If he'd only allowed one or zero ER instead of three in that last start against the Marlins, I'd put him at the top of my ballot. Finicky? Maybe. Things as they are, my vote would be:

1. Dickey
2. Medlen
3. Cueto
4. Kershaw
5. Kimbrel

I hate to put Kimbrel on the ballot ahead of Gio or Zimmerman, but neither pitched 200 innings or had an astounding ERA. Kimbrel not only had the K's, but he's also improved his control dramatically, dropping his BB/9 from 7.0 --> 3.7 --> 2.0 the last three years. His WHIP is 0.65 for the love of God.

Regardless of luck or opponent, Medlen has gotten the job done spectacularly since becoming a starter, but his Cy Young push has accumulated narrative like a rolling stone gathers moss.

Huh?

He would have gotten away with it, if it wasn't for that Medlen kid.

Maybe its a maglev stone, hence no friction.

Dickey.

I'm a Braves fan, and I can barely keep Medlen and Peter Moylan straight. One of those brainlock things.

One's a big tatted Aussie, the other isn't?

Yep, that's Moylan. I listen to more games on the radio than I catch on TV, and both have served mostly as setup men.

I thought this would end with Lee Corso putting a mascot-sized R.A. Dickey head on.

One's a big tatted Aussie, the other isn't?

Moylan = big tatted up Aussie
Medlen = 12 year old looking guy that doesn't curve the brim of his hat

I hate when people hold a great BABIP against a pitcher when it comes to the Cy Young award. BABIP is a predictive stat. I could care less whether a pitcher was dominant all season due to a good BABIP or a good K-rate or a good strand rate. What happened on the field happened on the field.

If Medlen had pitched lucky all year, and posted a 2.00 ERA with only 6 Ks per 9 or something like that, he would still be a better Cy Young candidate to someone with better peripherals who pitched to a 3.00 ERA.

my vote would be:

1. Dickey
2. Medlen
3. Cueto
4. Kershaw
5. Kimbrel

I know Cardinal bias and all, but no way does Medlen get my vote. Kimbrel is even more insane.

1. Dickey
2. Cueto
3. Lohse
4. Kershaw
5. A Washington National pitcher.

Medlen = 12 year old looking guy that doesn't curve the brim of his hat

I believe you mean the 12 year old boy who looks like a 35 year old lesbian.

I believe you mean the 12 year old boy who looks like a 35 year old lesbian.

God. This is ####### fantastic! Thank you.

A .255 BABIP means his performance isn't his "true ability," eh?

What if I told you that there was a man in the 90s who had a .255 BABIP... over a four year period. And that his BABIP indicated not that he was a magical luck wizard, but rather that he was awesome. And further, that in the 1000+ IP he had pitched before those 4 years, his BABIP had been .287, a number higher than the league average. Should we have knocked that man's Cy Young credentials each year, because there was no way he could possibly keep it up?

Medlen has pitched fantastically; I don't need BABIP to tell me that he won't do so forever. People who aren't actually Prime Greg Maddux tend to pitch less than their best from time to time, so Medlen will eventually falter. That's a terrible reason to knock what he's actually done, however.

the 12 year old boy who looks like a 35 year old lesbian

The great BBTF handle candidates just keep on rolling in ...

... though of course it's too long.

12

Kyle Lohse should not even be in the Cy Young conversation and I die a bit inside every time a local STL media hack tries to lump him in there.

He's had a nice season, and Boras will get him a nice contract this offseason, but the fact as a starting pitcher that he went an entire season without once finishing the 8th inning disqualifies him from Cy Young consideration.

Dickey was the best pitcher in the NL. He had the most dominant peak. He pitched the most innings. He's at or near the top in just about every counting and rate statistic. He's the Cy Young.

Gonzalez, Kershaw, and Cueto are the other primary contenders, but all are pretty clearly a half notch below Dickey in some way. Medlen and Kimbrel have interesting cases and either one could be given runner up consideration, but neither has the resume to win the award outright.

I'm a Braves fan, and I can barely keep Medlen and Peter Moylan straight. One of those brainlock things.

One likes to make fun of Nickelback on Twitter. The other one spent time in Danville.

CFB, how low would Medlen's ERA have to be in his 138 IP to get on your ballot? Sub 1.00? His ERA+ is 257. Or is it all about innings for you, such that a starter with a 3.80 ERA in 350 IP would take top spot? I can't say I agree with that logic.

He has 138 innings folks. He's not winning anything. Sure it's not his fault that the Braves management is so stupid that it took them so long to give him a chance, but quantity matters.

Kyle Lohse should not even be in the Cy Young conversation and I die a bit inside every time a local STL media hack tries to lump him in there.

Why not, by war, wpa, and era+ with an innings pitched component he belongs in any listing of top five pitcher in the NL.

CFB, how low would Medlen's ERA have to be in his 138 IP to get on your ballot?

To get on my hypothetical CY Young ballot with 138 innings pitched, it would have to have 10+ complete games and 5+ shutouts. His ERA+ would be fine if that was the case. But when I see obscenely high era+'s like his, it's clear to me that he isn't pitching deep into the games and getting lit up when he is tired(I call it the Pedro effect)

He's had a nice season, and Boras will get him a nice contract this offseason, but the fact as a starting pitcher that he went an entire season without once finishing the 8th inning disqualifies him from Cy Young consideration.

Didn't hurt Roger Clemens in 2004. (technically Clemens did finish the 8th inning once that year, but he only made it to the 8th inning three times)

Sure it's not his fault that the Braves management is so stupid that it took them so long to give him a chance, but quantity matters.

Actually I believe that his transition from reliever to starter was planned in March, and that it was done slowly on purpose to save his arm from accumulating too many innings. Basically he's on a more creative version of the Strasburg plan, and it's tough to argue with the results right now.

Can anyone do a PI search to see what the best ERA+ was in as many IP as Medlen has? I'd be surprised if its ever been bested.

Can anyone do a PI search to see what the best ERA+ was in as many IP as Medlen has? I'd be surprised if its ever been bested.

Yes, Medlen's has been bested.

This is pitchers with over 120 innings pitched and 200 era+

Can anyone do a PI search to see what the best ERA+ was in as many IP as Medlen has? I'd be surprised if its ever been bested.

Best ERA+ for someone throwing between 120 and 140 IP in a season in 283. Medlen's 257 is 3rd on the list. Sadly I'm cheap and don't subscribe so I don't know who the 283 is. Any guesses?

EDIT: Ah I see it was John Hiller.

PJ, Maddux, Big Train, and Gibson immediately leapt to mind as soon as I saw #23.

I'm gonna say John Hiller! :)

Can anyone do a PI search to see what the best ERA+ was in as many IP as Medlen has? I'd be surprised if its ever been bested.

Top 10 ERA+, >130 IP

Medlen finishes 9th.

Edit: Large, illegal-in-NYC beverage to cardsfanboy

But when I see obscenely high era+'s like his, it's clear to me that he isn't pitching deep into the games and getting lit up when he is tired(I call it the Pedro effect)

Since this is completely wrong and easily verifiable, why would you even bother making this post?

Looking at the lists from PI, it reminds me how ####### insanely awesome Pedro 1999/2000 and Maddux 1994/1995 really were.

Why not, by war, wpa, and era+ with an innings pitched component he belongs in any listing of top five pitcher in the NL.

Funny you cite WPA for Lohse, as Kimbrel and Medlen at 1 and 2 in WPA.

Since this is completely wrong and easily verifiable, why would you even bother making this post?

He's completely in the clouds on the subject of Pedro.

Funny you cite WPA for Lohse, as Kimbrel and Medlen at 1 and 2 in WPA.

To be honest I hadn't looked at any of the "clutch" stats in a month or so. I would never honestly use those stats for something like Cy Young, but remembered looking at it in the recent past.

But when I see obscenely high era+'s like his, it's clear to me that he isn't pitching deep into the games and getting lit up when he is tired(I call it the Pedro effect)

Since this is completely wrong and easily verifiable, why would you even bother making this post?

Incredibly wrong.

1. Pedro pitched 186 IP or more for every season but one from 1995-2005. That's a pretty good run of durability, actually.

2. From July 31-present, when the Braves finally put him in the rotation, Medlen has pitched 83.2 IP in 12 starts, 1/3 IP short of 7 IP per start.

3. If he were "getting lit up when he is tired," wouldn't that be reflected in his ERA? Anyway, in his 12 starts he's given up more than 1 R just twice (2 ER and 3 ER).

EDIT:

4. If he were "getting lit up when he is tired," I would think you'd see that he was being lifted in the middle of innings. He's pitched whole innings in every one of his starts but starts #2 and #3 (unless he's been lifted in the middle of an inning having retired no one; I'm not willing to look at every one of his starts to rule this out).

FWIW, Medlen has completed a higher percentage of his starts this year than any pitcher not named Verlander.

But when I see obscenely high era+'s like his, it's clear to me that he isn't pitching deep into the games and getting lit up when he is tired(I call it the Pedro effect)

This is the most puzzling post I've ever read on this site. How does a high ERA+ mean a player is sometimes getting lit up?

This is a rather fun split:

                      AVG  OBP  SLG
1st PA in G as SP    .237 .263 .351
2nd PA in G as SP    .152 .184 .172
3rd PA in G as SP    .192 .213 .288
4th+ PA in G as SP   .083 .083 .083

As you can see, Medlen gets lit up as he gets tired.

Medlen has had a great ERA in 138 innings, but does that make a Cy Young Award winner? For that to be valid you have to believe that ERA is a best measure of pitching quality and that guys like Dickey, Gonzalez and even Cliff Lee who've pitched 50% more innings with really good peripherals weren't as good just because their ERA was higher. If you only care about results and not peripherals, I don't see why ERA is a better measure than WPA and Cueto and Lohse become candidates. Medlen is a valid candidate, but just using ERA+ doesn't seem like conclusive proof that he's the right choice.

Why not, by war, wpa, and era+ with an innings pitched component he belongs in any listing of top five pitcher in the NL.

Which is precisely why you shouldn't rely on those metrics exclusively when measuring pitching performance.

Pitchers who pitch deeper into games are more valuable.

Which is precisely why you shouldn't rely on those metrics exclusively when measuring pitching performance.

Pitchers who pitch deeper into games are more valuable.

I absolutely 100% agree, but it's not like Lohse is competing against Koufax, Gibson or even Maddux or Randy for that distinction.

Dickey made it to the 8th inning 12 times, Kershaw 11, Cueto 7, Lohse 5, Medlen 4, Gonzalez 3, Zimmerman 0. That criteria helps Kershaw, but it doesn't hurt Lohse in comparison to the other competitors.

I'm a fan of the quality start, Lohse is tied for third(Kershaw and Zimmermann) in the nl with 24 (Behind Dickey 26, and Gallardo 25)

This is the most puzzling post I've ever read on this site. How does a high ERA+ mean a player is sometimes getting lit up?

Yep, my fault was quickly putting out a comment while playing with my nephew and didn't word it remotely correct.

When I see those high era+, it seems that in the post 80's era, that it's indicative of a pitcher who doesn't frequently pitch in the 8th and 9th inning, avoiding the opportunities to get lit up that plague other pitchers. The most obvious example of this is Roger Clemens 2004/2005. I call it unfairly the Pedro effect due to Pedro not being as good as the other elite pitchers at getting into the eighth inning, but he's better than any other pitcher in his era at getting to the eighth inning.

This article/post provides a great counterpoint to an argument I haven't heard anyone make.

In addition to taking advantage of poor hitting teams, Medlen has also experienced some luck since becoming a starter. He has a .255 BABIP (batting average of balls in play) as a starter, which is very low for starting pitchers (by contrast Dickey- .278, Gonzalez- .271, and Cueto- .300) and suggest that Medlen is due for a significant regression to the mean, with .300 being a typical major league average). His career BABIP of .295 has come in a reasonable sized sample of 120 games, and is a better indicator of his true ability.

Since 1980, there have been ten seasons in which a pitcher has qualified for the ERA title with an ERA under 2.00. Roger Clemens in 1990 was able to pull it off in 1990 with a BABIP of .292. Of the other nine, none had a BABIP over .263. An ERA under two pretty much ALWAYS means there's some luck involved.

But look at who the pitchers who did it were - Nolan Ryan, Dwight Gooden, John Tudor, Clemens twice, Maddux twice, Pedro Martinez twice, and Kevin Brown. The worst pitcher on the list is John Tudor, who had a really good career. Dwight Gooden is generally considered a guy who lost a Hall of Fame career because of substance issues and misuse. Everyone else is a HoF-caliber player. None of these guys was a true-talent 1.99-ERA pitcher, but there haven't been any of those since the deadball era. There isn't really any point in saying that a guy's performance is unsustainable when he has an ERA under two.

Medlen's issue isn't that his peripherals are masking a mediocre or merely good performance; his FIP would lead the league if he were qualified (are there qualifications for the FIP title?). It's the "if he were qualified" part that drops him behind the other candidates. The author does make a good point about who Medlen's opponents have been, but I don't think that citing Medlen's BABIP provides any useful information about how he's pitched this season.

This is the most puzzling post I've ever read on this site.

Where have you gone, battlefob? BTF turns its lonely eyes to you.

When I see those high era+, it seems that in the post 80's era, that it's indicative of a pitcher who doesn't frequently pitch in the 8th and 9th inning, avoiding the opportunities to get lit up that plague other pitchers.

So who are the pitchers who have pitched more frequently than Medlen to the eighth inning or beyond since Medlen joined the rotation?

It seems like cardsfanboy is taking a little tidbit about Pedro vs Clemens or Randy Johnson and extrapolating it into a league-wide trend.

Or perhaps he dreads Medlen starting the Wild Card Game and is inventing reasons why Medlen hasn't been quite that good.

So who are the pitchers who have pitched more frequently than Medlen to the eighth inning or beyond since Medlen joined the rotation?

None really, my knock against Medlen is nothing that is his fault. He just doesn't have enough innings. Yes he had a couple of games where he was pulled without allowing a run, but for the most part once he established himself as a starter, he has been used well.

Since 1980, there have been ten seasons in which a pitcher has qualified for the ERA title with an ERA under 2.00. Roger Clemens in 1990 was able to pull it off in 1990 with a BABIP of .292. Of the other nine, none had a BABIP over .263. An ERA under two pretty much ALWAYS means there's some luck involved. But look at who the pitchers who did it were - Nolan Ryan, Dwight Gooden, John Tudor, Clemens twice, Maddux twice, Pedro Martinez twice, and Kevin Brown.

You're seeing two different factors in these results. One is that, even with a low BABIP, you need good "FIP skills" to break 2.00 -- so mostly it's good K/BB/HR pitchers who make the list. But it's also true that pitchers do vary to a non-trivial degree in their BABIP skill. Tudor, Clemens, Maddux and Pedro were all above average in preventing hits on BIP (I don't remember the #s for Gooden and Brown), and that skill was a significant part of what made them great pitchers. When these guys posted very low BABIPs, they were getting a bit lucky that year -- but they were already starting from a low level.

Or perhaps he dreads Medlen starting the Wild Card Game and is inventing reasons why Medlen hasn't been quite that good.

Nope, Medlen has been that good, although I usually prefer to not even begin evaluating a young starting pitcher until their 14th game started in a season, but in Medlen's case he didn't have the hiccup that seems to often happen to a young pitcher after their 6th-11th start so he's probably a definite exception that that general rule (that I have)

Or perhaps he dreads Medlen starting the Wild Card Game and is inventing reasons why Medlen hasn't been quite that good.

I never, ever care about the pitcher that the Cardinals is facing in the playoffs. I have seen enough to know that it really doesn't matter how good or bad they are, randomness is accentuated in the post season and anything can happen, fretting or predicting based upon the quality of one player is utterly ridiculous.

A .255 BABIP isn't very out of the ordinary for a really good pitcher in the middle of a hot streak. I wouldn't hold that against Medlen.

But for those willing to dismiss BABIP and DIPS completely in Cy Young voting, do you think Kyle Lohse is as strong a candidate as Cole Hamels? Lohse actually has a lower ERA.

Tudor, Clemens, Maddux and Pedro were all above average in preventing hits on BIP (I don't remember the #s for Gooden and Brown), and that skill was a significant part of what made them great pitchers. When these guys posted very low BABIPs, they were getting a bit lucky that year -- but they were already starting from a low level.

Huh - I didn't know that about Pedro or Clemens. I mean, I knew there were guys who could consistently keep BABIP low, but I wasn't aware that either of those guys was among them.

But for those willing to dismiss BABIP and DIPS completely in Cy Young voting, do you think Kyle Lohse is as strong a candidate as Cole Hamels? Lohse actually has a lower ERA.

I don't dismiss it completely; for instance, I feel very confident that Jorge Sosa circa 2005 was succeeding through voodoo rather than skill.

That said, the CY case for those two pitchers is pretty similar (and basically non-existent for either, mind you). Even the FIP-based fWAR has them at less than 1 WAR apart, and their FIP delta is ~.20. This seems like a pretty bad example to plant a FIP flag on.