Cliff Lee

[Dahoss]

Did PG1985 steal Uncly's log in? I know Uncly isn't saying the best ever, she's saying one of. But I agree with Slotdirt, I have already heard from three friends of mine who are Phillies fans that said it's the best ever.

What is the rush to proclaim things the best ever nowadays?

[horseofcourse]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

when you root for a team, the only thing that matters is championships. I dont think that means individual accomplishments dont mean anything, they are nice. Obviously, because Halladay was stuck on the Blue Jays 95% of his career & didnt get a ring, doesnt mean that he hasnt had a HOF career to this point.

But I'd rather have a WS 2010 ring than a 2010 cy young award (Halladay)... as a fan.. any day. I would bet that Halladay would trade his award for a ring also.

I'm a Cleveland fan. Championships? Really? I am thrilled Lee signed with Philly. Everything I read was that he was gonna take the most money, period. The union is not gonna be happy he did this, but I think it is outstanding he shoved it in NY's face. Outstanding.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by Dahoss

Did PG1985 steal Uncly's log in? I know Uncly isn't saying the best ever, she's saying one of. But I agree with Slotdirt, I have already heard from three friends of mine who are Phillies fans that said it's the best ever.

What is the rush to proclaim things the best ever nowadays?

slot dirt started it

honestly I really wanted to argue the Braves thing & have been talking modern history on paper. I dont know a ton about pre 80's baseball & I know there have been better rotations in the complete history of MLB.

the next few years will work themselves out... I'm extremely happy to be in the spot we are in though.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by horseofcourse

I'm a Cleveland fan. Championships? Really? I am thrilled Lee signed with Philly. Everything I read was that he was gonna take the most money, period. The union is not gonna be happy he did this, but I think it is outstanding he shoved it in NY's face. Outstanding.

I'm a Philly sports fan who was born in 1983... I share your pain and praise a higher power for 2008.

[MaTH716]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

werent you one of the guys busting my balls about my McNabb opinion?

5 NFC championship appearances... 0 super bowls?

interesting..

What was your opinion? I think the guy was a warrior with the Birds who never had any weapons. Look what happened when he finally got a reciever, they went to the Super Bowl.

But refresh my memory.

[horseofcourse]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

Halladay and Let Timmy Smoke are a wash

Lee > Cain ( I think Cain is way better than Sanchez)

Hamels & Oswalt > Sanchez and Bumgardner (sp?)


but Giants have a great rotation, and any of those guys can certainly shut down any team on any night... proven in the playoffs.

As for what rotation would be better in 2018? Yeah I'll go with Giants.

I'd take the Phils rotation without question, but the Giant fan has an argument. They had an under 2 ERA in September and still took it to the last day against the Padres last year. That's how bad the offense they carried was. And in postseason they did it very, very well. Sanchez was best in the league in hits per 9 innings last year. Bumgarner is intriguing.

[Bigsmc]

Originally Posted by Dahoss

Did PG1985 steal Uncly's log in? I know Uncly isn't saying the best ever, she's saying one of. But I agree with Slotdirt, I have already heard from three friends of mine who are Phillies fans that said it's the best ever.

What is the rush to proclaim things the best ever nowadays?

How ironic to read this on a horsey board, of all places.

[horseofcourse]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

I'm a Philly sports fan who was born in 1983... I share your pain and praise a higher power for 2008.

I was born long before you, and I'm old enough to remember the Broad Street Bullies (almost!), the '80 Phils, the early '80s Sixer team that won it all, so to me Phlly is a championship city machine comparitively!

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by MaTH716

What was your opinion? I think the guy was a warrior with the Birds who never had any weapons. Look what happened when he finally got a reciever, they went to the Super Bowl.

But refresh my memory.

you thought i was crazy for being thrilled we traded McNabb and thinking we'll be better with out him.

Granted the whole Mike Vick thing is different than me talking about Kolb... but I'll still take Kolb over McNabb any day of the week, and twice on Sundays... and so would every GM in football (especially the redskins)

I would bet lots of $$ that if McNabb was the qb, we would have lost our past two games. With McNabb, you know the team isnt going to come back. He was a very good qb up until 2005. ups and downs since then.. and overrated. but he is certainly someone you do not want to count on come crunch time, which is why we never got a SB. We had plenty of opportunities against the Pats.

I mean, the Skins benched him with 2 mins left and a 1 possession game.. for Rex Grossman. If that doesnt make my case than nothing will.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by MaTH716

What was your opinion? I think the guy was a warrior with the Birds who never had any weapons. Look what happened when he finally got a reciever, they went to the Super Bowl.

But refresh my memory.

and i very much disagree with the weapons thing.

I'll take a stud O-line (which the eagles had) over a top WR every time.

B-West was one of the top weapons in football. We usually had a solid TE also. and a consistantly top 5 Defense.

The one thing I would have liked to see though, is Reid taking the ball out of McNabb's hands and running the ball a lot more. I'd be interested in seeing how that would have changed things, if I had a crystal ball or something.

[RockHardTen1985]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

don't be a fucl<wad.

Maybe if Yankee fans wouldnt have spit on his wife it could have been a different story.

Halladay, Lee, Hamels, & Oswalt. doesnt get much better than that.

Your right, your clearly the best now. Lets see them live up to it. They should be 1-5 to win the next 3 World Series Championships.
I doubt it though....

[MaTH716]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

you thought i was crazy for being thrilled we traded McNabb and thinking we'll be better with out him.

Granted the whole Mike Vick thing is different than me talking about Kolb... but I'll still take Kolb over McNabb any day of the week, and twice on Sundays... and so would every GM in football (especially the redskins)

I would bet lots of $$ that if McNabb was the qb, we would have lost our past two games. With McNabb, you know the team isnt going to come back. He was a very good qb up until 2005. ups and downs since then.. and overrated. but he is certainly someone you do not want to count on come crunch time, which is why we never got a SB. We had plenty of opportunities against the Pats.

I mean, the Skins benched him with 2 mins left and a 1 possession game.. for Rex Grossman. If that doesnt make my case than nothing will.

My argument was based on McNabb vs Kolb, and from what I remember Kolb did struggle a bit in his short time as QB. Obviously no one could have predicted Michael Vick playing at such a high level and having the sucess that he has had. But, you do have to admit that McNabb never had these types of weapons in all his years there. I don't know if they would be 9-4, but I believe that McNabb would have this team in playoff contention as well. I don't take any stock into the Grossman situation because I believe that Mike Shannahan isn't the genius that many people thinks he is.

[RockHardTen1985]

Originally Posted by Bigsmc

How ironic to read this on a horsey board, of all places.

He cant keep me off his mind, even in this time of being ignored.
I know it hurts him.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by MaTH716

My argument was based on McNabb vs Kolb, and from what I remember Kolb did struggle a bit in his short time as QB. Obviously no one could have predicted Michael Vick playing at such a high level and having the sucess that he has had. But, you do have to admit that McNabb never had these types of weapons in all his years there. I don't know if they would be 9-4, but I believe that McNabb would have this team in playoff contention as well. I don't take any stock into the Grossman situation because I believe that Mike Shannahan isn't the genius that many people thinks he is.

with our O-line the way it is, McNabb would be lucky to be 7-6 with this team. Our defense gives up a lot of points. McNabb doesnt have 1/4 the mobility that Vick has (nobody does... McNabb used to be mobile, but for some stupid reason he decided to become a pocket qb) I highly doubt we make the playoffs with McNabb at QB.

Also, we probably dont make the playoffs with Kolb, soley based on our O-line, not Kolbs play.

I disagree with the weapons thing. WR's arent the only weapons on a football team:

McNabb had a hugely better O-line.. much better defense.. RB is a wash.. TE is a wash, WR's were much worse.

Vick has better WR's... rb wash, te wash, o-line sucks, defense is average at best.

Kolb has started and finished 5 games in his career... and has been named the NFC offensive player of the week twice. He had a 133 passer rating against the Falcons, and played very solid against the 49ers. Titans game was rough. Green bay is dumb to go by.. he didnt have more than .2 seconds before the D was all over him, and people forget that they were running Vick in every other play. Kolb actually played only like 60% of the offensive snaps before he was concussed by Clay Matthews. One thing I can say with conviction, a two QB system of running guys in and out does not work. Vick sucked that first half too. Its not easy being the qb and istead of getting 3 downs, you start with 2nd and 13.

I read reports where 12-13 teams tried to get Kolb this past off season. Lots of them offered #1 picks... Eagles were only going to trade him for two 1st round picks, which nobody offered. barely anyone inquired about McNabb.. we had to give him to a division rival for goodness sakes!

Kolb has a 64% completion rating & 1,575 yards in his 5 starts & finishes the past two years. Thing is, he throws too many interceptions (tho the # is inflated by having two hail marys picked off). He needs experience. He also doesnt have incredible arm strength. Its not bad, and its certainly not as bad as some people make it out to be, but he has a tough time when the wind is blowing strong. Mike Vick is the better player, but whoever ends up with Kolb is getting a heck of a player. Unlike what the Skins got with McNabb.

[slotdirt]

Oh boy, now we're moving on to the Eagles. We all know antitrust's opinion of McNabb. I'll pass on that argument.

If Cole Hamels/Oswalt's 2011 season is better than Neagle's 1997 season (20-5, 4.1 WAR), Avery's 1993 season (18-6, 4.0 WAR), Kevin Millwood's 1999 season (18-7, 5.7 WAR), or any of the 1971 Baltimore Orioles (four starters with 20+ wins, 11, 18, 20, 21 CG, 12 combined CG SO, etc.), then maybe we can talk about 2011 Phillies being one of the all-time best rotations.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by slotdirt

Oh boy, now we're moving on to the Eagles. We all know antitrust's opinion of McNabb. I'll pass on that argument.

If Cole Hamels/Oswalt's 2011 season is better than Neagle's 1997 season (20-5, 4.1 WAR), Avery's 1993 season (18-6, 4.0 WAR), Kevin Millwood's 1999 season (18-7, 5.7 WAR), or any of the 1971 Baltimore Orioles (four starters with 20+ wins, 11, 18, 20, 21 CG, 12 combined CG SO, etc.), then maybe we can talk about 2011 Phillies being one of the all-time best rotations.

way to pick and choose those years.

and comparing a 5 man rotation to the 71 4 man rotation is pretty darn useless, as my 4 will have 33 combined less starts.... but you probably knew that..

you cannot judge it off wins and losses and it be a true reflection of how a pitcher pitched... but you know that also.

We can base it off WAR and ERA and strikeout to walk ratio.

You know how many times a Phillies pitcher went 7-9 innings and lost 2-1, or 1-0? Wins & losses arent always reflective of a pitcher. Take King Felix for example.

also eliminating the Eagles from the whole picture.. McNabb seems to be proving my points pretty darn well. Though I will say I watched in disbelief last week when the Skins and Low Throw actually scored a TD with less than a minute left.

[Scav]

Anyone else think that the Yankees were just a pawn in this bidding war. Pretty awesome if you ask me.

The one thing I will say about that rotation is that it is built for the regular season, and both Halladay and Lee should come into the playoffs ultra fresh. If you have to face Halladay and Lee guaranteed twice in a 7 game series, any team is in trouble.

[MaTH716]

Originally Posted by Scav

Anyone else think that the Yankees were just a pawn in this bidding war. Pretty awesome if you ask me.

The one thing I will say about that rotation is that it is built for the regular season, and both Halladay and Lee should come into the playoffs ultra fresh. If you have to face Halladay and Lee guaranteed twice in a 7 game series, any team is in trouble.

I don't think you can say that they were a pawn based on him taking less money and a shorter deal.

[Scav]

Originally Posted by MaTH716

I don't think you can say that they were a pawn based on him taking less money and a shorter deal.

I don't think he was ever going there. I think he was there just to drive up the deals from the other two.

[slotdirt]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

way to pick and choose those years.

and comparing a 5 man rotation to the 71 4 man rotation is pretty darn useless, as my 4 will have 33 combined less starts.... but you probably knew that..

you cannot judge it off wins and losses and it be a true reflection of how a pitcher pitched... but you know that also.

We can base it off WAR and ERA and strikeout to walk ratio.

You know how many times a Phillies pitcher went 7-9 innings and lost 2-1, or 1-0? Wins & losses arent always reflective of a pitcher. Take King Felix for example.

also eliminating the Eagles from the whole picture.. McNabb seems to be proving my points pretty darn well. Though I will say I watched in disbelief last week when the Skins and Low Throw actually scored a TD with less than a minute left.

When one is deciding the "best rotation ever," isn't one essentially picking the best rotation for THAT season alone? So how could I possibly be picking and choosing when picking a 4th starter's best year - given that the other three are named Smoltz, Glavine, and Maddux - to determine how the 90's Braves fall into the "best rotation ever" conversation?

Regardless, the Phillies 2011 rotation is going to have to do something pretty special to break into this conversation. On paper, they don't match up to the 60's Dodgers, 90's Braves, 70's Orioles, or even the 20's Yankees, but the actual season will obviously tell the tale.