C.C. Sabathia wins AL Cy Young

[Erik Bedard]

Voting results:

2007 AL Cy Young Award Voting
Pitcher, Club --------1st----2nd-----3rd----Points
C.C. Sabathia, CLE 19 8 119
Josh Beckett, BOS 8 14 4 86
John Lackey, LAA 1 5 16 36
Fausto Carmona, CLE 1 4 7
Eric Bedard, BAL 1 1
Roy Halladay, TOR 1 1
Johan Santana, MIN 1 1
Justin Verlander, DET 1 1

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20071113&content_id=2299400&vkey=news_mlb&fext=.jsp&c_id=mlb

Shows how little respect Bedard gets when MLB doesn't even spell his name right.

[-Kyle-]

Congrats to Sabathia...he totally deserves it. :)

[Erik Bedard]

Really? I had him fourth.

[Mattingly]

I'm not doubting his regular season stats, but how does an AL CYA winner end up getting lit up in the postseason?

[DoubleX]

I'm not doubting his regular season stats, but how does an AL CYA winner end up getting lit up in the postseason?

The voting occurs before the start of the postseason. If the voting occurred after the postseason, Beckett likely would have won.

[Mattingly]

The voting occurs before the start of the postseason. If the voting occurred after the postseason, Beckett likely would have won.
I'm familiar with that. I think that in some sports (unsure of baseball), the All-Star voting for MVP occurs around half-time.

I was just noting that he was the ace and the Yanks got to him, but didn't take fully advantage in making runs score. Boston did just that.

Anyway, congrats, but his October results didn't seem to show what he'd done the rest of the season. Weird.

[Erik Bedard]

Three games against two of the best offensive teams in baseball can't be deemed indicative of a pitcher's ability.

[digglahhh]

Really? I had him fourth.

There were several viable cadidates, so that's not that big of a deal.

[TonyStarks]

I'm not doubting his regular season stats, but how does an AL CYA winner end up getting lit up in the postseason?

Very disappointing games for CC during the Playoffs.

[insanefishpossay]

Anyway, congrats, but his October results didn't seem to show what he'd done the rest of the season. Weird.

Are there any 26 year olds in baseball who would be able to give a lights-out performance against the two best offensive teams in baseball after pitching more than 240 innings during the regular season?

[nerfan]

Really? I had him fourth.

Actually, me too.

Went

Beckett
Carmona
Lackey
CC Sabathia

At least for me.

[philkid3]

I had Beckett 5/6.

Sabathia
Carmona
Santana
Putz
Beckett/Lackey (Couldn't decide and low enough I didn't care.)

[Erik Bedard]

I had:

Beckett
Lackey
Bedard (Probably the best quality stats of the group; injury cost him award)
Sabathia
Carmona (Great ERA, but K/BB unspectacular)

[Neilios]

Beckett
Carmona
Sabathia
Bedard
Putz

[Rags2Riches]

CC winning wasn't that big a deal imho, what was is that Beckett only received "8" 1st place votes? :eek: wow

[mojorisin71]

CC winning wasn't that big a deal imho, what was is that Beckett only received "8" 1st place votes? :eek: wow

East Coast bias?

[STLCards2]

East Coast bias?

That has to be it! I am so sick an tired of sportswriters giving awards to smaller market, midwest team's players when the high profile, east coast player deserves it! :)

Seriously, I am suprised an impressed that IP total was probably the determining factor in who won the Cy Young voting. Sabathia pitched about 5-6 starts worth (or 20% more) of equal quality baseball more than Beckett - his win was well-deserved.

[AznInvasion]

Not to toot my own horn but I called it. Congrats Sabathia!

[AstrosFan]

I like the win for Sabathia. It's a good choice. He definitely had a better year than Beckett.

[Chi]

A good year for Sabathia. He was definitely worth the award.

This was a year where there were several candidates who could have been perfectly viable - I am surprised Chienming Wang didn't get any votes, though.

[plask_stirlac]

Can anyone explain how he's better than Carmona? He's about .6 WARP behind with 2 more starts.

[Chi]

More innings pitched, lower ERA? That's what the voters were looking at, I'm sure.

[hudsonharden]

Dan Haren went from in the running at the All-Star break to exactly zero votes at the end of the season :sigh:

[Chi]

The entire Oakland staff had a pretty horrific meltdown post-ASB. Chad Gaudin in particular went from devastating to ineffective.

Dan Haren still deserved a couple votes, I think. He wasn't the best pitcher of the year, but he was a solid performer the whole season, even with the A's in freefall, and deserves some recognition for it.

[plask_stirlac]

More innings pitched, lower ERA? That's what the voters were looking at, I'm sure.

Carmona has the lower ERA by a meaningful amount, and fewer unearned runs.

C.C. probably had a lower ERA on about Sep. 1st (I remember it was, anyway) when voters made up their minds... :noidea

[Chi]

Carmona has the lower ERA by a meaningful amount, and fewer unearned runs.

C.C. probably had a lower ERA on about Sep. 1st (I remember it was, anyway) when voters made up their minds... :noidea

S'what I mean. They send in their votes before the regular season is concluded.

[rdonahue]

Glad to see Sabathia get it. Those 40 extra IP or so make him deserving. I'm glad to see Verlander of my Tigers finished 5th (or tied for 5th) with one vote.

Speaking of the voting, others mentioned Wang (who I would not have voted for) and Haren and how they got nothing. Anyone think voters should be allowed to select 5 or maybe 10 guys on their ballot instead of just 3?

[Chi]

I think five is reasonable.

I would take Wang or Haren over a couple people who got votes - namely Lackey. Verlander had a good year, but the best of his career is yet to come, I think... he'll have his time in the sun soon enough.

[Erik Bedard]

Lackey led the league in ERA+. Wang had one thirty points lower.

[Stray Cat]

Congrats to C.C. :clapping

[KCGHOST]

Based on the criteria Sabathia was the choice. Certainly Beckett, Carmona, and Lackey had fine seasons that could have won in other years. If Bedard hadn't gotten injured he might have won this going away.

[philkid3]

I think five is reasonable.

I would take Wang or Haren over a couple people who got votes - namely Lackey. Verlander had a good year, but the best of his career is yet to come, I think... he'll have his time in the sun soon enough.

Wang wouldn't even have made it on my ballot if it had 10 spots.

[truman]

Here are the 2007 stats for the (arguably) 11 best starters.
RED = #1 / BOLD = top 3

Name IP ERA+ WHIP SLG K/9 K/BB QS% OPS+
E Bedard 182 141 1.088 .328 10.9 3.9 .750 62
F Carmona 215 145 1.209 .352 5.7 2.3 .813 75
J Beckett 201 139 1.141 .377 8.7 4.9 .667 74
CC Sabathia 241 138 1.141 .392 7.8 5.6 .735 80
J Lackey 224 144 1.210 .375 7.2 3.4 .727 79
D Haren 223 143 1.208 .396 7.7 3.5 .818 80
J Santana 219 133 1.073 .405 9.7 4.5 .636 77
J Verlander 202 122 1.230 .358 8.2 2.7 .656 77
K Escobar 196 127 1.267 .358 7.3 2.4 .667 77
R Halladay 225 125 1.243 .373 5.6 2.9 .677 79
CM Wang 199 117 1.294 .368 4.7 1.8 .667 83


If you view "value" as a part of CYA, then IP would have more significance and CC would get a boost. But if you view CYA as sheer performance, then I think CC drops a bit, due to an inferior OPS+ against.

I would rather have a pitcher with a slightly worse OBP against (read: WHIP) and lower SLG% against - like Carmona - than a low WHIP/ higher SLG against pitcher - like Sabathia or Santana. Why is it that nobody ever brings up SLG% against when talking about pitchers? Its one of the first measures looked at in comparing hitters, but always overlooked in comparing pitchers.

[skyking162]

If you view "value" as a part of CYA, then IP would have more significance and CC would get a boost. But if you view CYA as sheer performance, then I think CC drops a bit, due to an inferior OPS+ against.

I would rather have a pitcher with a slightly worse OBP against (read: WHIP) and lower SLG% against - like Carmona - than a low WHIP/ higher SLG against pitcher - like Sabathia or Santana. Why is it that nobody ever brings up SLG% against when talking about pitchers? Its one of the first measures looked at in comparing hitters, but always overlooked in comparing pitchers.

Point 1: Then why not give it to JJ Putz who destroyed the others in ERA? Do we have complete faith that if JJ, Carmona, Beckett, or Bedard threw as many innings as CC that they'd have maintained their stellar performance? Maybe if CC only had to throw 200 innings he would have been significantly stronger and better.

Point 2: OBP and SLG against would be ok, but both are subject to fielding and flukishly bad/good BABIPs. The traditional pitching peripherals are Ks, BBs, and HRs, which are strong determiners of OBP and SLG.

[skyking162]

Can anyone explain how he's better than Carmona? He's about .6 WARP behind with 2 more starts.

Can you explain what exactly WARP is and why it's a good choice to value pitchers?

[truman]

Point 1: Then why not give it to JJ Putz who destroyed the others in ERA? Do we have complete faith that if JJ, Carmona, Beckett, or Bedard threw as many innings as CC that they'd have maintained their stellar performance? Maybe if CC only had to throw 200 innings he would have been significantly stronger and better.

I don't have an analysis on how to judge relievers vs. starters. I concede that this decision is completely subjective.
Do I have faith that Carmona or Bedard would have superior numbers to CC if they pitched 241 innings?

Sabathia 241 IP, 3.21 ERA, .684 OPS against
Bedard 182 IP, 3.16 ERA, .615 OPS against
Carmona 215 IP, 3.06 ERA, .661 OPS against

In order to = CC's numbers, the following would be necessary:

Bedard 59 IP, 3.35 ERA, .898 OPS against
Carmona 26 IP, 4.44 ERA, .870 OPS against

Yes, I believe both pitchers would end up better than CC over 241 innings, though I feel stronger about Carmona's chances.

CC through 197 IP this year was worse than his 241 IP numbers.
Thru 28 starts: 197 IP, 3.38 ERA, .706 OPS against.

[skyking162]

In order to = CC's numbers, the following would be necessary:

Bedard 59 IP, 3.35 ERA, .898 OPS against
Carmona 26 IP, 4.44 ERA, .870 OPS against

Awesome. Question/Answer. More of that!

Carmona's a lock. Bedard's a stretch in my opinion, but I really don't have a good way to show it either way.

******

Some other questions...

- If Carmona *could* have easily pitched 25 more innings at a 4.44 ERA, why didn't he? Why was Sabathia pushed? Age?

- Should we assume Carmona's innings difference would be replaced with a 4.44 ERA? Replacement level for a starter is more like 5.50. For relievers it's probably a touch over 4.50. Can we assume the Indians had the relievers to throw 25 more innings?

- What might Sabathia have done had he left his starts 1 inning earlier each time? Would we be removing one innings of poorer performance from each game, on average? Would his starts later in the season have been more effective?

- Did Bedard's awesome level of performance related to his injury? Did he have to work too hard?

- How much credit should we give for "could have pitched more innings at that level" compared to "actually pitched that many innings at that level"?

- How much credit do we give for Sabathia gaining more outs by himself (strikeouts) rather than relying on fielders. Should we assume league-average fielders behind each pitcher or "replacement-level fielders" if there's such a thing?

[digglahhh]

Good questions, Skyking.

I think (surprise, surprise) this raises an issue of semantics about the Cy Young. Did Carmona perform better than Sabathia (even prorated against some acceptably diminished version of himself)? Whose performance was more valuable to Cleveland? Those are different questions.

It is reasonable to assume that Carmona could have matched numbers over equal innings. But, the problem is that those innings Sabathia has in pocket were not pitched by a theoretical diminsihed version of Fausto. They were pitched by actual guys. So, in relation to the team, it is only fair that we make up the innings Carmona lacks with the level of performance that they were actually replaced with (or an approximation of what can be expected from the type of players who replace those innings).

Then, of course, there is the added value of saving the bullpen from having to pitch those innings in the first place, which is even more difficult to quantify.

So, pound for pound, Carmona could come out ahead, but still be less valuable than Sabathia to his team.

In order to really get a good handle on things, we'd have to look start by start to look for other things too.

- I know that Fausto lead the league in some stat along the lines of starts w/ 7+ innings and 2 or fewer ERs. Was Carmona taken out of games because they were in hand, and it was decided to rest Carmona? Did C.C. have to pitch more innings because he was involved in more close games? Part of that is related to the quality of the missing innings issue. Were the situations that Carmona was in such that replacement level relief pitching for an inning or two wouldn't really hurt the Indians?

- Were the runners they left on stranded at similar percentages? To what extent did variation in the performance relievers contribute to their ERAs?

- Quality of line-ups faced? Did either pitcher just randomly have to pitch often against the extremely good or bad line-ups?


There are really a ton of things one can consider. Personally, I think that part of Carmona's low IP totals was a function of Cleveland not fully trusting him early and trying to get him out of games with leads, and with his confidence high, early on. This is partially age-related, and partially related to his performance versus expectations.

[Ytown Tribe fan]

I'm happy for CC but Carmona was better.

I also had Haren and Bedard ahead of Beckett.

[plask_stirlac]

I would rather have a pitcher with a slightly worse OBP against (read: WHIP) and lower SLG% against - like Carmona - than a low WHIP/ higher SLG against pitcher - like Sabathia or Santana. Why is it that nobody ever brings up SLG% against when talking about pitchers? Its one of the first measures looked at in comparing hitters, but always overlooked in comparing pitchers.

It's tough to calculate, I only see BBRef listing it (and the necessary stats).

Most sites have OAV at the very end like a note.

[Zagi-CRO]

It's ok, Sabathia was the best although Sabathia and Beckett have identical CYP=2.59
but C.C. has better ERA, SO, BB/SO, IP...




CYP W L ERA SO BB/K IP BB GS
C.C. Sabathia 2.59 19 7 3.21 209 5.6 241.0 37 34
Josh Beckett 2.59 20 7 3.27 194 4.9 200.2 40 30


My list:

1.C.C. Sabathia 2.59
2.Josh Beckett 2.59
3.John Lackey 2.62
4.Faus Carmona 2.83
5.Dan Haren 3.10
6.Kelv Escobar 3.10
7.Erik Bedard 3.16
8.Jus Verlander 3.18
9.Johan Santana 3.24
10.Scott Kazmir 3.46

[philkid3]

Now, I'm a stat guy, so why don't I know what a CYP is?

[Neilios]

Carmona was the MVP of the Indians this year. He was a close second to Beckett in my book.

[Zagi-CRO]

Now, I'm a stat guy, so why don't I know what a CYP is?

:) :)

CYP is my own formula for predicting CY Winner.
See:

CYP = ERA/1.20 - K/Av(IP40) + (L -4*W)/Av(GS40) +3

Av(IP40) = average of innings pitched based on first 40 starters 211.74
Av(GS40) = average of games started based on first 40 starters 32.87

A lower CYP is better!! Something like an ERA.

How it works?
CYP standing in the brackets.

Summary voting:
1.C.C.Sabathia (1)
2.Beckett (2)
3.Lackey (3)
4.Carmona (4)
5.Bedard (7)
6.Halladay (13)
7.J.Santana (9)
8.Verlander (8)
... Haren (5)
... Escobar (6)
...Kazmir (10)
... Wang (11)
... Vazquez (12)

For ex. Haren (5) vs. Halladay (13)


Haren CYP=3.10 15-9 --- 3.07 --- 192 --- 3.5 --- 222.2
Halladay CYP=3.70 16-7 --- 3.71 --- 139 --- 2.9 --- 225.1


CYP says Haren is better starter then Halladay!
Haren has better ERA, K and BB/K.
Halladay has only one win more.
I think it's obviously ok!

[Zagi-CRO]

The best 20-AL starters:
CYP formula


CYP W L ERA
C.C. Sabathia 2.59 19 7 3.21
Josh Beckett 2.59 20 7 3.27
John Lackey 2.62 19 9 3.01
Fausto Carmona 2.83 19 8 3.06
Dan Haren 3.10 15 9 3.07
Kelvim Escobar 3.10 18 7 3.40
Erik Bedard 3.16 13 5 3.16
Jus Verlander 3.18 18 6 3.66
Johan Santana 3.24 15 13 3.33
Scott Kazmir 3.46 13 9 3.48
Chien-Ming Wang 3.49 19 7 3.70
Javier Vazquez 3.53 15 8 3.74
Roy Halladay 3.70 16 7 3.71
Felix Hernandez 4.00 14 7 3.92
James Shields 4.12 12 8 3.85
Andy Pettitte 4.20 15 9 4.09
Joe Blanton 4.23 14 10 3.95
Dai Matsuzaka 4.26 15 12 4.40
A.J. Burnett 4.32 10 8 3.75
Jered Weaver 4.35 13 7 3.91

[digglahhh]

Now, I'm a stat guy, so why don't I know what a CYP is?

Because it is something that the poster made up. I don't have a problem with anybody inventing stats - I'm more that willing to join in the roasting in the stats forum.

But, if you are going to use your own made-up stats, it would be responsible of you to clearly label them as such, i.e., according to my system, _________

[rdonahue]

I'm not trying to start a fight or anything, but Zagi-CRO has explained his formula numerous times. He used it all season long. This is not the first time I've seen mention of CYP in one of his posts.

[digglahhh]

I'm not trying to start a fight or anything, but Zagi-CRO has explained his formula numerous times. He used it all season long. This is not the first time I've seen mention of CYP in one of his posts.

I wasn't trying to start a fight either. I've seen him explain his stat before.

'm just saying that since there are constantly new members joining, you can't expect somebody to understand something because you explained it previously. And, since there are so many stats created by established baseball research bodies, it is hard for even a statistically inclined member to follow them. Just seeing a random string of letters, one may ask if this is from a body like BP, THT, etc. or if it's somebody's own concoction.

Personally, unless you have a history of doing such work, and respectability within the community, I think it is disingenuous to throw around a homemade metric, knowing that a common fan may not be able to differentiate that from something that has undergone a far more critical research and review process. Sabermetrics has a tough enough hill to climb, I don't want to see people dismiss it because they mistake my science project for the latest technological innovation.

[Zagi-CRO]

I'm not trying to start a fight or anything, but Zagi-CRO has explained his formula numerous times. He used it all season long. This is not the first time I've seen mention of CYP in one of his posts.

I would like improve my formula so every advice is good welcome.
But I'm satisfied because CYP fulfilled the goal - to predict the CY Winner with significant value.

[skyking162]

I enjoy Zagi's idea of a Cy Young predictor. But once we have the actual winner, it's not really a good judge of whether the winner was a good choice or not.

I also think we should be more interested in who the best (or most valuable or whatever) pitcher actually was, not in who the ******* sportswriters will pick as their winner. Zagi's formula is a great reason why. He's tried many different weightings with many different stats and his current formula is the best. How many of us really think that the best pitcher should picked based on a convoluted combination of ERA, W/L, and Ks? But that's what best models their thinking.