You're not going to wrong with either one.

I said I would lean towards #2 in my earlier post.  The additional info you provided validates that.  DUR is the same, health and makeup is solid for both (a slight nod towards #1 there), but the high patience rating for #2 pretty much guarantees that you can keep him for most of his career if you choose to do so, where #1 might bolt at his first FA opportunity.

#2, and it isn't that close.

Great control...throws a ton of groundballs...two pitches in the high 70's...Good vR.

I would love to have him!

Posted by moethedog on 11/23/2010 10:21:00 PM (view original):
#2, and it isn't that close.

Great control...throws a ton of groundballs...two pitches in the high 70's...Good vR.

I would love to have him!

Why do you say it isn't close? 

#1 has better splits and better pitches.  Are you valuing 14 points of control and the GB/FB rating that much more than splits and pitches?

I'd go with #2 based on the total picture, but I can't understand the "isn't close" comment.

Yeah, I hear you tecwrg, those splits and pitch selections are making it very difficult despite the low GB/FB ratio.  I've looked at few pitchers in my league with similar ratings as pitcher #1 and they have all gone on to have solid careers without giving up much of the long ball.

tecwrg,

With good infield defense behind him, #2 will be an innings gobbling machine.  I wish his 3rd pitch was a bit better....but he has two good pitches.  I think the GB/FB ratio is very important.