Harper takes a case - and the payoff is confusion.
After two days of polling the voters who will decide the 2012 NL Cy Young Award, I can draw two conclusions — one should give R.A. Dickey encouragement; the other could give him extra incentive for his final four starts of the season.
Most significantly, the 12 voters I spoke to — out of 32 in all — were unanimous in saying the race is too close to call with nearly three weeks to go, and too close to even have a clear-cut favorite among four primary candidates: Dickey, Johnny Cueto, Gio Gonzalez and Clayton Kershaw.
...That’s how I happen to have an NL Cy Young vote this year, and like many of the voters I polled, I’m agonizing over it because you can truly make a solid case for any of the top candidates — Dickey, Gonzalez, Cueto and Kershaw. And there is little to separate any one of them from the others.
In addition, Matt Cain and Kyle Lohse are close enough that they could make a dramatic move with outstanding finishes. Aroldis Chapman and Craig Kimbrel are having spectacular seasons as closers, meriting consideration as well.
...The reasons are obvious: Statistics such as earned-run average, innings pitched, walks and hits per inning (WHIP), and strikeout-to-walk ratio all offer a truer evaluation of a pitcher’s performance.
Not that wins are meaningless. But many of the voters said they look at wins as something of a tie-breaker if it’s too close to call. In this case, Gonzalez leads with 19 wins, to 18 for Dickey and 17 for Cueto, but the Nationals lefthander has significantly fewer innings pitched, which some voters view as a key stat.
Repoz
Posted: September 14, 2012 at 05:41 AM |
74 comment(s)
Login to Bookmark
Tags:
awards
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
1. PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth) Posted: September 14, 2012 at 06:03 AM (#4235474)As things stand now I'd vote for Cueto. Not that his ERA this season is necessarily repeatable next year, but that 2.71 in a hitters' paradise is what happened this year and he gets credit for it, even if it involved a lot of luck.
If you don't buy into that philosophy, Kershaw's probably your man. But let's be real here, in a close multi-way race there's no way the writers are going to pick the guy that won last year. He's old news.
Kimbrel also looks like a legitimate candidate to me. What a year he's had. I could see him winning it when the starters split votes.
When I look at the numbers, I think it'll be Gonzalez. Ks, Wins, top 5 ERA, winning ballclub, no obvious frontrunner.
That certainly is a strong argument that Cueto won't be the guy.
Voters do seem to like high innings counts, though. Maybe Dickey has a better shot than I'm giving him credit for. The article is right, of course; this race hasn't been decided yet.
You say that like it's almost a bad thing. I think it's great that voters are willing to look at park adjustments.
Of course it'd be a good thing.
If the season ended today, I'd bet on Gonzalez winning. I think right now I'd vote for Dickey, though I probably should vote for Cueto.
I think it's lucky that both Chapman and Kimbrel have been so brilliant this year. Hopefully they'll split the closer vote.
I don't know if team success matters much for the CYA, but I'll admit to not having looked at it closely. If anything, Dickey has an advantage in that his team won't slow him down in the next few weeks to rest up for the postseason. Cueto has been shaky his last two starts. Since he's (going to finish) well beyond his previous innings high, I bet that he gets to skip a start down the stretch and doesn't throw more than six innings per from here on out.
But have to agree with the article, it's too close to call.
I don't think people worry about overuse for 37 y.o. Knuckleballers.
That said, I'd vote for Dickey if I had a vote today. That said, there's enough starts left for someone to separate from the pack. We'll see.
That being said, Cueto's going to have a tough time winning unless he starts pitching well again. Two weeks ago, 4 Reds had very good shots at awards - Cueto (CY), Frasier (ROY), Ludwick (Comeback Player), Chapman (Rolaids Relief); now, after slumps by all 4, I'd guess only Ludwick has a shot.
I don't see someone who had 92 innings pitched in his career prior to this season, getting consideration for comeback player of the year. Dunn is probably the AL player.... the NL player is a little bit tougher, I had predicted Santana, but his numbers haven't been good, Wainwright is second in the league in complete games and shutouts, but his 95 era+ isn't that impressive.
Shouldn't they shut him down altogether? He could get hurt!
He's already signed through 2016 with options for 17-18.
Nothing personal, but this is kind of stupid. Why would I care about something like that right now? The Nationals aren't the Pirates; they have money to spend, and they're going to have even more to spend after this season as revenues across the board start to go up, big time.
That is almost certainly true.
At the same time, Kimbrel has faced 195 batters this year. And he has struck out 98 of them.
That is just so absurd--so Bugs Bunnyish--I'd like to see it recognized somehow.
I understand this sentiment, but it falls down for me for at least two reasons, which Joey and Walt have already mentioned. While I suppose a 2012 Cy could theoretically increase Gio's 2019 cost, this seems unlikely to me, and more importantly, it's too far down the road for me to worry myself about. The other biggie is that I'm a fan before I'm a pragmatist - I want to see the guy I've been cheering for win the award, it's fun! Also, Cy Young awards are mounted forever, or something...
Kimbrel and Chapman duking it out for the Rolaids Relief Man award seems as good a way as any. Personally, I prefer Chapman. Unfortunately for awards purposes, sometimes a guy just has an amazing year at the same time that someone else is amazing.
Plus I must acknowledge that my former statement is stupid for another reason not yet mentioned: your team's guy winning a major award does good things for general fan interest in your team.
NL --
Cy Young: Gio Gonzalez (though I'd vote for Dickey)
MVP: Buster Posey (I think McCutchen deserves it more, but I think Posey will win. Nobody's going to vote for Braun after the offseason antics.)
ROY: Bryce Harper
Reliever: Craig Kimbrel
Comeback Player: Ryan Ludwick
Manager of the Year: Davey Johnson
Executive of the Year: Mike Rizzo (somewhere Ray DiPerna is gagging)
AL --
Cy Young: Justin Verlander (even though Price, Sale, and Felix all have equivalent or stronger arguments, I think Verlander gets it again on the strength of his IP alone)
MVP: Mike Trout
ROY: Mike Trout (making him the first LEGITIMATE rookie to win both ROY and MVP since Fred Lynn in '75 -- let's face it, Ichiro was a "rookie" in name only -- and for a non-playoff team no less!)***
Reliever: Honestly have no idea
Comeback Player: Adam Dunn
Manager of the Year: Buck Showalter, the biggest no-brainer of anyone on either of these lists
Executive of the Year: Billy Beane (somewhere Backlasher is gagging)
*** Actually, it occurs to me that even Trout really skirts the boundary of being a legitimate rookie; didn't the Angels artificially manipulate his plate appearances last year to make sure he fell something like two or three PA short of qualifying for a "full season" appearance? Lame.
EDIT: Fine.
Maybe, but Alex Rios is very close, and, to me, much more surprising.
Although pitchers recovering from surgery don't seem to be as miraculous anymore either. I guess the NL is in a bit of a down year for real comebacks? Maybe the league can come back from that next year.
Well, you know, OPS+ is supposed to be park-adjusted...
A.J. Burnett, Adam LaRoche and Aaron Hill can also make a very good case for Comeback Player in the NL.
According to BBRef, Rios' WAR has increased by 5.3 (-2.1 to 3.2) from 2011, while Dunn's has increased by 4.2 (-3.1 to 1.1). Rios has obviously been the more valuable player, but he wasn't as abysmally awful in 2011 as Dunn was. Rios' WAR lead also depends on you believing that Rios' defense has had a .6 WAR improvement, while Dunn's increasing defensive shortcomings cost him an additional .2 WAR over 2012. So it's close.
The shape of Dunn's season would make me want to give it to Rios. OPS by month:
Month Dunn RiosApr 881 807
May 976 738
June 770 950
July 788 1005
Aug 691 720
I know that the games in May count just as much as the ones in August, but Rios' year looks more like a sustainable comeback, especially when you consider that Dunn basically has to hit like he did in April and May to be a good player. Dunn looks like a guy who made some adjustments in the offseason, and now the league has partially figured them out. Rios just looks like he's a solid ballplayer again.
(Edit: Rios of course already did this dance in 2009-2010, so in a way I wouldn't want to give him a comeback award. No reason to think he won't flop again in 2013, then be great in '14. Or something.)
And while I wouldn't dispute that Buck Showalter is the frontrunner and very worthy for AL Manager of the Year, I wouldn't call him "the biggest no-brainer of anyone on either of these lists." The guy in Oakland's got a pretty good case too.
It's a little bit of both, but mostly it's about a "lost" season. I think only 45 games last year would qualify him for comeback player of the year.
Not sure, but leading the league in wpa has zero to do with being Cy young worthy. (That is like leading the league in xFip/fip ...useless stats which have no purpose in an awards discussion)
Drysdale did. Koosman finished second in the voting in 1976 (to Randy Jones of the Padres).
There is why you don't extrapolate miniscule numbers. There is also why you don't use WPA in MVP discussions.
Except that the Cy Young Award has nothing to do with "value". It has to do with who was the best pitcher, and I don't see how someone could say that a modern reliever couldn't have pitched better than a starter just because the reliever can compress everything into those innings. If you strike out half of the batters that you've faced, you deserve consideration.
Predictive value in a vacuum, sure. Not really useful for any award discussion, agreed. Not sure if it's reasonable people that want to bring them to the discussion or if it's just stubborn people.
When you only face 200 batters, that consideration should be short and final....He pitched great for about a month of a starters work load...Great rate stats, but not really the best pitcher. He's able to go balls to the walls for 4 batters, there is a reason why failed starters oftentimes make it as a good reliever, it's a massively easier job. I'll take Medlen's last 55 innings over what Kimbrel has done all season. Add in another 55 innings of relieving, and Kimbrel hasn't even been the most impressive pitcher on his own team. (Heck Beachy has a string of 49 innings with a 1.2 era this season also.)
Heck most of the contenders for the award could give you a split somewhere during the season where they posted 50 innings of 1.20 era. (don't care about the strikeouts, runs allowed is the stat that you are going for)
1: Burdette was never really good enough to be a Cy candidate except one time... but he did finish 3rd once- which was that one time (and he finished 3rd, but he was barely top 10, he win 20, none of the really good pitchers that year in the NL won 20
2: Koosman had a 2nd and a 6th, he finished 2nd in 1976 because he went 21-10, 2.69, Seaver went 14-11, 2.59 in more innings and finished 8th
3: Drysdale won one,. so did Smoltz in 1996 when he went 24-8, he was NOT regarded as #1 (or even #2) on that particular staff
I don't think how you get the outs should matter. Awards aren't about raw ability, or projected performance, they're about actual performance.
And it's about as good of an argument as Voting for MVP based upon "Rbi's on a pennant winning team"....the argument is there, it doesn't make it a good argument.
Because the actual performance of fielders doesn't matter...
After initially saying he was ineligible, MLB reinterpreted the rules to distinguish between service time accrued and days spent on the active roster.
The best answer is to weigh FIP and ERA in some manner. Not to ignore one or the other. Anyone who thinks you should only look at ERA is stubborn.
I think anyone who considers Fip is stubborn. They need to come out with a better stat in which it's adjusted on the individual basis. ERA is results, even if it includes defense, it's ultimately actual things that happened on the field. Fip doesn't care about what happened on the field, it is just an educated guess of what should have happened in a theoretical universe.
You do realize that homeruns allowed is about the only actual thing fip considers? If you meant to say that a pitcher throws an 0-2 pitch down and away and he hits a homerun with 2 men on base, he shouldn't be penalized for those men on base because of bad luck, then you are accurately reflecting Fip.
Fernando Rodney. .66 ERA and he's a closer (43 saves, but that's besides the point). He's got it locked.
First time I have ever heard that claim. If that is the case then it would make all the fip, xfip and dips data even more useless.
Don't really disagree, as ERA is a function of the order of the hits, but given a choice between full retard(fip/xfip) and a less accurate measure, there is no contest. I will go with ERA/ERA+ all the time. Also a component era figured using actual performanced allowed is another method I can get behind.
Seems like a law of diminishing returns after a while - once you're good enough to save almost all the games where you have a chance, you're pretty much good enough.
Because the actual performance of fielders doesn't matter...
Because K's and BB's don't tell us anything about the performance of the fielders. It just shows us how many chances they had. Let's stop pretending pitchers can't effect the quality of contact.
If you want to adjust for defensive quality, use an actual measure of defense.
WPA is simply a meaningless stat. It doesn't even measure what it purports to measure.
Just looking at walks and strikeouts is a mistake. Why should a pitcher get credit for a meatball thrown down the middle of the plate that Frenchy fouls back? Or a get-me-over fastball that Adam Dunn takes for strike one? Or a hanging curve that Mark Reynolds swings through? Or the enormous number of balls that Bill Hohn mistakenly calls strikes of strikes that Doug Eddings screws up and calls balls? That's giving way too much credit to the pitcher for outcomes that aren't truly dependent on him and him alone.
The only real way to determine the Cy Young winner is to rate each individual pitch for its effectiveness, regardless what the hitter did with it. A nastiness scale, if you will. Location, velocity, movement, etc. Score it, average it and the one with the highest average per pitch is your winner. No muss, no fuss. Though if you want to get crazy and apply a little leverage to the scale, thereby rewarding those pitchers who were at their nastiest when the game condition most dictated it, I'll listen to arguments.
When talking awards, no one cares about best "stuff". We care about performance. Projection is for the off-season. I really don't know why we'd stray beyond actual run prevention; adjusted for defense if you want.
Outcomes with adjustments is the way to go, I think.
Because the reason he fouled it back might be due to the setup pitch thrown before. I know you were just being cute, but it's not a good analogy.
I don't think Rodney can be ruled out as a Cy Young contender. The main candidates have all faltered recently, it's possible that none of them will reach 20 wins, Sale likely won't reach 200 innings, etc. Meanwhile Rodney has been a shutdown closer, will probably throw 75 innings or more, and may have the narrative of passing Eckersley for lowest ERA in 50+ innings.
You can make all the usual arguments against relievers for the Cy Young but with the way the voters tend to look at it he has a real chance.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main