This is a small piece of an article I wrote for Hardball Cooperative that is set to be posted tomorrow, I have expanded on it here since it is Royals related. I was looking at recent Cy Young awards that went to a pitcher with inferior stats. One of the most egregious sins that the voters have committed over the years was awarding the 1993 CYA to Jack McDowell. Removing wins from the equation look at the stats of these two pitchers (bold indicates led league):
Player A: 3.37 ERA, 125 ERA+, 256.2 IP, 158 K's, 1.28 WHIP, 10 CG, 4 SHO, 0.7 HR/9
Player B: 2.56 ERA, 179 ERA+, 238.2 IP, 186 K's, 1.10 WHIP, 5 CG, 1 SHO, 0.3 HR/9
Royals fans will recognize that player B is Kevin Appier, who had one of the greatest seasons by a pitcher in team history. But Appier could only manage a third place finish in CYA voting despite his fantastic year. Why you ask? Because McDowell won 22 games while Appier only won 18. Randy Johnson finished second in voting with 19 wins (he was also more worthy of the award than McDowell).
McDowell did have a good season but his ERA+ ranked just 22nd in all of baseball while Appier's was the best. Now I know ERA+ wasn't a stat back then but just looking at other more well known stats it is very evident that Appier should have been a unanimous selection. I really have a hard time believing that innings, complete games, and shutouts swayed the voters that much. It had to be the wins, it's the only logical explanation.
Greinke is in the same boat as Appier, dominating the league but lacking in wins (thanks to a woeful offense, pathetic defense, and an ineffective bullpen). He has a 2.05 ERA in his no decisions (tonight he has pitched six shutout innings thus far, predictably the offense has given him 1 run of support). I'd like to believe this is the year that the voters look beyond wins and study the whole picture. I mean it's bound to happen sometime.
Right?
0 comments:
Post a Comment