PDA

View Full Version : Mark Buehrle Debate


Rockabilly
07-18-2007, 12:33 PM
I heard on the score the other day that MB is probably the 4th best #1 pitcher in the AL Central and about 20 #1 starters are better than him...

IMO I think Buehrle is in the top 10 of #1 starters


What #1 starters are better than Buehrle if you think he is not in the top 10...

Huisj
07-18-2007, 12:39 PM
So I'm assuming they're considering the other #1 AL Central starters to be Verlander, Sabathia, Santana, and Meche? Being 4th of those isn't the worst thing. I think anyone right now would take Verlander or Santana over just about anyone.

JohnTucker0814
07-18-2007, 12:42 PM
I am a huge Buehrle fan, but here is my list of starters that are better than him...

In the American League

1. Johan Santana
2. Roy Halladay
3. C.C. Sabathia
4. Dan Haren
5. Erik Bedard
6. John Lackey
7. Justin Verlander

In the National League

1. Jake Peavy
2. Brandon Webb
3. Roy Oswalt
4. Chris Carpenter (if healthy)
5. Cole Hamels
6. Carlos Zambrano

I've probably missed 1 or 2 guys that have better overall career stats, but of the 13 guys on this list, I would take any of them ahead of Buehrle on my staff. Although, I'd take Buehrle as my #2 to these guys any day!

You have to admit though, when the team is slipping and we need a big win or a good pitching performance, Mark usually comes through. That is what an ace does for a team. Helps to prevent long losing streaks.

oeo
07-18-2007, 12:53 PM
In the Central, only Santana is better in my eyes. A couple years down the road, Sabathia and Verlander will probably be, but not right now.

balke
07-18-2007, 01:01 PM
I heard on the score the other day that MB is probably the 4th best #1 pitcher in the AL Central and about 20 #1 starters are better than him...

IMO I think Buehrle is in the top 10 of #1 starters


What #1 starters are better than Buehrle if you think he is not in the top 10...

I think the majority of people that say Buehrle isn't a top #1 will compile a list and include a lot of the stud starters who never really are. A lot of NL ERA #'s and K totals. Guys that are always on the DL, or struggling to find consistancy. Headcases and "Stuff". Buehrle just gives results in and out. He's had two bad half seasons, but he played those two halves. A lot of top tier pitchers get in trouble and go on the DL.

The innings he gives, the ERA he produces, and the Wins he collects and his health make him a top 10 starter in my mind. Peavy, Santana, Oswalt, Haren, these are guys I'd take over him without question.

There's older guys who are nearing the end of their careers that he's going to play better than now (Smoltz, Pettitte, Clemens, Mussina, Pedro, Johnson) and young guys who should be better if they progress just a little bit more, or can put together full seasons (King Felix, Kazmir, Verlander, Bonderman, Webb, Hamels, Zambrano).

Then there's a lot of guys who are injured a lot (Colon, Halladay, Mulder, Liriano? Wood, Prior) But they always seem to finish the season getting hurt, or perhaps aren't as consistant year to year as Buehrle.

Then there's guys who I just see him close to or even with and injuries or consistancy is a question (Beckett, Sabathia, Zito etc.) Where there isn't a clear cut "better".

Most people go "meh" cause Buehrle doesn't dominate with K's. He uses his defense, picks guys off, creates double plays, and generally keeps the ball on the ground.



But in the End, I put Buehrle in the top 10 for sure. He's not old, he's produced a great career in a ballpark that doesn't favor pitchers. He's survived the A.L. and provided a lot of special moments for the Sox. Its pretty dumb if you ask me when announcers just write off Buehrle, then they don't name 10 pitchers that are better.

Chicken Dinner
07-18-2007, 01:01 PM
What's the definition of "better"?

Huisj
07-18-2007, 01:07 PM
What's the definition of "better"?

100 mph fastball and strikeouts strikeouts strikeouts! You're only good if you get featured on "That's Nasty" by the Baseball Tonight staff.

TDog
07-18-2007, 01:15 PM
Is this the sort of thing they talk about on sports radio?

In medieval Iceland (if there were baseball), such an insult to one's honor could have started a war between families. One can only imagine the epic saga that would result, with much effusion of blood and a touch of desecration by public urination.

I have evolved to the point where I see no reason to be offended.

voodoochile
07-18-2007, 01:22 PM
Is this the sort of thing they talk about on sports radio?

In medieval Iceland (if there were baseball), such an insult to one's honor could have started a war between families. One can only imagine the epic saga that would result, with much effusion of blood and a touch of desecration by public urination.

I have evolved to the point where I see no reason to be offended.

So you aren't going to fly to Chicago, go to the WSCR host's house and pee on his dog?

If you change your mind, please have someone film it as tastefully as possible, I think we can make BIG bucks! :D:

Sockinchisox
07-18-2007, 01:31 PM
100 mph fastball and strikeouts strikeouts strikeouts! You're only good if you get featured on "That's Nasty" by the Baseball Tonight staff.

Buehrle has been featured on "Thats Nasty" his change up was the focus.

JorgeFabregas
07-18-2007, 01:46 PM
I am a huge Buehrle fan, but here is my list of starters that are better than him...

In the American League

1. Johan Santana
2. Roy Halladay
3. C.C. Sabathia
4. Dan Haren
5. Erik Bedard
6. John Lackey
7. Justin Verlander

In the National League

1. Jake Peavy
2. Brandon Webb
3. Roy Oswalt
4. Chris Carpenter (if healthy)
5. Cole Hamels
6. Carlos Zambrano

I've probably missed 1 or 2 guys that have better overall career stats, but of the 13 guys on this list, I would take any of them ahead of Buehrle on my staff. Although, I'd take Buehrle as my #2 to these guys any day!

You have to admit though, when the team is slipping and we need a big win or a good pitching performance, Mark usually comes through. That is what an ace does for a team. Helps to prevent long losing streaks.
Bedard and Lackey are about on par with Buerhle. Both are having very nice years, but so is MB. Hamels might very well end up better, but a 3.8 ERA in the NL is nothing to write home about. Carpenter has had two serious injuries in the last few years and still has an ERA above 4 despite spending almost half his career in the NL. The rest I don't take issue with. Wang and Kazmir probably deserve some consideration as well.

20 is an exaggeration. He probably places just outside of the top 10 in MLB. He's also having one of the top 5 seasons in the AL.

The Immigrant
07-18-2007, 01:49 PM
Buehrle has a 2.91 ERA even though his bullpen has allowed virtually all inherited runners to score. Not too shabby.

Flight #24
07-18-2007, 01:57 PM
I am a huge Buehrle fan, but here is my list of starters that are better than him...

In the American League

1. Johan Santana
2. Roy Halladay
3. C.C. Sabathia
4. Dan Haren
5. Erik Bedard
6. John Lackey
7. Justin Verlander

In the National League

1. Jake Peavy
2. Brandon Webb
3. Roy Oswalt
4. Chris Carpenter (if healthy)
5. Cole Hamels
6. Carlos Zambrano

I've probably missed 1 or 2 guys that have better overall career stats, but of the 13 guys on this list, I would take any of them ahead of Buehrle on my staff. Although, I'd take Buehrle as my #2 to these guys any day!

You have to admit though, when the team is slipping and we need a big win or a good pitching performance, Mark usually comes through. That is what an ace does for a team. Helps to prevent long losing streaks.

I'd disagree on at least Verlander, Sabathia, Bedard, Carpenter since one of the advantages to a Buehrle is consistency and durability and none of them have shown that (Halladay could also be in that category). They might, esp in the case of Verlander, but not to date.

But that said, even if Buehrle is the 15th best pitcher in baseball, he's still coming at a significant discount.

duke of dorwood
07-18-2007, 01:57 PM
All that matters is that he is OUR best pitcher

TheVulture
07-18-2007, 02:40 PM
I am a huge Buehrle fan, but here is my list of starters that are better than him...

1. Johan Santana - obviously can't argue that one
2. Roy Halladay - less than 150 IP 2 of last 3 years - not close to MB's performance this year, either
3. C.C. Sabathia - normally pitches 180-190 innings a year and has higher career ERA despite MB pitching in tougher park
4. Dan Haren - hard to argue, but MB's more established. Can he keep it up? Probably, but who knows.
5. Erik Bedard - Bedard - 28YO 35 wins... MB - 28YO 104 wins
6. John Lackey - close, I won't argue this one
7. Justin Verlander - I won't argue this one either, other than this guy hasn't shown he can pitch 230 innings a year over a 7 year period.

1. Jake Peavy - this guy's good, but he's not a horse like MB
2. Brandon Webb - hard to argue against Webb*
3. Roy Oswalt - hard to argue this one, too*
4. Chris Carpenter (if healthy) - when healthy*
5. Cole Hamels - hasn't proven himself, isn't putting up Buehrle numbers in the NL either, even though he K's a lot of guys. Maybe a few years from now.
6. Carlos Zambrano - other than he's a headcase, hard to argue*
*Plus, the whole NL/AL thing - can't definitively say any of these guys are any better than MB.

The only pitchers I can definitively agree are better than MB right now are Santana, and probably Haren and Verlander IF they can keep it up. Probably Lackey, Webb, Oswalt, Zambrano, but those guys are all pretty close to MB's level. MB is definitely top 10 or 12 on the list. Peavy's awesome, but not a guy who's shown he's a 34 start 200+ IP a year every year kind of guy.

TheVulture
07-18-2007, 02:45 PM
Oh yeah - Buehrle's on his 8th straight start of 7+ IP and 2 or less ER. There's really not more than a couple of guys having the kind of year he's having this year.

itsnotrequired
07-18-2007, 02:49 PM
Oh yeah - Buehrle's on his 8th straight start of 7+ IP and 2 or less ER. There's really not more than a couple of guys having the kind of year he's having this year.

He keeps the less than 2 ER streak alive but only went 6.1 innings today.

TheVulture
07-18-2007, 02:53 PM
He keeps the less than 2 ER streak alive but only went 6.1 innings today.

Oh. Still, if he was pitching like this for a good team, he'd be at the top of the list for some people, probably.

WhiteSox5187
07-18-2007, 03:08 PM
I think it's fair to put MB in the top ten AL pitchers, it's harder to compare him to the NL pitchers because say MB was pitching for the Dodgers, he'd have a bigger stadium weaker hitters, etc. But I certainly think MB is one of the twenty best pitchers in baseball and is certainly one of the most CONSISTENT pitchers year in and year out.

pearso66
07-18-2007, 05:26 PM
I Heard this same thing mentioned on the score. I don't know if he heard it from the same person, but I heard it from North. Who then went to list the guys in the AL who were better, and said "you don't need to give me a list, I know all of the pitchers", he mentioned a few better than Buehrle, said he'd take Clemens over Buehrle (not me), and couldn't remember if the A's still had the big 3.

Oh, and the best part was the reason he brought this up, Buehrle being outpitched 2-0 to Bedard the other day. You could make the point that he isn't a true #1, but please, come up with a better game to make your point than that one.

ilsox7
07-18-2007, 05:36 PM
As someone who has been adamant that Mark has historically not been a #1, I can easily say that he has pitched like a #1 this year. And I hope he does so for at least 4 1/2 more years.

MISoxfan
07-18-2007, 05:36 PM
On what planet is Sabathia better than Buehrle?

He's outperformed Buehrle in 2 seasons. Beuhrle's beat him in 4, 5 if you count this year. Buehrle is a year older than him however.

And Lackey? His best 2 seasons would be middle of the road seasons for Burls. And he's even older than Buehrle.

Bedard? He has 1 complete season under his belt. He's only made it over 150 innings once in his career. A real workhorse. I guess you could say he has a lot of potential if he wasn't the same age as Mark.

I can tell you love the strikeout, but at such a cost of ERA and durability?

balke
07-18-2007, 05:59 PM
You could make the point that he isn't a true #1, but please, come up with a better game to make your point than that one.

No you really can't come up with that point. People say it, but they don't have any real way of meaning it. Unless you believe there are truly only 5 #1's in baseball, I don't see how Mark isn't a true #1, and I think anyone who says that doesn't know a thing about baseball other than HR's are good, K's are good. In which case, I don't care about thier opinion. Mark is a #1, and I'm thrilled the Sox were able to keep him. I'm even more thrilled I don't have to listen to Sox fans beg for Zambrano all offseason. That guy is a mess, I don't want him or his finger pointing within a metric mile of the Cell.

kittle42
07-18-2007, 06:00 PM
All that matters is that he is OUR best pitcher

Not really. Maybe he should be our second-best pitcher. Actually, if there is a true commitment to winning, maybe next year he will be.

sullythered
07-18-2007, 06:06 PM
People here really seem to undervalue the ability to take the ball every fifth game.

UserNameBlank
07-18-2007, 06:08 PM
1. Johan Santana - obviously can't argue that one
2. Roy Halladay - less than 150 IP 2 of last 3 years - not close to MB's performance this year, either
3. C.C. Sabathia - normally pitches 180-190 innings a year and has higher career ERA despite MB pitching in tougher park
4. Dan Haren - hard to argue, but MB's more established. Can he keep it up? Probably, but who knows.
5. Erik Bedard - Bedard - 28YO 35 wins... MB - 28YO 104 wins
6. John Lackey - close, I won't argue this one
7. Justin Verlander - I won't argue this one either, other than this guy hasn't shown he can pitch 230 innings a year over a 7 year period.

1. Jake Peavy - this guy's good, but he's not a horse like MB
2. Brandon Webb - hard to argue against Webb*
3. Roy Oswalt - hard to argue this one, too*
4. Chris Carpenter (if healthy) - when healthy*
5. Cole Hamels - hasn't proven himself, isn't putting up Buehrle numbers in the NL either, even though he K's a lot of guys. Maybe a few years from now.
6. Carlos Zambrano - other than he's a headcase, hard to argue*
*Plus, the whole NL/AL thing - can't definitively say any of these guys are any better than MB.

The only pitchers I can definitively agree are better than MB right now are Santana, and probably Haren and Verlander IF they can keep it up. Probably Lackey, Webb, Oswalt, Zambrano, but those guys are all pretty close to MB's level. MB is definitely top 10 or 12 on the list. Peavy's awesome, but not a guy who's shown he's a 34 start 200+ IP a year every year kind of guy.
I agree with this list, but I think Mark over his career will outlast most, if not all, of these other pitchers. Webb, Santana, and Haren could have great careers but everyone else I'd bet either gets hurt or has at least 3-4 crappy seasons.

Mark will get his respect 8-10 years from now, but until then he'll just be another lefty soft-tosser who offers nothing special in the eyes of many. Of course, 8-10 years from now there will be another list of pitchers with great stuff who are labeled "better" primarily because of 2 or 3 very good to great seasons. There are always these hot shot young pitchers, but the ones who do their thing over a long period of time (Clemens, Pedro, Nolan Ryan, etc.) are very, very, very hard to come by and almost always find their way into Cooperstown.

MISoxfan
07-18-2007, 06:09 PM
Not really. Maybe he should be our second-best pitcher. Actually, if there is a true commitment to winning, maybe next year he will be.

Lets fix our actual problems instead?

balke
07-18-2007, 06:17 PM
Not really. Maybe he should be our second-best pitcher. Actually, if there is a true commitment to winning, maybe next year he will be.

Hahaha. Yeah, Santana and Buehrle in the same rotation. We aren't committed to winning otherwise. :redneck

Frontman
07-18-2007, 06:36 PM
In the AL Central, I'd but Santana over Buehrle; and that's it. Verlander/Sabathia I'd put on about the same level. If I had to decide, I'd pick Johan Santana over Mark, but that would be it.

pearso66
07-18-2007, 06:37 PM
No you really can't come up with that point. People say it, but they don't have any real way of meaning it. Unless you believe there are truly only 5 #1's in baseball, I don't see how Mark isn't a true #1, and I think anyone who says that doesn't know a thing about baseball other than HR's are good, K's are good. In which case, I don't care about thier opinion. Mark is a #1, and I'm thrilled the Sox were able to keep him. I'm even more thrilled I don't have to listen to Sox fans beg for Zambrano all offseason. That guy is a mess, I don't want him or his finger pointing within a metric mile of the Cell.


I guess I should have clarified. I think that Buehrle is a #1, but if he was going to try to come up with why he wasn't a 1, that was the wrong game to do it.

Brian26
07-18-2007, 07:14 PM
I heard on the score the other day that MB is probably the 4th best #1 pitcher in the AL Central and about 20 #1 starters are better than him...


This is why I don't listen to sports talk radio.

So let me get this straight. For a month, their story was about the Sox being cheapskates and not signing Buehrle, who was going to break the bank. All they did was take callers complaining about the situation.

So now that the Sox came up with the money and the story has a happy ending, the mediots have to start a call-in show about how Buehrle isn't that good.

Classic.

Daver
07-18-2007, 07:42 PM
Mark is not a #1 anyway, Contraes started opening day, and that is the only time the rotation ranking means a damn thing anyway.

AnkleSox
07-18-2007, 08:35 PM
When mediots compare Buehrle to the other 4 AL Central number 1s all that needs to be said is that he has a ring and the others do not.

ilsox7
07-18-2007, 08:38 PM
When mediots compare Buehrle to the other 4 AL Central number 1s all that needs to be said is that he has a ring and the others do not.

That really has nothing to do with this debate.

WhiteSox5187
07-19-2007, 12:54 PM
Mark is not a #1 anyway, Contraes started opening day, and that is the only time the rotation ranking means a damn thing anyway.
Playoffs matter a lot too.

JB98
07-19-2007, 01:47 PM
ESPN commentators stated last night that the Twins have only scored 13 runs total during Santana's seven losses.

Well, guess how many runs the Sox have scored in Buehrle's five losses: Six. Count 'em: Six. In three of Mark's losses, he allowed just two runs. Two of those three were complete games.

You can debate whether Mark is a No. 1 until the cows come home, but I'll tell you this: He would be a Cy Young candidate this season if he were not pitching for a horse**** White Sox team.