Thread: Baseball 2011
View Single Post
  #23  
Old 03-04-2011
shadows's Avatar
shadows shadows is offline
Dark Overlord
  
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,408
shadows has much to be proud ofshadows has much to be proud ofshadows has much to be proud ofshadows has much to be proud ofshadows has much to be proud ofshadows has much to be proud ofshadows has much to be proud ofshadows has much to be proud ofshadows has much to be proud ofshadows has much to be proud of
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by smc View Post
I'm getting tired of hearing about the Phillies pitching rotation for 2011 and the speculation that it might be the greatest in the history of baseball. I was thinking about this today when I was discussing baseball with a colleague. Despite the hyperbole and the frequent claims by the baseball "talking heads" on ESPN, NESN, etc., that Halliday et al. are greater than the 1969 Orioles rotation, I've decided I think this is crap. Here's why:

1. We haven't seen this rotation go through a year together -- that's the obvious reason.

2. The Orioles rotation, back in the 4-man days, were pitchers who expected to go 9 innings every time they pitched. With the exception of Halliday, none of the Phillies will be routinely going more than 6 or 7!

So, before the season starts, isn't it a bit ridiculous to anoint the Phillies when in 1969 Jim Palmer, Mike Cuellar, Pat Dobson, and Dave McNally became the only staff other than the 1920 Chicago White Sox with a quartet of 20-game winners?

My baseball fan friends, what think ye?
I'll wait and see how they do during the season before I give them that label. Heck, look at the Cardinal rotation now. It was supposed to be pretty strong and now it's looking pretty weak(they lose Adam Wainwright for the season, and Chris Carpenter for at least a start).
Reply With Quote