http://proxy.espn.go.com/chat/chatESPN?event_id=18782

Anyone else read this? He put out the debate on which righty starter would you rather have for 2008, between Jake Peavy for Josh Beckett. Maybe I am reading it with Sox colored glasses, but anytime anyone mentioned "clutch" or picking Beckett, Neyer was all over them, eventually he said that he wouldnt even pick Beckett second!

This response really grinded my gears the most, this guys town sums it up:

John (Dumfries, VA): Rob, I'm going to have to agree with you here. While Beckett has nasty stuff I believe Peavy's is nastier. He is a much better strike out pitcher than Beckett throwing at least 215 K's each of the last 3 seasons. Sure he pitches in Petco, but w/ the way he strikes batters out he usually using his talent as a pitcher to get outs and not the park. Peavy all the way. I doubt Beckett can duplicate 2007 again.

Why cant he? Is he 35? Is he going on the DL? Wasn't he still average at times in 2007?

Dan - San Jose: Both guys have great arms, stats, etc. But it sure seems like Beckett has more rings than Peavy. Additionally, it sure seems like Beckett played a huge part in winning those rings. Therefore, I'll take Beckett.

SportsNation Rob Neyer : Yeah. Mike Timlin has more rings than Trevor Hoffman. Which one you taking?

GOOD ONE ROB! No one is comparing Mike Timlin and Trevor Hoffman, are we?

I particularly like this response:

Matt Pleasanton, CA: Peavy had a dominant season, I'll agree. But in his biggest start, against the Rockies in the one-game playoff, he choked. Beckett, on the other hand, stepped up his performance in the postseason. Is that just experience?

SportsNation Rob Neyer : So every time a good player doesn't play well in an important game, he choked? Isn't it possible that he just, you know, didn't have a good game because sometimes good players have bad games? Isn't it possible that he was nursing an injury? Usually when we say an athlete has "choked" there's a better, more accurate explanation for his failure.


Um Rob, YES IT IS CHOKING when a good player doesn't play well in an important game.


This guy is clearly a moron and his opinion just doesn't matter.

I think Id take Peavy actually.

At the very least its up for discussion and doesnt make Neyer a "moron."

EDIT: Also, the question, as you phrased it was "who do you take for 2008." Peavy is likely to pitch better than Beckett in 08, so Peavy. If the question was who do you want starting for you in a one game playoff tommorow, then I say Beckett, but theyre still both good choices.

I agree with Neyer too, that I dont believe Beckett is the best starting pitcher in the majors, or even the 2nd best. Id take Johan in 08 over Beckett too for instance, and there might even be more if I think about it, but Im going out drinking.

I would take Peavy as well, I'd put Beckett at 3, but that is not the point of my rant. He posed a question, but it seemed like he didn't even want to listen to the Beckett part of it and in the end, mentions that he wouldn't even put Beckett 2nd. Who knows where Beckett would have been placed? Like I said, maybe it was my Sox-colored glasses, but I felt that every Beckett mention incited a negative response from Mr Neyer.

That specific debate aside, I think the majority of people who consider Neyer a moron are morons. Not that I agree with every opinion he offers, but few know the game, and pitchers, better.

I like to think a good player doesn't play well in an important game because the good players on the other team played better than he did. Sometimes the other team is just better.

Al Skinner said something similar after Boston College got hammered by Kansas last week. I'm paraphrasing here: "Sometimes in sports," he said, "the other team runs faster and jumps higher than you do. Kansas was better than us. It happens."

All right then.

Has nothing to do with his knowledge or anything like that, but why pose a question if you already have an opinion and decision formulated and come off sounding like you do not want to listen to others when they try to bring up opposing points?

Why didnt he just do Brandon Webb vs Jake Peavy then?

Rob Neyer spent a year researching a book where he lived in Boston and went to pretty much every Red Sox game, fwiw.

I couldn't disagree more homey. It has always baffled me that a player who puts together the kind of season Peavy did last year is characterized as a choker based one or two post season games. This would suggest that there were no "big," games during the regular season. An Ace starting pitcher carries his team on his back for the entire season. THAT is pressure as far as I'm concerned.

I'm more comfortable with Beckett on the mound. The dude has been amazing in the post-season, and that's all that matters to me. But no doubt Peavy has better stuff than Beckett.

Not to nitpick, but Im not sure "stuff" is the difference. I think Peavy is a better pitcher, albeit not by a wide margin(it gets a lot closer when we make league and park adjustments - Peavy gets an edge on both counts but is still better despite that), but I dont account the difference to their stuff.

I agree with everything you say, I guess I should have titled the thread "Whoever came up with this debate is a moron, and I am not a fan of how Rob Neyer handled it"

Obviously the best pitcher in the majors isnt up for the debate, but #2 goes to Peavy then Beckett and closely Webb and #5...Sabathia maybe, but thats neither here nor there.

He was also pitching in that one game playoff on three days rest....I'm as big a Beckett fan as there is out there, and I feel I would have to take Peavy. Sure, he benefits from pitching in mostly pitchers parks in the NL West and pitches against worse lineups, but Peavy is the cream of the crop. He has been spectacular every year of his career except 2 years ago. Beckett was good early on, but only recently learned how to really "pitch" instead of blow it by hitters.

I think right now you have to take Peavy. If Beckett duplicates or improves upon his 07, as I hope and think he will, then you take him. But for now its Peavy pretty handily, IMO.

He dismissed arguments about "clutch," because "clutch" hasn't been proven to exist. That's a valid way to handle a debate, I think.

However, Neyer is still a moron.

Inning for inning (if that really means anything, i've just heard it used alot for Petey), i'd take ML starters last year in this order...

Jake Peavy
Erik Bedard
Josh Beckett

Once you factor in innings, it gets hazy after Peavy.

EDIT: I was alerted Webb might deserve to be in there -- but that would bump Beckett off the top 3. So no dice.

Ralpho,

We here in the Northern VA/DC metro area often make fun of those that reside in Dumfries (which is only a smidgen better than living in a place called Man@sses). At any rate, the guy's probably not even a sox fan (as most sox fans around here are in fairfax, reston, herndon and in dc).

That being said, i'm goin with Beckett over Peavy (though i do believe on some level that they are pretty much the same pitcher in the respect that they are 200 inning workhorses).

Sounds like a silly debate to me....