I think I see what he's saying, but I won't assume I do. I don't think he's disagreeing with the fact that they had pretty much the same year, but with the way I said it.
And since I'm posting, what I meant to say was in response to the idea (and fact) of Zito being a wild card every time out this year, and that Mulder really wasn't. He was a relative sure thing for most of the season, but collapsed in such dramatic fashion that despite his several good months, his overall worth on the season was the same as Zito, who was perceived as having a bad year while Mulder only had a bunch of bad starts at the end and prior to that was pretty good.
It was more a point to a statement of a previous post than it was something to be taken by itself. So sure, if you take it out of context, it's kind of daft.
That's nice thinking and all, but c'mon man, you're talking about the Cubs here. He probably would've been the 60s version of Dwight Gooden with their luck. That's like putting a Jeff Bagwell Red Sox card up there.