn't be that big of a factor, Randy Johnson always gets drafted high and he's only a year younger than Clemens. In a redraft, age shouldn't be a big deal when the player has proven there numbers year in and year out.
Basically what i'm trying to say is, I love having Clemens on my team lol.
regardless of what you say, 2002/2003 were significant drop offs from clemen's normal status. it was perfectly logical to consider the possibility that 2004 was somewhat of a fluke since he had just gotten off of two years that were simply average. did he do something tremendously different in preperation for that year? no. well, except for gettin that bangin' (oh lord, did i just use the word bangin'?) vehicle
i'd love having clemens on my team. however, that's not the point; prior to this season it was not out of the question to think that there would be a pretty significant drop off. i was expecting 02/03 for 05, and since i play in keeper leagues, his value was essentially minimal
I do understand what your saying, but IMO i'm just not seeing it. His 2002 was just a average year, BUT he followed that up by getting close to his career avg, he did give up almost a run more still, but down a bit from the previous year, and his WHIP was right on par with his career average. So basically you could say 2002 was more of the fluke year if you really wanted to analyze it before this year started, just based off his improvement from the 02 to 03 season. If there was any doubt that 02 was a fluke year or not, he pitched that great year last year, which should've been enough to show that with his improvement from 02 to 03, and then his 04, he would've been great this year. How great? Well I didn't have a prediction/projection for him coming into the year because I go by the strategy draft bats, and trade for pitching later, so I traded for Clemens AFTER his great start.
But for your situation, yea in a keeper league his value is most defintley minimal and this arguement is useless lol.