>> |
Anonymous
>>424851
More than heard of them. But they are NOT relevant to the argument at hand. The fact remains that Hamels did NOT WIN those games. I'm the biggest Phils fan alive, but the fact remains that Howard won MORE GAMES for the Phils than Hamels did. Bullpen collapse or not, the FACT is that they lost some those games. In fact, they lost MOST of those games. I realize he has no control over when he comes out of the game, no control over run support, and no control over what the bullpen does after he leaves. But all that matters at the end of the season is WINS. I lost a bet with a friend because I said Hamels would finish top 3 in Cy Young voting. He will not, because playoffs don't count. The FACT here is that Howard CAUSED more WINS than Hamels. Hamels may have CONTRIBUTED to wins (and honestly probably should have a good 10 more wins), but he just simply did not CAUSE those. Also, even if he WON EVERY start (33 or 35 or whatever), is that more than Howard won? I don't have the stats, but I'd be interested to know.
|