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

[dalgreen]

A bunch of writers will climax over Carpenter's probable 22 -24 wins this year (I think he has 6 starts left). Assuming Carpenter and Clemens finish the season strong the question will be, "Do you vote the Cy Young to the best pitcher or the most dominant pitcher?" By the way, I think it would be cool if they split the vote and Willis ended up winning.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

Absolutely, and why shouldn't I? I wouldn't be much of a Cardinal fan if I didn't want my guy to win, would I?

 

 

Based on the Cy Young precedence that's been set, Carpenter deserves the Cy Young Award this year.

 

Like I said, I'm not sure why you all take it so personally........(some of you are downright testy about it), or why it's worth 20+ pages of effort from fans of a team who don't even have a horse in the race. I don't get it, unless it boils down the your hatred for the Cardinals, which is perfectly acceptable as long as you're willing to own that perspective, just as I own my Cardinal bias.

 

You admit that you're arguing for Carpenter because you're a Cardinal fan. That in itself devalues the rest of your argument. It has said that you were already predisposed to choose the Cardinal player for the award and therefore have looked for whatever evidence you can to support that argument.

 

Why do we have 20 pages? Because first and foremost we're baseball fans. We like to discuss baseball. While, for the majority of us, that includes Cubs baseball because that is the team which we have the most interest, it doesn't preclude us from having opinions about baseball in general.

 

It has nothing to do with Cardinal bias. Yur agrument has everything to do with bias. Why do you feel the need to argue with Cubs fans over this issue? Do you post the same arguments on an Astros board, or an Angels board, or a Brewers board, or a Braves forum? I can point you to those if you want. My guess is that you just want to argue here because you believe there's a bias that doesn't exist. You assume we're all saying "Oooh Boy...we want Clemens to win it so we can laugh at Cardinal fans." It has nothing to do with that. It has to do with the fact that we've looked at the evidence and have come to the intelligent conclusion that Clemens is the best pitcher. While you might argue the Cy Young shouldn't go to the best pitcher, that's another point that we disagree upon. My guess, which you've all but admitted, is that if Carpenter had Clemens numbers and Clemens had Carpenter's numbers you'd be here still arguing for Carpenter and making the arguments we are. The only difference in that situation is that we'd likely not be arguing with you, because we would agree.

[reggiemiller rules]

I agree with the stuff you said vance, but I think that Cardinals fans feel that previous votes have leaned towards the guys with the more wins even if the ERA is higher. So they feel that if your going on the way previous votes Carpenter should be the winner. ITs not taking anything away from Clemens its just they have seen guys with higher era's but more wint totals win in the past and they think it should be that way again. If Clemens wins it i wont be mad its hard to argue against a guy with a 1.50 ERA. I would just like to see Carp win it because he is just as deserving as Clemens.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

I agree with the stuff you said vance, but I think that Cardinals fans feel that previous votes have leaned towards the guys with the more wins even if the ERA is higher. So they feel that if your going on the way previous votes Carpenter should be the winner. ITs not taking anything away from Clemens its just they have seen guys with higher era's but more wint totals win in the past and they think it should be that way again. If Clemens wins it i wont be mad its hard to argue against a guy with a 1.50 ERA. I would just like to see Carp win it because he is just as deserving as Clemens.

 

I can sympathize that you have seen what the voters have done. I just don't think that makes him deserving. I likely would not have given it to Clemens last season either. Just thinking back, without examining all the numbers, I'd have probably gone with Johnson. I don't think Carpenter is just as deserving. I do think Carpenter had put together a season which is remarkable and in a number of other seasons would be the run away winner. However, I'm not sure I've ever watched a season where a pitcher has consistiently pitched as well, start after start, as Clemens has this year. I believe the Cy, regardless of how previous voters have voted, should go to the pitcher who has pitched the best. That is Clemens this year.

[treebird]

if you think the award is biased and just goes to the guy with the most wins, why do you want your pitcher to win it?

[reggiemiller rules]

I dont think it is biased or goes to the guys with the most wins, i think it goes to a guy with the best combination of wins and ERA which is what Clemens had last year and which is what Carp has this year. Clemens didnt have the ERA of RJ last year or the wins of Oswalt but he has the best combination out of the 3 of them. That is what Carp has this year he has a better combination of wins and ERA then Clemens does. Im not saying that is necessarily fair but it is the way it has been done in the past. Thats all im saying is the way it has been voted on in the past would seem as if it should go to Carpenter. IS that the right way to do it maybe not but thats the way it has been done so i feel that is the way it should be done this year again. Like i said Clemens has been a better then Carpenter in most of the main staistical categories like ERA and whip and those. But that dosent always mean you should get the Cy Young or at least it hasnt in the past.

[K-Town]

No it isn't, not at all actually. You're still focusing your agument on wins, which are useless as a tool to look at pitcher performance. I wouldn't expect you to agree with this, as you've proven your statistical ignorance for the last 20 pages.

 

I'm not "ignorant". I understand your statistics perfectly. I just don't care, actually.

 

Not caring about pertinent statistics is pretty much the definition of ignorance, actually.

 

I would have no problem saying that Carpenter deserved the Cy Young, if he actually did. I've been saying all year that I thought Pujols would deserve the MVP by the time the season ended, so you shouldnt act like I have some anti-Cardinal bias that is factoring into my decision.

 

Nice Ninja Edit. If you want the Cy Young award to go to the "Pitcher who wins a bunch of games on a team that you root for", then it is a worthless award, and you should probably be circle jerking with fellow Cardinal fans somewhere else.

 

Classy. I didn't invite you to this thread, and it has nothing to do with your team. If anybody should leave, it's you.

 

I'm not convinced on Pujols yet, and you won't hear me tooting his horn much (so I'm not COMPLETELY biased). And it's not silly for me to be tooting Carpenter's horn for the Cy Young. It's a close race for the Cy Young, whether you want it to be or not.

[K-Town]

Absolutely, and why shouldn't I? I wouldn't be much of a Cardinal fan if I didn't want my guy to win, would I?

 

 

Based on the Cy Young precedence that's been set, Carpenter deserves the Cy Young Award this year.

 

Like I said, I'm not sure why you all take it so personally........(some of you are downright testy about it), or why it's worth 20+ pages of effort from fans of a team who don't even have a horse in the race. I don't get it, unless it boils down the your hatred for the Cardinals, which is perfectly acceptable as long as you're willing to own that perspective, just as I own my Cardinal bias.

 

You admit that you're arguing for Carpenter because you're a Cardinal fan. That in itself devalues the rest of your argument. It has said that you were already predisposed to choose the Cardinal player for the award and therefore have looked for whatever evidence you can to support that argument.

 

Why do we have 20 pages? Because first and foremost we're baseball fans. We like to discuss baseball. While, for the majority of us, that includes Cubs baseball because that is the team which we have the most interest, it doesn't preclude us from having opinions about baseball in general.

 

It has nothing to do with Cardinal bias. Yur agrument has everything to do with bias. Why do you feel the need to argue with Cubs fans over this issue? Do you post the same arguments on an Astros board, or an Angels board, or a Brewers board, or a Braves forum? I can point you to those if you want. My guess is that you just want to argue here because you believe there's a bias that doesn't exist. You assume we're all saying "Oooh Boy...we want Clemens to win it so we can laugh at Cardinal fans." It has nothing to do with that. It has to do with the fact that we've looked at the evidence and have come to the intelligent conclusion that Clemens is the best pitcher. While you might argue the Cy Young shouldn't go to the best pitcher, that's another point that we disagree upon. My guess, which you've all but admitted, is that if Carpenter had Clemens numbers and Clemens had Carpenter's numbers you'd be here still arguing for Carpenter and making the arguments we are. The only difference in that situation is that we'd likely not be arguing with you, because we would agree.

 

I'm just wondering if you had 25 pages last year, explaining why Clemens shouldn't win.

 

I have some bias, but it's not like the Cy Young vote is a no-brainer this year. It's probably pretty close to a dead heat. If it were a "no-brainer" to Cubs fans, then the thread wouldn't be here to begin with. Why am I not on an Astros board, or a Brewers board? Because they haven't posed the question (apparently they don't care, while Cubs fans obiously do, because the question WAS posed on this board). I didn't start this thread. And if there's only one correct opinion, then you'll have to ask your buddy "Vance" why he asked the question (I have to assume right now that he was simply trying to bait a willing Cardinal fan into a discussion).

[K-Town]

if you think the award is biased and just goes to the guy with the most wins, why do you want your pitcher to win it?

 

It's not "biased", necessarily. But it's also not an ERA race. As "reggie" pointed out, it's better to look at the overall picture. Clemens probably hasn't helped his team as much as Carpenter has. No fault of Clemens, but an ordinary pitcher would have had similar results as what Clemens has had (the Astros losing more than half of his games). If you're not winning games, then sometimes your efforts are all for naught, unfortunately. It happens all the time. As already pointed out, Cy Young himself probably wasn't the very best pitcher of his era.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

K-town, well to clarify, I really don't need to ask my buddy "Vance", since he's me. I haven't had a split personality, at least not yet. I started the thread because the discussion kept popping up in other threads and it was a subject that I felt lent itself to a discussion. I love hoe you assume the worst of our motives here, while on face value we've assumed the best of yours. We could assume that any Cardinal fan here is here to troll. Instead we choose to give them opportunity to "prove" themselves. You've done ok, in that regard, with a few exceptions.

 

K-town, apparently you have some issues with Cubs fans. You ask a lot of questions as to our motives, but this is a Cubs fan site. You assume that we were trying to bait you (or others like you)into a argument. My guess is less than 10 percent of this forum are Cardinal fans. It seems more likely that I started the thread to discuss this issue with Cubs fans rather than bait a Cardinal fan. Now, if I posted the same thread on Cards Talk, maybe I would be trying to bait. You do a lot of complaining about us. You also had the nerve to tell IMB no one invited him. He's been around these forums a lot longer than you. If you don't like him and his opinions, I suggest it is you who should leave, because IMB isn't going anywhere.

 

No, I doubt we had 25 pages discussing it last year. I think last year it was a fargone conclusion that Clemens would win it. We may not have agreed, but it wasn't the point of discussion that it is this year. I know that several of our posters were likely hyping Zambrano for the award. I'm not saying he deserved it, but his numbers were at least strong enough to hype him here. I'm fairly certain I didn't travel to other fan sites to hype him. I kept it where it was appropriate.

 

No one thinks it's silly for you to be tooting Carpenter's horn, but some of the crap you've tried to use to do it is.

[K-Town]

K-town, well to clarify, I really don't need to ask my buddy "Vance", since he's me. I haven't had a split personality, at least not yet. I started the thread because the discussion kept popping up in other threads and it was a subject that I felt lent itself to a discussion. I love hoe you assume the worst of our motives here, while on face value we've assumed the best of yours. We could assume that any Cardinal fan here is here to troll. Instead we choose to give them opportunity to "prove" themselves. You've done ok, in that regard, with a few exceptions.

 

You don't have to assume anything about my motives. I've told you over and over again that I'm a slightly biased Cardinal fan that's here to toot his horn. That's my motive. I'm not sure how I can make it more clear. Am I here to "troll". No. If I were, I'd be involving myself in discussions about Cubs players, which I don't. How can I possibly be "trolling" on a Cubs board, when the thread has nothing to do with the Cubs?

 

K-town, apparently you have some issues with Cubs fans. You ask a lot of questions as to our motives, but this is a Cubs fan site. You assume that we were trying to bait you (or others like you)into a argument. My guess is less than 10 percent of this forum are Cardinal fans. It seems more likely that I started the thread to discuss this issue with Cubs fans rather than bait a Cardinal fan. Now, if I posted the same thread on Cards Talk, maybe I would be trying to bait. You do a lot of complaining about us. You also had the nerve to tell IMB no one invited him. He's been around these forums a lot longer than you. If you don't like him and his opinions, I suggest it is you who should leave, because IMB isn't going anywhere.

 

My posts have had nothing to do with IBM. For him to tell me to "go circle jerk with other Cardinal fans" was inappropriate, and so I called him on it, as politely as I could. I assume that you didn't start the thread to discuss it with other Cub fans, since it's in the "Rivalry" section of the message board. I'm starting to wonder why there even IS a "Rivalry" section, because it's clear that the Cubs fans here are offended by those who oppose their stance on a given topic. I haven't called anybody "ignorant", or told them to "go circle jerk with the Cardinals", or anything of the sort, and yet I see those types of things directed toward me in almost every page of this thread. Different people have different opinions. Otherwise, the thread would be titled "Who has the better ERA, Clemens or Carpenter", and the discussion would end.

 

No, I doubt we had 25 pages discussing it last year. I think last year it was a fargone conclusion that Clemens would win it. We may not have agreed, but it wasn't the point of discussion that it is this year. I know that several of our posters were likely hyping Zambrano for the award. I'm not saying he deserved it, but his numbers were at least strong enough to hype him here. I'm fairly certain I didn't travel to other fan sites to hype him. I kept it where it was appropriate.

 

No one thinks it's silly for you to be tooting Carpenter's horn, but some of the crap you've tried to use to do it is.

 

I didn't travel here to hype Carpenter. As I told you, I did not start this thread. And if it "not appropriate" for me to discuss Carpenter's case for the Cy Young Award here, then why did you start the thread in the first place? Whatever I've said that's "silly" is probably a little bit of my Cardinal bias coming through. I don't doubt that a bit. But as I've said, if I'm "silly", then I'm not the only one. The Cy Young race is probably pretty even right now, so I'm not alone in my thinking, and you can't assume that everyone who thinks that Carpenter deserves it is completely wrong, just because you don't see it that way. If you think I've ridiculously biased, then look at the thread where somebody asked who the World Series favorite was. You'll see that I picked the Red Sox, because they've proven themselves (last year). By the same token, the Cy Young voters proved to me last year (and years before) that Carpenter is meeting the criteria to win the award.

[indifferent]

STL's Bernie Miklasz on Carp and Pujols for CY/MVP

 

http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/sports/columnists.nsf/berniemiklasz/story/25046C7F119203928625706F00324AFA?OpenDocument

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

You don't have to assume anything about my motives. I've told you over and over again that I'm a slightly biased Cardinal fan that's here to toot his horn. That's my motive. I'm not sure how I can make it more clear. Am I here to "troll". No. If I were, I'd be involving myself in discussions about Cubs players, which I don't. How can I possibly be "trolling" on a Cubs board, when the thread has nothing to do with the Cubs?

 

I believe there was a comment about Cubs and wins, which could be borderline trolling. :-k

 

My posts have had nothing to do with IBM. For him to tell me to "go circle jerk with other Cardinal fans" was inappropriate, and so I called him on it, as politely as I could. I assume that you didn't start the thread to discuss it with other Cub fans, since it's in the "Rivalry" section of the message board. I'm starting to wonder why there even IS a "Rivalry" section, because it's clear that the Cubs fans here are offended by those who oppose their stance on a given topic. I haven't called anybody "ignorant", or told them to "go circle jerk with the Cardinals", or anything of the sort, and yet I see those types of things directed toward me in almost every page of this thread. Different people have different opinions. Otherwise, the thread would be titled "Who has the better ERA, Clemens or Carpenter", and the discussion would end.

 

I actually placed it in Rivalries since the two main candidates for the Cy are players on our rivals. It could have been placed in Baseball Discussions; either place would have likely been appropriate. Once again you're making a baseless assumption. I posted the thread at Northsidebaseball, which should logically imply (if I were dealing with someone who has any logic) that I wanted to discuss it with Cubs fans since this is (regardless of the section in the forum) a CUBS forum.

 

And BTW, many of us wondered why there was a rivalries section. Some of us would have preferred there not to be one. I don't think anyone is offended. We just find some arguments to be ridiculous.

 

 

 

I didn't travel here to hype Carpenter. As I told you, I did not start this thread. And if it "not appropriate" for me to discuss Carpenter's case for the Cy Young Award here, then why did you start the thread in the first place? Whatever I've said that's "silly" is probably a little bit of my Cardinal bias coming through. I don't doubt that a bit. But as I've said, if I'm "silly", then I'm not the only one. The Cy Young race is probably pretty even right now, so I'm not alone in my thinking, and you can't assume that everyone who thinks that Carpenter deserves it is completely wrong, just because you don't see it that way. If you think I've ridiculously biased, then look at the thread where somebody asked who the World Series favorite was. You'll see that I picked the Red Sox, because they've proven themselves (last year). By the same token, the Cy Young voters proved to me last year (and years before) that Carpenter is meeting the criteria to win the award.

 

And as we've said, just because the voters did it, doesn't mean it should have been the case. We don't agree much with Joe Morgan around these parts, even if ESPN thinks he's a genius.

 

And you're right, the Cy Young is about even because there are still a number of baseball people that think wins are an appropriate measure of a pitcher's performance. Those people are wrong.

[K-Town]

I totally agree that the remark about the "Cubs winning" was inappropriate, and I promptly apologized. I could have edited it out, but I own the fact that I said it, and it was inappropriate. I meant it in a fun way (heck, my son is a Cubs fan, and I razz him all the time). Regardless, it was inappropriate, on this forum. Again, my apoligies to those who were offended.

 

I acknowledge that this is a CUBS board. If you'd rather I disappear, all you have to do is ask.

 

 

Vance, I'm just having trouble understanding, if this is such a "no-brainer" question, then why even ASK it? It just seems like you're TRYING to make someone expose themselves as someone that you can call a complete idiot (not that you've done that, but you know what I mean).

 

Clemens has a better ERA. If that's the question that you really meant to ask, then consider it answered.

 

 

Can you even FATHOM the possibility that some people might read more into the Cy Young Award than simply "who has the best ERA"? I think that ERA is VERY important. If Clemens had pitched anywhere near as many innings as Carpenter (which he won't........... he'll likely have pitched the equivalent of 4 or 5 fewer games, when all is said and done), then that would be one thing. If Carpenter were 19-4 "by accident", then that would be one thing (even Cardinal fans agree that Garrett Stephenson had NO business winning 16 games in 2000, because he was terrible).

 

 

My point is that when you consider the entire package, wins, innings, ERA, the one bad outing by Carpenter back in April, strikeouts, KK/BB, the fact that Carpenter has pitched 3 of the top 5 games in all of baseball (not just the NL) this year, the fact that a precedence has been previously set by the voters that doesn't have much to do with ERA.......... so on and so forth, then you realize that Carpenter might deserve to get the nod over a guy who hasn't pitched a 9-inning game all year, and has had his team win more games than they've lost (for whatever reason) when he starts.

[imb]

I'm just wondering if you had 25 pages last year, explaining why Clemens shouldn't win.

 

Of course not, because we didn't have some sunshine pumping Diamondback fan over here throwing a fit.

[1908]

There seems to be more name calling than discussion going on in this thread lately. Let's keep things civil.

[K-Town]

I'm just wondering if you had 25 pages last year, explaining why Clemens shouldn't win.

 

Of course not, because we didn't have some sunshine pumping Diamondback fan over here throwing a fit.

 

That's because the best fans on the planet are in St. Louis, not Arizona. :lol: It's hard to get D-back fans worked up about ANYTHING.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

I totally agree that the remark about the "Cubs winning" was inappropriate, and I promptly apologized. I could have edited it out, but I own the fact that I said it, and it was inappropriate. I meant it in a fun way (heck, my son is a Cubs fan, and I razz him all the time). Regardless, it was inappropriate, on this forum. Again, my apoligies to those who were offended.

 

I wasn't saying you were a troll. You made some erroneous assumptions without basis to my intent. I was simply stating how we could make the same.

I acknowledge that this is a CUBS board. If you'd rather I disappear, all you have to do is ask.

 

I don't think we want you to dissapear. I would prefer that you stop making arguments that aren't really pertinent to the subject..ie bringing Cordero into this. I think you know it's not, but like creating another argument.

 

Vance, I'm just having trouble understanding, if this is such a "no-brainer" question, then why even ASK it? It just seems like you're TRYING to make someone expose themselves as someone that you can call a complete idiot (not that you've done that, but you know what I mean).

 

Clemens has a better ERA. If that's the question that you really meant to ask, then consider it answered.

 

 

Can you even FATHOM the possibility that some people might read more into the Cy Young Award than simply "who has the best ERA"? I think that ERA is VERY important. If Clemens had pitched anywhere near as many innings as Carpenter (which he won't........... he'll likely have pitched the equivalent of 4 or 5 fewer games, when all is said and done), then that would be one thing. If Carpenter were 19-4 "by accident", then that would be one thing (even Cardinal fans agree that Garrett Stephenson had NO business winning 16 games in 2000, because he was terrible).

 

I think it is more to than ERA. Way too far back in the thread, I mentioned the number of starts in which Clemens had given up more than three runs. When I did the research, it was none. Now I think it is one.

 

I think UK among others have demonstrated the stats which indicate Clemens dominance. Search far enough, and I think at the start of the thread I included much more than ERA in the discussion. You seem to want to boil it down to Clemens only has a better ERA, but there's more to it than that.

 

And of course, I can fathom that others would see it differently. While I think there is a remarkable amount of evidence that indicates Clemens should be the winner, I'm quite aware of those that would disagree. I just haven't seen a convincing argument in favor of Carpenter. The matter of one inning per start simply isn't convincing enough. And no, I can't look past the fact Carpenter had a disaster start in April unless I can then look past Clemens 5 run start against the Brewers. Both are part of the performance, regardless of when they occurred. Clemens still has a consistiency of going six or more innings and giving up 2 runs or less that is remarkable.

 

My point is that when you consider the entire package, wins, innings, ERA, the one bad outing by Carpenter back in April, strikeouts, KK/BB, the fact that Carpenter has pitched 3 of the top 5 games in all of baseball (not just the NL) this year, the fact that a precedence has been previously set by the voters that doesn't have much to do with ERA.......... so on and so forth, then you realize that Carpenter might deserve to get the nod over a guy who hasn't pitched a 9-inning game all year, and has had his team win more games than they've lost (for whatever reason) when he starts.

 

It boils down to much more than Clemens with a better ERA. His performance this year, even when broken down with game logs, is much more dominating than Carpenter. He's had one, only one start in which he allowed over three runs. That is unheard of! While Clemens may not have pitched a 9-inning game all year, he has gone eight on multiple occasions. If he were five and out on multiple occasions, I might have to give you that caveat, but he's averaging just under 7 innings a start and I don't think that handicaps him.

 

Finally, regardless of what Joe Morgan or anyone else says, I refuse to let a heavily team dependent stat have a great influence on who I believe is the better pitcher.

[indifferent]

Vance, although I agree comparing starters to closers is apples and oranges, closers have been awarded and have contended for the CY in the past.

[K-Town]

I posted this in another thread, but it's probably better suited for this one:

 

 

Did you know... The record for the most major league baseball career innings is held by Cy Young, with 7,356 innings.

 

He pitched for 22 years and won 511 games which is still a record today.

 

He holds the major league record for complete games with 751.

 

He is fourth on the all time list for shutouts with 76.

 

He led the league in shutouts seven times.

 

He led the league in wins four times.

 

 

 

In the spirit of the award, it might not be a bad idea to consider these things before you decide who to give the award to. Maybe the writers are more "on track" than we think.

 

Sounds alot like an award that's custom-made for a guy like Chris Carpenter.

 

I didn't find anything about him that's related to ERA.

[wolf stansson]

K-Town - Please just give it up. You have your opinion, they have theirs, rehashing your point 4,302,193,092 times isn't going to convince anybody differently. Now all you are doing is defending yourself from personal attacks and if you ask me you're kind of bringing it on yourself. If you want a bunch of people to agree with you, go to a Cardinals board, because this has crossed the line past a discussion and has reverted to a lot of people just attacking you personally and you them.

[BleedCubbieBlue81]

Cy Young also leads the majors in career losses.

 

Plus, he had 19 seasons where he lost over 10 games, including 12 where he lost 15 or more, and 3 where he lost 20 or more. So what's your point? I know guys pitched a lot more back then, but many of his seasons were not very stellar.

 

The award isn't based off of his stats. It's based off of the best pitcher in baseball. They just named the award after him as an honor.

[CardsFanInChiTown]

I suspect we are going to get some answers tonight...

 

 

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/preview?gameId=250903118

 

 

Folks, this is why we love baseball.

[Illini Iceman]

I say screw both of them and give it Dontrelle Willis.

[AC036198]

I say screw both of them and give it Dontrelle Willis.

:D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D