NL Cy Young Award?

[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 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.