Do you guys think buerhle will start in the all star game?

 

Halladay and Buehrle stats are a lot a like... but mark is obviously on a better team

To me, it's a tough call. Either one (or Garland for that matter) deserves it. Since Halladay is in the AL East, and the east coast bias in the media is so sickening it's not even funny, I think Halladay will end up getting it.

To me, it's a tough call. Either one (or Garland for that matter) deserves it. Since Halladay is in the AL East, and the east coast bias in the media is so sickening it's not even funny, I think Halladay will end up getting it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The east coast bias works for the Yankees and Red Sox, not the Blue Jays.

Francona has faced Halladay more than he's faced Buehrle. That might help.

 

On the other hand, who knows what Ozzie said about working the guys when Francona called him. That might carry some weight too.

 

Halladay went 9 innings tonight and got a no decision, keeping him on 12 wins. Buehrle got the win, as we all know. I don't think you can go wrong either way.

 

I wouldn't be surprised either to see Bonderman getting the ball, just because of the city (Loaiza got it in Chitown)

GO BUEHRLE! HE SHOULD START!

 

Anyone who thinks halladay should start is a Blue Jay's fan.

 

 

 

Roy Halladay has better stats than Buehrle in almost every f***ing category. Halladay is having he better season and should start the All-Star game. Picking Halladay over Buehrle does not make you any less of a Sox fan and it does not meen you don't love Buehrle.

GO BUEHRLE! HE SHOULD START!

 

Anyone who thinks halladay should start is a Blue Jay's fan.

Roy Halladay has better stats than Buehrle in almost every f***ing category. Halladay is having he better season and should start the All-Star game. Picking Halladay over Buehrle does not make you any less of a Sox fan and it does not meen you don't love Buehrle.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well, it really doesn't matter who any of us think should be starting the All-Star Game. Afterall, Giambi was selected to start over Konerko at the All-Star Game last season and he was hitting .240 while Konerko was on a tear. Konerko didn't even get in. It doesn't go solely by stats and it never has.

Edited June 29, 200520 yr by Jabroni

The east coast bias works for the Yankees and Red Sox, not the Blue Jays.

 

Maybe, but I'm thinking they'll see that the Blue Jays are in the AL East, and the east coast bias will kick in, thus making Halladay the starter. Not that he doesn't deserve it, but something like that will be what pushes him over the top in a very close race between the two.

Maybe, but I'm thinking they'll see that the Blue Jays are in the AL East, and the east coast bias will kick in, thus making Halladay the starter. Not that he doesn't deserve it, but something like that will be what pushes him over the top in a very close race between the two.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I could also consider the Orioles to be in that bias but not the Blue Jays. I don't think they get the same coverage that the Yankees, Red Sox, and Orioles get on ESPN.

I want Halladay to get the nod. Starters usually pitch two or three innings. Let Buerhle get an inning and call it a night.

Being that he's our guy, I hope Buehrle starts. I think it would be a good thing mostly because it would be a large step towards Mark getting the national attention that he should be getting.

 

But Halladay is just as deserving. I won't complain either way.

Being that he's our guy, I hope Buehrle starts.  I think it would be a good thing mostly because it would be a large step towards Mark getting the national attention that he should be getting.

 

But Halladay is just as deserving.  I won't complain either way.

 

my sentiments exactly... well put.

 

Im just glad Mark will be getting his second All-Star appearance.... hopefully the game will be decided this time.

White Sox > Blue Jays therefore, Buehrle > Halladay.

White Sox > Blue Jays therefore, Buehrle > Halladay.

 

Although that is true, doesn't anybody think that Halladay being a former Cy Young winner will factor into the decision?

Although that is true, doesn't anybody think that Halladay being a former Cy Young winner will factor into the decision?

Loaiza is having a great season and deserved the Cy Young that year. The Nats are in 1st place...does that make him an All-Star? In my view, their numbers are too similar and the fact that we have the best record in the league gives him an edge.

Loaiza is having a great season and deserved the Cy Young that year. The Nats are in 1st place...does that make him an All-Star? In my view, their numbers are too similar and the fact that we have the best record in the league gives him an edge.

That's a red herring...Loaiza isn't having a great season this year.

 

Buehlre and Halladay have comparable numbers, so he's suggesting that the previous Cy Young award will count then...only after you get to the point where the candidates have comparable numbers.

But the ASG isn't about preivous performance unless Torre is managing.

 

Loaiza: 3-5, 3.63 ERA, 94.1 IP, 73 K, 28 BB, 1.33 WHIP, 1st Place

 

Not great at all but good numbers. He got extremel unlucky in all his losses.

But the ASG isn't about preivous performance unless Torre is managing.

 

Loaiza: 3-5, 3.63 ERA, 94.1 IP, 73 K, 28 BB, 1.33 WHIP, 1st Place

 

Not great at all but good numbers. He got extremel unlucky in all his losses.

Contreras: 3-4, 4.15 ERA (in the AL), 91 IP, 69 k, 1.25 WHIP, 1st place.

 

Overall, better numbers than Loaiza except for ERA, which probably would be better than Esteban's if he was in the NL (rule of thumb - subtract .94 to convert from AL to NL).

 

Do you think Contreras is an all-star?

Contreras:  3-4, 4.15 ERA (in the AL), 91 IP, 69 k, 1.25 WHIP, 1st place.

 

Overall, better numbers than Loaiza except for ERA, which probably would be better than Esteban's if he was in the NL (rule of thumb - subtract .94 to convert from AL to NL).

No no. The NL is more high scoring this year.

No no.  The NL is more high scoring this year.

It doesn't have to do with how many runs the leagues score, it has to do with the comparitive OPSs of the 7,8,9 hitters in the two leagues. The NL is much weaker.

It doesn't have to do with how many runs the leagues score, it has to do with the comparitive OPSs of the 7,8,9 hitters in the two leagues. The NL is much weaker.

But if the NL is scoring more runs it is harder to pitch against.........

But if the NL is scoring more runs it is harder to pitch against.........

Overall runs scored can be sqewed. If a team like the Rockies give up 13 runs in a game and 33 runs in a series sudenly the NLs runs are going up where they shouldn't be.

Contreras:  3-4, 4.15 ERA (in the AL), 91 IP, 69 k, 1.25 WHIP, 1st place.

 

Overall, better numbers than Loaiza except for ERA, which probably would be better than Esteban's if he was in the NL (rule of thumb - subtract .94 to convert from AL to NL).

 

Do you think Contreras is an all-star?

 

You could also throw out there his baa which was around .200 last I knew...

Overall runs scored can be sqewed. If a team like the Rockies give up 13 runs in a game and 33 runs in a series sudenly the NLs runs are going up where they shouldn't be.

The NL teams have a higher average OPS by #7 hitters (.708 to .704)

The AL teams have a higher average OPS by #8 hitters (.714 to .692)

The AL teams have a higher average OPS by #9 hitters (.684 to .519)

 

Average AL 7-9: .700

Average NL 7-9: .639

 

So you're telling me a .20 average differential for the 7, 8, and 9 hitters is enough to add .94 to an ERA for a league that scores less runs?

Edited June 29, 200520 yr by WHarris1

Cheat said it is closer to .3 of a run difference from al to nl.

 

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Cheat said it is closer to .3 of a run difference from al to nl.

 

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

^^^

that. 9.4 is excessivly high.