OK, at the time you wrote that, Lincecum was 11-5 , while Halladay was 14-8. Since then, Lincecum lost to Chicago (later that day after you posted) and Halladay beat the Mets last night....so they are 11-6 and 15-8 respectively.
Yes, you ack'd that Halladay had the better ERA, but I don't recall you saying anything about Halladay having the bette year. But yes, by all accounts, Halladay is indeed having the better year.
Re: innings pitched...look at Lincecum's numbers in September over the last three seasons....2 under .500 and an ERA of 3.70, while Halladay is 4 over .500 and an ERA of 2.48. Halladay isn't the one breaking down in September.
You mean Brian Wilson, not Dan Wilson....yes, he's having an excellent year. I'm not referring to taxing out your closer, I'm talking about taxing out your middle-relivers. In 10 games this year, Lincecum hasn't reached the 7th inning. It's only happened 4 times to Halladay this season. This can be an important number...your #1 starter is pitching right after your #4 and #5 starters, who generally don't go as deep into games. A manager counts on his #1 starter to go 7 innings (at least) to give his middle-men a breather - 4 times this year Lincecum hasn't even gone 5 innings.
On the strikeouts issue....until this season, Halladay had a lower Ks per 9 innings because he pitched in a far superior league/division (but he has always had better control). Now that both are pitching in the NL, Halladay's K's per 9 innings are close to Lincecum's.
And even with Halladay striking out more men than before, that hasn't affected other aspects of his game. His pitch count per inning is better than Lincecum's. Halladay averages 2.2 pitches less per inning.
I'm not "bashing" Lincecum, he's a great pitcher. Would I take a guy with his record? In a heartbeat. But now that Halladay is in the same league and we have something that's a bit closer to apples-apples, what we've seen so far is that Halladay is the better and more effective performer. Let's see where things stand in October.
