Clemens,Carpenter, or Willis for Cy Young? (edit)

[UK1679666180]

ERA is a rate stat, PRAA is an accumulative stat. A far better stat than Wins, Losses, ERA, CG, etc or "whatever" less accurate stat the writers will use to determine the Cy Young.

 

If there's a better stat than that, I'd like to see it. I think Vorp is up there as well.

[imb]

Question for UK

 

PR (Pitching Runs)

Invented by John Thorn and Pete Palmer, this is a measure of the number of runs a pitcher saved compared to average. The formula is league-average RA/IP minus park-adjusted RA/IP, times total innings pitched. This is the same formula as Lee Sinins' RSAA (see below).

 

RSAA

Runs Saved Above Average. This stat, which is also tracked and reported by Lee Sinins, is a measure of a pitcher’s effectiveness and contribution. The formula is RA/IP minus league-average RA/IP, times total innings pitched.

 

PR

Clemens 58

Carpenter 48

 

RSAA

Clemens 43

Carpenter 32

 

What is the point of RSAA if PR is basically a better version of it?

[UK1679666180]

They're the same thing to me, b/c the 43 you mentioned for Clemens as listed by BP is technically PRAA, not RSAA.

[UK1679666180]

IMB, you'll usually see a direct correlation between VORP and PRAA/RSAA. You won't see that as often with pitchers especially once you get beyond the two starters b/c Win Shares overvalues a closer, IMO.

 

If you have VORP and PRAA stating pitcher A is the better than pitcher B, you know what the conclusion is.

[K-Town]

19-4. As much as people want to pretend that wins don't matter, the fact still remains that unless your team wins a game, you've accomlplished NOTHING, in the big picture.

 

Everybody wants to play the "what if" game. "What if" Houston was scoring runs for Clemens. Maybe he'd have more wins.

 

That's fine, but it goes both ways.

 

"What if" Carpenter's team wasn't scoring for him. Has anybody considered that Carpenter may dig in a little harder if he had to, and possibly give it all he's got for 6 innings, rather than pacing himself for 8 or 9? I think it's fair to say that a pitcher with a lead is going to relax a little bit, maybe not focus quite as much. Perhaps if Carpenter were backed into a corner game after game, he'd be less prone to making a mistake here and there.

 

 

We can play the "what if" game all day long. And yes, something should be said for Clemens' ERA. But in Carpenter, we're not talking about a guy with 19 wins, and a 4.50 ERA. Carpenter has been EXCELLENT in every aspect of what he's doing, including helping his team win games.

 

If you want to talk about "replacement value", then let's talk about it. Clemens' team has won 14 games when he started. If a trained monkey replaced Clemens, they would have won 14 fewer games.

 

If a trained monkey replaced Chris Carpenter, then the Cards would have won 19 fewer games.

 

 

Last time I check, 19 is more than 14. So the "replacement value" doesn't hold much water with me.

[wekse]

does this trained monkey have a name?

[K-Town]

does this trained monkey have a name?

 

Jerome Williams, Jeff Suppan, take your pick.

[UK1679666180]

19-4. As much as people want to pretend that wins don't matter, the fact still remains that unless your team wins a game, you've accomlplished NOTHING, in the big picture.

 

Everybody wants to play the "what if" game. "What if" Houston was scoring runs for Clemens. Maybe he'd have more wins.

 

That's fine, but it goes both ways.

 

"What if" Carpenter's team wasn't scoring for him. Has anybody considered that Carpenter may dig in a little harder if he had to, and possibly give it all he's got for 6 innings, rather than pacing himself for 8 or 9? I think it's fair to say that a pitcher with a lead is going to relax a little bit, maybe not focus quite as much. Perhaps if Carpenter were backed into a corner game after game, he'd be less prone to making a mistake here and there.

 

 

We can play the "what if" game all day long. And yes, something should be said for Clemens' ERA. But in Carpenter, we're not talking about a guy with 19 wins, and a 4.50 ERA. Carpenter has been EXCELLENT in every aspect of what he's doing, including helping his team win games.

 

If you want to talk about "replacement value", then let's talk about it. Clemens' team has won 14 games when he started. If a trained monkey replaced Clemens, they would have won 14 fewer games.

 

If a trained monkey replaced Chris Carpenter, then the Cards would have won 19 fewer games.

 

 

Last time I check, 19 is more than 14. So the "replacement value" doesn't hold much water with me.

 

Wins are only as good as the offense around him. There's a reason why 4 STL starters have more wins than Clemens with Marquis 1 win behind and that isn't b/c of Carpenter's or Clemens' pitching ability. My "what if" stats told me otherwise.

 

Please explain why 4 Cards' starter have more wins than Clemens and why Marquis is only 1 behind?

 

If you put a trained monkey with the Cards offense it'd have a better record than the monkey with the astros offense.

[wekse]

i'll explain it...they are better pitchers, wins are very important can you not see that?!?

 

/sarcasm

[SouthSideRyan]

19-4. As much as people want to pretend that wins don't matter, the fact still remains that unless your team wins a game, you've accomlplished NOTHING, in the big picture.

 

Everybody wants to play the "what if" game. "What if" Houston was scoring runs for Clemens. Maybe he'd have more wins.

 

That's fine, but it goes both ways.

 

"What if" Carpenter's team wasn't scoring for him. Has anybody considered that Carpenter may dig in a little harder if he had to, and possibly give it all he's got for 6 innings, rather than pacing himself for 8 or 9? I think it's fair to say that a pitcher with a lead is going to relax a little bit, maybe not focus quite as much. Perhaps if Carpenter were backed into a corner game after game, he'd be less prone to making a mistake here and there.

 

 

We can play the "what if" game all day long. And yes, something should be said for Clemens' ERA. But in Carpenter, we're not talking about a guy with 19 wins, and a 4.50 ERA. Carpenter has been EXCELLENT in every aspect of what he's doing, including helping his team win games.

 

If you want to talk about "replacement value", then let's talk about it. Clemens' team has won 14 games when he started. If a trained monkey replaced Clemens, they would have won 14 fewer games.

 

If a trained monkey replaced Chris Carpenter, then the Cards would have won 19 fewer games.

 

 

Last time I check, 19 is more than 14. So the "replacement value" doesn't hold much water with me.

 

So you can recognize that a guy with 19 wins and a 4.50 ERA doesn't deserve the Cy Young award over Clemens. Even though 19 is more than 14? Even though UNLESS YOUR TEAM WINS, then your start means nothing? Even though your trained monkey factor is still higher for the 4.50 ERA guy than Clemens?

[Transmogrified Tiger]

I just wanted to say that the phrase "trained monkey factor" is hilarious, and should be injected into as many conversations as possible.

[PujolsPower]

FYI - Going back to 1980, the biggest negative win differential (starters only) by a Cy Young winner was 5 games by Randy Johnson in 1999. Johnson went 17-9 with a 2.48 ERA compared to Hampton at 22-4 with a 2.90 ERA. In that year RJ struck out 364 while Hampton K'ed just 177. Given Carpenters 8 win lead and lead in K's, I don't see how Clemens could win the Cy Young, unless voters take age and name recognition into consideration.

[ltb]

Last time I check, 19 is more than 14. So the "replacement value" doesn't hold much water with me.

 

hey k-town

who deserved the nl cy young last year?

randy johnson or shawn estes?

....cause randy only had one more win, you know.

 

thanks bud!

[ltb]

Given Carpenters 8 win lead and lead in K's, I don't see how Clemens could win the Cy Young, unless voters take age and name recognition into consideration.

 

yeah, let's go ahead and ignore the 0.78 advantage clemens has in ERA.

 

that's monstrous.

[reggiemiller rules]

Last time I check, 19 is more than 14. So the "replacement value" doesn't hold much water with me.

 

hey k-town

who deserved the nl cy young last year?

randy johnson or shawn estes?

....cause randy only had one more win, you know.

 

thanks bud!

 

That comparison isnt fair because its not just about wins in that case becasue all of Estes numbers were nowhere near Johnsons. In this case Carpenters numbers are close or better then Clemens so that argument between RJ and Estes doesnt make sense. I think it is still a toss up if Carpenter ends up with 22 or 23 wins and Clemens only has 13 or 14 and the ERA's stay the same I think Carp will win based on previous voting results. If Clemens gets within 3 or 4 wins I think he will have a good shot at the award.

[ltb]

Last time I check, 19 is more than 14. So the "replacement value" doesn't hold much water with me.

 

hey k-town

who deserved the nl cy young last year?

randy johnson or shawn estes?

....cause randy only had one more win, you know.

 

thanks bud!

 

That comparison isnt fair because its not just about wins in that case becasue all of Estes numbers were nowhere near Johnsons. In this case Carpenters numbers are close or better then Clemens so that argument between RJ and Estes doesnt make sense. I think it is still a toss up if Carpenter ends up with 22 or 23 wins and Clemens only has 13 or 14 and the ERA's stay the same I think Carp will win based on previous voting results. If Clemens gets within 3 or 4 wins I think he will have a good shot at the award.

 

carpenter's ERA isn't even close to clemens' - that is one big stat the cy young voting is based on.

 

the comparison i made IS fair, because he basically throws statistics out the window a la john kruk, saying that more wins = better pitcher.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

If I were voting, I'd still vote for Clemens. Nothing has changed the fact that Clemens has been the better pitcher.

 

To me, Cy Young Award is to the best pitcher. That, folks, this season has been Clemens.

[ltb]

If I were voting, I'd still vote for Clemens. Nothing has changed the fact that Clemens has been the better pitcher.

 

To me, Cy Young Award is to the best pitcher. That, folks, this season has been Clemens.

 

seconded.

 

i can't stand clemens, but he has undoubtedly been the best pitcher in baseball this year.

[reggiemiller rules]

Last time I check, 19 is more than 14. So the "replacement value" doesn't hold much water with me.

 

hey k-town

who deserved the nl cy young last year?

randy johnson or shawn estes?

....cause randy only had one more win, you know.

 

thanks bud!

 

That comparison isnt fair because its not just about wins in that case becasue all of Estes numbers were nowhere near Johnsons. In this case Carpenters numbers are close or better then Clemens so that argument between RJ and Estes doesnt make sense. I think it is still a toss up if Carpenter ends up with 22 or 23 wins and Clemens only has 13 or 14 and the ERA's stay the same I think Carp will win based on previous voting results. If Clemens gets within 3 or 4 wins I think he will have a good shot at the award.

 

carpenter's ERA isn't even close to clemens' - that is one big stat the cy young voting is based on.

 

the comparison i made IS fair, because he basically throws statistics out the window a la john kruk, saying that more wins = better pitcher.

 

Actually I would say that ERA is taken into account less then wins. Oswalt got 3rd last year based on his wins while Peavy didnt even crack the top 10 even though he lead the league in ERA. So wins is taken into account more then ERA. As long as the ERAs are still good.

[ltb]

Peavy didnt even crack the top 10 even though he lead the league in ERA

 

peavy barely qualified for the ERA title, which explains why he wasn't in the voting.

 

an ERA as low as clemens' in this era is unheard of since maddux and certainly makes him deserving of the cy young, considering his peripherals.

[reggiemiller rules]

Peavy didnt even crack the top 10 even though he lead the league in ERA

 

peavy barely qualified for the ERA title, which explains why he wasn't in the voting.

 

an ERA as low as clemens' in this era is unheard of since maddux and certainly makes him deserving of the cy young, considering his peripherals.

 

Im not saying that Clemens isnt deserving, im just saying that if you look at previous votes they tend to go with guys who have more wins even if the ERA is a little higher. Is that right? its up to them im just saying that based on what previous votes have shown Carpenter is probably the favorite as of now based on his win total.

[K-Town]

If you're going to play the "what if" game ("what if" Clemens had more run support), then you have to play it both ways.

 

 

What if Carpenter had LESS run support. He may have thrown shutout after shutout, also. Pitching with a lead is completely different than pitching for your life. You tend to relax a little, maybe be a little more aggressive, and are prone to making a mistake here and there.

 

We know what happened last year with the voting, but here's an even more glaring example of what the voters think the Cy Young should be about (which is what really matters, right?).

 

1996 Cy Young Voting:

 

Kevin Brown: ERA 1.89 (17-11 record) - 2 first place votes

John Schmoltz: ERA 2.94 (24-8 record) - 26 first place votes.

 

 

You all can define the Cy Young criteria however you want to, but you're not the ones voting. As far as I'm concerned, a strong precedence has been set, and it clearly has very little to do with ERA.

[K-Town]

Peavy didnt even crack the top 10 even though he lead the league in ERA

 

peavy barely qualified for the ERA title, which explains why he wasn't in the voting.

 

an ERA as low as clemens' in this era is unheard of since maddux and certainly makes him deserving of the cy young, considering his peripherals.

 

"Barely qualified". What the heck does that mean, and what does it have to do with anything. If the voters are using terms like "barely qualified" when voting, then the award is a farce. You either qualify or you don't.

[UK1679666180]

You didn't answer my question of how 4 Cards pitchers have more wins than Clemens and Marquis only have 1 less win than Roger?

 

There has to be a reason behind that.

[K-Town]

You didn't answer my question of how 4 Cards pitchers have more wins than Clemens and Marquis only have 1 less win than Roger?

 

There has to be a reason behind that.

 

The same reason Oswalt has been more successful than Clemens this year.......because those pitchers held the opponent to fewer runs than the opponent scored in those games.

 

 

Now I have a question for you:

 

If Clemens is getting 3.6 runs per game, but giving up 1.5 runs per game, then why is he winning fewer than half of his games?