Bumgarner or Kershaw?

[DB24]

Bumgarner, no doubt.

[floplag]

Regular season is meaningless. Just ask the Angels how much having the best record in baseball and all their great regular season stats meant in the playoffs...not a damn thing. Give me the guy who gets it done in Oct when it matters, not the guy who gets it done in May and folds like a deck of cards when the pressure is on 

 

riiight, and how do you get to the post if you dont play well in those meaningless games...

some of you are flat out spoiled

[floplag]

It's more than 3 games, it's 59.2 post-season innings since he shut out Detroit for 7 innings in the 2012 WS.

In those innings:  0.90 ERA and 0.65 WHIP

In 88.1 career post-season innings:  2.14 ERA and 0.88 WHIP

 

Not since Sandy Koufax has any lefty pitcher dominated post-season play like Bumgarner has. 

 

ok so 6 games... doesnt change anything.

you can have Bumgarner, ill take Kershaw everytime

 

[211275]

riiight, and how do you get to the post if you dont play well in those meaningless games...

some of you are flat out spoiled

You do like the Royals did. You play average, barely above .500 ball most the way and get hot a month out. Easy. 

[Blarg]

They played to. 603 in the second half.

[Angel Oracle]

Koufax never pitched in a single playoff game but with four man rotations and no specialized bullpen, pitchers of his era would throw 100 or more innings before seasons end compared to today.

That is true.

 

The WS stats for Koufax are ridiculous.    57 innings from 1959-1966: 0.95 ERA and 0.83 WHIP

Only Willie Davis' Excellent CF Adventure in game 2 of the 1966 WS soiled Koufax's post-season rep.

Edited October 31, 2014 by Angel Oracle

[Mark68]

MadBum

 

The difference between Kershaw and Bumgarner is not that huge in the regular season. The difference has been night and day in the postseason. When his name gets mentioned (in terms of postseason performance) ahead of pretty much every other name in MLB history, that makes a statement.

 

The sample size is no longer small.

[disarcina]

Kershaw -- regular season;

 

Bumgarner -- post-season.

 

 

overall if I had to choose between the two -- Kershaw.

[Lou]

MadBum

 

The difference between Kershaw and Bumgarner is not that huge in the regular season. The difference has been night and day in the postseason. When his name gets mentioned (in terms of postseason performance) ahead of pretty much every other name in MLB history, that makes a statement.

 

The sample size is no longer small.

 

you  think over a run difference in ERA is not much of a difference?

 

the difference between Kershaw's and Bumgarner's ERAs was larger

than the difference between Richards and Santiago.

Edited November 1, 2014 by Lou

[bloodbrother]

Kershaw has a career ERA of 2.48. There's a good chance his postseason ERA won't stay at 5.12. THere hasn't been a more dominant pitcher in baseball over the past few seasons. That's the guy I want pitching for my team

Edited November 1, 2014 by bloodbrother

[Angel Oracle]

So far, Kershaw has been the pitching equivalent of A-Fraud through 2008.

[Mark68]

you  think over a run difference in ERA is not much of a difference?

 

the difference between Kershaw's and Bumgarner's ERAs was larger

than the difference between Richards and Santiago.

The difference between a sub-2 ERA and a sub-3 is not the same as a sub-3 to a sub-4.

 

An ERA in the 2s is still very effective, one in the 3s is mostly effective.

 

The difference between Kershaw and Bumgarner is not equatable to the difference between Richards and Santiago, and it's even less equatable than the difference between Santiago and Wilson.

 

Don't get me wrong, if I had Kershaw, I'd be fine with it. But the postseason matters, and Kershaw has sucked in it. His sample size isn't that small. He's had 3 effective starts out of 8, and in those 5 that weren't effective, he was not only not effective, he was downright bad.

[Lou]

actually, the difference doesn't change in value. One run is equal to one run, regardless of how many runs a team scores.

[ten ocho recon scout]

Im gonna get flamed for this, but as much as i like kershaw, i still think felix is closer to him than he'll ever get credit for. While kershaw os a god, hes also helped by his division and league. Just as he rightly got credit for no hitting the rox this year when they were hot (and that was legit), it shouldnt be ignored on the other end of the spectrum, meaning all those games against weak offenses in a league that favors pitching.

If you swapped the two, kershaw probably wouldnt be effected a ton by facing a dh and playing better hitting teams like us (currently), oakland and texas (recently). But id bet felix would have a more generous effect facing pitchers and pinch hitters, in with the likes of the giants (great team, decent offense) the rocks away feom home, dbacks, padres etc.

(And to be clear, i still the think kershaw is the best...just not by as large of a margin as some others do)