Welcome to our community

Be apart of something great, join today!

Who should have won the Cy Young Award (2000-2013)

Disclaimer: Links on this page pointing to Amazon, eBay and other sites may include affiliate code. If you click them and make a purchase, we may earn a small commission.

Topnotchsy

Featured Contributor, The best players in history?
Aug 7, 2008
9,446
168
I was looking at Pedro Martinez's stats and noticed that in both 2002 and 2003 he lead the AL in winning percentage, ERA, WHIP, hits per 9 innings and K's per 9 innings, and somehow the voters managed to find someone else to win the Cy Young. (Looking at a comparison with Zito and Halladay who won those two year's does not really offer any reason Pedro should not have won.) It occurred to me that there are often seasons where most people would agree the "wrong" player won the award (I would argue that this was true in 2012 as well when Dickey won the NL Cy Young over Kershaw) and in some cases, had the most deserving player been given the award, we'd have a different perspective on things (imagine Pedro had 5 Cy Young's instead of the 3 he won etc.) I thought it would be interesting to have a series of threads that went through the major awards over the years and considered who really deserved the award. I figured we'd start with the Cy Young Award winners since 2000. I'm going to give my list some thought.

Here's a link to the actual winners:
http://www.baseball-reference.com/awards/mvp_cya.shtml

AL
2013 - Max Scherzer (1)
2012 - David Price (1) (Verlander could easily have won as well)
2011 - Justin Verlander (1)
2010 - Felix Hernandez (1)
2009 - Zach Greinke (1)
2008 - Cliff Lee (1) (Halladay was about equally deserving)
2007 - CC Sabathia (Lackey was about even)
2006 - Johan Santana (1)
2005 - Johan Santana (3)
2004 - Johan Santana (1)
2003 - Pedro Martinez (3) (Halladay won. He pitched many more innings but Martinez had an ERA over a full run lower.)
2002 - Pedro Martinez (2) (Zito won... Pedro was better)
2001 - Mike Mussina (5) (Really weak season for AL pitchers.)
2000 - Pedro Martinez (1)

NL
2013 - Clayton Kershaw (1)
2012 - Clayton Kershaw (2)
2011 - Clayton Kershaw (1)
2010 - Roy Halladay (1)
2009 - Tim Lincecum (1) (could hear an argument that Carpenter should have won)
2008 - Tim Lincecum (1) (it's a coin-toss between Lincecum and Johan in my mind)
2007 - Jake Peavy (1)
2006 - Brandon Webb (1)
2005 - Roger Clemens (3) (having only 13 wins kept him from winning, but his ERA was basically a run better than Carpenter who won)
2004 - Randy Johnson (2) (Clemens won this due to W/L, but Johnson was a far superior pitcher)
2003 - Jason Schmidt (2) (Gagne won it. He was less deserving than Schmidt and the 3rd place finisher Mark Prior)
2002 - Randy Johnson (1)
2001 - Randy Johnson (1)
2000 - Randy Johnson (1)
 
Last edited:

tpeichel

Well-known member
Oct 10, 2008
15,639
119
Johan Santana should have won the CY Young in 2005 instead of Bartolo Colon.

Colon
222 IP, 3.48 ERA, 1.15 WHIP, 157 K

Santana
231 IP, 2.87 ERA, 0.97 WHIP, 238 K

Of course, Colon had 21 wins to Santana's 16, so they gave it to Colon.
 

smapdi

Well-known member
Aug 7, 2008
4,397
221
Colon pitched for a decent Angels team that made the playoffs. Santana pitched for a mediocre Twins team that didn't. Tallest pole in a small tent often loses out.
 

tpeichel

Well-known member
Oct 10, 2008
15,639
119
Colon pitched for a decent Angels team that made the playoffs. Santana pitched for a mediocre Twins team that didn't. Tallest pole in a small tent often loses out.

That should make a difference when the players are fairly close, but Santana had Colon by 80 Ks and a half point in ERA. Colon only led the league in Wins, Santana led the league in Ks, WHIP, ERA+, Hits/9 IP, Ks/9 IP and was edged out for the ERA lead 2.87 to 2.86.

Santana led the league in more categories than Felix Hernandez did in his 13 win Cy Young award winning season in 2010 when the Mariners won 61 games. Voters have finally realized that luck is a big factor in Wins and they no longer use that as a major factor when voting. I believe the 2010 voters would have given Santana a well-deserved third Cy Young in 2005.
 

Topnotchsy

Featured Contributor, The best players in history?
Aug 7, 2008
9,446
168
Added my thoughts to the first post. One thing I've noticed is that for the most part the voters have done a better job recently. Was pretty interesting going through the numbers, and looking back I think that history would look at some of the players a little differently had the voting been better. Would have been nice if Mussina won the award when he deserved it. Probably would have changed his HOF discussions. Pedro was cheated out of a couple of Cy Young Awards, and Johan (and Kershaw) should have won 3 in a row.
 

markakis8

Active member
Oct 31, 2008
12,081
2
I'm okay with R.A. Dickey winning the Cy Young in 2012. I mean was Kershaw really that much better? I argue Dickey was better. Kershaw had only a slightly better ERA and WHIP, actually had one less K than Dickey...Dickey had more CG and SHO and my favorite stat for the knuckleballer...walked LESS than Kershaw in MORE innings pitched...why not give it to the guy that won 20 games as compared to Kershaw's 14 wins? Dickey certainly wasn't the beneficiary of playing on a great team either.

It's not like Kershaw's 2013 season was his 2012 season.
 

maxe0213

New member
Oct 10, 2012
1,833
0
California and Oregon for school
I'm okay with R.A. Dickey winning the Cy Young in 2012. I mean was Kershaw really that much better? I argue Dickey was better. Kershaw had only a slightly better ERA and WHIP, actually had one less K than Dickey...Dickey had more CG and SHO and my favorite stat for the knuckleballer...walked LESS than Kershaw in MORE innings pitched...why not give it to the guy that won 20 games as compared to Kershaw's 14 wins? Dickey certainly wasn't the beneficiary of playing on a great team either.

It's not like Kershaw's 2013 season was his 2012 season.
Kershaw had a .2 era better. thats not only slightly better. Dickey had more innings and only one more strikeout. Kershaw pitched a better season and should've won. Dickey got votes for being a feel good comeback pitcher.
 

Topnotchsy

Featured Contributor, The best players in history?
Aug 7, 2008
9,446
168
I'm okay with R.A. Dickey winning the Cy Young in 2012. I mean was Kershaw really that much better? I argue Dickey was better. Kershaw had only a slightly better ERA and WHIP, actually had one less K than Dickey...Dickey had more CG and SHO and my favorite stat for the knuckleballer...walked LESS than Kershaw in MORE innings pitched...why not give it to the guy that won 20 games as compared to Kershaw's 14 wins? Dickey certainly wasn't the beneficiary of playing on a great team either.

It's not like Kershaw's 2013 season was his 2012 season.

I don't think it was the worst decision in the world, but I believe that Kershaw was better. He had a lower ERA and WHIP which is enough for me. I don't put much stock in wins (as this probably makes clear) but I'll take Kershaw here.
 

markakis8

Active member
Oct 31, 2008
12,081
2
Kershaw had a .2 era better. thats not only slightly better. Dickey had more innings and only one more strikeout. Kershaw pitched a better season and should've won. Dickey got votes for being a feel good comeback pitcher.

.2 is not significant enough better when it comes to numbers that Dickey put up that year and you do realize we are talking about a knuckle pitcher that led the NL in strikeouts, right? Not a 93-95 LHP pitcher.


I don't think it was the worst decision in the world, but I believe that Kershaw was better. He had a lower ERA and WHIP which is enough for me. I don't put much stock in wins (as this probably makes clear) but I'll take Kershaw here.

You two don't put ANY stock into the fact that Dickey had more IP and went the further into the games more often than Kershaw while putting up just as good/better numbers?

Do you guys remember he pitched for the Mets? lol He wasn't coming out of the game after 5 innings with a 10-2 lead and being the beneficiary.

Do you remember some of the games he pitched that year? Back to back 1 hit, 12 k shutouts vs Baltimore and Tampa Bay?

And Dickey didn't win the award that year b/c it was a feel-good "comeback" story, he won b/c he was the best pitcher in the NL. Kershaw was just as good, but Dickey had better numbers and just as good numbers in all categories. There isn't a single category where Kershaw was way ahead and Dickey was ahead in many of them.
 

Topnotchsy

Featured Contributor, The best players in history?
Aug 7, 2008
9,446
168
You two don't put ANY stock into the fact that Dickey had more IP and went the further into the games more often than Kershaw while putting up just as good/better numbers?

Do you guys remember he pitched for the Mets? lol He wasn't coming out of the game after 5 innings with a 10-2 lead and being the beneficiary.

Do you remember some of the games he pitched that year? Back to back 1 hit, 12 k shutouts vs Baltimore and Tampa Bay?

And Dickey didn't win the award that year b/c it was a feel-good "comeback" story, he won b/c he was the best pitcher in the NL. Kershaw was just as good, but Dickey had better numbers and just as good numbers in all categories. There isn't a single category where Kershaw was way ahead and Dickey was ahead in many of them.

Dickey pitched 6 more innings and played in one more game; they basically pitched equally deep into games. Kershaw had a lower ERA, lower WHIP, and gave up far fewer homers. I don't think either player was "way ahead" in any significant category. Ultimately I felt that Kershaw was ever so slightly better because of the weight I put on ERA and WHIP, but as mentioned I think one can argue either way.
 

markakis8

Active member
Oct 31, 2008
12,081
2
Dickey pitched 6 more innings and played in one more game; they basically pitched equally deep into games. Kershaw had a lower ERA, lower WHIP, and gave up far fewer homers. I don't think either player was "way ahead" in any significant category. Ultimately I felt that Kershaw was ever so slightly better because of the weight I put on ERA and WHIP, but as mentioned I think one can argue either way.


My original argument was...they are that close, so why can't wins be the deciding factor? This isn't a colon/johan type scenario. Dickey had 20, Clayton had 14. Dickey had 6 L, Kershaw had 9.

but we can agree to disagree.

btw, just so there is clarification, I think Kershaw is the best pitcher in baseball at this moment.
 

Topnotchsy

Featured Contributor, The best players in history?
Aug 7, 2008
9,446
168
My original argument was...they are that close, so why can't wins be the deciding factor? This isn't a colon/johan type scenario. Dickey had 20, Clayton had 14. Dickey had 6 L, Kershaw had 9.

but we can agree to disagree.

btw, just so there is clarification, I think Kershaw is the best pitcher in baseball at this moment.

Got it. Actually, I may come around on the argument. I had pretty much dismissed wins, but I may be overdoing the advanced metrics biased if I ignore it completely. Thanks for clarifying.
 

trauty

Member
Oct 8, 2010
564
0
I've often wondered what modern day voters would have done with Nolan Ryan's 1987 season. He led the NL in ERA (2.76 -- 0.27 lower than 2nd place), ERA+ (which, of course wasn't a stat in 1987), led in hits per 9 IP (6.548 - around 3/4 of a hit lower than 2nd), 1st in strikeouts with 270 (37 more than 2nd), 1st in strikeouts per 9 IP (11.480 -- over 3 k's/per 9 IP over 2nd place!). He was near the top of the charts in quite a few other positive categories as well. Unfortunately for him, even though he led the league in ERA and Strikeouts, he finished with an 8-16 record. He did all this at the young age of 40. Unbelievably, even in the caveman times of 1987, he still finished 5th in the CY Young voting. I wonder how he would have fared in this day and age.
 

maxe0213

New member
Oct 10, 2012
1,833
0
California and Oregon for school
My original argument was...they are that close, so why can't wins be the deciding factor? This isn't a colon/johan type scenario. Dickey had 20, Clayton had 14. Dickey had 6 L, Kershaw had 9.

but we can agree to disagree.

btw, just so there is clarification, I think Kershaw is the best pitcher in baseball at this moment.
They are close but wins hold such little value that Kershaw should have won. Kershaw had a higher WAR, lower ERA, Lower WHIP. Kershaw also beat Dickey in categories of HR/9, K/9, and H/9 and I believe his ERA Plus was better. I hold more value in K/9 than total strikeouts as well.

The Mets also scored more Runs/Game than the Dodgers thus leading to a few more wins.

I understand your argument but Kershaw beats Dickey in many of the categories that determine pitchers worth unlike wins.
 

SINFULONE

Active member
Sep 26, 2008
5,691
0
I've often wondered what modern day voters would have done with Nolan Ryan's 1987 season. He led the NL in ERA (2.76 -- 0.27 lower than 2nd place), ERA+ (which, of course wasn't a stat in 1987), led in hits per 9 IP (6.548 - around 3/4 of a hit lower than 2nd), 1st in strikeouts with 270 (37 more than 2nd), 1st in strikeouts per 9 IP (11.480 -- over 3 k's/per 9 IP over 2nd place!). He was near the top of the charts in quite a few other positive categories as well. Unfortunately for him, even though he led the league in ERA and Strikeouts, he finished with an 8-16 record. He did all this at the young age of 40. Unbelievably, even in the caveman times of 1987, he still finished 5th in the CY Young voting. I wonder how he would have fared in this day and age.

Good post.I have looked at Ryan's stats before, and am stunned he didn't have a better record as overpowering as he was.That is baffling a starter could go 8-16 with a 2.27 ERA.And the Astros were good enough to go to the NLCS the year before.No way he deserved to win that year, but in '89 Magrane had a 2.87 or something ERA (led NL), but was only 5-9.
 

Members online

Top