[besson3c]

I'm still shaken by this... Wow!

I think part of my emotional state is explained by my reading this Sports Illustrated article written before the season began:

Why is baseball's best pitcher also the hardest worker in - 04.05.10 - SI Vault

This gets into Roy Halladay's personal life story, his near suicide, his demotion, his wife, his work ethic and perseverance and a bunch of other stuff - it left an impact on me. Then, to see the guy's lifelong dream realized in a no-hitter in his post season debut is just crazy.

Seriously, the article and story here is movie worthy even if you don't care about baseball at all, it's such a cool success story and an inspirational piece about hard work and dreams. Maybe the article is greatly dramatized, but...

Does anybody know somebody who was at today's game? Did you watch it on TV? Any Philly fans here?

[Shaddim]

Wow, one walk away from two perfect games in the same season. That's pretty damned amazing.

[ShortcutToMoncton]

Wait until he returns to Toronto. He's a god there. Stuck on a mediocre team in the best division in baseball and was still a machine every season. Every Jays fan knew he would dominate in Philly.

greg

[Dork.]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

Wow, one walk away from two perfect games in the same season. That's pretty damned amazing.

To put that in perspective, The Mets have zero no-hitters in 7,806 regular season games (and 70-ish post-season games) in their history (I counted!). And they've had some excellent pitchers over the years.

Halladay has two in 34 starts this year.

I want to go to the zoo with him.

[besson3c]

I think you can make a good argument for Halladay being the pitcher of the decade (2001-2010)

[rickey939]

Rickey is very impressed.

[besson3c]

Who else would you put as pitcher of the decade? Johan Santana would be in there, although he has pitched in 40 fewer games and about 200 fewer innings. Tim Hudson is a candidate too. Roger Clemens and Pedro Martinez haven't pitched much recently, nor has Greg Maddux.

However, you still have to factor in the fact that Santana pitched for several of those years in the weak AL Central and Hudson in the NL while Halladay put up his numbers in the AL East.

[besson3c]

Rickey, did you read the Sports Illustrated article, posted above?

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton 

Wait until he returns to Toronto. He's a god there. Stuck on a mediocre team in the best division in baseball and was still a machine every season. Every Jays fan knew he would dominate in Philly.

greg

It's too bad so few people knew much about him prior to this year, although I suppose you could make the some argument that Jose Bautista is not getting the attention he deserves either.

Check out Jose Bautista's 2009 numbers and compare them to his 2010... You'll flip at the difference!

http://www.baseball-reference.com/pl...autijo02.shtml

[JMan09]

That was a great article. I've heard a little about him the past few years, being a Yankees fan and keeping up with that division. About time he's on a good team that can put his talent to good use. He's got to be the pitcher of the decade, for dominating for that long. Another dominating pitcher for this time frame is Mariano Rivera as a closer.

[Dork.]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Who else would you put as pitcher of the decade? Johan Santana would be in there, although he has pitched in 40 fewer games and about 200 fewer innings. Tim Hudson is a candidate too. Roger Clemens and Pedro Martinez haven't pitched much recently, nor has Greg Maddux.

However, you still have to factor in the fact that Santana pitched for several of those years in the weak AL Central and Hudson in the NL while Halladay put up his numbers in the AL East.

When does the decade start? If you are counting decades from 2000-2009, then Halladay's tremendous year this year doesn't count, and Roger and Pedro have one more huge year to back them up.

I found this, which puts Johan on top, followed by Randy Johnson (remember him?), Oswalt, Pedro, then Halladay. And I forgot how dominant Johnson was until I remembered that he basically owned the NL CY Young award for the first few years of the decade. Even though the Mets always seemed to hit him well, I would probably put him ahead of both Johan and Halladay for that span.

(And call Halladay "Doc" all you want, but to me, there's only one Doc.)

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Dork. 

When does the decade start? If you are counting decades from 2000-2009, then Halladay's tremendous year this year doesn't count, and Roger and Pedro have one more huge year to back them up.

I found this, which puts Johan on top, followed by Randy Johnson (remember him?), Oswalt, Pedro, then Halladay. And I forgot how dominant Johnson was until I remembered that he basically owned the NL CY Young award for the first few years of the decade. Even though the Mets always seemed to hit him well, I would probably put him ahead of both Johan and Halladay for that span.

(And call Halladay "Doc" all you want, but to me, there's only one Doc.)

I think it depends on how you compile these numbers.

If you look at best numbers regardless of total number of years and innings pitched or best pitchers that happened to pitch during this time frame (even if this time frame did not represent them at their peak), the pitchers listed on this page make sense. However, I was counting this decade to be 2001-2010 and the best specific numbers through this decade. Johan Santana I'll give you, but Randy Johnson's numbers after 2005 are a little more human (although his numbers prior and in the 1990s were crazy, so I'm not taking anything away from him). Pedro Martinez - same sort of thing. Oswalt and Santana are a little more comparable, but I think you have to somehow modify these numbers to account for their fewer innings and weaker divisions.

Obviously the manner in which you would skew these numbers and the issue of whether they should be skewed at all is a matter of debate, but this is just my bias.

At any rate, all of these pitchers are bad ass!

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by JMan09 

That was a great article. I've heard a little about him the past few years, being a Yankees fan and keeping up with that division. About time he's on a good team that can put his talent to good use. He's got to be the pitcher of the decade, for dominating for that long. Another dominating pitcher for this time frame is Mariano Rivera as a closer.

Yes, Rivera is definitely in the same class as well. I guess I should have said that I think that Halladay is the best starting pitcher of this decade, cause it's hard to compare the two of them!

[ShortcutToMoncton]

"Best-of" lists definitely underestimate the division Halladay's been in. The Yankees and Red Sox teams over the past decade have consistently been amongst the greatest teams of all time (as much as it pains me to say it).

I think every Jays fan felt it was a given that barring injury Halladay would go for the Cy Young in Philly. It was predictable. He would probably have 4 or 5 Cy Youngs at this point had he been anywhere but the AL East.

(Wild speculation I know, but I think well-founded nonetheless.)

greg

[Jim Paradise]

As a Jays fan and someone who always has appreciated pitching more than other baseball positions, I'm really happy to see Halladay achieve this!

[Dork.]

Bill James says that Tim Lincecum's 15-K 2-hitter was better then Halladay's no-no.

More proof that statistics don't tell the whole story.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Dork. 

Bill James says that Tim Lincecum's 15-K 2-hitter was better then Halladay's no-no.

More proof that statistics don't tell the whole story.

Yeah, those stats are interesting... They showed Brandon Morrow's 1 hitter earlier this year to be on the most dominant starts in the history of all of baseball with 17 strikeouts.

[Dork.]

The Stat guys like strikeouts because anytime a ball is put into play anything can happen, and when you strike out a lot of batters you are putting fewer balls into play. But you need at least three pitches to strike anyone out, and usually a lot more, and if a pitcher relies on the strikeout they had better be able to throw up to 140 or 150 pitches over 9 innings. Sadly, many managers today would pull a young pitcher at 120 or fewer pitches, even if they are cruising.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Dork. 

The Stat guys like strikeouts because anytime a ball is put into play anything can happen, and when you strike out a lot of batters you are putting fewer balls into play. But you need at least three pitches to strike anyone out, and usually a lot more, and if a pitcher relies on the strikeout they had better be able to throw up to 140 or 150 pitches over 9 innings. Sadly, many managers today would pull a young pitcher at 120 or fewer pitches, even if they are cruising.

Yeah, that Morrow game required a ton of pitches out of him. I understand the wisdom and dominance factor behind strikeout artists, but if I were a manager I would prefer pitch efficiency any time - the ability to go deep into games consistently, and in the case of pitchers that induce a lot of ground balls, the ability to invoke a lot of double plays too.

[Dork.]

And now Roy has another Cy Young! (and unanimously, too!)

Zoo With Roy: BROKEN NEWS (& FACES): ROY HALLADAY WINS 2010 NL CY YOUNG AWARD

[Shaddim]

So funny, Vegas wouldn't even give odds on this.

[besson3c]

I hope Felix Hernandez wins it in the AL...

I agree with Roy winning it in the NL, bias aside I think there is more than enough argument for it