2004 Cy Young Awards - Predictions and Commentary

On the merits: Schmidt followed by Clemens and Sheets (Rocket actually got a tough loss yesterday), Mulder followed thisclose by Santana and Schilling.

Bill James formulated a Cy predictor for the latest book, based on past voting factors... Schmidt has nearly caught Gagne, and Rivera leads Mulder:

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/features/cy

Seaver was my fave player as a kid, but fer Chrissake if he said "the National League is hitting under .200 against Leiter / Schmidt" once more... They play interleague games, Tom. And with his "In my day we threw 135+ pitches," TT has a great chance to be Bob Feller in 25 years.

Has a mere 9 wins, so the James Cy Predictor has him 14th.

Jason Schmidt - 49.3
Mark Mulder - 47.1
Roger Clemens - 46.6
Johan Santana - 46.6
Ben Sheets - 44.2
Livan Hernandez - 43.5
Curt Schilling - 43.1
Randy Johnson - 42.3
Tom Glavine - 42.0
Carlos Zambrano - 41.3
Al Leiter - 40.7
Ryan Drese - 40.1
Carl Pavano - 39.3
Brad Radke - 39.2
Russ Ortiz - 39.0

Schmidt is the NL Cy Young canidate with no one else really close. Without him, SF would be nothing.

Well, that rationale isn't working on the Rolen fans re Bonds for MVP, is it? Of course, Schmidt hasn't won 6 Cys, so there's no Schmidt fatigue.

That would be true if the Giants had only won one of every five games. Fortunately, they are just north of one of every two games, so obv. there is something else going on in SF.

No pitcher is having a dominating, MVP consideration year, ie Pedro 1999-2000 or Maddux '94-95.

But that's not dominance.

DATE     OPPONENT        IP     H     ER     BB     SO     HR     W/L
6/9      Mets           7.0     6      1      0     10      1      W
6/15     Expos          8.0     3      2      0      7      1      W
6/20     Brewers        8.0     4      2      2     12      1      W
6/25     Brewers        7.0     4      1      0     10      1      W
7/1      White Sox      8.0     3      2      2     12      1      L
7/6      Royals         9.0     3      0      2     13      0      W
7/11     Tigers         8.0     2      2      2     11      1      L
7/17     Royals         8.0     1      0      4      9      0      W
7/22     Devil Rays     7.0     3      1      3     10      1
7/27     White Sox      6.0     2      1      2      6      1      W
8/1      Red Sox        8.0     2      2      1     12      2      W
8/7      A's            6.1     7      3      1     10      0      W
8/12     Mariners       7.0     7      1      2      7      1      W
8/18     Yankees        7.0     5      2      1      6      0      W
8/23     Rangers        8.0     4      1      1     11      1      W
---------------------------------------------------------------------
         TOTAL        112.1    56     21     23    146     12    12-2

"Over his last 15 starts, Santana is 12-2 with a 1.68 ERA (the Twins were shutout and scored one run in the two games he lost). He has averaged 11.7 strikeouts per nine innings while giving up an astounding 4.5 hits per nine innings, and has a 6.3-to-1 strikeout-to-walk ratio. Santana has also averaged 7.5 innings per start while going at least seven innings 13 times, and has pitched against five of the top six offenses in the American League."

GIANTS NOTEBOOK

Schmidt can't shake injury, will miss at least next start

By David Kiefer

Mercury News

Jason Schmidt was scratched from Tuesday's start because his strained right groin hasn't healed enough.

The Giants ace tested it Sunday by throwing for eight minutes in the outfield, followed by about 15 half-speed pitches off an indoor mound. There was no pain, but Schmidt was tentative about the possibility of throwing with a full windup or at full speed.

The plan is for Schmidt to pitch Saturday, with Wayne Franklin starting in Schmidt's place Tuesday, but there is no certainty that Schmidt will be ready even by then.

``You've got to go with his gut instincts,'' pitching coach Dave Righetti said. ``And his gut instincts needed a few more days, and we're going to give it to him.''

There may be a temptation to use Schmidt in a playoff race even if he's not 100 percent, but trainer Stan Conte said that's not an option.

``Groin injuries on pitchers are potentially dangerous on elbows, shoulders and everything else,'' Conte said. ``You want to be as sure as we can be that he's going to be able to go out there and pitch his normal game and not hurt anything else.''

Schmidt went on the disabled list for more than a month because of a groin injury to start the 2002 season, but there is no talk of the D.L. just yet. If Schmidt does not show improvement on his next throwing days, Tuesday and Wednesday, that could change.

2003 National League Cy Young Award
                          1st           Max        |       Season Results 
 Rk Name             Team Place Points Points Share|  W-L   IP  ERA   WHIP  SO SV
+--+----------------+----+-----+------+------+-----+------+---+-----+-----+---+--+
  1 Eric Gagne        LAD   28    146    160  0.91 |  2-3   82  1.20 0.693 137 55
  2 Jason Schmidt     SFG    2     73    160  0.46 | 17-5  208  2.34 0.953 208   
  3 Mark Prior        CHC    2     60    160  0.38 | 18-6  211  2.43 1.103 245   
  4 Russ Ortiz        ATL    0      9    160  0.06 | 21-7  212  3.82 1.314 149   

anyway, i'm sure we've had this arg before, but he automatically always (theoretically) pitches when it counts, and they don't. the fact that none of them have any control over it doesn't change how it effects their value to their teams. i'm not saying gagne was as valuable as schmidt or prior last year, and the voting was ridiculous (28 first place votes to 2 apiece for prior and schmidt???), but i didn't think him being in the running, or even winning, was all that ridiculous. and i definitely don't think he's overrated, though it'll be interesting to see how he comes out of this recent speed bump (and i'm pretty sure that's all it is).

if gagne is so good, why does he pitch so rarely?

overall, his innings have a much higher leverage than prior's or schmidt's. proven by science.

"if gagne is so good, why does he pitch so rarely?"

i don't think he pitches "rarely"; he pitches in about half of the dodgers games. as for the innings, name one closer who consistently throws more than one inning per appearance. (i don't think there is one; there might be an elite reliever or two every now and then, like mota or even foulke last year.)

gagne has been atrocious this month though, with a much lower strikeout rate so it's not just bad luck. he's gotten 4 days off, and if he struggles in his next couple appearances i'd be pretty worried were i a dodgers fan.

btw, gagne's actually faced a higher overall quality of batters.

let me say this again, i saw gagne as a starter twice get his ass handed to him in games where his pitching led to sizable deficits for his team = his "low-leverage inning" pitching was crap and he was demoted to the bullpen. gagne became a closer not because he was great at protecting leads from inning one, that's for sure!

so do you think prior and schmidt would fare better or worse than gagne if they pitched solely "high-leverage" innings?

prior and schmidt aren't "worse" pitchers when they have big leads, it's just that their tremendous abilities aren't being maximized in such a situation. gagne's abilities aren't fully maximized either (except in theory as (as i'm sure you know very well) the contemporary closer model is hardly the most efficient use of ace relievers), but there's still some degree of control there and it adds a lot to the value of what he does.

SF 100-61
Schmidt's 17 wins in 29 starts are .17 of their total wins. Now even if they won eight or nine of Schmidt's no decisions, that is still about .25 percent of their victories.

LA 85-77
Gagne had 55 saves and two wins, so he was involved in .67 percent of his teams victories. Now he didn't have to pitch as many innings, but he did have to be involved much more often.

Closers are overrated until your team starts dropping big games in the ninth, especially in the playoffs.

72-73-74 A's -- Rollie Fingers
75-76 Reds -- Rawly Eastwick/Will McEnaney (good overall bullpen)
77-78 Yanks -- Goose Gossage
79 Pirates -- Kent Tekulve
80 Phillies -- Tug McGraw
82 Cards -- Bruce Sutter
84 Tigers -- Willie Hernandez
85 Royals -- Dan Quisenberry
86 Mets -- Roger McDowell/Jesse Orosco (good overall bullpen)
87 Twins -- Jeff Reardon
89 A's -- Dennis Eckersley
90 Reds -- Myers/Dibble/Charlton "The Nasty Boys"
91 Twins -- Rick Aguilera
92-93 Blue Jays -- Tom Henke/Duane Ward (good overall bullpen)
96 Yankees -- Wetteland/Rivera
98-99-00 Yankees -- Rivera
02 Angels -- Percival/K Rod/Donnelley (good overall bullpen)

It seems that most of the teams that win it all have a good closer. The teams that won it all not mentioned usually had killer starting pitching and some had good bullpens, but perhaps the closer wasn't as top notch.

The true ironic thing about Gygax's Gagne bashing is not that he is a Giants fan, but that he has him on his fantasy team.

Were I a GM, I would take a good starter over a great closer any day of the week. And I think it's funny when gygaxor's player grudges come out b/c I definitely have some of my own.

sure luck plays a part w/ any reliever because whether their appearances, duration, and situations are entirely at the mercy of the manager/game situation instead of written in stone. i don't think that means we should discount what a guy does when we're talking about a seasonal award.

And John, I'm genuinely surprised that you're making the "high leverage" argument, since it's in my opinion an ephemeral and arbitrary distinction. A team scores in the first inning, and then both pitchers throw zeroes up on the board. Is the ninth necessarily more "important" than that first inning now? Or a middle inning where a runner's on second with less than two out?

"a way to smooth out the problem of comparing the apples and oranges of starting/closing would be to examine common performance -- i.e. how Schmidt/Prior/GagMe do as starters; or, how same do as closers. Since we have one of these sets, we'll use that, and we know how it breaks down."
i agree, if you're asking who the better pitcher is, BUT:

-gagne might be a much better pitcher now
-no one's saying he's actually better, or even as good, as prior or schmidt.
-and what i feel like i'm still not getting across for whatever reason is that i'm not talking so much actual talent here as i am actual value. the cy young isn't determined by talent, and it shouldn't be. and i think, though the best reliever in baseball is never as talented a pitcher the best starter, it is possible, through intelligent utilization of the reliever's skills and some luck, to significantly bridge and possibly surpass that difference in terms of value to one's team.

if you don't want to take that into consideration because it's beyond the control of the pitcher and because he's actually an inferior talent, i think i'm ok with that. i just can't stand big thick lines that gets drawn in these debates by most people - "context shouldn't be considered in the deciding of the mvp award and those that do consider it are morons" (even though i think context-neutral evaluation is important), "relievers shouldn't be considered for the cy and those that do consider them are idiots" (even though there's something to that idea as well). (and i don't think that's what you or gygax are saying at all but forgive me for taking this opportunity to pick on a strawman. i just hate seeing blind partisan bullshit from people who i feel should be above it.)

The few teams that have won it all without a good closer are teams that usually have a bunch of good starting pitchers and in some cases like the 01 D-Backs and the 88 Dodgers, used their top starter to both start in the series and close out the final game (Johnson and Hershiser).

A team can win it all without a closer, but I would say is much more likely to do so with one.

"Santana now leads Mulder in the following categories:

- ERA
- Batting Average Against
- On-Base Percentage Against
- Slugging Percentage Against
- OPS Against
- Strikeouts
- Strikeouts Per Nine Innings
- Walks
- Walks Per Nine Innings
- Strikeout-to-Walk Ratio
- WHIP
- Quality Starts
- Quality Start Percentage
- Average Game Score
- DIPS ERA
- Component ERA
- Win Shares
- Win Above Average
- Win Shares Percent
- Runs Saved Above Average
- Value Over Replacement Player
- Support-Neutral Wins Above Replacement"

santana has a waaay cooler name.

>i have to think rivera was every bit as valuable as, say, pettitte during the yankees' run<

No doubt. But that's because Rivera is a great relief ace, and Pettitte was great in 1997 and merely OK to pretty good in every other season of his career.

"...in 1990, Bob Welch got 27 wins for the Oakland A's, an absurd amount of wins. He had a great year all around. But the reason he got 27 wins was not because he had a great year; he had a great year because he was, statistically speaking, the third luckiest pitcher since WWII. By that, I mean that he won because his relief pitchers and hitters won the games for him. If you give him a league average bullpen and batters, his .816 winning percentage would have been .589."

http://use.perl.org/~pudge/journal/14871

Welch still won 27 games! He was the 3rd luckiest pitcher since WWII, well outside of McLain winning 31 in 68, no other AL pitcher had won 27 since Feller in 1940.

NL Pitchers, VORP

Randy Johnson 59.2
Jason Schmidt 55.8
Carl Pavano 51.3
Livan Hernandez 46.9
Roger Clemens 46.9

Of course, Arizona scores their 1 run on a HBP, a sac bunt by RJ's PH, a single to right (that didn't score the runner?), and a sac fly. Ungh.

It's a lot like the 2002 Cy race between Schilling and Unit -- Schilling had a big lead in wins (and ERA, I believe) and people were ready to etch his name on the statue in mid-August, but Unit finished strong and Schilling faltered (although he still won 20+ games). If he hadn't tapered off so much then the award would have been his that year, and I think he's in the same position now.

For the NL, I just can't see Unit getting it if he finishes with a W-L below .500. If I were betting now, I'd still say Schmidt, provided he doesn't fuck up too much more.

In a year with no dominant starters (with impressive W-L, that is), could Armando Benitez get consideration?

Benitez 2004 61.1 IP 28 H 58 SO 41 S 1.03 ERA
Gagne 2003 82 IP 37 H 137 SO 55 S 1.20 ERA

I think he'd have to finish with more than 50 saves to get serious consideration, but with Florida making a WC run right now it might not be out of the question. Other than the strikeout rate, he compares quite well with Gagne's Cy season (and 9K/IP is still pretty amazing).

On the Bill James Predictor, Schmidt is now FIFTH, trailing Gagne, Benitez, Isringhausen! and Pavano. Carl P and Clemens are both back in contention, and if either wins 20 while Schmidt doesn't, I like their chances better than any closer's, or Big Unit's.

Johan Santana ...
                         GS      ERA      W     L     OAVG     SO/9
This Season              30     2.85     17     6     .196     10.4
Since June 1             19     1.66     15     3     .146     11.4
Since All-Star Break     11     1.38     10     0     .152     11.1

In your effort to discount "wins" when selecting a Cy Young award winner you overlook the fact that the mark of a great pitcher is to win the tough games. Sandy Koufax got little run support from the Dodgers but he won the 1-0 and 2-1 games. Yes, giving up three runs may be a quality start, but the idea is to outpitch the other guy. Johnson has a history of losing tough games. There is a missing intangible somewhere. -- Stephen Perry, Raleigh, N.C.

Stephen, I wasn't trying to discount wins as a measuring stick for the Cy. The number of wins is a factor. It should be. The question is how many? I said before that I don't think a guy with a losing record should get it. I think it takes a .500 record, minimum. And it'd help if Johnson got in the top 10 in wins. Otherwise, I agree with you about the Unit. I'm not sure what the intangible is that's missing -- I guess that's part of what makes it an intangible -- but something's amiss. Johnson always seems to give up the late solo homer, or maybe two of them, and the way the Diamondbacks are playing, that's usually enough to bury him.

Gagne actually had a losing record last year (2-3), but W-L doesn't really matter with relievers.

Gagne is still in the lead, but I think that's a weakness of the CYP. That is, when it comes to closers, the W-L record isn't so important. (Gagne is 6-3, so he gets 30 points for his W-L record alone).

http://www.aarongleeman.com/rivas1.jpg

Some espn.com dingaling declared that the NL Cy is between Clemens and Oswalt! Roy O has had about the tenth-best season in the league.

Oswalt hasn't had the second-best season in the league, but he's maybe at fifth or sixth -- plus, he's tied with Clemens and Pavano for the all-important Wins stat right now.

Unit, Sheets, Pavano, Schmidt, Clemens, Zambrano and Livan Hernandez have all pitched better than Oswalt this year, and you can make a case for putting Oliver Perez and Jake Peavy ahead of him. By BBWAA standards, he'll certainly finish ahead of some of the support-starved.

Shawn Estes, 14-7
Randy Johnson, 14-13

I can't find the BP stats, but I'm pretty sure Estes leads the NL in Pitcher Luck this year.

Shocker!

Here is a link to Gammons article about Rivera and the MVP award.

"Because winning the AL East is so important this season -- the Red Sox or Yankees will have a distinct homefield advantage..."

What a foundation to build a dopey argument on. How will this homefield be any more or less meaningful, before the fact? And the votes will be in before anyone can even try to refute this on the results.

This silly talk won't go away til there's a BBWAA Fireman of the Year award.

Similarly, last year you had a very vocal minority complaining that closers should win the Cy Young because that award "should" be given to a starter. Fortunately, sanity prevailed and Gagne still won. But a closers award could solve that problem.

Once again a post on ILB gets a response on the field.

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/recap;_ylc=X3oDMTBpcDBuM2RlBF9TAzk1ODYxNzc3BHNlYwN0aA--?gid=240922127&prov=ap

Will the win-centric BBWAA give the Cy to Schilling over Santana? I wouldn't be remotely surprised.

Ironically, Schilling's last few starts have been some of his best of the season.

Randy Johnson 70.9
Carlos Zambrano 63.2
Ben Sheets 62.6
Roger Clemens 62.0
Carl Pavano 59.5

Zambrano doesn't have a shot either, we agree? btw, Gammons wrote the Yankees are expected to go after Pavano.

Jake Peavy has eye-popping numbers for a guy with only 160 IP.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/story?columnist=stark_jayson&id=1892977

Wait, didn't Stark argue vociferously against voting ARod for MVP last year, claiming that the award wasn't for the best player? Didn't he pick Shannon Stewart for MVP last year?

Pavano has been great this year and was good for the Marlins down the second half the year before. Does this mean he will be good next year or is he the next coming of Andy Hawkins? They can drop the cash, but this is the kind of investment that got the Yanks into the basement back in the 80s. I'd say the money is even on this one.

The Unit is probably the best starter in the NL, but I think he will get edged out by Clemens. Both of those guys are freaks of nature being as good as they are at their age.

Johan Santana 1
Curt Schilling 2
Brad Radke 3
Jake Westbrook 4
Mark Buehrle 5

Randy Johnson 1
Ben Sheets 2
Carl Pavano 3
Roger Clemens 4
Carlos Zambrano 5