Quote: Originally Posted By habsfan1 on 3/02/2010Tough choice...this hasn't made it easier

I'd go w/Glavine. He pitches for longer and has just as many high quality seasons as Cone. Plus in prog leagues with a decent defense behind him you can surely win with him in some of his lesser seasons. Innings are tough to find, take the extra seasons of Glavine.

Cone is 24% better

Glavine is 23% more valuable

it's a craft. you wanna fish when you cross the bar, you gonna need rope and anchor. Glavine is rope. You can go off the shelf and bring home halibut. You gotta go long and deep. You gotta stay out there all day. Cone is anchor. You can park right off the buoy and bring home salmon. You could limit in a minute. But the river is going against you and so is the tide. Decide. Solid or spectacular? How much time you got? How good is your craft?

That is one fiicked-up metaphor.

I am fairly sure that's the most intelligent thing bagchucker has ever written.

Quote: Originally posted by jfranco77 on 3/02/2010Pretty much what everyone else said. Is this a single-season progressive? If so I'd lean towards Glavine... once you get into the 90s, just having a guy who can give you 200 non-awful innings every year is huge.

Trust me, I'm in a single-season progressive heading into 98 and I've spent mid-1st round picks on guys like Justin Thompson, Pedro Astacio, and Dustin Hermanson.

I couldn't agree more. I have gone through the 90's twice and anybody who can give innings is valuable, especially non-awful ones as jfranco said.

Besides, i have used David Cone and wasn't thrilled .

Hint

Thanks for the input guys...

Just made my pick, and I went with Glavine. I think all those innings will serve me well in the future.