http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/8...-Cy-Young-hype
Printable View
I say yes.
But not THIS reliever.
Eric Gagne's Cy Young season should pretty much be the benchmark.
Yeah, relievers should be allowed to win the Cy Young - so long as they really were the best pitcher in the league, and that takes a lot for a reliever to overcome the best starter.
K-Rod winning the Cy Young award would be horrendous. He's not even the best reliever in the league, let alone better than Cliff Lee and Roy Halladay, the two guys who should be 1-2.
A whole lot. Even when Gagne did it, Schmidt had an absolutely great season. But not exactly an incredible season, where Gagne was doing very special things, and had just as good a season the year after, to prove it wasn't a fluke and validate the award even more.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoustonGM
I have faith that those voting are smart enough to not be so enamored by a save total. But if he breaks the record, it'll be a close vote.Quote:
K-Rod winning the Cy Young award would be horrendous. He's not even the best reliever in the league, let alone better than Cliff Lee and Roy Halladay, the two guys who should be 1-2.
I think Matsuzaka deserves to be in the conversation if Halladay is. He's had practically as good a season (outside of sheer starts, not to mention CG), and is a huge part of a team in contention.
Cliff Lee is absolutely unreal though, and is closer every day to locking it up.
Halladay's thrown 204 innings so far, at a 158 ERA+. He's struck out 175 and walked 34, allowed 15 home runs. Matszuaka's thrown 70 less innings, with 132.2, at a 151 ERA+. His peripheral numbers are pretty poor - 10 homers, 78 walks and 117 strikeouts.Quote:
Originally Posted by justanewguy
Matsuzaka is not near the discussion, while Halladay's the clear #2 to Lee. The innings Halladay provides are a big chunk of his value, and Matsuzaka is nowhere near that, and that absolutely must be accounted for (which is why Sabathia deserved the Cy Young over Beckett last year). Matsuzaka's also getting very lucky to have an ERA that high. He's not going to sustain that unless he cuts his walk rate drastically.
Agreed.Quote:
Cliff Lee is absolutely unreal though, and is closer every day to locking it up.
You're right, I didn't look at the numbers all that closely, but I knew Matsuzaka was walking a lot of batters. The innings are definitely huge in Halladay's favor, and I had DiceK after Halladay anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoustonGM
However, I tend to lean toward the camp that places extra value on players in terms of the team's overall success when it comes to MVPs and Cy Youngs. I also feel that results trump detailed stats. If the ERAs, win totals, and ERA+s are similar, I wouldn't hold it against a pitcher for getting it done in an "ugly" way. The biggest difference between the two, in my mind, is the innings. And while DiceK did miss a few starts, the fact that Halladay can go out to start and finish a game, along with his detailed stats, outweigh Matsuzaka.
Still, I'd put Matsuzaka third, but probably closer to Halladay than you would.
Halladay is one of the most dominating pitchers this season. I don't think that CLiff lee knows how to pitch anything outside of the strike zone anymore...his strike to ball ratio is amazing...
For award purposes, yes, I'd agree. Although, and I'm sure you know, if a pitcher gets it done in an "ugly" way, he's not likely to sustain that in the future.Quote:
Originally Posted by justanewguy
I think the lack of innings really puts Matsuzaka far behind. He doesn't even qualify for the ERA title as of right now, although he's close to. I'd put Lackey ahead of Matsuzaka, but he's very close in innings. I'd also put Duchscherer ahead of him, although at the end of the season, Matsuzaka's likely to be ahead of Duke. I haven't done any real serious analysis, but a quick eyeball, I'd put the Cy Young ballot as Lee-Halladay-Joe Nathan-Duchscherer-Lackey-Matsuzaka, as of right now. Come the end of the season, I'd guess that it'd be more like Lee-Halladay-Lackey-Matsuzaka-NathanQuote:
The biggest difference between the two, in my mind, is the innings. And while DiceK did miss a few starts, the fact that Halladay can go out to start and finish a game, along with his detailed stats, outweigh Matsuzaka.
Still, I'd put Matsuzaka third, but probably closer to Halladay than you would.
Curious if the 6 people who think that relievers should NEVER win the Cy Young would care to explain their reasoning.
I think relievers need their own award, the rolaids relief award sucks. I'd like to see one for them cause i consider most closers over-rated. not to say i dont think closers ever deserve it. Gange did, but K-Rod should be in the conversation this year.
Oh, and Roy Halladay wipes the floor with dice-k
True, it's just a point system, no actual voting. I think relievers are fine as is, though.Quote:
Originally Posted by WiffleBaller
You mean shouldn't?Quote:
I'd like to see one for them cause i consider most closers over-rated. not to say i dont think closers ever deserve it. Gange did, but K-Rod should be in the conversation this year.
Although Lee has been outstanding I personally would vote for Hallyday - reason+ is 8 COMPLETE games & IMO a tougher division.
He won't win as Lee is the "golden boy" story of the moment
(btw I have nothing against relievers winning the Cy but they have to work harder than a SP,similar to a DH v a Position player - K Rod has been good but the guys above are a better reflection of what the award stands for.)
Cc
Quote:
Originally Posted by HoustonGM
That is in fact a typo, thanks. I was saying he shouldn't be in the convo this year.
Keep in mind that K-Rod is indeed having a remarkable season. Closers are in my opinion result guys, not stat guys. By that I mean that their ERA and K's numbers doesn't really matter that much, they're only out there to do one thing and that is to close games. And he's on pace to having well over 60 saves. That gets 5 stars in my book. Not saying he should win the Cy Young award, but he should definately be in the consideration.
But a "save" is not a particularly hard result, and it's also entirely a result of opportunity which the pitcher can't control. I'd rather have a pitcher accumulate 70 innings of great relief in 1 run and tie games, and get 20 saves, than a pitcher accumulate 70 innings of great relief in "save situations", which could be anyhwere from a 1 to 3 run lead, and get 40 saves. It's about leverage, and nearly any pitcher in the league can close out a 3 run lead with an inning to go. Using your best reliever in that situation is a waste of resources.Quote:
Originally Posted by Slingshot
The Cy Young is for the best pitcher in the league. Saves do not at all tell you anything about how good the pitcher was. K-Rod is not even the best closer, let alone the best pitcher. Yes, he's having a remarkable season. It's remarkable because he's getting a ton of save opportunities. He's already had nearly 60 and it's not even September, and only a couple pitchers ever accumulated 60 opps in an entire year. That's remarkable, but entirely out of his control. It's being on the right team at the right time.
If Mariano Rivera, Joe Nathan, or any other good reliever were given the same amount of opportunities as Rodriguez, they'd have an equal amount of, if not more, saves. By using the save to justify considering him for an award that goes to the best pitcher, we'd be using opportunity, rather than performance, to evaluate players, and that's a silly way to go about evaluation.
Yeah that'd be as silly as giving the award based solely on wins .... oh ... wait ...Quote:
Originally Posted by HoustonGM
Yeah, true, which is why K-Rod is going to come in 2nd or 3rd on the ballot, with an outside shot of actually winning it. The BBWAA doesn't know how to actually evaluate players. They look at wins, saves, and stories.Quote:
Originally Posted by gRYFYN1
If Cliff Lee didn't have a great story to go along with the great season, I'd say K-Rod would be a shoo-in to win it.
:dQuote:
Originally Posted by gryfyn1