AL Cy Young

[loveyabye]

I know wins can be overrated, but here's an award where an even number like 20 can score major points -- no pun intended -- with the voters. Beckett's go Sabathia in ERA, albeit a small margin, and wins -- two-third's of the triple crown. I think that'll make a world of difference come voting time.

Peavy's got the real triple crown.

Yes, Beckett's got 20 wins. He's also got 29 starts, four fewer than Sabathia, and 194 innings, 23 fewer than Lackey and 40 fewer than Sabathia. He's got a great K/BB ratio, but ... Sabathia has a better one.

That 0.05-run difference in ERA? It's one run over the course of 234 innings. One run over an entire season. It's the difference between winning the game 5-2 or 5-3.

I think C.C.'s earned this one.

As an Indians fan I agree. However, the Indians have not won a major individual award since Gaylord Perry in '72 and I don't think it's going to happen this year either.

The biggest slight was 1995 when Mo Vaughn won the MVP award over Albert Belle, and this was before Belle became so Belle-like.

Belle: .317/50 HR/173 RBI
Vaughn: .300/39/165

 

[mike311gd]

I know wins can be overrated, but here's an award where an even number like 20 can score major points -- no pun intended -- with the voters. Beckett's go Sabathia in ERA, albeit a small margin, and wins -- two-third's of the triple crown. I think that'll make a world of difference come voting time.

Peavy's got the real triple crown.

Yes, Beckett's got 20 wins. He's also got 29 starts, four fewer than Sabathia, and 194 innings, 23 fewer than Lackey and 40 fewer than Sabathia. He's got a great K/BB ratio, but ... Sabathia has a better one.

That 0.05-run difference in ERA? It's one run over the course of 234 innings. One run over an entire season. (Seriously, calculate it yourself. (82/234)*9 = 3.153846. (83/234)*9 = 3.192308. That's just one tiny run.)

I think C.C.'s earned this one.

I'm not arguing with that. But I don't see him beating Beckett when the votes are counted. Twenty seems like the magic number for pitchers, especially after last season when no one reached the mark. If Beckett gets shelled tomorrow, and Sabathia can put some more distance between them, my view will probably tweak a little. Right now, though, I think Beckett gets the nod -- whether he deserves it or not.

 

[mike311gd]

Oh, well, C.C. is my answer. The innings clinch it for me; it shows how durable he's been, saving the bullpen every five games. Without him, that pen might be overworked.

 

[zeke12]

buckdub --

I know what you're saying, but at the same time, it's not as though either one of them is vastly superior when W-L is discounted -- as was the case with Santana and Colon.

Beckett's got a slightly lower ERA and WHIP, for instance. Sabathia has certainly pitched MORE than Beckett, and that should probably tip the scales over W-L record.

You're absolutely right that W-L record still factors in too much, but I don't see this as a particularly egregious example. Beckett has certainly pitched well enough to win the award in most years, and one might even argue that, in the end, Beckett pitching in Boston is a bigger factor than the 20 wins.

Of course, we're both assuming how the vote will go, so we might just be jerking each other off here.

 

[Oz]

Agree with you, Mike. And Zeke, too.

But I don't care that Beckett WILL win, because I think he will, and we all know why. I'm asking who SHOULD win.

I voted for Beckett, because I believe he will win. Sabathia probably ought to win, though.

 

[buckweaver]

Well, let's not go sucking each other's dicks quite yet.

But you're right that Beckett has pitched well enough to win it most years. I just think Sabathia has pitched much better -- that slightly worse ERA, as I noted, is the difference of a single, solitary run over the same number of innings. I think that's a wash, just as I think that 20-6 vs. 18-7 is a wash and Sabathia's K/BB vs. Beckett's WHIP is a wash.

So the difference to me is in the innings pitched ... 4 more starts and 40 more innings is a major, major swing. If Beckett had made four more starts, at the CYA-caliber level he's pitched at, the Red Sox might have locked up home-field three weeks ago. And then he'd really be a lock for the award.

 

[zeke12]

As long as you remember your durability committment the next time Bert Blyleven and the HOF come up, I cede the point and my remaining time to the distinguished gentleman from California.

 

[buckweaver]

Fifth in strikeouts, ninth in shutouts ... yeah, I'm on the Bert Bandwagon.

 

[zeke12]

Help me out, would you?

The Bert Bandwagon is large, and growing. Viva la Bert!

 

[spnited]

I voted for Beckett because he deserve to win.
I don't see where Sabathia was superior in so many ways except wins. And you guys seem to be putting an awful lot of stock in innings pitched. True, Beckett missed a few starts, but ...

Beckett averaged 6 2/3 IP/start; Sabathia averaged 7 IP/start
Beckett averaged 8.7k/9 IP; Sabathia averaged 7.8 K/9 IP
Beckett has marginally (ok, insignificant) edge in ERA and WHIP.
Beckett also had 26 decisions in 29 starts (very high ratio) to CC's 25 decs. in 33 starts.

More wins, fewer losses (in more decisions), better ERA and WHIP, better k/9 IP.
Beckett is the winner.

Sabathia has a strong case but if Beckett wins there is no way to say Sabathia got screwed.

 

[zeke12]

spnited --

I don't disagree with that. I don't disagree with buckdub, either. I don't think either of us really thinks either one of those two can get screwed here.

There is certainly merit to your point that it appears, at least from the numbers, that Sabathia got taken off the hook a few times.

There's also merit to the argument that Sabathia was more durable.

Both are probably deserving. I do think Beckett will win, and I won't have a problem with that.

 

[spnited]

And after looking at the numbers, I don't think it's hard to say Sabathia outpitched Beckett at all. It's very easy for me to say that Sabathia ... has flat-out ... outpitched Beckett. He's outpitched him in every way.

Except in the W-L record.

I don't know, Zeke....seems Buck thinks Sabathia has outpitched Beckett in every way... which he has not.

 

[zeke12]

Well, I'll let buckdub speak for himself, but I think that depends on what weight you give to each number.

Clearly, you're placing more weight on K/9 innings and he's placing more on total K's...

The beauty of baseball, methinks.

 

[amraeder]

spnited --

I don't disagree with that. I don't disagree with buckdub, either. I don't think either of us really thinks either one of those two can get screwed here.

There is certainly merit to your point that it appears, at least from the numbers, that Sabathia got taken off the hook a few times.

There's also merit to the argument that Sabathia was more durable.

Both are probably deserving. I do think Beckett will win, and I won't have a problem with that.

I'd have to look, but I think the fact that Sabathia has fewer decisions per start is because of the bullpen blowing wins for him, not the team picking him up in would-be losses.

That said, Fausto for President!! er, Cy Young

 

[bostonbred]

I'm biased, but I have seen about 95% of Sox games this season. And Beckett's been the only consistant pitcher of the bunch...the only poor game I remember him pitching was earlier in the summer against the Rockies.

Without him, one could argue the Sox wouldn't even be in the playoffs. He's been that important at the front of the rotation, especially since Dice-K ran out of gas late this season, Schilling missed almost two months, and Wakefield's been mediocre-to-terrible after a superb April and May.

 

[Oz]

I'm biased, but I have seen about 95% of Sox games this season. And Beckett's been the only consistant pitcher of the bunch...the only poor game I remember him pitching was earlier in the summer against the Rockies.

Add in a game against the Yankees in April, one against the Rangers in June and one against the Orioles in July. Those are the games where he gave up five or six runs this season. So four there.

Sabathia, meanwhile, has six such games with the last coming in mid-July.

 

[amraeder]

I'm biased, but I have seen about 95% of Sox games this season. And Beckett's been the only consistant pitcher of the bunch...the only poor game I remember him pitching was earlier in the summer against the Rockies.

Without him, one could argue the Sox wouldn't even be in the playoffs. He's been that important at the front of the rotation, especially since Dice-K ran out of gas late this season, Schilling missed almost two months, and Wakefield's been mediocre-to-terrible after a superb April and May.

Thing is, without any of these guys, their teams wouldn't be in the playoffs.
Carmona's been good, but C.C. had to stop losing streak after losing streak when the Indians were trying to get the back of the rotation figured on. No C.C. (or Carmona) and no playoffs for the Tribe.

 

[bostonbred]

I'm biased, but I have seen about 95% of Sox games this season. And Beckett's been the only consistant pitcher of the bunch...the only poor game I remember him pitching was earlier in the summer against the Rockies.

Add in a game against the Yankees in April, one against the Rangers in June and one against the Orioles in July. Those are the games where he gave up five or six runs this season. So four there.

Sabathia, meanwhile, has six such games with the last coming in mid-July.

Judging by earned runs, Beckett's had three games with 5 or more runs with the last coming on July 31. Two of those came in his poor June.

As you mentioned, Sabathia's had six games (twice as many as Beckett) of 5 or more earned runs with the last coming on July 14.

Both have been very good. But with Carmona and Sabathia both aces, this will most likely turn into what happened in 2002 with Barry Zito grabbing the Cy Young (not saying he didn't deserve it) because Pedro and Lowe basically cancelled each other despite each having good arguments for deserving the award.

 

[heyabbott]

No one likes Wang?

 

[mike311gd]

No one likes Wang?

How long have you been saving that one?