NL Cy Young Award?

[djson1]

Ok...now that the season is over, what are your thoughts and reasons for who should win the NL Cy Young award? This has to be one of the toughest decisions in recent years as there is no clear winner between Arrieta and Greinke...and some votes will obviously go to Kershaw too.

Usually, I have my personal clear winner, but in all honesty...I can't make up my mind between Jake or Zack?

Below is an excerpt from SFGate:

Arrieta (22-6, 1.77 ERA) threw six scoreless innings in his final regular-season start Friday, and his 0.75 ERA after the All-Star break is the best in history — as is his 0.41 ERA after July. He hasn’t given up a run in his past 402/3 innings at Wrigley Field, where his ERA is 1.97, best by a Cub since Greg Maddux in 1992. His road ERA is 1.60. He no-hit the Dodgers.
How can you not vote for Arrieta?
Greinke (19-3, 1.66 ERA) has the lowest ERA and WHIP (0.844) since Maddux in 1995. Koufax, voted among the four greatest living players in a promotion at the All-Star Game, never had an ERA or WHIP that low. Greinke surrendered two or fewer runs in all but six of his 32 starts and gave up more than three runs twice. His ERA never got as high as 2.00.
How can you not vote for Greinke?
Kershaw (16-7, 2.16 ERA), who makes his last start Sunday, leads the league in innings and strikeouts after leading the league in ERA and WHIP each of the past four years. He has three Cy Young trophies and is the reigning MVP, but he has never struck out this many batters (294), had a better strikeout-per-nine-inning ratio (11.6) or thrown three shutouts (No. 3 was the division clincher over the Giants on Tuesday).

Although Kershaw was awesome in the second half, I would have to exclude him because he wasn't dominating in the first 1/3 of the season. Zack and Jake were consistent all year and the only reason I may give the nod to Zack is because many of his outings were either lost or no-decisions because of the lack of run support. But it's still a tough call.

[sbfinley]

Can't complain with either Greinke or Arrieta, although in Kershaw will likely take a few West Coast votes from Greinke and Arrieta will win it.

[CMIZ5290]

Originally Posted by sbfinley

Can't complain with either Greinke or Arrieta, although in Kershaw will likely take a few West Coast votes from Greinke and Arrieta will win it.

I agree, Arrieta would get my vote. Also, keep in mind, he pitches in Wrigley field! Nobody hardly talks about that...

[HRBAKER]

The pride of Farmington, MO

[chaddurbin]

advanced metrics favor kershaw, traditional stats go to greinke...but the cubs narrative and east coast bias prolly means arrieta winning. i mean no one notices west coast baseball unless kershaw throws a no-hitter or greinke goes 44 straight w/o allowing a run.

[Tabe]

I would go with Greinke. He was consistently elite all year long. Both Kershaw and Arrieta were not as good the first half of the season. But, really, the right answer is a repeat of 1969.

[sycks22]

Arrieta wins hands down. Kershaw / Greinke take votes from each other. Arrieta had one of the best 2nd halfs of a season in the history of baseball when the Cubbies needed it most.

[djson1]

Originally Posted by Tabe

But, really, the right answer is a repeat of 1969.

You're right...I completely forgot about the co-winners from the AL in '69. If there was ever a time when you need to have co-winners in the NL, I think both Greinke and Arrieta deserve it. Valid arguments really can be made for both. I bet the final vote count will come out very close and a tie would make it only right.

[clydepepper]

Originally Posted by djson1

You're right...I completely forgot about the co-winners from the AL in '69. If there was ever a time when you need to have co-winners in the NL, I think both Greinke and Arrieta deserve it. Valid arguments really can be made for both. I bet the final vote count will come out very close and a tie would make it only right.

It would be a shame for either to not win.

[the 'stache]

Originally Posted by sycks22

Arrieta wins hands down. Kershaw / Greinke take votes from each other. Arrieta had one of the best 2nd halfs of a season in the history of baseball when the Cubbies needed it most.

Really, Arrieta and Kershaw both had one of the greatest second halves in baseball history, when you look at the numbers (while Greinke was certainly no slouch, either). Truth be told, Kershaw was actually a little bit better than Arrieta in the second half. Here are the numbers to compare for yourself.

Second half (from July 14th on):

Arrieta 12-1, 0.75 ERA, 107 1/3 IP, 113 K (9.5 K/9 IP), 23 BB (1.93 BB/9 IP), (4.91 K:BB), 0.727 WHIP, 3.839 WPA
Kershaw 10-1, 1.31 ERA, 109 2/3 IP, 141 K (11.6 K/9 IP), 15 BB (1.23 BB/9 IP), (9.4 K:BB), 0.720 WHIP, 4.131 WPA
Greinke 11-1, 1.99 ERA, 99 1/3 IP, 94 K (8.5 K/9 IP), 20 BB (1.81 BB/9 IP), (4.7 K:BB), 0.846 WHIP, 2.822 WPA

Arrieta's 0.75 ERA in the second half may be unmatched in baseball history. In fact, we know it's the lowest ERA by a starting pitcher (minimum 12 starts) since 1914. But ERA can be deceiving because so much more than the pitcher influences earned runs allowed. I think that the metrics make it clear that Kershaw was better in the second half by the narrowest of margins. A slightly lower WHIP. Higher win probability added. More than 2 strikeouts more per 9 innings pitched, and 0.7 fewer walks. While Arrieta's strikeout to walk ratio of 4.91 is stellar, a 9.4 K:BB ratio is ridiculous. 141 Ks against 15 BB is historic. Since 1914, only nine pitchers have had a better second half strikeouts to walk ratio (minimum 10 starts). By the metrics, Kershaw was more responsible for his success, and his team's success, when he pitched in the second half.

So, let's look at the entire season. If we look at the standard figures only, then Arrieta would come out on top:

1. Jake Arrieta, 22-6, 1.77 ERA, 236 K
2. Zack Greinke, 19-3, 1.66 ERA, 200 K
3. Clayton Kershaw, 16-7, 2.13 ERA, 301 K

Each leads in one Triple Crown category. But while a team plays a big role in a pitcher's win total, and ERA, strikeouts are the result of the pitcher's performance almost exclusively. Certainly that is one thing to consider, but to which degree rests with the individual voters.

When we start to look at metrics, some interesting things are seen.

ERA +
1. Greinke 225
2. Arrieta 219
3. Kershaw 175

Though Jake Arrieta plays his home games at Wrigley Field, and Greinke and Kershaw both benefit from a pitcher's park in Dodgers Stadium, when the ballparks the pitchers pitched all their games in is taken into consideration, Greinke leapfrogs Arrieta. Kershaw's ERA +, predictably, lags behind the other two because his season ERA was higher.

WHIP
1. Greinke 0.844
2. Arrieta 0.865
3. Kershaw 0.881

These three are really, really close. Nearly a statistical dead heat. But this next figure is very telling. Perhaps the clearest indication of who actually threw the best.

FIP
1. Kershaw 1.99
2. Arrieta 2.35
3. Greinke 2.76

FIP considers strikeouts, walks, hit by pitcher and home runs allowed. In layman's terms, it measures how a pitcher does completely independent of the defense behind them. In other words, for the things that a pitcher alone can control, which pitcher was the best? Kershaw is the clear winner here, besting Arrieta by 18%, and Greinke by a whopping 38%. For two top-tier pitchers that share the same defense, that's a surprising gap between Kershaw and Greinke.

Consider that they give up nearly identical hits per 9 IP:
1. Arrieta 5.9
2. Greinke 6.0
3. Kershaw 6.3

And nearly identical home runs per 9 IP:
1. Arrieta 0.4
t2. Kershaw and Kreinke 0.6

All very close. But when you consider the BAbip (batting average on balls in play) these pitchers realized, it's significant that Kershaw had the worst of all.

1. Greinke .232
2. Arrieta .247
3. Kershaw .283

And the number of double plays turned is surprising, also:

t1. Arrieta and Greinke 15
3. Kershaw 8

Then there is the bequeathed runners metric. This is telling, too. In games where these three pitchers left during play (in other words, while the inning was still ongoing), how many base runners did the next pitcher inherit, and how many of them scored (which affects the ERA of the pitcher who allowed the base runner). Look at this:

1. Zack Greinke 8 runners. 1 scored (12.5%)
2. Jake Arrieta 8 runners. 2 scored (25%)
3. Clayton Kershaw 10 runners. 6 scored (60%)

Subsequent pitchers allowed 6 of the 10 runners left by Clayton Kershaw to score, which is twice the number of runners that scored from Greinke and Arrieta combined. How big a difference does this make?

If only 2 of those bequeathed runners had been allowed to score, as happened for Jake Arrieta, Clayton Kershaw's season ERA would drop from 2.13 to 1.97. If only 1 of those bequeathed runners had been allowed to score, as happened for Zack Greinke, Kershaw's ERA for the season drops from a 2.13 to a 1.93. These last three metrics seem to support the FIP figure: Kershaw gets less help defensively than the other two pitchers. A significantly higher number of batters reach base against Clayton Kershaw on balls hit in play. More balls are falling in the outfield, or getting through the infield. And, by nearly a two to one margin, the other pitchers are getting more double play balls. These are things beyond the pitcher's control.

Kershaw had the highest strike percentage (more on that in a bit). He also has the best strikeout to walk ratio of all three pitchers, and by a wide margin.
1. Kershaw 7.17
2. Greinke 5.00
3. Arrieta 4.92

Here is a quick look at the starting infield defenses the Cubs and Dodgers had, by position (using dWAR as a basis):

1B: Rizzo, Cubs (dWAR 0.0); Gonzalez, Dodgers (dWAR 0.1)
2B: Russell, Cubs (dWAR 2.6); Kendrick, Dodgers (dWAR -1.0)
SS: Castro, Cubs (dWAR 0.4); Rollins, Dodgers (dWAR -0.1)
3B: Bryant, Cubs (dWAR 0.6); Turner, Dodgers (dWAR 0.6)
C: Montero, Cubs (dWAR 0.4); Grandal, Dodgers (dWAR 0.2)

Cubs dWAR 4.0; Dodgers -0.2

On the edges, the two infield defenses are quite similar (at least by dWAR). However, up the middle, the Cubs are clearly better defensively. Addison Russell and Starlin Castro, the principle players at short and second base, combined for a 3.0 dWAR, while Howie Kendrick and Jimmy Rollins combined for a -0.2 dWAR.

WPA/LI (situational wins)

This is win probability added divided by the leverage index of each play. This, too, is telling. Though Arrieta won three more games than Greinke, and six more than Kershaw, situational wins are nearly identical.

t1. Kershaw and Arrieta 5.8
3. Greinke 5.7

Things like ERA, wins, hits allowed: these are subjective to a point. Metrics like FIP are not. It removes variables (fielders behind the pitcher) from the equation.

But when you look at the strikeout figures, Kershaw is absolutely overpowering. Look at the number of starts where these guys struck out ten or more batters:

1. Kershaw 13
2. Arrieta 4
3. Greinke 1

What about starts with 9 strikeouts (just missing 10):

1. Kershaw 5
t2. Greinke and Arrieta 2

Also, look at strikeouts per 9 innings pitched:

1. Kershaw 11.6
2. Arrieta 9.3
3. Greinke 8.1

In 18 of Clayton Kershaw's 33 starts, he struck out 9 or more batters. This is a big component of FIP. While in many of the metrics, the trio are remarkably close (hits per 9 IP, home runs per 9 IP, walks per 9 IP, WHIP), Kershaw's strikeout figure should be a big boon for his team. Yet he only won 16 games.

Look at average innings pitched per start:

1. Kershaw 7.05
2. Greinke 6.95
3. Arrieta 6.93

Pretty close, but Kershaw narrowly throws more innings per start. But since we're talking about historic seasons, this statistic trumps them all:

Since 1901, the highest K/9 IP by a starting pitcher (200 IP min) in National League history:

1. Randy Johnson, Arizona 2001. 13.41
2. Randy Johnson, Arizona 2000. 12.56
3. Randy Johnson, Arizona 1999. 12.06
4. Clayton Kershaw, Los Angeles 2015. 11.64

47. Jake Arrieta, Chicago 2015. 9.28
157. Zack Greinke 2015. 8.08.

For every nine innings he pitches, Kershaw gets nearly 12 outs by himself with strikeouts. The only other pitchers in the history of National League baseball to average 11 or more strikeouts per 9 innings in any season are the aforementioned Randy Johnson, Nolan Ryan, Dwight Gooden, Curt Schilling and Kerry Wood.

One more thing to look at. Strike percentage:

1. Clayton Kershaw 68%
2. Jake Arrieta 65%
3. Zack Greinke 64%

The numbers are pretty close, but it could be inferred that Clayton Kershaw had the best command, overall. Since 2000, there have been 313 National League pitchers to throw 200 or more innings, and only 10 of them have had a higher strike percentage than Kershaw in 2015.

Now, I will absolutely respect your opinions, guys. And I will state that it's my absolute belief that Jake Arrieta will win the Cy Young Award in the National League. Why? Two reasons. 1. Narrative. The Cubs will be the sentimental favorites for baseball fans who don't "have a horse in the race." We all know it's been over a century since the Cubs last won it all. And while Greinke and Kershaw have both won Cy Young Awards in the past, Arrieta has never achieved this level of dominance before. People (and voters) like a feel good story. Not only are the Cubs a feel good story, but how about a 29-year old pitcher who has never won more than 10 games in a season suddenly wins 22 games and has an historic second half? 2. As has been mentioned before, the fact that two of the three pitchers are on the same team will, in essence, partially "cancel each other out", though I believe this flawed thinking. When Zack Greinke is on the field, Clayton Kershaw is watching the game from the bullpen, and vice versa. This isn't the same circumstance where one MVP candidate benefits from another in the same lineup. These two guys never see the field at the same time. The greatness of one should not cancel out, or in any way diminish the greatness of the other. Consider that the Dodgers will have two of the three Cy Young finalists, yet the Cubs won 5 more games than the Dodgers did.

However, when I look at everything, I see that Clayton Kershaw was just better overall, though the gap appears to be quite small.

One more metric, one of my own creation. You've heard of quality starts (6 IP, 3 earned runs or fewer). This is one I call dominant starts (7 IP, 1 earned run or fewer, 10 strikeouts or more):

Dominant starts in 2015:
Zack Greinke 1
Jake Arrieta 4
Clayton Kershaw 9

Truthfully, any one of these guys are deserving of the Cy Young. All had spectacular seasons. I think Clayton Kershaw did just a wee bit more, but I'll be happy for whoever gets the hardware.

[KCRfan1]

At some point things get analyzed and analyzed again, and then again. And we end up over analyzing everything. Like when they tell the speed at which ball leaves the bat on a home run. I could care less, if the ball clears the fence it's still a home run. I'm just old school, and subscribe to keeping it simple. I don't care who had the best second half. Was the first half less important? Who was the consistent performer during the season, helped their team the most, and had the numbers to back it up against other pitchers in the league. The winner IMO is Arrieta.

[sycks22]

Originally Posted by the 'stache

Really, Arrieta and Kershaw both had one of the greatest second halves in baseball history, when you look at the numbers (while Greinke was certainly no slouch, either). Truth be told, Kershaw was actually a little bit better than Arrieta in the second half. Here are the numbers to compare for yourself.

Second half (from July 14th on):

Arrieta 12-1, 0.75 ERA, 107 1/3 IP, 113 K (9.5 K/9 IP), 23 BB (1.93 BB/9 IP), (4.91 K:BB), 0.727 WHIP, 3.839 WPA
Kershaw 10-1, 1.31 ERA, 109 2/3 IP, 141 K (11.6 K/9 IP), 15 BB (1.23 BB/9 IP), (9.4 K:BB), 0.720 WHIP, 4.131 WPA
Greinke 11-1, 1.99 ERA, 99 1/3 IP, 94 K (8.5 K/9 IP), 20 BB (1.81 BB/9 IP), (4.7 K:BB), 0.846 WHIP, 2.822 WPA

Arrieta's 0.75 ERA in the second half may be unmatched in baseball history. In fact, we know it's the lowest ERA by a starting pitcher (minimum 12 starts) since 1914. But ERA can be deceiving because so much more than the pitcher influences earned runs allowed. I think that the metrics make it clear that Kershaw was better in the second half by the narrowest of margins. A slightly lower WHIP. Higher win probability added. More than 2 strikeouts more per 9 innings pitched, and 0.7 fewer walks. While Arrieta's strikeout to walk ratio of 4.91 is stellar, a 9.4 K:BB ratio is ridiculous. 141 Ks against 15 BB is historic. Since 1914, only nine pitchers have had a better second half strikeouts to walk ratio (minimum 10 starts). By the metrics, Kershaw was more responsible for his success, and his team's success, when he pitched in the second half.

So, let's look at the entire season. If we look at the standard figures only, then Arrieta would come out on top:

1. Jake Arrieta, 22-6, 1.77 ERA, 236 K
2. Zack Greinke, 19-3, 1.66 ERA, 200 K
3. Clayton Kershaw, 16-7, 2.13 ERA, 301 K

Each leads in one Triple Crown category. But while a team plays a big role in a pitcher's win total, and ERA, strikeouts are the result of the pitcher's performance almost exclusively. Certainly that is one thing to consider, but to which degree rests with the individual voters.

When we start to look at metrics, some interesting things are seen.

ERA +
1. Greinke 225
2. Arrieta 219
3. Kershaw 175

Though Jake Arrieta plays his home games at Wrigley Field, and Greinke and Kershaw both benefit from a pitcher's park in Dodgers Stadium, when the ballparks the pitchers pitched all their games in is taken into consideration, Greinke leapfrogs Arrieta. Kershaw's ERA +, predictably, lags behind the other two because his season ERA was higher.

WHIP
1. Greinke 0.844
2. Arrieta 0.865
3. Kershaw 0.881

These three are really, really close. Nearly a statistical dead heat. But this next figure is very telling. Perhaps the clearest indication of who actually threw the best.

FIP
1. Kershaw 1.99
2. Arrieta 2.35
3. Greinke 2.76

FIP considers strikeouts, walks, hit by pitcher and home runs allowed. In layman's terms, it measures how a pitcher does completely independent of the defense behind them. In other words, for the things that a pitcher alone can control, which pitcher was the best? Kershaw is the clear winner here, besting Arrieta by 18%, and Greinke by a whopping 38%. For two top-tier pitchers that share the same defense, that's a surprising gap between Kershaw and Greinke.

Consider that they give up nearly identical hits per 9 IP:
1. Arrieta 5.9
2. Greinke 6.0
3. Kershaw 6.3

And nearly identical home runs per 9 IP:
1. Arrieta 0.4
t2. Kershaw and Kreinke 0.6

All very close. But when you consider the BAbip (batting average on balls in play) these pitchers realized, it's significant that Kershaw had the worst of all.

1. Greinke .232
2. Arrieta .247
3. Kershaw .283

And the number of double plays turned is surprising, also:

t1. Arrieta and Greinke 15
3. Kershaw 8

Then there is the bequeathed runners metric. This is telling, too. In games where these three pitchers left during play (in other words, while the inning was still ongoing), how many base runners did the next pitcher inherit, and how many of them scored (which affects the ERA of the pitcher who allowed the base runner). Look at this:

1. Zack Greinke 8 runners. 1 scored (12.5%)
2. Jake Arrieta 8 runners. 2 scored (25%)
3. Clayton Kershaw 10 runners. 6 scored (60%)

Subsequent pitchers allowed 6 of the 10 runners left by Clayton Kershaw to score, which is twice the number of runners that scored from Greinke and Arrieta combined. How big a difference does this make?

If only 2 of those bequeathed runners had been allowed to score, as happened for Jake Arrieta, Clayton Kershaw's season ERA would drop from 2.13 to 1.97. If only 1 of those bequeathed runners had been allowed to score, as happened for Zack Greinke, Kershaw's ERA for the season drops from a 2.13 to a 1.93. These last three metrics seem to support the FIP figure: Kershaw gets less help defensively than the other two pitchers. A significantly higher number of batters reach base against Clayton Kershaw on balls hit in play. More balls are falling in the outfield, or getting through the infield. And, by nearly a two to one margin, the other pitchers are getting more double play balls. These are things beyond the pitcher's control.

Kershaw had the highest strike percentage (more on that in a bit). He also has the best strikeout to walk ratio of all three pitchers, and by a wide margin.
1. Kershaw 7.17
2. Greinke 5.00
3. Arrieta 4.92

Here is a quick look at the starting infield defenses the Cubs and Dodgers had, by position (using dWAR as a basis):

1B: Rizzo, Cubs (dWAR 0.0); Gonzalez, Dodgers (dWAR 0.1)
2B: Russell, Cubs (dWAR 2.6); Kendrick, Dodgers (dWAR -1.0)
SS: Castro, Cubs (dWAR 0.4); Rollins, Dodgers (dWAR -0.1)
3B: Bryant, Cubs (dWAR 0.6); Turner, Dodgers (dWAR 0.6)
C: Montero, Cubs (dWAR 0.4); Grandal, Dodgers (dWAR 0.2)

Cubs dWAR 4.0; Dodgers -0.2

On the edges, the two infield defenses are quite similar (at least by dWAR). However, up the middle, the Cubs are clearly better defensively. Addison Russell and Starlin Castro, the principle players at short and second base, combined for a 3.0 dWAR, while Howie Kendrick and Jimmy Rollins combined for a -0.2 dWAR.

WPA/LI (situational wins)

This is win probability added divided by the leverage index of each play. This, too, is telling. Though Arrieta won three more games than Greinke, and six more than Kershaw, situational wins are nearly identical.

t1. Kershaw and Arrieta 5.8
3. Greinke 5.7

Things like ERA, wins, hits allowed: these are subjective to a point. Metrics like FIP are not. It removes variables (fielders behind the pitcher) from the equation.

But when you look at the strikeout figures, Kershaw is absolutely overpowering. Look at the number of starts where these guys struck out ten or more batters:

1. Kershaw 13
2. Arrieta 4
3. Greinke 1

What about starts with 9 strikeouts (just missing 10):

1. Kershaw 5
t2. Greinke and Arrieta 2

Also, look at strikeouts per 9 innings pitched:

1. Kershaw 11.6
2. Arrieta 9.3
3. Greinke 8.1

In 18 of Clayton Kershaw's 33 starts, he struck out 9 or more batters. This is a big component of FIP. While in many of the metrics, the trio are remarkably close (hits per 9 IP, home runs per 9 IP, walks per 9 IP, WHIP), Kershaw's strikeout figure should be a big boon for his team. Yet he only won 16 games.

Look at average innings pitched per start:

1. Kershaw 7.05
2. Greinke 6.95
3. Arrieta 6.93

Pretty close, but Kershaw narrowly throws more innings per start. But since we're talking about historic seasons, this statistic trumps them all:

Since 1901, the highest K/9 IP by a starting pitcher (200 IP min) in National League history:

1. Randy Johnson, Arizona 2001. 13.41
2. Randy Johnson, Arizona 2000. 12.56
3. Randy Johnson, Arizona 1999. 12.06
4. Clayton Kershaw, Los Angeles 2015. 11.64

47. Jake Arrieta, Chicago 2015. 9.28
157. Zack Greinke 2015. 8.08.

Clayton Kershaw basically gets 4 innings of outs by himself, every time he takes the mound. He gets roughly 12 of the 21 outs recorded in every start without involving the other eight men on the field. His defense is only responsible for getting nine outs. The only other pitchers in the history of National League baseball to average 11 or more strikeouts per 9 innings in any season are Johnson, Nolan Ryan, Dwight Gooden, Curt Schilling and Kerry Wood.

One more thing to look at. Strike percentage:

1. Clayton Kershaw 68%
2. Jake Arrieta 65%
3. Zack Greinke 64%

The numbers are pretty close, but it goes to show that Clayton Kershaw had the best command, overall. Since 2000, there have been 313 National League pitchers to throw 200 or more innings, and only 10 of them have had a higher strike percentage than Kershaw in 2015.

Now, I will absolutely respect your opinions, guys. And I will state that it's my absolute belief that Jake Arrieta will win the Cy Young Award in the National League. Why? Two reasons. 1. Narrative. The Cubs will be the sentimental favorites for baseball fans who don't "have a horse in the race." We all know it's been over a century since the Cubs last won it all. And while Greinke and Kershaw have both won Cy Young Awards in the past, Arrieta has never achieved this level of dominance before. People (and voters) like a feel good story. Not only are the Cubs a feel good story, but how about a 29-year old pitcher who has never won more than 10 games in a season suddenly wins 22 games and has an historic second half? 2. As has been mentioned before, the fact that two of the three pitchers are on the same team will, in essence, partially "cancel each other out", though I believe this flawed thinking. When Zack Greinke is on the field, Clayton Kershaw is watching the game from the bullpen, and vice versa. This isn't the same circumstance where one MVP candidate benefits from another in the same lineup. These two guys never see the field at the same time. The greatness of one should not cancel out, or in any way diminish the greatness of the other. Consider that the Dodgers will have two of the three Cy Young finalists, yet the Cubs won 5 more games than the Dodgers did.

However, when I look at everything, I see that Clayton Kershaw was just better overall.

One more metric, one of my own creation. You've heard of quality starts (6 IP, 3 earned runs or fewer). This is one I call dominant starts (7 IP, 1 earned run or fewer, 10 strikeouts or more):

Dominant starts in 2015:
Zack Greinke 1
Jake Arrieta 4
Clayton Kershaw 9

Truthfully, any one of these guys are deserving of the Cy Young. All had spectacular seasons. I think Clayton Kershaw did just a wee bit more, but I'll be happy for whoever gets the hardware.

My fingers hurt thinking about how long it took to write all of this. Lots of great points Bill, but Jake is my man. Wrigley is one of the hardest parks to pitch in the majors and a lot tougher than Chavez Ravine.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Kershaw has won it multiple times already and has the highest ERA and lowest win total. I don't think he will win, even if Bill's deeper look shows that those facts really are not that meaningful. Tossup as between the others, maybe Arrieta because of the 22 wins.

[clydepepper]

Bill- once again, you have proved yourself the master researcher....thanks for allowing the rest of us to continue having lives (little lol)

As a retired lefty who struck out more than my share many moons ago, I will point out that as seductive and sexy the punch-out can be, it, in higher numbers lends itself to the other fielders being back on the heels and not being as prepared to handle batted balls.

I can certainly see your point about FIP, but what I just mentioned is the down-side of such 'dominance' in a team game.

Again from the left-handed perspective - I would not be unhappy if Kershaw won again- even though that would break Sandy's Dodger record for Cy Young awards won - I could always fall back on the fact that Sandy's awards were during time when only a single award was given for all of MLB - that's still amazing!

As far as the teammates canceling each other out- ideally, it is a flawed argument, but the reality is that the votes are from geographically specific media organizations and thusly are prone to choose a pitcher from their 'area', thereby voting for one and not the other - and, in general, that would play out for the entire 'area' - the human homey-bias is identical to the regional disparity you see with every Heisman selection.

As you have said these guys are incredibly close in performance. I just think it would be more of a shame if either Arrieta or Greinke didn't win since this year in particular, you cannot say, as you could last year, that Kershaw was clearly the best.

-and it takes a lot out of me to go against the southpaw - and so I believe it adds to the validity of my conclusion.
.
.

[chaddurbin]

alot of words to say arrieta is pipped by either kershaw or greinke in whatever pitching metric you measure these guys by, and fip/xfip unfairly penalizes greinke who's become more of a pitching wizard through his craft and artistry. he's consciously pitching toward hard contact this year as he (correctly) deduces those turn into more outs than pitching to soft contact and having dunkers and bloopers fall in for hits.

as jonah keri points out even if you dig deeper kershaw still delivered the most raw value as a pitcher, followed by greinke and arrieta. all the numbers are still ridiculously close this year, and at this point it really doesn't matter who the cy young is, it's gonna come down to subjectivity and biases...and although i'm a dodgers fan i think arrieta will come out ahead for the reasons i listed in my previous post. and greinke won't care, he'll still opt out and get a huge 25-30mil deal for 6-7 years.

[the 'stache]

Originally Posted by CMIZ5290

I agree, Arrieta would get my vote. Also, keep in mind, he pitches in Wrigley field! Nobody hardly talks about that...

Originally Posted by sycks22

My fingers hurt thinking about how long it took to write all of this. Lots of great points Bill, but Jake is my man. Wrigley is one of the hardest parks to pitch in the majors and a lot tougher than Chavez Ravine.

Well, Wrigley Field may really not be the hitters park people tend to think it is. At least, it isn't now. According to this list compiled by the Sporting News, Wrigley Field is neither a hitter friendly or a pitcher friendly park. It is ranked 15th of the 30 home stadiums (with #1, Coors Field, being the most hitter friendly park, and #30, Petco Park, being the most pitcher friendly). So, Wrigley Field is dead in the middle, a neutral park overall, per their rankings. I don't know why that is now (and I would like to see their methodology), as I do know that Wrigley used to be considered more of a hitter's park, especially for left-handed pull hitters. But this ranking system is based off of recent analysis. I'd tend to put Wrigley a little higher up this list, high-neutral towards a hitters park. I grew up in Milwaukee, and while I've never been to a game at Wrigley, I watched a lot of them on WGN as a kid. My father grew up in Chicago. The Braves were his team, but he went to many games at Wrigley, to see the Braves when they were in town, or to go watch the Cubs with his friends. Based on what he's told me, and from my memories, I think some of the neutrality in this ranking tends to come from the unpredictability of the winds, though it may be overstated. It can be a hitters paradise, or a pitchers dreamland, depending on which way the wind is blowing. It's nothing like hitting at Dodger Stadium at night, where fly balls go to die. I absolutely agree that Wrigley is a tougher place to pitch than Dodger Stadium, though. While I think Greinke has improved since leaving Milwaukee, a good part of his numbers can be attributed to switching from Miller Park to Chavez Ravine.

I'll look around a little bit, and see where other rankings have the stadiums listed. Really, it's a moot point, because Arrieta was sensational away from Wrigley. I mean, 13-1 with a 1.60 ERA on the road is...wow. Kershaw wasn't as good on the road, 5-4 with a 2.60 ERA (certainly not bad, at all, as most pitchers would kill for that kind of road ERA), but some of that is explained by two road starts at Coors Field. Take away his May 10th start, and he has a 2.32 road ERA for the season.

Oh well, as Lou alluded to, after a while, you can over-analyze things, and the numbers all start to run together.

[clydepepper]

Bill- The 'improvements' made to Wrigley Field in recent years have all had a negative effect on Homeruns and offense in general.

In addition to the new outfield stands and score board, there has also been an increase in taller building along Waveland Avenue - directly behind the left-field stands.

While, directionally, the structures don't block the wind, they certainly change the dynamics.

All of this very much makes the 23-to-22 days far in the rearview mirror.
.
.

[the 'stache]

Thank you, Raymond. That's a great explanation! /tip of the cap to you, good sir.

I tell you, I'm really torn. If I had a gun held to my head, I don't know who I'd choose. I honestly don't. The really frustrating thing to me, as somebody who is a complete statistics nut (I know, you guys couldn't tell), I can sit down and make an argument for all three of them.

Jake Arrieta has the big numbers. He's the only guy in the NL with 20 wins, and one of two pitchers in the game this year with a sub 2.00 ERA. While he wasn't as good in the first half (10-6, 2.66 ERA, 123 K in 121 2/3 IP, a 0.986 WHIP), that's still a damned good first half. So while it's not really a check in the plus column, it's not a negative, either. I know logic tells us all games count the same, and a win in April is important as a win in September. But is it really? Lose a game in the first week of the season, oh well, you'll get 'em tomorrow. Win a big game at the very end of the season, not only does the pitcher carry confidence into the playoffs, but that pitcher's team will get the biggest confidence boost their is. Why? Because if they're in a 5 game series, they know that pitcher will start two games. In a 7 game series, the pitcher could conceivably start three. And since the All Star break, Arrieta has been almost unhittable (12-1, 0.75 ERA, 113 K in 117 1/3 IP, 0.727 WHIP). He has the best overall numbers of anybody in the Majors this year, and he has been historically good at the right time.

Zack Greinke has been the picture of consistency. 19-3, 1.66 ERA, 200 Ks in 222 2/3 IP, 0.844 WHIP. Best ERA and WHIP in the Majors. To me, the most impressive statistic of all, one that I don't recall ever seeing before, is that Greinke's ERA never went above 2.00 at any point the entire season. It topped out at 1.97 on June 2nd. And when he had his huge shutout streak going, he should have won at least one more game, which would have given him 20. On June 18th, he pitched 7 innings of shutout ball, but left with the score tied 0-0. The Dodgers won it 1-0. On June 23rd, he pitched 6 innings of shutout ball, but the Dodgers didn't score. They lost 0-1. 13 shutout innings he pitched, but the Dodgers didn't give him a single run of support. But his shutout streak was magnificent. 4-0, 45 2/3 IP, 43 strikeouts, 4 BB, 19 hits, a 10.75 K:BB ratio, and a 0.503 WHIP. That's insane. Opponents hit .124 off of him over those 6 games.

Kershaw was just sheer dominance. 301 Ks, 11.6 Ks/9 IP, a 0.881 WHIP, 7.17 K:BB, 16-7, 2.13 ERA for the season. 4 complete games and 3 shutouts, which tied with Jake Arrieta for the league lead. I know the win-loss record and ERA aren't as impressive as the other two. But I've been looking at Kershaw's starts from the beginning of the season, and it seems that his team let him down on more occasions than the other two starters were let down. Like Greinke, Kershaw had a long scoreless streak. 37 2/3 IP where he was 4-0, threw 2 shutouts (and could have easily had a third. He was pulled after 8 innings of 3 hit, 0 walk, 14 K shutout ball at Washington, and had only thrown 101 innings). His numbers during the streak are as impressive as Greinke's: 18 hits, 1 walk, 50 Ks, a 50:1 K:BB ratio, and a 0.510 WHIP. Opponents hit .140 off of him.

Any one of them would be a deserving winner.

[the 'stache]

One final post. Look at some of Kershaw's starts where he got completely gypped:

April 22nd @ San Francisco. He pitches 6 innings, allows 2 runs (2 earned), strikes out 9. No decision. Dodgers lose 2-3.

April 28th vs San Francisco. He pitches 7 innings, allows 2 runs (2 earned), strikes out 8. Takes the loss. Dodgers lose 1-2.

June 12th @ San Diego. He pitches 6 2/3 innings, allows 1 run (1 earned), strikes out 11. No decision. Dodgers win 4-3.

June 27th @ Miami. He pitches 7 innings, allows 3 runs (1 earned), strikes out 9. Takes the loss. Dodgers lose 2-3.

July 3rd vs New York (NL). He pitches 7 innings, allows 1 run (1 earned), strikes out 7. No decision. Dodgers lose 1-2.

August 18th @ Oakland. He pitches 7 innings, allows 1 run (1 earned), strikes out 7. No decision. Dodgers lose 4-5.

August 23rd @ Houston. He pitches 8 innings, allows 1 run (1 earned), strikes out 10. No decision. Dodgers lose 2-3.

Seven starts where he goes at least six innings, doesn't allow more than 2 earned runs in any of them, and he goes 0-2.

48 2/3 IP, 11 runs (9 earned), 1.67 ERA, 61 Ks, 11.3 Ks/9 IP.

The Dodgers score 16 runs in those 7 starts (2.28 runs per start). Seven quality starts, 21% of his starts for the year where he has a 1.67 ERA, and doesn't get a single win. Now, he did have a couple bad starts. He had three starts where he allowed 4 earned runs, and one where he allowed five. But Kershaw should have won a lot more than 16 games. And he shouldn't have lost 7. Realistically, he should have been at least 18-5.

Arrieta, on the other hand, only had 3 starts where he pitched at least six innings, allowing 2 or fewer earned runs, and didn't get a win.

It will be interesting to see the final vote, and read the commentary from the national writers once the winner has been announced.

[KCRfan1]

Ugh. Enough with the saber metrics.....Can't ANYTHING be simple anymore? Pitcher X pitched on Tuesdays, pitcher Y on Thursday, but during the day in this park that had renovations that moved the fences in, no moved out, that that that that.....But wait! It was CLOUDY that day!!!! Good Lord. I agree with a previous poster, my fingers hurt looking at the amount of time and typing that has been done on some of the comments in this thread. Not to mention my head hurting trying to digest some of this stuff. Pitchers can't help where they pitch, when they pitch, and against who they pitch against. Just like hitters. They play where they play, and against who they play against. You can't help it, nor penalize players for it ( or reward players for the opposite ).

[Peter_Spaeth]

With his loss last night, Kershaw's post season stat line is now 1-6, 4.99. Yeah, we know, small sample size and all that.

[clydepepper]

Originally Posted by the 'stache

One final post. Look at some of Kershaw's starts where he got completely gypped:

April 22nd @ San Francisco. He pitches 6 innings, allows 2 runs (2 earned), strikes out 9. No decision. Dodgers lose 2-3.

April 28th vs San Francisco. He pitches 7 innings, allows 2 runs (2 earned), strikes out 8. Takes the loss. Dodgers lose 1-2.

June 12th @ San Diego. He pitches 6 2/3 innings, allows 1 run (1 earned), strikes out 11. No decision. Dodgers win 4-3.

June 27th @ Miami. He pitches 7 innings, allows 3 runs (1 earned), strikes out 9. Takes the loss. Dodgers lose 2-3.

July 3rd vs New York (NL). He pitches 7 innings, allows 1 run (1 earned), strikes out 7. No decision. Dodgers lose 1-2.

August 18th @ Oakland. He pitches 7 innings, allows 1 run (1 earned), strikes out 7. No decision. Dodgers lose 4-5.

August 23rd @ Houston. He pitches 8 innings, allows 1 run (1 earned), strikes out 10. No decision. Dodgers lose 2-3.

Seven starts where he goes at least six innings, doesn't allow more than 2 earned runs in any of them, and he goes 0-2.

48 2/3 IP, 11 runs (9 earned), 1.67 ERA, 61 Ks, 11.3 Ks/9 IP.

The Dodgers score 16 runs in those 7 starts (2.28 runs per start). Seven quality starts, 21% of his starts for the year where he has a 1.67 ERA, and doesn't get a single win. Now, he did have a couple bad starts. He had three starts where he allowed 4 earned runs, and one where he allowed five. But Kershaw should have won a lot more than 16 games. And he shouldn't have lost 7. Realistically, he should have been at least 18-5.

Arrieta, on the other hand, only had 3 starts where he pitched at least six innings, allowing 2 or fewer earned runs, and didn't get a win.

It will be interesting to see the final vote, and read the commentary from the national writers once the winner has been announced.

While we are sending out flowers to those who have suffered for lack of support...let us send a special arrangement to one Shelby Miller, who led the majors in losses, but probably had more 'quality starts' than the average pitcher with a winning record...reminds me of Nolan Ryan's 1987 nightmare (8-16, but led league in both strikeouts and ERA)
.

[the 'stache]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

With his loss last night, Kershaw's post season stat line is now 1-6, 4.99. Yeah, we know, small sample size and all that.

Well, he got the loss last night, yes. But he didn't pitch poorly, either. 6 2/3 IP, 3 earned runs, 4 hits, 4 walks (that's atypical for him), 11 Ks. He made a mistake for a home run in the fourth, and gave up a hit and a couple walks in the 7th that led to the bases loaded with two outs when he was pulled. But the relief pitcher that came in fresh could have gotten one out instead of giving up a two run single.

And how many runs did the Dodgers score in support of Kershaw? One. Kershaw pitched well enough to win, but again, his team did nothing to help him. That's been a recurring theme in Los Angeles this season.

Originally Posted by KCRfan1

Ugh. Enough with the saber metrics.....Can't ANYTHING be simple anymore? Pitcher X pitched on Tuesdays, pitcher Y on Thursday, but during the day in this park that had renovations that moved the fences in, no moved out, that that that that.....But wait! It was CLOUDY that day!!!! Good Lord. I agree with a previous poster, my fingers hurt looking at the amount of time and typing that has been done on some of the comments in this thread. Not to mention my head hurting trying to digest some of this stuff. Pitchers can't help where they pitch, when they pitch, and against who they pitch against. Just like hitters. They play where they play, and against who they play against. You can't help it, nor penalize players for it ( or reward players for the opposite ).

Why does it bother you so much? Nobody is forcing you to read my posts.

As far as "pitchers not being able to help where they pitch", that goes without saying. However, that statement doesn't mean the conclusions arrived at from in-depth research are without merit. If one pitcher has a 4.00 ERA, and another has a 3.00 ERA, without context, the assumption otherwise may be that the pitcher with the lower ERA was better. But when you determine that the pitcher with the 4.00 ERA started half his games at Coors Field, and was missing his Gold Glove shortstop for the whole season, while the pitcher with the 3.00 ERA started half his games at Petco, simple assumptions prove inaccurate.

Statistical analysis has advanced quite a bit in the last few decades. If you prefer to employ old fashioned methods, more power to you. But don't belittle those who choose to go a little deeper.

Originally Posted by clydepepper

While we are sending out flowers to those who have suffered for lack of support...let us send a special arrangement to one Shelby Miller, who led the majors in losses, but probably had more 'quality starts' than the average pitcher with a winning record...reminds me of Nolan Ryan's 1987 nightmare (8-16, but led league in both strikeouts and ERA)
.

I had Shelby Miller on my fantasy team for most of the year, and I couldn't believe his luck. He had an outstanding season, but I imagine he felt like he was all alone out there at times.

Since this is a baseball card forum, here's my Miller rookie.

[KCRfan1]

That's fine Bill, I'm not going to get into it with you. I follow baseball very closely, and understand how much statistical analysis plays into the game today. You're a detail guy and pull out every single thread of information you possibly can ever find to support a point. To me, it's just exhausting reading that stuff. At the end of the day most of us are still going to look at wins, loses, era, strikeouts, and perhaps the batting average of the opposing teams and how they hit against the pitcher. We do the same with batters. Hits, runs, home runs, batting average, rbi's. and perhaps stolen bases. At some point, there is just too much information and frankly we can make numbers do what we want them to to suit our needs, or support an argument or to prove a point. So in your hypothetical example, you can have that 4 era pitcher at Coors who didn't have his gold glove ss all season long, and I'll take the 3 era pitcher at Petco. Any hardware between the two, I'll win every single time.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Bill, Kershaw WALKED the bases loaded in the seventh. Three walks, not a hit and a couple of walks. In other words, he imploded. The best pitcher on the planet is not supposed to walk the bases loaded in the seventh inning of a playoff game. Stop spinning.

His post-season stat line is 1-6 4.99. Try spinning that.

[the 'stache]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Bill, Kershaw WALKED the bases loaded in the seventh. Three walks, not a hit and a couple of walks. In other words, he imploded. The best pitcher on the planet is not supposed to walk the bases loaded in the seventh inning of a playoff game. Stop spinning.

His post-season stat line is 1-6 4.99. Try spinning that.

Fine. He walked three instead of two and a hit.

[the 'stache]

Originally Posted by KCRfan1

That's fine Bill, I'm not going to get into it with you. I follow baseball very closely, and understand how much statistical analysis plays into the game today. You're a detail guy and pull out every single thread of information you possibly can ever find to support a point. To me, it's just exhausting reading that stuff. At the end of the day most of us are still going to look at wins, loses, era, strikeouts, and perhaps the batting average of the opposing teams and how they hit against the pitcher. We do the same with batters. Hits, runs, home runs, batting average, rbi's. and perhaps stolen bases. At some point, there is just too much information and frankly we can make numbers do what we want them to to suit our needs, or support an argument or to prove a point. So in your hypothetical example, you can have that 4 era pitcher at Coors who didn't have his gold glove ss all season long, and I'll take the 3 era pitcher at Petco. Any hardware between the two, I'll win every single time.

Again. If you don't like the way I post, ignore me. It's that simple.

[chaddurbin]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Bill, Kershaw WALKED the bases loaded in the seventh. Three walks, not a hit and a couple of walks. In other words, he imploded. The best pitcher on the planet is not supposed to walk the bases loaded in the seventh inning of a playoff game. Stop spinning.

His post-season stat line is 1-6 4.99. Try spinning that.

kershaw was certainly not as his best, and for the reigning "best pitcher on the planet" he does seem to have some of his worst games in the postseason. having said that the dodgers bullpen blows, the guy that allowed the 2-run single after kershaw left is the same guy that allowed the 3-run hr last year in the 7th to the cards after kershaw exited that game.

in his last 3 postseason starts...his stats thru the first 6inn in each (18 total innings) he's allowed 3 runs on 8 hits, with 28 strikeouts and 3 walks. in the 7th of those games he's recorded 4 outs, allowing 11 runs on 9 hits and 3walks with 2 strikeouts. so it is what it is, maybe he's worn down or tires late, his bullpen lets him down, mattingly stays with him longer because a 75% kershaw is still better than what's in relief..but here's a guy that in the regular season gets thru 7 and 8 on a regular basis.

i don't know why we're talking about postseason in a cy young thread tho...i'd still take kershaw over anybody right now to start a game if my life is depended on it.

[Peter_Spaeth]

One game? Give me Bumgarner. The dude thrives on pressure.

[HRBAKER]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

One game? Give me Bumgarner. The dude thrives on pressure.

...and he's a good bat too!

[clydepepper]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Bill, Kershaw WALKED the bases loaded in the seventh. Three walks, not a hit and a couple of walks. In other words, he imploded. The best pitcher on the planet is not supposed to walk the bases loaded in the seventh inning of a playoff game. Stop spinning.

His post-season stat line is 1-6 4.99. Try spinning that.

at $32,571,000, he can hire someone to spin it for him.

What about the AL Cy Young? I'm staying with David Price (reminding everyone that the Cy is for the regular season)
.
.

[Peter_Spaeth]

I like Keuchel but it's a tossup in my book between him and Price.

[chaddurbin]

congrats to jake a, greinke was hosed! i'm prolly more pissed about it tho since he didn't even care enough to show up...and where's the homer love a los angeles sports rag writer voted for arrieta #1. if this was midwest america that writer would have already been fired or at least had some passive-aggressive shade thrown his way wrapped in a layer of pretend niceness.