RubeBaker
09-23-2007, 10:16 AM
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/features/cy
Oh look, now ESPN has come up with a formula to predict who will win the CY Young award.:rolleyes:
First off, you could make an argument for Brandon Webb, but Jake Peavy seems to be the obvious choice for the NL.
But Sabathia over Beckett? Please. I'm not saying Sabathia shouldn't win, I think he has a fair chance to win. But how can he be leading using a statistical formula? Just look at the numbers:
Wins: Beck 20, CC 18 (Beckett has 40 fewer IP too and 4 fewer games started)
Losses: Beck 6, CC 7
ERA: Beck 3.14, CC 3.19
R/9: Beck 3.3, CC 3.5
K/9: Beck 8.69, CC 7.89
WHIP: Beck 1.13, CC 1.14
Opponent BA: Beck .240, CC .258
Opponent OBP: Beck .282, CC .291
I think you are starting to catch my drift. On paper, Beckett is statistically the better player. Yet, he losing to Sabathia. Furthermore, look at the past results the formula provided:
2006- Johan Santana and Billy Wagner???
2005- Mariano Rivera??? and Chris Carpenter
2004- Johan Santana and Eric Gange???
The ones with the "???" are incorrect. The formula is 3/6. 50%. A coin flip.
Here's the formula:
Cy Young Points (CYP) = ((5*IP/9)-ER) + (SO/12) + (SV*2.5) + Shutouts + ((W*6)-(L*2)) + VB
1) Shutouts are just simply added in Sabathia has one, and Beckett has none. Advantage: CC. So it helps to play in a system where managers let their pitchers pitch, such as with Ozzie Guillen, as opposed to where they play chicken and pull em too soon, such as with Joe Torre.
2) You wanna know why a closer has come out on top every other year? It's that (SV*2.5). A closer with 40 saves will automatically get 100 points, while a starter gets a big fat 0. But there is that ((5*IP/9)-ER)) which I guess is ment to balance it out. But let's say a starter throws 200 innings and gives up 85 runs. Using that part of the formula, the points come out to 26.1. Take a closer who pitches 75 innings, but does what a closer is supposed to do and gives up a solid 12 runs. Thant winds up giving him a score of 29.7. Again, it favors the closer too much. With Beckett and Sabathia it is going to give CC a better adavantage because he has pitched more innings. It will be a bigger number that the runs are subtracted from. Remeber, Beckett allowed fewer runs per 9 than he did.
3) What is that VB? Here it is: Victory Bonus (VB): A 12-point bonus awarded for leading your team to the division champsionship (pro-rated based on the current standings). In other words, we are going to divy up 12 points amng the guys we THINK did the most to help win the division. You could make the old argument of a great pitcher on a bad team yadda yadda yadda... But the basic problem is this, you are inserting subjective material into a formula that is supposed to be objective. The fact that Beckett has stayed so good is one reason why the Sox are even ahead of the Yanks still. They will be a playoff team. Yet, Sabathia gets 12 points because his team wins a lot when he's not on the hill, and Beckett only gets 6. Wipe that garbage alone out, and the points are:
Beckett: 163.6
Sabathia: 159.1
Now that would make much more sense, given the comparisons I showed you.
Like their player ranking formula, this one is another dud. Bad ESPN, bad!
Oh look, now ESPN has come up with a formula to predict who will win the CY Young award.:rolleyes:
First off, you could make an argument for Brandon Webb, but Jake Peavy seems to be the obvious choice for the NL.
But Sabathia over Beckett? Please. I'm not saying Sabathia shouldn't win, I think he has a fair chance to win. But how can he be leading using a statistical formula? Just look at the numbers:
Wins: Beck 20, CC 18 (Beckett has 40 fewer IP too and 4 fewer games started)
Losses: Beck 6, CC 7
ERA: Beck 3.14, CC 3.19
R/9: Beck 3.3, CC 3.5
K/9: Beck 8.69, CC 7.89
WHIP: Beck 1.13, CC 1.14
Opponent BA: Beck .240, CC .258
Opponent OBP: Beck .282, CC .291
I think you are starting to catch my drift. On paper, Beckett is statistically the better player. Yet, he losing to Sabathia. Furthermore, look at the past results the formula provided:
2006- Johan Santana and Billy Wagner???
2005- Mariano Rivera??? and Chris Carpenter
2004- Johan Santana and Eric Gange???
The ones with the "???" are incorrect. The formula is 3/6. 50%. A coin flip.
Here's the formula:
Cy Young Points (CYP) = ((5*IP/9)-ER) + (SO/12) + (SV*2.5) + Shutouts + ((W*6)-(L*2)) + VB
1) Shutouts are just simply added in Sabathia has one, and Beckett has none. Advantage: CC. So it helps to play in a system where managers let their pitchers pitch, such as with Ozzie Guillen, as opposed to where they play chicken and pull em too soon, such as with Joe Torre.
2) You wanna know why a closer has come out on top every other year? It's that (SV*2.5). A closer with 40 saves will automatically get 100 points, while a starter gets a big fat 0. But there is that ((5*IP/9)-ER)) which I guess is ment to balance it out. But let's say a starter throws 200 innings and gives up 85 runs. Using that part of the formula, the points come out to 26.1. Take a closer who pitches 75 innings, but does what a closer is supposed to do and gives up a solid 12 runs. Thant winds up giving him a score of 29.7. Again, it favors the closer too much. With Beckett and Sabathia it is going to give CC a better adavantage because he has pitched more innings. It will be a bigger number that the runs are subtracted from. Remeber, Beckett allowed fewer runs per 9 than he did.
3) What is that VB? Here it is: Victory Bonus (VB): A 12-point bonus awarded for leading your team to the division champsionship (pro-rated based on the current standings). In other words, we are going to divy up 12 points amng the guys we THINK did the most to help win the division. You could make the old argument of a great pitcher on a bad team yadda yadda yadda... But the basic problem is this, you are inserting subjective material into a formula that is supposed to be objective. The fact that Beckett has stayed so good is one reason why the Sox are even ahead of the Yanks still. They will be a playoff team. Yet, Sabathia gets 12 points because his team wins a lot when he's not on the hill, and Beckett only gets 6. Wipe that garbage alone out, and the points are:
Beckett: 163.6
Sabathia: 159.1
Now that would make much more sense, given the comparisons I showed you.
Like their player ranking formula, this one is another dud. Bad ESPN, bad!