The 2011 Cy Young Debate.
by aroddhomes on Jan 6, 2012 2:37 PM PST
Email
PrintOk so I was curious if everyone truly thinks that Verlander deserved a unanimous decision on the Cy Young Ballot? If you did i would like to know what put him over the top so much?
Consider the following statistics.
- Justin Verlander has 15 starts giving up at least 3 or more runs & 6 starts giving up 4 or more. While Jered Weaver only has 9 starts giving up 3 or more.
- Verlander has 19 starts with 2 or less runs, while Weaver has 24 STARTS with 2 or less runs!
24 out of 33! or 19 out of 34?
- Verlander puts up 3.29 in 49.2 innings against the 4 teams + boston that made the playoffs (This doesnt include verlander’s 20 innings in the postseason that he posted a 5.31 era, it would = 3.85 in 70 inn.)
- Weaver put up 3.03 era in 77 innings against those same teams!
- Weav faced New York and Texas top 2 hitting teams 7 times! Verlander, 3 times.
- Verlander pitches behind the 2nd best offense & best setup/closer roles in ALL of baseball and gets 7 WINS after allowing 3 or more runs, while Weaver pitches infront of a below average offense ranked #15 with a rookie closer and gets a total of ONE win after allowing 3 or more runs!!
- Weaver pitched 3 days rest twice(once after jet-lag from grandfathers funeral) and helped push Angels offense for a post-season run. Verlander did his first 3 day rest in the postseason, but gave up 5 runs.
Now comes the heart of my post as I am trying to find some fault in my argument. After considering these statistics I was wondering if this truly is a good enough argument to debate the Cy Young decision. I am curious if anyone can counter this argument with anything good (sorry if I sound cocky haha). If anyone has anything to explain this blunder please explain what i am missing in my thinking.
The rest of my argument is as follows...
Not to take anything away from Verlander who is a tremendous athlete, but the bottom line is that Verlander was overhyped after his no hitter to a team that was in a hitting slump missing its 2 best hitters(Batistsa and Lind). Weaver’s 3 hit 8 innings against the Yankees in a tense September Race showdown, is a feat much more valuable than Verlander’s no hitter when half of the Yankees lineup made the All star game. Once again I am not trying to take anything away from Verlander's credability. It's much easier to get a better WHIP when u play the top 2 hitting teams 3 times in a season, versus Weavers 7 times, not including Detroit’s lineup!
So should that no-no combined with an offense that provided 24 wins with a great pitcher give us a pretty good gimmick for cy-young? Wins obviously shouldn't factor into determining the best pitcher but how much should a bonus feat such a Verlander's no-hitter factor in?? Sure it is a part of history, but shouldn't Cy Young determine the best overall pitcher of the season, not so much the biggest game changer at a certain game?
If you look at the stats Weaver totally outpitched in clutch situations against BETTER teams. Verlander may have more IP, but that can be said only because his manager thinks Verlander is the greatest pitcher to come out of baseball. A “Dusty Baker” type over-pitching strategist, versus Scoscia who takes guys like Dan Haren out in a 9th inning shutout bid.
Lastly i'd like to make it known that Verlander is an amazing pitcher, but i guess my question to all you fans is that should his no-hitter, and other intangibles, that don't necessarily determine a better pitcher, make Verlander the unanimous Cy Young for 2011 even when Weaver out-pitched in every category once adjust the stats to teams faced?
This Fan-Post is authored by an independent fan. Tell us what you think and how you feel.
48 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
You forgot
that Verlander also led the league in whiny-bitching-about-being-owed-no-hitters-by-opposing-teams-in-playoff-contention.
His WBABONHBOTIPC above replacement was staggering.
This is a sig.
by Caseys Kiss of Death on Jan 6, 2012 2:45 PM PST reply actions 6 recs
Dennis Mitchell's dad called
He wants his glasses back.
Now is the winter of our deep content.
by rspencer on Jan 6, 2012 5:24 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Thanks for covering my back on this one!
It’s gratifying to know someone gets my archaic cultural references.
Now is the winter of our deep content.
If there is a case to be made for Weaver...
…you just made it. It’s very convincing… However, even if you look past Wins, ERA, and WHIP, Verlander was better.
IP, K/9, BB/9 etc all favor Verlander.
Love the Weav but Verlander deserved the award. Not so sure about the MVP, however.
He shouldn't have gotten the MVP.
Pitchers shouldn’t be eligible for the award.
by moralesforpresident on Jan 6, 2012 11:38 PM PST up reply actions
Yess, but...
he pitched shitty teams, its a pretty big award, like i understand he outpitched in those categories but either he did by barely anything(such as the era), or the other stats dont really matter…like im so baffled by the unanimous-ness of the decision…It just has a mainstream media feel to it.
Re: strength or schedule...
You are only looking at one side of the argument my friend. You point out that Weav faced the power house offenses more than Verlander, but you omit the fact Weaver faced the likes of Seattle and Oakland way more than Verlander did as well.
Average wRC+ of each pitcher’s opponents:
Weaver: 97.03
Verlander: 96.21
That’s a difference of one spot on the overall standings. Weaver pitched, on average, against the 12th best offense in baseball and Verlander pitched against the 13th best offense in baseball.
Interesting..
Best point made yet…i didnt know such a stat really existed for examining pitchers, it backs up that Weaver did pitch better players, but not by much according to this, so the logic would be that Verlander barely outpitched Weav without including such intangibles like a horrible offense and things to bring down his confidence level…i kind of see it but not on a unanimous vote level..
Those geezers are usually just excited that they can get it up
And they will award anyone who’s responsible. Just ask Jeter and his GG.
Tim Salmon: The once and future Kingfish.
by Teixeira Who? on Jan 7, 2012 12:03 AM PST up reply actions
Your arguments are great
I wasn’t aware of a lot of these facts. However, you’re preaching to the choir here. I think
Mark Trumbo: 2011 Rookie of the Year
Whoop, got cut off
I was going to say I’m pretty sure everyone here’s not too hot on Verlander anyway due to his crybaby antics. He certainly shouldn’t have been made MVP, and this post reinforces that fact.
Mark Trumbo: 2011 Rookie of the Year
Seriously right?
but like i was just posting it here because if i did it for any other team blog theyd all give BS excuses…i was just looking for some other reason that i may have missed that puts Verlander over the top…There is the argument for all his natural talent possibly being better but then Weaver outpitched him 5 out of 6 months, Better Pitcher Season wise=Cy Young.
Pujols
The neighbor is a cranky irish expat. He if wanted no snakes, he shoulda stayed in Ireland.
-Moondoggy
by DAD OF VLAD on Jan 6, 2012 7:52 PM PST reply actions 7 recs
Verlander had a better season that Weav, but not by much.
I certainly agree that Verlander had factors in his favor, such as a better offense and a reliable bullpen that can shut the door. I felt like Weaver got screwed on several occasions last year.
by moralesforpresident on Jan 6, 2012 11:52 PM PST reply actions
But Why??
What was it that Verlander did better in?? because the facts show that Weavs important stats like ERA and WHIP were better than Verlanders 5 out of 6 months…literally Weav had 4 bad starts that screwed him & sent everything throught the roof, and Verlander coasted on average teams. Like is there something not in the stats that Verlander did better??
there is no logic
they just see the 24 wins and swoon
"id take 5th Dimention Wormhole Rivera over Wells any day of the week"
-clover_black
by the king of CERA on Jan 7, 2012 9:24 AM PST up reply actions
W's and K's are sexy.
That’s why.
by moralesforpresident on Jan 7, 2012 12:44 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
Petty solid dude.
"Baseball is beautiful. It is the only sport in which you can fail 70% of the time and still be considered the greatest player"
by Halos2011champs on Jan 7, 2012 7:21 AM PST via mobile reply actions
If you’re going to count Detroit’s superior offense as helping Verlander get wins, then you also have to acknowledge that the Angels’ superior defense helps many of Weaver’s stats.
I don’t disagree with your overall conclusion, but since you’re looking for arguments, here’s one. (On the other hand, at this point I don’t really give a shit who won last year’s Cy Young. Awards don’t really mean much to me. I prefer championships.)
by Rock Island Line on Jan 7, 2012 9:43 AM PST reply actions
Well thanks for re-signing with us for cheaper than market value bro.
I didn’t see that one coming.
YOU DON'T KNOW THE POWER OF THE DARKSIDE.....
You’re forgetting that Verlander had to pitch without the premium advantage that Jeff Mathis provides. Weaver’s numbers, without Mathis, would be mediocre at best. Verlander WITH Mathis – I just got a boner.
i have a trumboner.
by truhalo on Jan 7, 2012 5:19 PM PST via mobile reply actions
BONERS*
none of that z shit. boners are a serious topic.
"id take 5th Dimention Wormhole Rivera over Wells any day of the week"
-clover_black
by the king of CERA on Jan 7, 2012 10:31 PM PST up reply actions
Angels
If Jered Weaver wasn’t on ’em, and Verlander was, this argument would be laughed out of the room.
by mattwelch on Jan 8, 2012 5:54 AM PST reply actions 3 recs
ding ding ding
We are all guilty of homerism (I think I made that word up) on some level at one point or another… This is a case of that.
Meh, it is what it is.
Verlander got the awards, but we got Latroy Hawkins. I mean Albert Pujols.
YOU DON'T KNOW THE POWER OF THE DARKSIDE.....
by halofolife on Jan 8, 2012 10:27 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Just dont get what made Verlander so much better tho?? The stats i posted show that Weaver outpitched in categories that truly mattered.
the "categories that truly mattered"????
Jesus Christ, if you must…..
CATEGORY 1: Earned Run Average. One of the basic important categories of pitching — Verlander 2.40, Weaver 2.41. It’s as close as can be, but Verlander wins.
CATEGORY 2: Adjusted ERA+. Where we take Earned Run Average, then adjust it for the offensive context the player pitched in — Verlander 170 (100 being league average), Weaver 158. Suddenly not as close.
CATEGORY 3: Innings pitched — Verlander 251, Weaver 235.2. So not only was Verlander better on a per-inning basis than anyone else in the AL, he pitched more innings than anyone else in the AL. This is important, no?
CATEGORY 4: Wins — Verlander 24, Weaver 18. Yeah I know, old fashioned, right? Still, this is the basic thing we’re trying to accomplish on the baseball field.
CATEGORY 5: Winning percentage — Verlander .828, Weaver .692. See above.
CATEGORY 6: Wins Above Replacement for pitchers — OK, so Wins and Winning Percentage depend a lot on your offensive support, right? Well, WAR doesn’t, and WAR says Verlander got 8.6, Weaver 6.6. That’s a HUGE spread.
CATEGORY 7: Strikeouts — Verlander 250, Weaver 198. Strikeouts are the single most important positive thing that pitchers can control.
CATEGORY 8: Games Started — Verlander 34, Weaver 33. Close again, but no cigar again.
Note that in each of these important, basic eight categories of pitching performance, not only did Verlander beat Weaver, he beat everybody else in the American League (well, he tied for Games Started). I’m sorry, but ERA in 77 innings against playoff teams is not as important of a stat.
I love me some Jered Weaver, but he doesn’t need this kind of help. Verlander deserved the award, and the English language deserves to be used correctly.
by mattwelch on Jan 9, 2012 2:38 PM PST up reply actions 3 recs
Once again...
haha i really don’t mean to be a homer, but it’s just so obvious to me..
Category 1: As i showed above Weaver out-pitched Verlander ERA wise 5 of 6 months, and like me and “BigGame48” showed he played better teams showed by his wRC+ giving possible reason for that 0.01 era difference, maybe even more.
Category 2: You put adjusted ERA which is a somewhat fair tool, if it were actually calculated correctly. Adjusted ERA takes a stadiums past 3 year stats into calculation instead better tools of Park dimensions and weather.
Past 3 years Angels have good pitching & shitty offense in a horribly offensive division besides this year which isnt calculated anyways, while Detroit has had horrible pitching past 3 years with amazing hitting.
All the conditions of Comerica are more favorable to pitchers naturally than Angel Stadium besides left-center. Comerica is far Colder, has much more Precipitation, and a higher altitude making it harder for a ball to travel, unlike Angel stadium’s 100 degree dry/low altitude.
Comerica has higher fences by 5 ft. & longer distances to each wall by avg 15 ft.
That whole myth of Angel’s stadium being a good pitchers park is somewhat true due to dimensions but has alot more to do with Angels being a team based on pitching and D.
Category 3: Innings pitched i will give to Verlander, but like i said above that has alot to do with his manager compared to Sosh. Verlander had about 15 ip more than Weav, but this isnt really blowing Weav out of the water, Weaver could have easilly matched this is he made his 2 missed starts, but woulda coulda shoulda, ill just give it to Verlander even tho he has a manager thats willing to leave him in on 3 days rest after 120 pitches in game 2 with Benoit, Coke, and Valverde. U get the idea?? Amazing feat but cmon he asked for that 3 run hr.
Category 4 & 5: My stats showed that if Verlander and Weav switched teams Verlander would loss precisely 6 Wins off that 24 and Weaver would get more than 24 with that kind of run support…so Wins are essentially useless. unless u wanna compare teams.
Category 6: WAR could be explained by Weaver having a better pitching staff that could replace him 2.0 wins better than Verlander’s replacements…this should have nothing to do with talent.
Category 7: Ill give Verlander the K’s fair and square because he blew Weaver out.
Category 8: Games started = IP talent wise.
So Verlander beat Weav in IP and K’s, what does this say? Verlander had a more natural talent type of year than Weaver, but did not out-pitch him!!!….ERA and WHIP with wRC+ show this..
There are too many intangibles to be calculated for such a big award. But they weren’t as we can see.
"Amazing feat but cmon he asked for that 3 run hr."
huh? Verlander was better. Your stats show? Maybe your a baller, but otherwise, ‘your stats’, . . . "So Verlander beat Weav in IP and K’s, what does this say? " It says he’s better. It’s OK. Weaver is a top 5 AL starter now. That is awesome.
by Wally's World on Jan 11, 2012 2:56 AM PST up reply actions
Agree to disagree i guess..
My stats just showed that Weaver beats Verlander in ERA, WHIP, BA, Walks, hits, HRs, and just about every category with the exception of Ks and IP when you adjust them to the teams they played against…
If u calculate Weavs stats for top 7 teams in AL he beats Verlander in every category. But guess what?? If u calculate his stats for the bottom 8 in the AL he still beats Verlander in every category, so the reason Verlander came out on top by barely an inch in everything except Ks and IP is because he played the bottom 8 far more than Weaver did.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- College player makes impossible over the fence catch to save tournament game (Video)
- Security!: Camden Yards guard collides with Royals’ Mike Moustakas
- The Juice: Nelson Cruz matches career high eight RBIs, Pujols stays hot in Seattle
- Benches clear at Fenway as Red Sox-Rays rivalry heats up
- Keeping good company: Albert Pujols becomes fourth-youngest player to hit 450 home runs
