I like Jayson Stark and I really like Roy Halladay (I’ve spent many first round fantasy picks on Halladay over the past several years), but I think Stark really went overboard in his latest ESPN.com column.
In the column, which discusses the recent trade of Halladay to the Phillies, Stark had this to say about the former Cy Young winner:
He has been, unquestionably, the best starting pitcher in baseball for the last eight seasons.
I don’t necessarily disagree with Stark about Halladay, but to say that he’s been “unquestionably” the best is grossly overstating the case. When I read this, the first name I thought of was Johan Santana. Here are their numbers from 2002-2009:
Halladay: 130-59, 3.13 ERA, 1260 K, 1710 IP, 1.131 WHIP, 4.10 K/BB, 144 ERA+
Santana: 119-57, 2.89 ERA, 1641 K, 1580 IP, 1.064 WHIP, 4.07 K/BB, 153 ERA+
At first glance, it looks like Santana’s been the better pitcher, although it’s very close and Halladay’s extra 130 innings may be enough to put him ahead. Either way, I think it’s pretty obvious that Halladay is not “unquestionably” the best starting pitcher* of the last eight years.
*It may be possible that Stark is getting cute here, since Santana spent parts of the 2002 and 2003 seasons in the bullpen.
Tags: ERA+, ESPN, Jayson Stark, johan santana, Philadelphia Phillies, Roy Halladay, WHIP
(4.89 out of 5)
I think Halladay’s extra innings give him the edge. 130 is a lot of innings – think how many seasons it would take someone like Carl Pavano to put up 130 innings!
my pedro cheerleading knows no ends…so while the IP takes him down a notch (almost 250 less innings than halladay), check out pedro’s other 2000-2009 stats: 152 ERA+, 1620 Ks, 4.63 K/BB, 1.036 WHIP, 1 cy young.
or even Randy Johnson? 3 cy youngs, 137 ERA+, 2182 Ks!!!, 1.114 WHIP, 4.51 K/BB, and 175 MORE innings than Halladay.
Yeah, if it was the whole decade, I would probably choose Pedro or Randy Johnson. I guess Stark wanted to say that Halladay was the best so he had to arbitrarily cherry-pick 2002-2009, rather than use the entire decade.