Cliff Lee signs with the Philadelphia Phillies

Originally posted by BirdmanJr:
Cole Hamels is not an ace lol

well thought out argument...thanks for contributing to this thread

Originally posted by Knowledge:

Originally posted by BirdmanJr:
Cole Hamels is not an ace lol

well thought out argument...thanks for contributing to this thread

People who arent totally biased understand that Hamels is a top pitcher in the NL. The guy was 4th in WAR for pitchers in the National League, 6th in K's and top 15 in ERA and WHIP.
He would be a #1 on half the teams in the league. He had one off year in 09 but came back strong this past year. I'd take him anyday.

Originally posted by 49erJim:

Originally posted by 49ersMyLife:

Originally posted by Knowledge:
the phils pitching wasnt the reason we got knocked out of the playoffs...it was the hitting..so i think if they were trying to counter the giants they would have went out a grab a few sluggers..They simply signed lee cause hes a great pitcher...nothing more nothing less

That's really not how it works. Having another bat in that line-up wouldn't have mattered.

They signed Lee because they lost and didn't win the WS. Had they won the WS - I doubt they would be shelling out 120 million to add to that rotation.

someone who gets it! Wow thanks for making sense. Knowledge has no clue and I have no idea why he has this post name. The bats went dead due to the Great overpowering awesome pitching of the SF Giants, one or two or 3 more bats or power hitters make no change, that would have folded just like Ryan Howard did (You have to love that last strike out of R Howard hehehe) Thats the reason were saying that the Phills signed Lee, it was the way the SF Giants slapped em in the NLCS. Thats why they did not re-sign Werth. It all makes total sense now. They knew that they need Lee more then a power hitter to win it all in 2011. The Giants did not need any power hitters and won it all. Smart teams jump on opps like this.

I guess English class was never your strong suit.

Originally posted by Ninerjohn:

Originally posted by Knowledge:

Originally posted by BirdmanJr:
Cole Hamels is not an ace lol

well thought out argument...thanks for contributing to this thread

People who arent totally biased understand that Hamels is a top pitcher in the NL. The guy was 4th in WAR for pitchers in the National League, 6th in K's and top 15 in ERA and WHIP.
He would be a #1 on half the teams in the league. He had one off year in 09 but came back strong this past year. I'd take him anyday.

There's a difference between taking someone and calling him an ace.

You could make the same argument for j. Sanchez.

Cole hamels is the fourth best pitched on his team. Would be 3rd, 4th or POSSIBLY 5th if MadBum keeps it up. Just saying.

You can make the argument that blah blah dude had this and that but he hasn't impressed me on the mound since the playoffs in 08

Originally posted by Knowledge:

Originally posted by BirdmanJr:
Cole Hamels is not an ace lol

well thought out argument...thanks for contributing to this thread

because he's not an ace.

He's a great pitcher but you can't put him in the same category of Roy, Ubaldo, Lincecum, Lee, Felix Hernandez etc.

maybe he will be someday

..

Originally posted by skeetskeet:

Originally posted by Ninerjohn:

Originally posted by Knowledge:

Originally posted by BirdmanJr:
Cole Hamels is not an ace lol

well thought out argument...thanks for contributing to this thread

People who arent totally biased understand that Hamels is a top pitcher in the NL. The guy was 4th in WAR for pitchers in the National League, 6th in K's and top 15 in ERA and WHIP.
He would be a #1 on half the teams in the league. He had one off year in 09 but came back strong this past year. I'd take him anyday.

There's a difference between taking someone and calling him an ace.

You could make the same argument for j. Sanchez.

Cole hamels is the fourth best pitched on his team. Would be 3rd, 4th or POSSIBLY 5th if MadBum keeps it up. Just saying.

You can make the argument that blah blah dude had this and that but he hasn't impressed me on the mound since the playoffs in 08

basically..Cain would be #1 on half the teams in the NL also but I don't consider him an ace

Originally posted by skeetskeet:

Originally posted by Ninerjohn:

Originally posted by Knowledge:

Originally posted by BirdmanJr:
Cole Hamels is not an ace lol

well thought out argument...thanks for contributing to this thread

People who arent totally biased understand that Hamels is a top pitcher in the NL. The guy was 4th in WAR for pitchers in the National League, 6th in K's and top 15 in ERA and WHIP.
He would be a #1 on half the teams in the league. He had one off year in 09 but came back strong this past year. I'd take him anyday.

There's a difference between taking someone and calling him an ace.

You could make the same argument for j. Sanchez.

Cole hamels is the fourth best pitched on his team. Would be 3rd, 4th or POSSIBLY 5th if MadBum keeps it up. Just saying.You can make the argument that blah blah dude had this and that but he hasn't impressed me on the mound since the playoffs in 08

So now you are saying that Hamels would "possibly be 5th" on the Giants. Really? WOW. I didn't know that Zito had improved that much. Hamels would be 2nd or 3rd on the Giants staff. When Sanchez can come close to achieving what Cole Hamels has then perhaps he can be in the discussion. As for Bumgarner... let him pitch a full season.

Freaking john... lincecum.. Cain has a higher value than hamels right now, only reason hamels might be more sought after is cuz he's a lefty. But Cain pretty much did what hamels did in 08. He was unhittable. J. Sanchez is VERY comparable to Hamels. Wild lefties. Great potential. Nasty stuff. So based on his success TWO YEARS AGO maybe u put hamels above Sanchez. Madison Bumgarner has all the tools and potential to be a front line guy but obviously Hamels has a better track record but MadBum has a world series ring in his first season and contributed huge in the playoffs. So maybe hamels 4 after Timmy Cain and Sanchez then madbum after hamels...

Where the f**k did u get zito from? You have four above average starters and one mediocre and u bring in another good pitcher u drop the mediocre... so yeah john try again buddy cuz I'm no zito supporter

Originally posted by skeetskeet:
Freaking john... lincecum.. Cain has a higher value than hamels right now, only reason hamels might be more sought after is cuz he's a lefty. But Cain pretty much did what hamels did in 08. He was unhittable. J. Sanchez is VERY comparable to Hamels. Wild lefties. Great potential. Nasty stuff. So based on his success TWO YEARS AGO maybe u put hamels above Sanchez. Madison Bumgarner has all the tools and potential to be a front line guy but obviously Hamels has a better track record but MadBum has a world series ring in his first season and contributed huge in the playoffs. So maybe hamels 4 after Timmy Cain and Sanchez then madbum after hamels...

Where the f**k did u get zito from? You have four above average starters and one mediocre and u bring in another good pitcher u drop the mediocre... so yeah john try again buddy cuz I'm no zito supporter

There is NO way that Sanchez is regarded the same way as Cole Hamels nor has he had the success that Hamels has had. This is not even debatable. There isnt a baseball team in the world that would take Sanchez over Hamels. Hamels is over a year younger and has a lifetime record of 60-45 with a 3.53 era. Compare that to Sanchez with a 34-49 record and a 4.26 era. Not to mention that Sanchez choked in the playoffs while Hamels was THE star of the 2008 World Championship run.

Cain and Hamels are close. There 2010 seasons were almost identical. I do believe that Hamels would have more value because he is lefthanded and more of a strikeout pitcher but its virtually even between the two. You could easily make the argument that Cain is 2 or Hamels would be 2 in that rotation.

Oh by the way your comparison of Sanchez and Hamels as being "wild lefties" is laughable. Sanchez has walked close to 5 batters per 9 innings in his career. Hamels has walked closer to 2 men per 9 (2.4) in his career. He was top 10 in the NL in fewest walks per 9 each year from 2007-2009. 2007 - 4th, 2008- 9th, and 2009 -6th. He was also first and 3rd in WHIP in 08 and 07 which is an impossible achievment for a wild pitcher. Perhaps you need to rethink that stance. LOL

Originally posted by Ninerjohn:

Originally posted by skeetskeet:
Freaking john... lincecum.. Cain has a higher value than hamels right now, only reason hamels might be more sought after is cuz he's a lefty. But Cain pretty much did what hamels did in 08. He was unhittable. J. Sanchez is VERY comparable to Hamels. Wild lefties. Great potential. Nasty stuff. So based on his success TWO YEARS AGO maybe u put hamels above Sanchez. Madison Bumgarner has all the tools and potential to be a front line guy but obviously Hamels has a better track record but MadBum has a world series ring in his first season and contributed huge in the playoffs. So maybe hamels 4 after Timmy Cain and Sanchez then madbum after hamels...

Where the f**k did u get zito from? You have four above average starters and one mediocre and u bring in another good pitcher u drop the mediocre... so yeah john try again buddy cuz I'm no zito supporter

There is NO way that Sanchez is regarded the same way as Cole Hamels nor has he had the success that Hamels has had. This is not even debatable. There isnt a baseball team in the world that would take Sanchez over Hamels. Hamels is over a year younger and has a lifetime record of 60-45 with a 3.53 era. Compare that to Sanchez with a 34-49 record and a 4.26 era. Not to mention that Sanchez choked in the playoffs while Hamels was THE star of the 2008 World Championship run.

Cain and Hamels are close. There 2010 seasons were almost identical. I do believe that Hamels would have more value because he is lefthanded and more of a strikeout pitcher but its virtually even between the two. You could easily make the argument that Cain is 2 or Hamels would be 2 in that rotation.

Oh by the way your comparison of Sanchez and Hamels as being "wild lefties" is laughable. Sanchez has walked close to 5 batters per 9 innings in his career. Hamels has walked closer to 2 men per 9 (2.4) in his career. He was top 10 in the NL in fewest walks per 9 each year from 2007-2009. 2007 - 4th, 2008- 9th, and 2009 -6th. He was also first and 3rd in WHIP in 08 and 07 which is an impossible achievment for a wild pitcher. Perhaps you need to rethink that stance. LOL

Yeah Cain and Hamels are more comparable not Sanchez lol

but they are both 2nd tier and not aces..hope Cain becomes one though

I would say the only way Hamels and Sanchez would be comparable, is for the last 2-3 years you put Hamels on the Giants, and Sanchez on the Phils. I think their Ws and Ls and maybe ERA would mirror each other in actuality.

but that is it.

And Cliff Lee is on borrowed time. His deal he made with the Devil is running out. Befor 3 years ago. No one ever heard his name before.

Just my .02 on him

Originally posted by ninerlifer:
I would say the only way Hamels and Sanchez would be comparable, is for the last 2-3 years you put Hamels on the Giants, and Sanchez on the Phils. I think their Ws and Ls and maybe ERA would mirror each other in actuality.

but that is it.

Maybe but Hamels does pitch in a hitters friendly park while Sanchez pitches in a pretty friendly pitchers park. Listen, I think Sanchez is a very good lefty. I just dont think there is anyway he is in Cole's class.