August 19, 200818 yr I'm bored sitting in the airport for a while so I'm going to post the Minor League and first season stats of Volquez, Cueto, Smoltz, Maddux and Glavine for debate. Minors W L ERA K's BB H9 HR9 BB9 K9 WHIP 29-15 3.28 358 82 7.76 0.62 2.12 9.26 1.10 20-26 3.62 251 166 8.32 0.81 4.06 6.14 1.38 21-25 3.94 305 165 8.23 0.73 3.53 6.53 1.31 36-27 3.72 560 213 7.32 0.86 3.50 9.21 1.20 23-6 2.65 184 98 7.55 0.21 2.89 5.43 1.16 It's very obvious that all the pitchers are comparable in their minor league careers. First full season W L ERA K's BB H9 HR9 BB9 K9 WHIP 8-11 4.90 136 53 9.25 1.60 3.28 8.44 1.39 7-17 4.56 84 63 9.26 0.55 2.90 3.87 1.35 12-11 2.94 168 72 6.92 0.65 3.12 7.27 1.12 15-5 2.73 150 70 7.60 0.59 4.15 8.90 1.31 6-14 5.61 101 74 10.47 0.98 4.28 5.84 1.64 Once again pretty comparable for the most part. It's just laughable that you all are saying they are not. Because obviously they are. Just look at the numbers.
August 19, 200818 yr Author Who had the first season of 12-5 and 2.73? Its currently going on as we speak.
August 19, 200818 yr Its currently going on as we speak. Cueto is not 12-5, and his ERA isn't close to 2.73
August 19, 200818 yr Those are first full seasons. Volquez had 17 ML starts prior to this year. I don't see how in the world you can try, and use his stats from this year, and compare them to Maddux, Glavine or Smoltz's first year. For the record, Volquez is 15-5
August 19, 200818 yr Author Volquez had 17 ML starts prior to this year. I don't see how in the world you can try, and use his stats from this year, and compare them to Maddux, Glavine or Smoltz's first year. For the record, Volquez is 15-5 Because its his first full year, and those are the stats I put.
August 19, 200818 yr Author Volquez had 17 ML starts prior to this year. I don't see how in the world you can try, and use his stats from this year, and compare them to Maddux, Glavine or Smoltz's first year. For the record, Volquez is 15-5 Smoltz had 12 starts before his first full year, Glavine had 9 and Maddux had 5. Not really much of a difference anyway.
August 19, 200818 yr Because its his first full year, and those are the stats I put. He's pitched enough innings pitched from previous years that he doesn't qualify as a rookie. Therefore I don't think anyone considers this is first year.
August 19, 200818 yr Author He's pitched enough innings pitched from previous years that he doesn't qualify as a rookie. Therefore I don't think anyone considers this is first year. Well that would make Smoltz' first year look a lot worse too as he is in the same boat.
August 19, 200818 yr Author You all have to remember, I never once said Volquez and Cueto would have the same careers as The big 3. I simply stated that at this point they have equal potential to reach the same success. By looking at the numbers, thats very obvious.
August 19, 200818 yr What we all witnessed with Glavine, Smoltz and Maddux is something we might never see again. I'm not even talking about all the division titles in a row, just the unbelievable staff that they made up for that period of time. I don't believe there has ever been a team that has 3 members of a starting rotation go in the HOF and likely 1st ballot at that. While that doesn't mean Volquez, Cueto won't have great careers, it's not fair to them to compare them to the big 3. Plus the big 3 had a heck of a team around them, a Hall of Fame manager and one of the great GM's of all time. You mix all that together and we saw the success they had. It would be great to see the Reds build up a solid and consistent starting rotation, but we also know how long it's been since that happened.
August 19, 200818 yr Author What we all witnessed with Glavine, Smoltz and Maddux is something we might never see again. I'm not even talking about all the division titles in a row, just the unbelievable staff that they made up for that period of time. I don't believe there has ever been a team that has 3 members of a starting rotation go in the HOF and likely 1st ballot at that. While that doesn't mean Volquez, Cueto won't have great careers, it's not fair to them to compare them to the big 3. Plus the big 3 had a heck of a team around them, a Hall of Fame manager and one of the great GM's of all time. You mix all that together and we saw the success they had. It would be great to see the Reds build up a solid and consistent starting rotation, but we also know how long it's been since that happened. That's why I'm taking such heat for even mentioning them in the same breath. People love the Big 3. Its not unthinkable that two pitchers on the same team may be as good as them one day.
August 19, 200818 yr That's why I'm taking such heat for even mentioning them in the same breath. People love the Big 3. Its not unthinkable that two pitchers on the same team may be as good as them one day. It's very much unthinkable. Pitching today is WAY different than it was back in the early 90's. Pitchers were more durable, pitched longer and a lot of other factors took place. No pitchers will ever compare to Smoltz, Glavine, & Maddux..It's as simple as that.
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.