AL Cy Young Award

[Hambombs]

Also that John Lester deserves considering for being the best pitcher in baseball from 2006-2011.

Lol

 

[Hambombs]

So who wins it? What do people think? I don't care really about it lol

 

[MilkSpiller22]

to me scherzer is the clear winner... he has 24 QS only person higher in the AL is James shields.
He has 20 wins- that is the highes in baseball...
He has a .9646 WHIP which is best in the AL
He has a .2995 ERA which is top 5 in the AL...

QS shows consistancy throughout season
20 wins shows the "REAL" stat that the casual fan and media loves

 

[ImSmartherThanYou]

So who wins it? What do people think? I don't care really about it lol

As of today, my ballot would be:

1. Sale
2. Scherzer
3. Darvish
4. Iwakuma
5. Sanchez

But they're all so close. Very little separates the Top 4 candidates in my mind. And they still have at least one start left. Then, there's a pretty good drop-off to the guys vying for the #5 slot (Sanchez, Felix, Shields, Kuroda, Colon, Santana, etc.)

 

[MilkSpiller22]

As of today, my ballot would be:

1. Sale
2. Scherzer
3. Darvish
4. Iwakuma
5. Sanchez

But they're all so close. Very little separates the Top 4 candidates in my mind. And they still have at least one start left. Then, there's a pretty good drop-off to the guys vying for the #5 slot (Sanchez, Felix, Shields, Kuroda, Colon, Santana, etc.)

How can you defend Sale over Scherzer... to me it is not even a race... If scherzer does not get it then there is something wrong with the baseball voting(which there is)...

 

[ImSmartherThanYou]

to me scherzer is the clear winner... he has 24 QS only person higher in the AL is James shields.
He has 20 wins- that is the highes in baseball...
He has a .9646 WHIP which is best in the AL
He has a .2995 ERA which is top 5 in the AL...

QS shows consistancy throughout season
20 wins shows the "REAL" stat that the casual fan and media loves

Quality starts and wins are a terrible way to judge who the best pitcher was.

Wins, as we all know, are a team accomplishment and are influenced by factors well outside the pitcher's control.

Quality Starts is a completely arbitrary statistic that really doesn't tell you much at the end of the day. Do you realize that a pitcher could start 30 games and have 30 quality starts and still end up with a 4.50 ERA and only 180 innings pitched? The league average ERA this year is 4.01, so a pitcher with a 4.50 ERA is actually pretty bad.

Now, I think Scherzer has a strong case for the award and I wouldn't mind one bit if he won, but that's based on his overall resume, and it should have nothing to do with W-L record or Quality Starts. I also think he actually *will* win because I think the lack of a single stand-out candidate will give the old timers who love them some wins will be the deciding factor.

 

[ImSmartherThanYou]

How can you defend Sale over Scherzer... to me it is not even a race... If scherzer does not get it then there is something wrong with the baseball voting(which there is)...

Sale: 209 IP, 7.2 IP/GS, 3 CG, 1 SHO, 45 BB, 221 K, 2.97 ERA, 144 ERA+, 1.053 WHIP, 7.5 H/9, 1.9 BB/9, 9.5 K/9, 4.91 K/BB, .225 BAA, .628 OPSA, 7.3 bWAR, 2.94 xFIP
Scherzer: 207 IP, 6.7 IP/GS, 0 CG, 0 SHO, 50 BB, 230 K, 3.00 ERA, 139 ERA+, 0.965 WHIP, 6.5 H/9, 2.2 BB/9, 10.0 K/9, 4.60 K/BB, .201 BAA, .588 OPSA, 6.1 bWAR, 3.13 xFIP

It's extremely close. A real coin flip. I think Scherzer has been more dominant, but Sale more durable while nearly as dominant. Iwakuma and Darvish are right there with them, too.

If you don't think it's close, that's your problem. I agree Scherzer will win in a landslide because the voters still value the W too much.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Quality starts and wins are a terrible way to judge who the best pitcher was.

Wins, as we all know, are a team accomplishment and are influenced by factors well outside the pitcher's control.

Quality Starts is a completely arbitrary statistic that really doesn't tell you much at the end of the day. Do you realize that a pitcher could start 30 games and have 30 quality starts and still end up with a 4.50 ERA and only 180 innings pitched? The league average ERA this year is 4.01, so a pitcher with a 4.50 ERA is actually pretty bad.

Now, I think Scherzer has a strong case for the award and I wouldn't mind one bit if he won, but that's based on his overall resume, and it should have nothing to do with W-L record or Quality Starts. I also think he actually *will* win because I think the lack of a single stand-out candidate will give the old timers who love them some wins will be the deciding factor.

You clearly dont understand why Quality starts is such a great statistic(it is one of my favorites)
The league average scores 4+ runs per game, so all a QS means is that a pitcher leaves the game in position to give there team a win since they have only at most given 3 runs... this is one of the only stats that shows consistency throughout the season... would you rather have a pitcher with a great ERA but struggles in too many games??

If you saw why i included wins- as much as you hate the stat it is still a "REAL" stat... "REAL" stat is my word for the black and white stats. they are the stats that are all about production, reasoning is irrelevant... these are the best stats for casual fans and media, so you can never discount them... A statistic you need to explain will never be able to get mainstreamed...

But Sale only beats Scherzer in one major category and that is ERA, and that is too close to even call a winner...

 

[StanMarsh51]

You clearly dont understand why Quality starts is such a great statistic(it is one of my favorites)
The league average scores 4+ runs per game, so all a QS means is that a pitcher leaves the game in position to give there team a win since they have only at most given 3 runs... this is one of the only stats that shows consistency throughout the season... would you rather have a pitcher with a great ERA but struggles in too many games??

.

At most he may be giving up 3 ER, but he may not be pitching close to a full game, and that's one of the issues with the stat. A 6 inning, 3 ER performance isn't necessarily better than a 9 inning, 4 ER performance. The guy in the 9 inning, 4 ER game has a lower ERA but didn't get the quality start.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Sale: 209 IP, 7.2 IP/GS, 3 CG, 1 SHO, 45 BB, 221 K, 2.97 ERA, 144 ERA+, 1.053 WHIP, 7.5 H/9, 1.9 BB/9, 9.5 K/9, 4.91 K/BB, .225 BAA, .628 OPSA, 7.3 bWAR, 2.94 xFIP
Scherzer: 207 IP, 6.7 IP/GS, 0 CG, 0 SHO, 50 BB, 230 K, 3.00 ERA, 139 ERA+, 0.965 WHIP, 6.5 H/9, 2.2 BB/9, 10.0 K/9, 4.60 K/BB, .201 BAA, .588 OPSA, 6.1 bWAR, 3.13 xFIP

It's extremely close. A real coin flip. I think Scherzer has been more dominant, but Sale more durable while nearly as dominant. Iwakuma and Darvish are right there with them, too.

If you don't think it's close, that's your problem. I agree Scherzer will win in a landslide because the voters still value the W too much.

How is it a problem, i just dont understand you fans that discount the old stats totally. I love the new stats but they are all theoretical, the old statistics are the stats that actually happen and matter...

 

[ImSmartherThanYou]

You clearly dont understand why Quality starts is such a great statistic(it is one of my favorites)
The league average scores 4+ runs per game, so all a QS means is that a pitcher leaves the game in position to give there team a win since they have only at most given 3 runs... this is one of the only stats that shows consistency throughout the season... would you rather have a pitcher with a great ERA but struggles in too many games??

If you saw why i included wins- as much as you hate the stat it is still a "REAL" stat... "REAL" stat is my word for the black and white stats. they are the stats that are all about production, reasoning is irrelevant... these are the best stats for casual fans and media, so you can never discount them... A statistic you need to explain will never be able to get mainstreamed...

But Sale only beats Scherzer in one major category and that is ERA, and that is too close to even call a winner...

Yeah... I understand Quality Starts just fine, thanks. It's a completely arbitrary statistic and is waaaaaaaaaaaaaay down the list of statistics that should be used to compare and evaluate pitchers.

So I guess you're taking this from more of a "who will win" standpoint than a "who should win" standpoint, which is fine. Again, I believe Scherzer *will* win. I'm just not yet convinced that he *should* win. It's still too close between he, Sale, Darvish and Iwakuma. I'm only interested in who *should* win, since the writers have rendered all the awards all but meaningless thanks to their incompetence and inconsistency. You haven't provided any justification for why he should, just why you think he will.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

At most he may be giving up 3 ER, but he may not be pitching close to a full game, and that's one of the issues with the stat. A 6 inning, 3 ER performance isn't necessarily better than a 9 inning, 4 ER performance. The guy in the 9 inning, 4 ER game has a lower ERA but didn't get the quality start.

Stan read my post again because your rebuttal did not make any sense, you are fixated on the ERA and that is irrelevant since they are 2 total different stats...

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Yeah... I understand Quality Starts just fine, thanks. It's a completely arbitrary statistic and is waaaaaaaaaaaaaay down the list of statistics that should be used to compare and evaluate pitchers.

So I guess you're taking this from more of a "who will win" standpoint than a "who should win" standpoint, which is fine. Again, I believe Scherzer *will* win. I'm just not yet convinced that he *should* win. It's still too close between he, Sale, Darvish and Iwakuma. I'm only interested in who *should* win, since the writers have rendered all the awards all but meaningless thanks to their incompetence and inconsistency. You haven't provided any justification for why he should, just why you think he will.

No, not at all, i just dont discount the oldfassioned stats like you do...

And clearly you dont understand quality starts if you think it is arbitrary... read my post again maybe you will learn something...

 

[StanMarsh51]

Stan read my post again because your rebuttal did not make any sense, you are fixated on the ERA and that is irrelevant since they are 2 total different stats...

I get your point perfectly...

How is a 6 inning, 3 ER performance any better than a 9 inning, 4 ER performance?

Merely giving up less runs isn't always better when it comes at the expense of throwing a lot less innings (durability/workload matters).

 

[ImSmartherThanYou]

How is it a problem, i just dont understand you fans that discount the old stats totally. I love the new stats but they are all theoretical, the old statistics are the stats that actually happen and matter...

There were plenty of "old stats" in the comparison I just provided which are still excellent measures of pitcher quality, and very few of the stats I posted are "theoretical". Wins just aren't a good measure unless you're dealing with pitchers who play on equally-skilled teams. Quality Starts is arbitrary. Actually, Quality Starts is just as theoretical as a stat like WAR. Isn't it "theoretical" that allowing 3 ER in 6 IP puts your team in a position to win? Except, at the end of the day, the pitchers at the top of the league in WAR are always among the best pitchers in the league, while a pitcher can be near the top of the league in QS and be nowhere near one of the best pitchers in the league.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

I get your point perfectly...

How is a 6 inning, 3 ER performance any better than a 9 inning, 4 ER performance?

That is a silly question- it is better to let up only 3 runs than 4... you assume that the back end of your Bullpen can hold on the win dont you??

If your team only scores 4 runs wouldnt 3 runs be better than 4??

 

[MilkSpiller22]

There were plenty of "old stats" in the comparison I just provided which are still excellent measures of pitcher quality, and very few of the stats I posted are "theoretical". Wins just aren't a good measure unless you're dealing with pitchers who play on equally-skilled teams. Quality Starts is arbitrary. Actually, Quality Starts is just as theoretical as a stat like WAR. Isn't it "theoretical" that allowing 3 ER in 6 IP puts your team in a position to win? Except, at the end of the day, the pitchers at the top of the league in WAR are always among the best pitchers in the league, while a pitcher can be near the top of the league in QS and be nowhere near one of the best pitchers in the league.

QS is not theoretical at all because it is not about winning and it is not about ERA... it is its own stat...

 

[StanMarsh51]

That is a silly question- it is better to let up only 3 runs than 4... you assume that the back end of your Bullpen can hold on the win dont you??

If your team only scores 4 runs wouldnt 3 runs be better than 4??

Merely giving up less runs isn't always better when it comes at the expense of throwing a lot less innings (durability/workload matters).


Is a guy who throws 160 innings a season allowing 55 earned runs better than a guy throwing 220 innings allowing 65 runs?

Jeremy Hellickson and David Price each started 31 games last season, and each gave up virtually the same # of earned runs (60 and 61)....were they both similarly good last year?

 

[ImSmartherThanYou]

No, not at all, i just dont discount the oldfassioned stats like you do...

And clearly you dont understand quality starts if you think it is arbitrary... read my post again maybe you will learn something...

The only "old fashioned stat" that you've presented that I've disregarded is wins, and I do so for good reason: it's too heavily dependent on factors outside the pitcher's control. Quality Starts is more "new" than the vast majority of the stats I posted.

I won't learn anything from rereading your post. I've forgotten more about pitching than you'll ever know. Quality Starts is an arbitrary, incomplete statistic. A guy who pitches 6 innings and gives up 3 runs is no more likely to help his team win than a guy who gives up 4 runs over 8 innings or 1 run over 5.2 innings. Why is 6 IP/3 ER the cutoff? Those are arbitrarily selected thresholds that don't tell you anything.

 

[StanMarsh51]

That is a silly question- it is better to let up only 3 runs than 4... you assume that the back end of your Bullpen can hold on the win dont you??

If your team only scores 4 runs wouldnt 3 runs be better than 4??

You never assume....