If you were building a team...

[TripleCrown9]

Re: If you were building a team...

Boy this would be so much better if it were all-time.

Ted Williams and Sandy Koufax all day.

[bkrich83]

Re: If you were building a team...

Kershaw and Posey

Other players I'd consider

Felix
Strasburg
Cain
Verlander

Stanton
Trout
Harper
Lawrie
Headley

Good call on Posey.. He's a franchise cornerstone imo as well.

[mattlanta]

Re: If you were building a team...

Mike Trout and Felix Hernandez

This. I don't think I'd be able to build around someone like Strasburg who's already had Tommy John surgery. Felix is the epitome of durability IMO.

[goh]

Re: If you were building a team...

Buster Posey and Felix Hernandez.

[Marino]

Re: If you were building a team...

Kershaw and Posey

[Cards2WS]

Stanton/Trout and Kershaw.

Honestly, Stanton and Trout are a toss up. Would be stoked outta mind to get either one.

Kershaw is the best pitcher in baseball plain and simple.

[CabreraMVP]

Re: If you were building a team...

All time, I would take Willie Mays and Pedro Martinez. Mays is probably the greatest all around player ever and Pedro is one of the best right handers ever, especially considering he playeg in the steroid era. His 2001 season?? .74 WHIP? In the heat of the Steroid Era? Man that's incredible.

[DieHardYankee26]

Posey and King Felix or Kershaw I think. Really hard to pick between them.

All time- Barry Bonds and Pedro. Easy.

[UrdnotWrex1232]

Re: If you were building a team...

For my batter I'd take Mike Trout, for obvious reasons. He's young and does it all.

For my pitcher I'd take Felix Hernandez. I considered David Price and Justin Verlander, but Hernandez has durability and youth. He'd be the ace of my pitching staff for years to come.

[bkrich83]

Re: If you were building a team...

For the guys picking Pedro, why would you take him over a guy like say Greg Maddux who was equally or even more dominant than Martinez for a longer period of time and much more durable?

[DieHardYankee26]

For the guys picking Pedro, why would you take him over a guy like say Greg Maddux who was equally or even more dominant than Martinez for a longer period of time and much more durable?

I will give you the longer period of time, but I don't find him to be as dominant as Pedro at all. Thinking about it more, starting a franchise I'd probably take Roger Clemens. But for a year, I'd definitely take Pedro.

[bkrich83]

Re: If you were building a team...

I will give you the longer period of time, but I don't find him to be as dominant as Pedro at all. Thinking about it more, starting a franchise I'd probably take Roger Clemens. But for a year, I'd definitely take Pedro.

How was he not as dominant as Pedro? Imo he was more dominant. Look at 1992 to say 1999 or so. 4 straight Cy Young's weren't on accident.

[DieHardYankee26]

Re: If you were building a team...

Both have 9 years with ERA+ over 150, Pedro has 5 over 200 and Maddux has 2. Pedro had 2 of the best seasons of all time pitching in the AL East in the heart of the steroid era. I'm confused on what your definition of dominance is, because Pedro dominated the better league's hitters, and he dominated them even more than Maddux. He had a season with over twice as many K's as hits, and a WHIP under .800. It doesn't get any more dominant than that. Maddux pitched almost twice as many innings and only has 17 more WAR. Pedro's best season was 11.4 WAR and a 291 ERA+. Those are videogame numbers. Actually, I couldn't even replicate those numbers in the Show. Pedro had 7 years with a WHIP under 1.00. That's ridiculous. For comparison, Maddux had 4 and pitched in the NL his entire career facing a pitcher every 9th batter.

I can't see any way Maddux was more dominant than Pedro. Like I said, he was dominant for longer, but Pedro, at his best, I would take twice before I took Maddux. Interestingly enough, I've actually done this before like 2 years ago with another poster here.

[NYJets]

Re: If you were building a team...

Pedro's 2000 season was better than any season Maddux ever had, so I guess you could argue at their absolute peaks Pedro was more dominant. But that doesn't make up for all the advantages that Maddux had. He was dominant for a longer period of time, he was more durable, and even when his prime was over he hung on as an above average innings eater that would be valuable for any rotation for a long time. So if the question means you get this player for their entire career I'd take Maddux over Pedro easy.

[CabreraMVP]

Re: If you were building a team...

I like Pedro just because of his arsenal. I'm not debating who was better between him or Maddux, they are both two of the best ever. I just like Pedro's ability to blow you away. To strikeout 13 batters per 9 innings, with just 1.6 walks like he did in 1999, that's incredible. I just prefer the power pitcher in this case.

Maddux pitched longer, but it's not like Pedro couldn't stay on the field. From 1995 to 2005, he was the best pitcher on the planet and averaged 30 starts a season in that span. He still pitched enough to be worthy of building around.