
Originally Posted by
Saga
I know this discussion is a couple pages back, but just wanted to put this in here about the Cy Young voting. Amalie Benjamin, a writer for the Boston Globe, does a "mailbag" every so often where she answers questions. Here's an informative one on the Cy Young voting process:
Robert from Chelmsford, Massachusetts asks: With Jon Lester having a Cy Young season, I thought I would ask what your take is on what it takes to win the Cy Young award. Is it 90 percent ERA, which has very little to do with what team you play on, or is it weighted substantially by W-L record, SOs, walks and so on, which are more influenced by your team of origin, if you will.
Answer: This is a particularly interesting question for me, Bob, as I have one of the two Cy Young votes for the Boston chapter of the Baseball Writers of America (BBWAA). And I've never voted for the Cy Young (though I've voted for MVP, Manager of the Year, and Rookie of the Year in the last three seasons). To me, win-loss record is one of the least important factors, as we saw last year with Zack Greinke. There are so many things that can impact whether a pitcher gets a win or a loss, many of which have nothing to do with how well he pitches. I'll take things like ERA, strikeout-to-walk ratio, and WHIP (walks plus hits per inning pitched) into account, along with ERA-plus, which adjusts ERA to ballpark and league. For example, at the moment, Cliff Lee leads the American League in ERA-plus with a 162. (Over 100 indicates better than average). Ultimately, I'll look at a lot of factors, as I take my voting responsibilities very seriously.
I know Amalie's voting logic can't speak for the entirety of the BBWAA voters, but be real -- there's not even an element of "omgroyhalladay," or "might as well give it to Lincecum" in her answer. The writers don't vote like that. That's just stupid.