NL Cy Young race
Lincecum may have had the best year, and he gets a chance to add to his case today. Webb has a lot of wins, e.r.a. a little high, although peripherals look fine. Sabathia had an awesome half season. Santana had a great last 2 months, although only 16 wins hurts, except that is due toa lousy bullpen. Pitching a shutout on 3 days rest in a pennant race crucial game helps.
I'd probably give it to lincecum, but I bet Webb will get it. Close though, in my mind, between lincecum and santana.
3 recs |
217
comments
Comments
+1
Lincecum numbers are filthy but voters can’t seem to ignore 20+ win candidates.
Edge: Webb
by bryeic on Sep 28, 2008 10:14 AM EDT 0 recs
Lincecum
Santana’s bullpen may have blown a few saves for him, but Lincecum’s offense has not supported him well all season. Last I heard he still led the league in “Criminially Unsupported Starts” or whatever that stat is. He should easily have more than 20 wins. I do think these last two starts have hurt his chances though. Webb has the magic 20-win mark though on his side. All three are excellent candidates, but I think Lincecum deserves it.
Sabathia doesn’t even belong in the conversation as a Top 5 candidate in my opinion. This is all just internet and fanboy hype fueled by ESPN. He was only in the NL for half a season. And I know some player back in the 80s won the Cy in a similar instance, but the cases aren’t all that similar. That season there really were no good candidates in the NL.
"My mom always taught me it's better to laugh at yourself than to laugh at others. She was so wrong. ;)" -Pedrophile
by Boxkutter on Sep 28, 2008 10:44 AM EDT 0 recs
Here's Sabathia's numbers in that half season
11-2, 1.65 ERA, .92 WHIP, 128K, 25BB, in 17 Starts, 141.2IP, 7CG, 3 SHO
Here’s Lincecum:
18-5, 2.62ERA, 1.17 WHIP, 265K, 84BB in 33 starts, with 227IP, 2CG and 1 SHO
Basically, in half a season Sabathia tripled Lincecum’s CG and SHO numbers, crushed him in WHIP, ERA and K:BB (5.12 to 3.15), beat him in winning %, and was a key cog for a playoff team under intense pressure, pitching extremely well on 3 days rest his final 3 turns through the rotation – 21.2IP, 2ER, 20K, 4BB, 15H (.88 WHIP).
I think there’s a legitimate case to be made that, half season or no, Sabathia deserves the NL Cy Young
by Locke000 on
Sep 29, 2008 11:07 AM EDT
up
0 recs
Half season
Neal Heaton had a great half season in 1990.
by Lunkwill Fook on
Sep 29, 2008 12:16 PM EDT
up
0 recs
um
?
I get that that is supposed to be some smart-ass response, but even as that it fails.
by nms on
Sep 29, 2008 1:06 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Let me esplane
You’re taking rate staffs like ERA, WHIP, and K:BB and applying them to half a season and comparing them to a guy who did it over a full season.
by Lunkwill Fook on
Sep 30, 2008 1:23 AM EDT
up
0 recs
Agreed
If we’re talking about great half-seasons, shouldn’t we consider Justin Duchscherer for the AL?
by Fanon on
Sep 30, 2008 6:49 PM EDT
up
0 recs
yes
I knew what you were trying to say. My point was the bringing Neal Heaton into this was pretty random and missed the point entirely
by nms on
Oct 1, 2008 12:40 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Ummmmm…. if you know what I’m trying to say, then I didn’t miss my point. Neal Heaton was just a random example of half season excellence that turned into full season mediocrity. Should I have said Jack Armstrong instead?
by Lunkwill Fook on
Oct 1, 2008 2:17 PM EDT
up
0 recs
the point is
that a guy having a random good half year is not at all the same as a guy having a massively great year, in total, between two leagues.
To compare the two is inane
by nms on
Oct 1, 2008 3:09 PM EDT
up
0 recs
I get that
But its not like Sabathia’s full season numbers (including against better AL lineups) are massively worse than Lincecum’s – 2.70 ERA (to Lincecum’s 2.62), 259K (to Lincecum’s 265), 17W (to Lincecum’s 18), 59 BB (to Lincecum’s 84), 1.11 WHIP (to Lincecum’s 1.17), 10CG (to Lincecum’s 2), 5 SHO (to Lincecum’s 1)
Yes, about half of those stats were compiled in the AL, but they validate Sabathia’s half-season NL Stats. He’s not a fluke pitcher catching a hot streak (obviously). He’s a dominant pitcher who happened to hit the NL mid year. He has better control than Timmy, better WHIP, goes the distance vastly more often and pitches shutouts vastly more often.
The only reason to discount Sabathia’s half season NL numbers is you Heaton analogy – the “well, maybe its a fluke/anyone can have a great half season” argument. The full season numbers wipe out that theory.
by Locke000 on
Oct 2, 2008 12:40 AM EDT
up
0 recs
Full season
His full season numbers are essentially equal to Santana and Lincecum’s. THAT’S the Neal Heaton reference.
by Lunkwill Fook on
Oct 2, 2008 10:05 AM EDT
up
0 recs
Against better competition
True – but he was pitching that first half season against better lineups than either Santana or Lincecum.
But that’s not the point – if you tell me that Santana, Sabathia and Lincecum are essentially even on the numbers (and I agree, they are), then I think you need to strongly consider giving Sabathia the Cy given the way he got his numbers (3 straight turns on short rest, in the middle of a playoff race? That’s ridiculous). JMO, but with awards like MVP and Cy, all things being equal, I’ll go with the guy who did it for a playoff team under intense pressure. Sabathia-Santana-Lincecum, in that order
by Locke000 on
Oct 2, 2008 10:33 AM EDT
up
0 recs
Cy Young is not voted on due to playoff contention like the MVP is and I’m happy that it isn’t. It’s about who is the best pitcher.
And that’s a huge assumption you’re making about Sabathia facing better lineups. Which teams are in his division? The Twins, Royals, and Tigers had largely disfunctional offenses all season. Johan had to pitch against the Phillies and Marlins regularly. Add to that that Johan pitched on three days rest as well in the middle of a pennant chase…. it’s really pretty even, full season wise.
Add to that, AL stats just don’t count towards the NL Cy Young. They just don’t.
by Lunkwill Fook on
Oct 2, 2008 11:14 AM EDT
up
0 recs
First, the DH changes everything, because there’s no automatic out in any of the lineups the way there is in the NL. There’s a reason why pitchers moving AL to NL tend to drop ERA, and pitchers going in the other direction tend to gain it.
Second, I know AL stats don’t count towards the NL Cy Young. But when a pitcher has a dominant half season in a league after being traded mid-season, the only operative question (IMO) is whether the dominant half season is a fluke (guy just happened to luck into a hot streak, no way he keeps it up) or not. What the full season (AL) stats do is validate CC’s half-season stats – they demonstrate that his dominant half season was not just a question of timing, not a fluke.
And once that’s out of the way, I have no problem voting for him for the Cy.
Again, I get it – you want a blanket rule that no pitcher traded mid-season is eligible for the Cy Young in either league. I’m not buying that.
by Locke000 on
Oct 2, 2008 3:20 PM EDT
up
0 recs
It's not that he was traded mid season
It’s that he didn’t play in enough games! If a guy pitches 7 shutouts in his only 7 starts of the season, should he be Cy Young? No, of course not.
by Lunkwill Fook on
Oct 2, 2008 4:08 PM EDT
up
0 recs
no
but why not?
the answer is sample size – you can’t extrapolate from seven starts to what the whole season numbers would have looked like. That’s not an issue for Sabathia
by Locke000 on
Oct 2, 2008 8:43 PM EDT
up
0 recs
CC wishes Bret Myers was an automatic out right about now.
Space.
It's a problem we face.
So we never go anywhere.
We just stay in one place.
by hazel on
Oct 5, 2008 4:27 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Good points
People also need to remember that Rick Sutcliffe won the Cy Young after coming over to Chicago from Cleveland after starting 15 games in the 1984 season. He made 20 starts for the Cubs that year going 16 and 1 with a 2.69 ERA.
"When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him."
-Jonathan Swift
by King Billy Royal on
Sep 29, 2008 1:15 PM EDT
up
0 recs
As I said...
these are not comparable situations. There were no decent candidates other than Sutcliffe that year. The only 20 game winner in the NL also had double digit losses and a high ERA. That’s not the case this year.
"My mom always taught me it's better to laugh at yourself than to laugh at others. She was so wrong. ;)" -Pedrophile
by Boxkutter on
Sep 29, 2008 1:40 PM EDT
up
0 recs
They are comparable
No other good candidates? Why don’t you look at the following:
Dwight Gooden
17 wins, 9 losses, 2.60 ERA, 218 innings, 276 K’s, 1.08 WHIP
That line is eerily similar to Lincecum this year. Not to mention that the K’s are actually much better. If Gooden wasn’t a good candidate, then how is Timmy a good one this year?
Bruce Sutter
1.54 ERA, 45 saves
Huge year for a closer. Great ERA and the highest amount of saves ever in the NL at that time.
Joaquin Andujar
20 wins, 14 losses, 3.34 ERA, 1.10 WHIP
You stated that he had a high ERA but is 3.34 really ‘high’? Lower then league average ERA. Great year on divison champ.
You stated that “There were no decent candidates other than Sutcliffe that year” but that is obviously false. Gooden was better then Timmy this year, Sutter just set the NL record for saves and Andujar led the NL in wins on a division winner while eatting innings and posting a below average ERA. I do not think Sabathia should win the Cy Young but lets not act like there is not precedent.
"When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him."
-Jonathan Swift
by King Billy Royal on
Sep 29, 2008 1:58 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Not to mention
Andujar led the league in innings pitched, shutouts, and tossed 12 complete games.
"When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him."
-Jonathan Swift
by King Billy Royal on
Sep 29, 2008 2:57 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Context
Pitching lines in general were much better in 1984 than in 2008 (though 2008 seems like kind of a rebound year from recent years). A 3.34 ERA nowadays is just fine….but back then, it didn’t get you a lot of support Cy Young. And 20-game winners were common enough that 17 wins was a major blemish.
The best candidates for the job were Gooden (probably should have won it), Andujar and Sutter (each with warts, and then had a vote split issue because they were on teh same team), and Mario Soto, who won “only” 18 games and had a 3.53 ERA. All in all, the lines at the top of the leaderboard were unusually weak. And into that waltzed Sutcliffe with a 16-1 record.
I can clearly remember listening to this debate on KMOX in 1984, and people talking about how the Cubs guy (Sutcliffe) would not be thought of so highly if there were better candidates.
by siddfynch on
Oct 3, 2008 12:32 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Say what you will...
you aren’t going to convince me that someone who only spent half the season in the NL deserves the National League Cy Young Award more than three great candidates who spent the entire season in the National League. If this was like 1984 again and there were no decent alternatives, then I would agree with you. But the NL has some great alternatives this year in Lincecum, Santana, Webb, Haren, and Dempster. I would vote for all five of them before I would vote for Sabathia.
Lincecum started the season, in his first 14 starts, with an ERA of 1.99 pitching 90.2 innings with only 76 hits allowed and 92K. He also had an 8-1 record. Why don’t we just look at that body of work? Because it takes a full season. What Sabathia Sympathizers are doing is ignoring the entire body of work. They want to give him an Award for a full-season’s work, even though he was in the American League for half the season. But they won’t mention that if you use his stats from the entire season, he has a worse record, higher ERA, and less strikeouts than Lincecum with a WHIP barely 0.06 lower.
"My mom always taught me it's better to laugh at yourself than to laugh at others. She was so wrong. ;)" -Pedrophile
by Boxkutter on
Sep 29, 2008 1:56 PM EDT
up
0 recs
This is funny stuff
The WHIP is “barely .06” lower – but that ERA differential of .08 is huge, huh? And Timmy’s 6 strikeout margin over Sabathia’s full season numbers . . . you’re right, that makes all the difference in the world (this site needs an eyeroll smiley)
Even using full-season stats, Lincecum and Sabathia are comparable in every category other than K:IP – where Lincecum blows Sabathia away and K:BB (Sabathia destroys Lincecum), CG (Sabathia destroys Lincecum) and SHO (again, Sabathia destroys Lincecum).
Not that its going to change your mind – I just find it funny that you’d call folks “Sabathia Sympathizers” when you’re obviously in the tank for Timmy.
by Locke000 on
Oct 2, 2008 12:46 AM EDT
up
0 recs
A myth
It is a myth that Tim Lincecum didn’t receive offensive support this season. The last time I checked, the Giants’ offense had scored about a run and a half per nine innings more for Tim than for its other pitchers, including Matt Cain with the second-worst support in the game.
Where Tim was let down was primarily by his bullpen, which blew five wins for him. Intriguingly, the Mets blew seven of Johan Santana’s wins, while the Diamondbacks’ relievers blew only one win for Brandon Webb. If none of the three bullpens had blown a single win for these top three guys, each would have won 23 games.
Tim was let down by a questionable balk call, which cost him his first win of the season. He was let down by his defense in two of his final three games, with a horrible misplay by Eugenio Velez — an infielder making only his fourth start in the outfield — and an error on Rich Aurilia that was changed to a hit after the game costing Tim four earned runs and the ERA title.
But Tim wasn’t let down by the Giants’ offense, who uncharacteristically supported him well.
Tim finished first in the NL in strikeouts, SLG against, OPS against, batting average against, batting average against with runners in scoring position (.164 entering his final start), strikeouts per nine innings, homers against, homers per nine, and winning percentage.
He was second in ERA and wins.
Sadly, I think Johan Santana — based in New York — will win the award. Clearly I think Tim deserves to become only the second NL pitcher to win the award in his first full season (with the other being Fernando Valenzuela).
by sharksrog on
Oct 2, 2008 1:21 AM EDT
up
0 recs
Santana leads the league in innings and ERA
Lincecum may have an edge in some peripherals, but Santana does have those two numbers in his favor, and he is second in strikeouts to Lincecum. I’m not saying he should win over Lincecum, but I think he’s the second best candidate and closer than people give him credit for.
by aap212 on Sep 28, 2008 11:28 AM EDT 0 recs
+1
The Cy race in the NL should be Lincecum-Santana-Webb. Hell, I don’t even know if Webb belongs third.
by demondeaconsbaseball on
Sep 28, 2008 4:08 PM EDT
up
0 recs
It’s like people saw Santana not put up an ERA in the 1’s for the first month he was in the NL and wrote him off for the year. I would have no problem penciling him in right behind Lincecum.
by mraver on
Sep 28, 2008 7:21 PM EDT
up
0 recs
why would he not be ahead of Lincecum
when he has pitched jsut as well over a few more innings
by nms on
Sep 28, 2008 7:38 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Lincecum has him in wins, BAA, K’s by a wide margin, and he would be tied in ERA if he didn’t get fucked over by the bullpen in his last start. I think Lincecum should win it, though barely.
by boonitez on
Sep 28, 2008 11:58 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Because he hasn't?
For the reasons I listed above, Johan didn’t pitch quite as well as Tim. He merely had a bit more luck.
by sharksrog on
Oct 2, 2008 1:24 AM EDT
up
0 recs
I agree
I thank AAP212’s analysis is right on. And I think Brandon Webb’s 22 wins will, sadly, make it a three-way race, with CC Sabathia finishing fourth, then Ryan Dempster and Edinson Volquez.
by sharksrog on
Oct 2, 2008 1:23 AM EDT
up
0 recs
meaningful games
That counts in Santana’s favor. Yeah, I guess Sabathia didn’t pitch enough in NL. Although Manny may be NL mvp if you look at what he did for them and what he meant to the team (Andre Ethier may want to give him a nice gift outta his next salary).
by wobatus on Sep 28, 2008 12:39 PM EDT 0 recs
Meaningful?
There is no question Tim Lincecum didn’t pitch in games as meaningful as the other top Cy Young Award candidates. But no pitcher was as great a stopper as Tim, who went an amazing 14-1 after Giants losses.
Oh, and Tim went 13-1 in games in which he received three or more runs of support.
When Tim pitched at AT&T, it wasn’t merely a ball game; it was a rock concert. Tim yielded very few important runs, pitching with incredible consistency.
by sharksrog on
Oct 2, 2008 1:28 AM EDT
up
0 recs
Santana
I will go with the league leader in ERA and innings pitched. The job of a starting pitcher is to prevent runs and go as deep into a game as possible to give his team the best chance to win and not exaust the bullpen.
"When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him."
-Jonathan Swift
by King Billy Royal on Sep 28, 2008 12:39 PM EDT 0 recs
innings and era
there will be very small difference in those categories if lincecum goes 7 or so and pitches well today, but good points. The slight era differential won’t mean that much. The fact Santana’s starts have meant something in a pennant race means more to me. It is close though.
by wobatus on Sep 28, 2008 1:34 PM EDT 0 recs
Close
It’s extremely close. I think Lincecum will win because the talk has been mostly about him the last two months but Santana has been amazing. Both pitchers, with proper offensive/bullpen support would have won 20+ games this year. Both are high on the strike out list with low ERA’s. Honestly, I think it’s going to come down to two things:
a) Lincecum’s much higher strikeout total makes him look for “dominant”
b) Johan’s ERA is only slightly lower and he’s (currently) one win behind Lincecum.
by Lunkwill Fook on
Sep 28, 2008 2:30 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Only two
Only two NL starting pitchers have ever won only 16 games in a full season and won the Cy Young Award.
Rick Sutcliffe was the first, winning 16 games after coming over from the Indians in a mid-season trade. Ironically, Brandon Webb was the other, winning the award in 2006 with 16 victories.
For Lincecum to win 18 games with the Giants was AMAZING! I figured if he had a great season he might win 15.
by sharksrog on
Oct 2, 2008 1:31 AM EDT
up
0 recs
I'd give it to Sabathia
Hes been as good as any pitcher in the game and I think the fact that he hasn’t spent enough time in the NL is more than offset by the fact the time he has spent in the league has had as much impact as any one player can ever have.
Hes been an automatic W (and bullpen saver) for a team that needs every win it can get to go to October.
Lincecum and Santana.. and others.. have been tremendous as well though.
I guess I’d go Sabathia, Santana, Lincecum
I’d also be tempted to give Manny a first place NL MVP vote for similar reasons of otherwordly dominance with pennant race impact (Brewers and Dodgers probably don’t make postseason without Sabathia/Manny) offsetting lack of time in a league.
Plus I think it is silly that a mid-season league changing trade essentially makes a player ineligible for postseason awards no matter how dominant the player is.
by nms on Sep 28, 2008 2:40 PM EDT 0 recs
Manny?
Not Braun or Pujols or Howard? They’ve all been better, except maybe for Howard. But Howard’s been better in HR’s and RBI’s. And Braun had a huge impact with the Brewers. He was a huge part of the reason they just made the playoffs.
by boonitez on
Sep 29, 2008 12:11 AM EDT
up
0 recs
no one
has been better than the Dodgers’ version of Manny. When I looked at the numbers yesterday he was hitting .400+ with a .495 (or so) OBP and almost 20 HRs and a 220 OPS+ since coming over to the Dodgers.
Throwing in the good half-season he had in Boston with his otherworldly time as a Dodger, and how that impact was probably the difference in his team making vs. not making the playoffs, and that leads me to give him my nonexistent vote.
My biggest regret about that scenario is that it means I can’t vote Pujols for the MVP. Hes been insane, even by his standards, this year. Thats my biggest conflict.
I think, as good as Braun and Howard are and have been, Manny over them is an easy call
by nms on
Sep 29, 2008 12:30 AM EDT
up
0 recs
Manny is 62 BRAA for the season, Pujols is 80
Manny is a godawful fielder, Pujols is the best 1B in the league.
It’s not even close. Anyone who votes for someone other than Pujols should be thrown into the Mississippi wearing concrete shoes.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on
Sep 29, 2008 12:52 AM EDT
up
0 recs
as I said
Pujols for MVP isn’t a vote I can disagree with but a guy putting his team in the playoffs by impersonating Ted Williams is tremendous.
The value of what Manny has done for his team the last few months has been unGodly
by nms on
Sep 29, 2008 1:47 AM EDT
up
0 recs
A guy singlehandedly carrying a janky crew of roleplayers and 5th starters
to the point where it is actually playing meaningful games in September is more tremendous…
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on
Sep 29, 2008 5:16 AM EDT
up
0 recs
exactly
The fact the RYAN LUDWICK made an all star game, and from here on out, owes Albert Pujols his lively hood is justification enough.
Without Albert this team is only above Pittsburgh
Remember: baseball guys... baseball...
by Metty5 on
Sep 29, 2008 5:19 AM EDT
up
0 recs
Howard's candidacy is a joke
He’s not more valuable than Pujols, Wright, Reyes, Hanley Ramirez, or Carlos Beltran. I think Delgado’s candidacy is a joke too. But chicks dig the long ball, and by chicks I mean voters.
by aap212 on
Sep 29, 2008 1:48 PM EDT
up
0 recs
CC
CC Sabathia was the best pitcher in all of baseball after being traded to the Brewers. But he threw less than half his games in the NL and didn’t pitch his very best ball down the stretch.
If CC had done what he did for the Brewers all season long, we wouldn’t have much of a discussion going on here. But aside from CC in the second half, Tim Lincecum was the NL dominator all season long.
by sharksrog on
Oct 2, 2008 1:34 AM EDT
up
0 recs
Santana will get it
Rightly or wrongly.
Rowdy Hardy Fan Club member.
by doublestix on Sep 28, 2008 2:52 PM EDT 0 recs
I don't know how
Santana could get it wrongly.
Hes got more starts and innings than Lincecum, a better ERA and an equal (actually ever so slightly better) ERA+ and there isn’t a big difference in the W-L (if thats looked at)
by nms on
Sep 28, 2008 3:09 PM EDT
up
0 recs
I agree and disagree
I agree that Johan Santana could well win the award. And if he did so, it wouldn’t be the biggest injustice baseball has yet seen. But this has got me even more realizing Tim should be the winner because:
. His ERA+ of 164 was actually just higher than Johan’s 163.
. His FIP of 2.62 (same as his actual ERA) was dwarfed by Johan’s 3.53, which was within two hundredths of being a full run higher than his ERA.
. Tim had a much lower hit rate than Johan despite posting a .312 BABIP compared to Johan’s .278. It might be fair to say that half that difference was Johan and half was luck. And that is probably giving the benefit of the doubt to Johan.
. With a league-leading 11 homers against, Tim yielded fewer than half as many homers as did Johan (23).
. If one took a poll of NL hitters as to which starter was hardest to hit, Tim would win hands down. Even Conor Jackson, whose teammate is Brandon Webb, said Tim was the toughest. Teammate Eric Byrnes has also been extremely profuse in his praise of Lincecum’s stuff.
The more I look at this, the sadder I will be if Johan wins. Johan edged Tim out for the ERA title because Eugenio Velez charged a ball that had he stayed put he could have caught without moving, resulting not in an inning-ending out but in two earned runs in Lincecum’s third-to-last start.
Meanwhile, Tim blew Johan away in FIP. Just flat-out blew him away. By over 0.90 runs. The “L” in Lincecum didn’t stand for luck this season.
by sharksrog on
Oct 2, 2008 1:49 AM EDT
up
0 recs
In defense of Santana
I’m not surprised his BABIP is higher as he is a fly ball pitcher (0.94 GO/AO this year) vs 1.17 GO/AO for Lincecum. The fly balls lead to more homers, but it also leads to a better average against all other things equal. Santana also walked 21 less in 7 more innings.
I agree that Lincecum was downright filthy and if keep can keep striking out more than a batter an inning without giving up many homers he’ll win several awards (if he keeps his health) even if he doesn’t get it this year.
by carverslacker on
Oct 9, 2008 7:22 PM EDT
up
0 recs
I should add
that I think you can make an excellent case for each, although I would probably also lean to Lincecum.
by carverslacker on
Oct 9, 2008 7:25 PM EDT
up
0 recs
question
Why all the love for Sabathia, but not Harden? Granted, Sabathia has a lot more innings, but it’s not as if Harden has missed a bunch of starts. And while Sabathia has been good, inning for inning Harden is better.
by ozzman99 on Sep 28, 2008 5:01 PM EDT 0 recs
He's been as good...
on the innings he did pitch… but whe you look at how apeshit CC went with all of those CG’s, it’s not even close. Dude took over for entire games, just like he did today – and on short rest to boot.
by slurve on
Sep 28, 2008 5:16 PM EDT
up
0 recs
it's NL cy young, not major league cy young
in that case it’d be a lot closer.
by son.of.sourman on
Sep 28, 2008 5:23 PM EDT
up
0 recs
yes
it is the NL Cy Young, but it seems silly to basically elimate players having fine seasons for consideration for awards just because they got traded. And in Sabathia and ManRams case their crazy good years have had a monsterous impact on the NL.
by nms on
Sep 28, 2008 5:35 PM EDT
up
0 recs
No one is eliminating them because they got traded
It is just ridiculous to extrapolate the numbers from half a season in the NL and turn it into their entire season to make an argument for the Cy Young or MVP. For example. Sabathia was tremendous for Milwaukee. But compared to Lincecum, his 2008 stats didn’t stack up. He was second best. Lincecum has more wins, fewer losses, a better ERA, more strikeouts, etc.
So if you want to argue that Sabathia was more valuable during his time in the NL, that’s fine. Maybe he’ll win the NL July 8th-September 30th Cy Young Award.
The same goes for Manny. His full season stats are embarrassing compared to Pujols.
by JayWise on
Sep 29, 2008 1:31 AM EDT
up
0 recs
but that is my point
Sabathia’s stats DO stack up with Lincecum’s when you look at what each did over the full season.
"Lincecum has more wins, fewer losses, a better ERA, more strikeouts, etc. "
And Sabathia has more CGs, SHOs, fewer walks and an IP advantage equal to 4 whole starts.
And the ERA difference is very small. about .14 in ERA and 5 points in ERA+.
I think the sticking point for me is the huge advantage Sabathia has in quantity. 24 more innings pitched, at the quality that Sabathia pitches, is a pretty big deal.
by nms on
Sep 29, 2008 1:39 AM EDT
up
0 recs
I am pretty sure that Shutouts are factored into a stat called
ERA. If you argue that Sabathia had more SO, then let me respond by saying that Lincecum must have had a few games where he gave up a lesser number of runs.That probably means that he was more consistently, rather than having a focused stretch which is less impressive (for that, please see Esteban Loaiza, early 2003). I also think that the different of .14 in ERA seems small out of context, but you’re talking about the difference between a ~2.6 and a ~2.74. As your ERA lowers, it becomes much harder for additional drops.
All of that aside, I think it’s bull to set aside the traditionally valuable stats and try to argue valid but less useful stats like Complete Games and Shutouts. Whats the matter? Was BAA on a Tuesday night unavailable? Johan Santana never had a complete game during his 04 and 06 campaign, and that didn’t bother voters in the slightest…. And in terms of innings pitched? If San Francisco had run Lincecum out there one more time his arm would have fallen off, and then Sabathia would have been a better Cy Young Candidate for sure.
Speaking of which, when Sabathia’s visiting Dr. James Andrews next year (knock on wood) because of all of those extra innings pitched, maybe he’ll regret begging to go on short rest or stay out there for another inning every single start.
by JayWise on
Sep 29, 2008 7:53 AM EDT
up
0 recs
dude
you quoted Wins and Losses… by those high standards I don’t see the harm in including shutouts.
And regardless of any future injuries that occur from his work this year that doesn’t change the fact that Sabathia pitched THIRTY THREE more innings this year. 33 more innings of ace quality ball is a TON of value and performance that more than makes up for Lincecums Ks or BAA.
by nms on
Sep 29, 2008 1:09 PM EDT
up
0 recs
I just don't see it
The extra innings don’t do it for me, especially when you get passed a certain threshold. At that point IP has as much to do with the number of runs that your team has put up, the relief core, the manager, as anything else. If you told me that Sabathia pitched 220 and Lincecum pitched under 190 then I might think something of it.
by JayWise on
Sep 29, 2008 3:00 PM EDT
up
0 recs
well
I’m sorry those extra innings don’t do it for you but that isn’t the point.
33 innings is a whole hell of a lot. And 33 more innings of Sabathia’s pitching is a whole hell of a lot of value that Lincecum didn’t provide to his team
by nms on
Sep 29, 2008 3:27 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Yeah, Sabathia's arm is totally going to fall off
Those last 12 innings really put it over the top.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on
Sep 29, 2008 2:47 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Sarcasm doesn't make what i said any less valid
He was overused, plain and simple.
by JayWise on
Sep 29, 2008 2:57 PM EDT
up
0 recs
first off
he wasn’t.
But secondly, and more importantly, why on earth does that matter for the Cy Young race even if he was?
by nms on
Sep 29, 2008 3:25 PM EDT
up
0 recs
He was responding
To what i said as a PS about Sabathia probably wrecking his arm over this one race.
by JayWise on
Sep 29, 2008 4:16 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Correct
because it was utterly invalid to begin with. I just pointed that fact out.
Deterministic statements about player injuries are moronic. The most you can say about pitching 12 more innings than last year (in the regular season— remember that he threw a bunch more innings in the playoffs) is that there is a small additional marginal risk of him suffering an injury.
I know you’d love to score some snark points here, but reality is much less cut-and-dried than you would like.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on
Sep 29, 2008 5:58 PM EDT
up
0 recs
and as I said
the Pujols/ManRam call is agonizingly close for me, and I’m not denying that over the course of the whole year Pujols had a better year, but the MVP vote asks for the value of a players offense and defense to his team and I think single-handedly putting your team in the playoffs by doing a Ted Williams impersonation puts ManRam over the edge there.
I do EASILY understand a vote for Pujols though.
by nms on
Sep 29, 2008 1:41 AM EDT
up
0 recs
I don't think what Manny did for LA was more valuable than what Pujols did for the Cards
I think that even if you compare post-trade Manny to Pujols over the same period, they are approximately equal.
Same number of HR.
Manny’s OPS is (only) 38 points higher (although at that level, 38 points is REALLY hard to get)
Pujols as 6 more doubles
Manny has 1 more RBI
Pujols has 3 more runs
Their SB numbers are bad
Manny has 5 more hits
and Pujols has much better defense.
Their numbers are a wash. To give Manny the award punishes every superstar player who doesn’t act like a petulant child. He put himself in the middle of a pen


