PDA

View Full Version : Sale for CY Young


billyvsox
09-19-2012, 12:10 AM
IMO, Sale deserves the cy young. Reasons:

1) The Yankees and Rangers are the other winners with no candidates so that should matter. Same for Orioles and Oakland
2) Weaver, Price, Verlander, Felix all will miss the playoffs
3) 2nd in wins, 2nd in era
4) All the other candidates pitch in "pitchers' parks, Sale does not

Thoughts?

mzh
09-19-2012, 12:15 AM
In a year like this with so many close candidates, whoever goes deep into the postseason will probably be the most likely to pull it off. If Sale can make a few big October starts on the national stage, there's no reason he shouldn't be able to get it. Go Chris! :gulp:

WLL1855
09-19-2012, 12:19 AM
Having your team win the division or make the playoffs shouldn't matter for the Cy Young Award. It is an individual award.

That said, I think Sale deserves serious consideration for the award. Pretty hard to overlook Price this year though, IMO.

WLL1855
09-19-2012, 12:20 AM
In a year like this with so many close candidates, whoever goes deep into the postseason will probably be the most likely to pull it off.

I believe the voting for season awards is done before the postseason games are played.

DSpivack
09-19-2012, 12:20 AM
I would give it to Price or Verlander before Sale.

Whether their teams make the playoffs or not should be practically irrelevant.

FielderJones
09-19-2012, 12:33 AM
Price maybe, but which measurement tips it to Verlander (http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/v/verlaju01.shtml) over Sale (http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/s/salech01.shtml) in 2012?

DSpivack
09-19-2012, 12:40 AM
Price maybe, but which measurement tips it to Verlander (http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/v/verlaju01.shtml) over Sale (http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/s/salech01.shtml) in 2012?
The peripherals between the two look very similar (the differences do not seem statistically significant), but Verlander is more durable and can pitch a lot more innings than Sale at this point, and in comparing the two I think that tips the scales in Verlander's favor.

Nellie_Fox
09-19-2012, 12:55 AM
I believe the voting for season awards is done before the postseason games are played.You are correct. And I don't think your team should have to make the postseason to be considered for the individual awards.

palehozenychicty
09-19-2012, 01:16 AM
As good as Sale was this season, Mr. Price is the winner. It ain't his fault that the offense on his team is subpar As long as they play in that dome, I don't see it getting better. Nobody is going.

WhiteSox5187
09-19-2012, 01:16 AM
You are correct. And I don't think your team should have to make the postseason to be considered for the individual awards.

What about MVP?

I don't think how your team does should be considered for Cy Young, Steve Carlton and Felix Hernandez won it on awful teams, but for MVP I think your team has to at least be contending.

Nellie_Fox
09-19-2012, 01:24 AM
What about MVP?

I don't think how your team does should be considered for Cy Young, Steve Carlton and Felix Hernandez won it on awful teams, but for MVP I think your team has to at least be contending.Nope. I've heard the old "they could have lost just as easily without him" line, but I don't buy it. Ernie Banks won the NL MVP in both '58 and '59 (thus giving both league MVP's to Chicago in '59) on a team that finished in 5th place in the 8 team league both years. Then, when they finished 7th in '60, he was 4th in MVP vote.

WhiteSox5187
09-19-2012, 01:28 AM
Nope. I've heard the old "they could have lost just as easily without him" line, but I don't buy it. Ernie Banks won the NL MVP in both '58 and '59 (thus giving both league MVP's to Chicago in '59) on a team that finished in 5th place in the 8 team league both years. Then, when they finished 7th in '60, he was 4th in MVP vote.

Hmm, well, I disagree. I suppose there might be some exceptions, I recall reading somewhere a sports writer once defended his vote for Banks winning the MVP on a last place team by saying "Without Banks the Cubs would finish in Albuquerque," but I think typically I think the MVP should be on a contending team so he could because a guy who hits .300 and 40 HRs on a team that wins the division is more valuable than a guy putting up the same numbers on a team that loses 100. But that is just my opinion.

DSpivack
09-19-2012, 01:39 AM
Hmm, well, I disagree. I suppose there might be some exceptions, I recall reading somewhere a sports writer once defended his vote for Banks winning the MVP on a last place team by saying "Without Banks the Cubs would finish in Albuquerque," but I think typically I think the MVP should be on a contending team so he could because a guy who hits .300 and 40 HRs on a team that wins the division is more valuable than a guy putting up the same numbers on a team that loses 100. But that is just my opinion.

I think that's silly. The guy on the non-contending team can't control who his teammates are, and hasn't contributed any less because his teammates suck. Baseball isn't a team sport like the others in that you could make your teammates better. If the Tigers and Angels miss the playoffs I don't think that means that Trout or Cabrera deserve the MVP any less, and I would say the same if they weren't contending for playoff spots.

In the NL this year, who should get the MVP? I think you can make a good case for McCutchen, Braun, or Posey. I don't think Posey should get bonus points over the other two simply because he happens to play on a team with much more talented pitchers.

Nellie_Fox
09-19-2012, 01:53 AM
Hmm, well, I disagree. I suppose there might be some exceptions, I recall reading somewhere a sports writer once defended his vote for Banks winning the MVP on a last place team by saying "Without Banks the Cubs would finish in Albuquerque," but I think typically I think the MVP should be on a contending team so he could because a guy who hits .300 and 40 HRs on a team that wins the division is more valuable than a guy putting up the same numbers on a team that loses 100. But that is just my opinion.How good do you have to be to put up those kind of numbers on a team with no other threats? The opposition can pitch around you in any important situation, meaning you have much less chance to do damage.

QCIASOXFAN
09-19-2012, 02:35 AM
I agree. A double digit strike out performance and a win tomorrow could seal it for him.

gosox41
09-19-2012, 03:17 AM
In a year like this with so many close candidates, whoever goes deep into the postseason will probably be the most likely to pull it off. If Sale can make a few big October starts on the national stage, there's no reason he shouldn't be able to get it. Go Chris! :gulp:

Aren't all these awards voted on just after the season ends and not announced to the off season? I thought they were.


Bob

gosox41
09-19-2012, 03:25 AM
What about MVP?

I don't think how your team does should be considered for Cy Young, Steve Carlton and Felix Hernandez won it on awful teams, but for MVP I think your team has to at least be contending.

I agree. MVP means 'Most Valuable Player'. How valuable of a player are you to a team if your team is terrible. So you're less bad?

I think the Silver Slugger Awards should be used to identify the best hitters, even if it is position by position. If the team isn't contending, then the players aren't valuable to the team winning.

Or to look at it another way, where would the Sox be without Rios or Sale this year versus where would thte '87 Cubs be without Dawson.

I think the answer is that the Sox wouldn't be in first place right now while the '87 Cubs would obviously still be a last place team.


Bob

gosox41
09-19-2012, 03:28 AM
How good do you have to be to put up those kind of numbers on a team with no other threats? The opposition can pitch around you in any important situation, meaning you have much less chance to do damage.



I would guess a bad team has less 'important situations' then a contending team. I'm sure Ernie got pitched to in many 8-1 games. Without knowing the stats, I don't think the Cubs played many 1-2 run games when compared to a contending team. Last place teams are generally in last place because they are bad, not because they had a year of leading the league in 1 run games played and having a terrible record in 1 run games.



Bob

Dibbs
09-19-2012, 09:07 AM
I think he would have to win his final 3 starts, while lowering his ERA in the process to have a real chance to get the votes.

asindc
09-19-2012, 09:14 AM
I agree. MVP means 'Most Valuable Player'. How valuable of a player are you to a team if your team is terrible. So you're less bad?

I think the Silver Slugger Awards should be used to identify the best hitters, even if it is position by position. If the team isn't contending, then the players aren't valuable to the team winning.

Or to look at it another way, where would the Sox be without Rios or Sale this year versus where would thte '87 Cubs be without Dawson.

I think the answer is that the Sox wouldn't be in first place right now while the '87 Cubs would obviously still be a last place team.


Bob

Well, by the same rationale, Eddie Gaedel should be in the Hall of Fame as a player.

I think Sale should be in the discussion with Price and Verlander. Right now, I'd vote Price, Verlander, and Sale in that order.

DonnieDarko
09-19-2012, 09:20 AM
I would give it to Price or Verlander before Sale.

Whether their teams make the playoffs or not should be practically irrelevant.

This.

MISoxfan
09-19-2012, 10:27 AM
I agree. MVP means 'Most Valuable Player'. How valuable of a player are you to a team if your team is terrible. So you're less bad?

I think the Silver Slugger Awards should be used to identify the best hitters, even if it is position by position. If the team isn't contending, then the players aren't valuable to the team winning.

Or to look at it another way, where would the Sox be without Rios or Sale this year versus where would thte '87 Cubs be without Dawson.

I think the answer is that the Sox wouldn't be in first place right now while the '87 Cubs would obviously still be a last place team.


Bob

Does a $50 dollar bill have less value in an otherwise empty wallet?

SBSoxFan
09-19-2012, 07:37 PM
Who would you vote for?

Verlander 2012 League Ranks:
8th in AL in W (14)
1st in AL in IP (217.1)
2nd in AL in SO (218)
4th in AL in ERA (2.82)
2nd in AL in WHIP (1.05)
8th in AL in W% (.636)
1st in AL in CG (6)

Sale 2012 League Ranks:
3rd in AL in W (17)
8th in AL in SO (173)
2nd in AL in ERA (2.78)
3rd in AL in WHIP (1.06)
3rd in AL in W% (.739)

Price 2012 League Ranks:
1st in AL in W (18)
10th in AL in IP (187.2)
6th in AL in SO (181)
1st in AL in ERA (2.54)
6th in AL in WHIP (1.11)
2nd in AL in W% (.783)

Wins tend to carry a lot of weight for Cy Young voting; Verlander's not even in that picture. Plus, he has won less than half his starts. If Sale wins tonight, he will have won two-thirds of his starts. What might hurt both Sale and Price is that neither is going to make a full complement of starts (33-35) for the season.

DSpivack
09-19-2012, 08:09 PM
Who would you vote for?

Verlander 2012 League Ranks:
8th in AL in W (14)
1st in AL in IP (217.1)
2nd in AL in SO (218)
4th in AL in ERA (2.82)
2nd in AL in WHIP (1.05)
8th in AL in W% (.636)
1st in AL in CG (6)

Sale 2012 League Ranks:
3rd in AL in W (17)
8th in AL in SO (173)
2nd in AL in ERA (2.78)
3rd in AL in WHIP (1.06)
3rd in AL in W% (.739)

Price 2012 League Ranks:
1st in AL in W (18)
10th in AL in IP (187.2)
6th in AL in SO (181)
1st in AL in ERA (2.54)
6th in AL in WHIP (1.11)
2nd in AL in W% (.783)

Wins tend to carry a lot of weight for Cy Young voting; Verlander's not even in that picture. Plus, he has won less than half his starts. If Sale wins tonight, he will have won two-thirds of his starts. What might hurt both Sale and Price is that neither is going to make a full complement of starts (33-35) for the season.

Yeah, no. Wins are the least important stat you posted there, and the voters showed that in awarding the very deserving Felix Hernandez the Cy Young a couple of years ago. That said, I'm still not sure whether I would give the award to Price or to Verlander.

chicagowhitesox1
09-19-2012, 09:43 PM
I never felt relief pitchers should ever win the Cy Young Award but Fernando Rodney of TampaBay is making a strong case too. He's putting up a Dennis Eckersley type of year.

Lip Man 1
09-19-2012, 11:15 PM
Voting on the major awards is done in September before the season ends, that way the BBWAA have time to tally the votes and so forth.

That's the reason Kenny didn't get Executive of the Year in 2005, voting was done in September when it looked like the Indians were going to catch the Sox.

Lip

chicagowhitesox1
09-20-2012, 10:21 AM
I always thought the voting was held after the season. I would have to think Kirk Gibson was helped by his WS homerun in 1988. Then again Gibson actually led the league in war that year. He didn't really have much competition that year either.

Nellie_Fox
09-20-2012, 12:01 PM
I always thought the voting was held after the season. I would have to think Kirk Gibson was helped by his WS homerun in 1988. Then again Gibson actually led the league in war that year. He didn't really have much competition that year either.No. It has always been held before the post-season in order to ensure that it's a regular-season award and not influenced by post-season performance. There are separate MVP awards for playoffs and WS. From the Baseball Writers Associaton of America web site:
Voters submit their ballots before the start of the postseason.


http://bbwaa.com/voting-faq/

WhiteSox5187
09-20-2012, 02:02 PM
Yeah, no. Wins are the least important stat you posted there, and the voters showed that in awarding the very deserving Felix Hernandez the Cy Young a couple of years ago. That said, I'm still not sure whether I would give the award to Price or to Verlander.

I do think that voters tend to place less importance on wins now than at any time previously but I suspect that if you had two guys with similar stats with one guy having more wins they might lean towards the guy with more wins. I also think that voters looked at Verlander's 25 wins last year when giving him the MVP because while they might not be a good metric 25 wins is awfully impressive any way you slice it.

DonnieDarko
09-20-2012, 03:09 PM
I have the same theory for Wins/Losses as I do for ERA: if those numbers are too high or too low, then it tells you a lot. However, it's all the inbetween where you have to use other stastics to evaluate performance.

DSpivack
09-20-2012, 03:17 PM
I have the same theory for Wins/Losses as I do for ERA: if those numbers are too high or too low, then it tells you a lot. However, it's all the inbetween where you have to use other stastics to evaluate performance.

Meaning what? Felix Hernandez won the Cy Young, deservedly so, at 13-12. Justin Verlander has as many wins this season as Phil Hughes.

DonnieDarko
09-20-2012, 03:22 PM
Meaning what? Felix Hernandez won the Cy Young, deservedly so, at 13-12. Justin Verlander has as many wins this season as Phil Hughes.

Check the second part of the statement. I consider 13-12 to be pretty middling, and thus in need of more numbers to evaluate that said performance.