2010 MLB Season Discussion

[Conrad]

Right now I think the reasons for possibly giving the NL CY candidates the award are:

Jimenez: voters overvalue win/loss
Halladay: OMGROY (name recognition)
Lincecum: He won it the last two years, why not give it to him for a third?
JJ: Lights out pitching, currently best ERA in the majors, most deserving of the award. Unfortunately he won't win this because he's a no-name pitcher amongst casual fans and on a fourth-place team.

[Ensam]

I mean, I definitely want JJ to win it. But

Halladay: 7 2/3rd innings per start, 2.28 ERA, 7 CG
Wainwright: 7 inningers per start, 1.94 ERA, 4 CG
JJ: 6 2/3rd innings per start, 1.61 ERA, 1 CG

Yeah JJ has nice ERA advantage but Halladay goes an inning more on average. Wainwright goes more per start, and not much of an ERA advantage.

Can make an argument for all 3.

[Conrad]

It's a month old so it doesn't hold up as well anymore, but this one guy who does a sabermetrics blog for the Phillies proved that Halladay had been better than Jimenez up to that point. The overarching point of the article, though, is that the voters don't know shit.

http://crashburnalley.com/2010/06/18...-the-cy-young/

[Saga]

Right now I think the reasons for possibly giving the NL CY candidates the award are:

Jimenez: voters overvalue win/loss
Halladay: OMGROY (name recognition)
Lincecum: He won it the last two years, why not give it to him for a third?
JJ: Lights out pitching, currently best ERA in the majors, most deserving of the award. Unfortunately he won't win this because he's a no-name pitcher amongst casual fans and on a fourth-place team.

You realize that sports writers vote on this right? You really think they're going to use reasoning like "omgroy" and "why the hell not" for their voting?

[Conrad]

Think about what you just wrote.

[Melena]

Don't know if anyone saw the replay, but Velez of the Giants nearly got decapitated by a Pat Burrel line drive into the dugout last night. Replays were scary cause you see how quickly he just dropped.

[Cephius]

JOHNSON IS NOT ON A WINNING TEAM THEREFORE HE IS NOT A WINNER NOR VALUABLE

[Akiyama]

For fuck sakes. Get Nate McLouth out of the big league lineup. Dude's shit.

[Akiyama]

Hey look. McLouth came up with bases loaded, grounded into another inning ending double play, and the Braves lose because of that. If he's not gone and the Braves don't get another OF or just say gtfo McLouth, then there's not much they'll do. Fuck, even Melky's way better than that waste of roster space. Clearly he doesn't know how to play for a semi decent team and needs to play for the Pirates again.

[Headspace]

Another shutout loss.

[Saga]

Think about what you just wrote.

Enlighten me, because from what I've seen in the voting the last couple years, the BBWAA writers are breaking the mold a bit and not just voting for wins/losses (why the hell not), or on name recognition (omgroy). Greinke (16-8, 2.16 ERA) and Lincecum (15-7, 2.48 ERA) won it last year. Their W/L records aren't out of sight and certainly aren't close to previous award winners (Cliff Lee in 2008, 22-3 and Peavy in 2007, 19-6), though their ERAs are microscopic. Especially last year, after the awards were announced, reading the Boston Globe and LA Times articles on the respective writers' voting and reasoning they have a much higher baseball IQ than you give them credit for. I can't speak for the other publications, I just think your logic is flawed.

"Unfortunately he won't win this because he's a no-name pitcher amongst casual fans and on a fourth-place team," for Josh Johnson is bullshit when Greinke won it last year on a nothing team. There were plenty of pitchers up for debate in the AL last year, Greinke was hardly the clear favorite. Plenty of top-notch pitchers up for the award in the NL this year, except Josh Johnson a) is much more of a clear favorite than Greinke was, and b) isn't really a no-name pitcher anymore, especially to the writers and analysts who get paid to follow the sport. Just because the nation over doesn't know who Josh Johnson is doesn't mean the writers are oblivious to him. Thank god the country doesn't vote on this award.

Edit: Also just to throw my two cents in, I think Wainwright should be in the discussion as well. 14-5, 1.94 ERA this year so far, unbeaten at home, 8.3K/9, 4CG, 1.00 WHIP, 148.1 IP to date.

[*Shinzon*]

"The Angels have acquired Dan Haren from Arizona, according to Andrew Baggarly of the Mercury News (via Twitter). Arizona will receive Joe Saunders, Patrick Corbin, Rafael Rodriguez, and a player to be named later in return."

Hrm

[Cephius]

lol, retarded. I see we're back to "one price for the Yankees, one price for everyone else" garbage. Enjoy Joe Fucking Saunders, lol.

[Headspace]

No one wants your shitty prospects.

[Cephius]

Joe Saunders, superstar.

[AshTS]

Even later, but Wainwright or JJ for CY.

I hate the Cardinals with a passion too. I don't understand how Cincy can lead the NL in AVE, hits, runs (I think still) and also lead the MLs in being shut out.

Should have just scored 1 run last night and saved 6 for today.

Also lol @ McClouth, I hated seeing him bat for Gwinett as well.

[Kurp]

What were the Yankees offering for Haren? The last I heard was something built around Joba.

I'm really surprised that the D-backs would pull the trigger with almost a week left before the deadline for a package like that.

[AshTS]

Haren due a lot of money, they probably could not trade him fast enough.

[Ohemgee]

JJ goes hard for the strikeouts (thus why his average outing is lower than Halladay and Wainright)

But for fucks sake he's going to be another Kevin Brown

[Cephius]

What were the Yankees offering for Haren? The last I heard was something built around Joba.

I'm really surprised that the D-backs would pull the trigger with almost a week left before the deadline for a package like that.

Supposedly they were offering Nova and McAllister, two of their top pitching prospects who project to be #3 or 4 type guys in the majors.

The issue I have is that Saunders is not good, he's not even worth the 6 million in arbitration that he'll get next year. Haren, while having a good amount of money on his contact, is worth more than what he's getting paid. See what I mean? Something doesn't add up there. Matt from fangraphs sums it up better than I can:

Make no mistake, Dan Haren is still a very good pitcher and he wasn’t a drain on their payroll. Haren was more than worth his contract. That value obviously makes him an easier commodity to move, but the point then would be to get good assets back. We do not yet know the identity of the player to be named later but have heard that it is not Mike Trout, the Angels only really exciting prospect. The known portions of the trade return range from intriguing but far away (Corbin) to generic (Rodriguez) to downright horrendous (Saunders). Joe Saunders probably doesn’t even make sense to retain given that he’s making almost $4 million this year and would expect to see a raise to the $6 or $7 million mark if he went through arbitration.

That is not a good haul; it’s not even a decent haul. It’s downright bad. It’s the sort of return you’d more expect if the person getting traded was a liability due to his contract, not an asset. The Diamondbacks just acted as if they have no understanding of Haren’s .350 BABIP or that their home park is prone to serving up home runs. The Diamondbacks just acted like Dan Haren was Scott Kazmir. He’s not and whoever eventually takes over as the full time GM in Arizona will rue this day as one that set back the organization significantly.

And if they were that desperate to get cheap, why would they take Joe Saunders (in arb years) over the two Yankee pitchers, who could be just as good making league minimum?