Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Christy Mathewson vs. Roger Clemens

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Christy Mathewson vs. Roger Clemens

    Here's a battle of two all-time greats. Christy Mathewson won 373 games, posted a 2.13 ERA and led the league in victories four times. Not to be outdone, Clemens too led the league in wins four times, while striking out 4,672 batters and earning 354 wins.

    Two of the best all-time...but which one was better?
    8
    Christy Mathewson
    25.00%
    2
    Roger Clemens
    75.00%
    6
    Last edited by Cowtipper; 10-03-2012, 05:30 AM.

  • #2
    As Great as Christy was, he can't hang with the medicine man. Clemens put up the greatest stats of all-time. Clemens had to deal with the DH most of his career, along with the tiny strike zone, juiced ball, and small ball parks. He wasn't allowed to coast in games like Matty could. Yet Clemens still bested him in ERA+(143-135). Matty was incredible however. He had nearly a photographic memory, probably threw around 90 mph, and could carve the corners of the plate with a curve, screwball, and changeup. Matty was said to have all of the batters' weaknesses memorized and NEVER made the same mistake twice. He just learned this on his own, not by studying tape for hours and hours. Matty with his pitching chops and incredible control would still be great today. And Matty didn't have the benefit of steroids in his day. Even if they were around, I highly doubt that Matty would have taken them. Clemens did take steroids, which allowed him to ut up the best stats ever. I'll call him the best ever, even though there's a huge asterisk next to his name. I think a great comp for Matty is Greg Maddux.

    Comment


    • #3
      Depends on how you look at it. If you believe Clemens is an innocent man who never took anything stronger than a protein shake, then he wins. If you believe he's a steroid cheat, but didn't benefit from them, then he wins again. If you believe he is a steroid cheat and did benefit from them, then Mathewson wins. There's also the league quality issue. I'll abstain from voting here.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by fenrir View Post
        Depends on how you look at it. If you believe Clemens is an innocent man who never took anything stronger than a protein shake, then he wins. If you believe he's a steroid cheat, but didn't benefit from them, then he wins again. If you believe he is a steroid cheat and did benefit from them, then Mathewson wins. There's also the league quality issue. I'll abstain from voting here.
        I'll agree:

        Ignoring PEDS, Clemens easily.
        Including PEDS, a much harder decision since we do not know if/how much Clememns benefited. Especially since his alleged roidiest years (as a Yankee) were his worst, in terms of ERA+, etc.
        1885 1886 1926 1931 1934 1942 1944 1946 1964 1967 1982 2006 2011

        1887 1888 1928 1930 1943 1968 1985 1987 2004 2013

        1996 2000 2001 2002 2005 2009 2012 2014 2015


        The Top 100 Pitchers In MLB History
        The Top 100 Position Players In MLB History

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by fenrir View Post
          Depends on how you look at it. If you believe Clemens is an innocent man who never took anything stronger than a protein shake, then he wins. If you believe he's a steroid cheat, but didn't benefit from them, then he wins again. If you believe he is a steroid cheat and did benefit from them, then Mathewson wins. There's also the league quality issue. I'll abstain from voting here.
          Pretty succinct. Agreed. It all depends on how you answer this.
          "It's better to look good, than be good."

          Comment

          Ad Widget

          Collapse
          Working...
          X