CC, I agree, finishing fourth kind of stinks after the season you had.
The AL Cy Young award ceased to be a contest roughly in August when it became clear that was on his way to a dominant season. There was no longer talk about if he would win the Cy Young, but whether or not he would add the MVP to his credentials as well (full disclosure: I feel that pitchers should be ineligible for MVP consideration). It was therefore no surprise when Verlander won the award handily last week. What should have come as a surprise for many baseball fans, however, was how the rest of the vote shaped up. Specifically, why on Earth did get more points than ? (I’m not even going to touch the fact that came in fifth place in the voting because even at my young age I need to watch my blood pressure.)
2010 was meant to be the season that saw baseball awards voters take their analysis to the next level. That was the year that won the AL Cy Young on the strength of his 249.2 innings of 3.04 FIP baseball, despite winning only 13 games. King Felix’s crown was taken as evidence that the Cy Young voters at least were beginning to understand that the pitcher with the most wins is often not the best pitcher in the game, just a good pitcher on a good to great team. This year’s vote wasn’t subject to as much scrutiny because Verlander dominated in so many pitching categories in 2011, but the runners up for the award reveal that the baseball voters haven’t advanced as much in their logic as we’d assumed.
To begin, Verlander wasn’t the slam dunk for the award that so many of us thought he was. Who was the fWAR leader for AL pitchers in 2011? That’s right, none other than Carsten Charles Sabathia. As far as Fangraphs was concerned Verlander, despite leading the AL in ERA, Strikeouts and Innings Pitched was not the best pitcher in his league. He was the second best.
I don’t actually buy into pitcher WAR too much (or WAR in general as anything more than a good starting indicator for more thorough analysis). Earlier in the season I took a closer look at the numbers and concluded that Verlander was having a better season than CC, despite his lower WAR. My purpose for pointing to the WAR number isn’t to undermine Verlander’s well deserved Cy Young, but to point out that the contest for the award was closer than many realized (CC also had a better FIP and xFIP than Verlander) from a performance perspective, and to ask the questions: 1. What metrics probably drove this voting outcome? 2. Why did the big guy, who was a legitimate first place contender, slip all the way to fourth in the final tally?
The data in the table below are taken entirely from Fangraphs. The table compares the most important pitching metrics among the top four vote getters in the 2011 Cy Young race.
Glancing at these numbers the answer to the my first question jumps right out at me. CC Sabathia was the best of the four pitchers in FIP and xFIP, but the worst in ERA and, unsurprisingly, BABIP. The Cy Young voters are therefore not as sophisticated as we thought. They’ve moved past a pitcher’s win-loss record (thank GOD!) but they haven’t strayed very far. It looks like ERA has jumped up as their most valued stat, which is infinitely better than wins, but still indicative of an incomplete analysis.
This brings me to the answer to my second question. CC came in fourth because he had the fourth best ERA of the bunch, even though a case could be made that he pitched the best of the four. That, in turn, raises a third question. Where should the big guy have finished in the Cy Young vote? I argue he should have come in second place, ideally in a much closer race that what we had.
Justin Verlander was still probably a better pitcher in 2011 than CC was. He struck out more batters, walked fewer and pitched more innings than Sabathia. It is the innings total — admittedly out of CC’s control at the end of the season — that pushes Verlander over the edge in my mind. He was on the mound more and continued to give the Tigers excellent performance.
But CC was closer than many people realize. Most importantly, he smoked Verlander in allowing home runs while very nearly matching him in every other category. Two relevant areas detracted from Sabathia’s other credentials. First, even if the Yankees were ultimately to blame for this (a decision I agreed with), CC pitched 13.1 fewer innings than Verlander, a material difference. Two, he allowed 8.7 hits per nine innings, nearly a full hit higher than the 7.9 he allowed in 2010 and a full hit more than the 7.7 he allowed in 2009. While the extra hits could be due to poor defense — and explain many of CC’s peripheral stats — the extra base runners add up. All said, a more sophisticated voting bloc would have made CC their second choice overall, most certainly not the fourth.
Why, then, did and James Shields finish ahead of Sabathia? The answer is almost certainly ERA and, in Shields’ case, complete games. All four pitchers threw a ton of high quality innings, but two of them, Sabathia and Verlander, did most of the dirty work themselves while Weaver and Shields got big assists from luck, their defenses and their home ball parks. The net effect was improved ERA numbers, which appear to be what drove the Cy Young voters this year, as well as a healthy dose of baseball idiocy. How else can we explain Jose Valverde coming in fifth place?
If you enjoyed this article, please consider sharing it!
I haven’t looked at the stats, but based soley on the old fashioned eye test, CC was mediocre at best from August 1. (That’s not even counting his less than stellar playoff performance which I realize does not enter into the vote). I’m certain if you look at his numbers for the last 2 months of the season you may change your mind.
CC was mediocre at best in the last two months of the season, but he was phenomenal the rest of the time. Cy Young voting is meant to reflect an entire season’s work, not just a portion of that season. CC was the best pitcher on the planet in June and July but that didn’t seem to factor into people’s voting.
I would agree that CC should have done better than 4th. I thought all along he was pitching better than Weaver despite ERA, but I don’t think he was all that close to Verlander considering how dominant Verlander was for the entire season. As Frank mentioned CC did slump towards the end of the year, while Verlander was undoubtedly the best pitcher in all of baseball the last month or so of the season. It was a very deserving Cy Young season for Verlander.
Glad you decided to comment on this, Mike. Somebody had to.
I think it’s clear that CC’s higher ERA had something to do with his finishing 4th, and the fact that he scuffled down the stretch, as Frank pointed out, probably stuck out in some voters’ minds.
But looking at the entire body of work and his numbers over the course of the whole season, which is what voters are supposed to do in determining their choices, it seems to me that CC was deserving of finishing 2nd behind Verlander. He had a better year than both Weaver and Shields, plain and simple.
Before the Cy Young was actually announced, on my blog, I evaluated 5 candidates: Sabathia, Weaver, Verlander, Shields, and Beckett, using different categories and point values, and such to determine who should get what place. Here’s the link: http://yankeesfansunite.wordpress.com/2011/11/14/evaluating-al-cy-young-candidates-2/
Anyway, I came to a similar conclusion, that Sabathia was better than Shields and Weaver this year.
Surprisingly enough, he excelled the most out of the 5 in the “Stuff” category, that included K/9, K%+GB%, and Swing/Miss%. He actually fared better in that category than Justin Verlander did.
Here are how the points came out:
1. Verlander, 10 points
2. Sabathia, 2 points
3. Weaver, 0.6 points
4. Shields, -2.5 points
5. Beckett, -10.6 points
That order looks about right, though I would have probably voted for Shields above Weaver considering the CG’s and the fact that he pitches in the East. Interesting point system though.
Thanks.
Yeah I wanted to do it solely on stats, but if I put “x” factors into it, like what you said- pitching in the AL East, I would have probably upped Shields.
I had no idea CC generated more swings and misses than Verlander this season, I would have never thought that. I would say it had something to do with the changeup, but fangraphs says he threw the change less this year than he has since before 2007.
It was probably the ridiculous number of swings and misses he got with the slider in that no-hitter/rain game. That was incredible.
He had what a solid 11 games where that thing was almost un-hittable. That stretch was the best I have ever seen him pitch. It may have been as well as I’ve ever seen anyone pitch in that kind of time frame.
Yeah I know – it just couldn’t last…
That’s why I don’t like the criticism of Joe for bringing him back in that rain delay. Sure that could have had something to do with his performance in the game or two after that, but to blame the rest of the season on that is lazy. Sabathia was due for some regression, and if I’ve learned anything from baseball it’s that however hot you are at one point in the season you will have a slump to match it.
Thanks for commenting guys. I think it is pretty evident that CC was the 2nd best pitcher in the AL. Verlander deserved the award, regardless of what WAR said, but the numbers just don’t bear out CC coming in 4th.
Anti-Yankee bias plays a factor in the voting I’m sure. I mean if you don’t root for the Yanks you probably root against them, and not many writers grew up cheering for the Bombers. Even if they don’t intend to slant voting away from Yankee players, the results usually show they do.
And direct evidence for that anti-Yankee bias is Girardi coming behind Manny Acta for Manager of the Year. I mean, yes, the Indians did better than what was expected, but c’mon now- they were still a sub-.500 ballclub.
I personally always thought the Yankees were managed by money. A big wad of 100′s just sits in the dugout and when the wind blows one away they make a pitching change. Can’t win a managerial award with that kind of payroll right haha.
Exactly – no matter how good of a job Girardi did last year.
What about park effects and strength of schedule? Seems to me that CC had the tougher park, and the tougher competition. Given that their numbers were close, this should tilt the scales in favor of CC.
In any event, even if he was the best, the notion that Verlander was by far and away the best pitcher in the AL is ridiculous.
There is certainly argument using those criteria yes. Though I think the innings seperation tilts the scales back towards Verlander. Verlander wasn’t light years ahead of CC as the voting suggets, but I think he was pretty clearly the Cy Young winner for this year.
Good to see Verlander win MVP. I’m a huge advocate for pitchers getting votes for MVP when they deserve it. I thought Sabathia should have if not won, at least place high in the voting for MVP in 2010. He didn’t outpitch Hernandez so he shouldn’t of won Cy Young, but he was tons more valueable to his team because without him we don’t make the playoffs that year. Elite starting pitchers value is really been underrated in recent years, despite the need to have one in the league. A great ace can mean the difference in a playoff entry and a mediocre team with a strong year.