November 15, 201114 yr officialBBWAA BBWAA Justin Verlander unanimously wins AL Cy Young. Story and full voting at bbwaa.com
November 15, 201114 yr (Checking out the window to confirm.) Yes, I can also report that the sun rose today.
November 15, 201114 yr Author jaysonst Jayson Stark Found it fascinating that Jose Valverde finished 5th in AL Cy Young. No blown SVs but among AL relievers with 50+ IP, he ranked 19th in WAR!
November 15, 201114 yr Glad no morons put Sabathia first. No surprises in the voting. QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 15, 2011 -> 01:11 PM) jaysonst Jayson Stark Found it fascinating that Jose Valverde finished 5th in AL Cy Young. No blown SVs but among AL relievers with 50+ IP, he ranked 19th in WAR! WAR is maybe not a great measure for closers. No way anyone in their right mind would have rather had 18 closers more so than Valverde last year.
November 15, 201114 yr When is the last time someone won unanimously? There are usually a few jerks who throw it off.
November 15, 201114 yr QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Nov 15, 2011 -> 03:47 PM) When is the last time someone won unanimously? There are usually a few jerks who throw it off. Halladay last season. In the AL, Johan was the last one in 2004 & 2006.
November 15, 201114 yr QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Nov 15, 2011 -> 03:56 PM) Halladay last season. In the AL, Johan was the last one in 2004 & 2006.
November 16, 201114 yr This was as anti-climatic as you could possibly get. NL CY will be MUCH more dramatic. I'm going with my male lover if I were gay - Clayton Kershaw.
November 16, 201114 yr QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Nov 15, 2011 -> 01:19 PM) Glad no morons put Sabathia first. No surprises in the voting. WAR is maybe not a great measure for closers. No way anyone in their right mind would have rather had 18 closers more so than Valverde last year. I think Valverde's screw ups in mop up time screwed with his peripherals, meaning poorer numbers. He was definitely top 10 last season considering how good he was in save situations. Still, the joke is that he got 5th somehow, ahead of Dan Haren.
November 16, 201114 yr Glad no morons put Sabathia first. No surprises in the voting. WAR is maybe not a great measure for closers. No way anyone in their right mind would have rather had 18 closers more so than Valverde last year. It was 18 relievers with a higher WAR than Valverde, not 18 closers. I'm betting that most of those 18 were not closers, but yeah, I agree that WAR is not a great measure for closers.
November 17, 201114 yr QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Nov 16, 2011 -> 07:14 AM) It was 18 relievers with a higher WAR than Valverde, not 18 closers. I'm betting that most of those 18 were not closers, but yeah, I agree that WAR is not a great measure for closers. FWIW, Valverde was 2nd in the AL in WPA, first among closers. Only David Robertson had a higher WPA. Valverde also led the league in shut downs (saves or good appearances in close game situations) with 38. His 5 meltdowns were the second lowest for a closer. So Valverde really did have a great season if you view things from a win probability perspective. His peripherals were far from excellent though. Which probably means he won't repeat what he did this past year.
November 17, 201114 yr QUOTE (chw42 @ Nov 17, 2011 -> 04:35 AM) FWIW, Valverde was 2nd in the AL in WPA, first among closers. Only David Robertson had a higher WPA. Valverde also led the league in shut downs (saves or good appearances in close game situations) with 38. His 5 meltdowns were the second lowest for a closer. So Valverde really did have a great season if you view things from a win probability perspective. His peripherals were far from excellent though. Which probably means he won't repeat what he did this past year. I am sure he won't, not just because of the odds, but because I think he was unusually lucky (which is what you are getting at I think). His stuff was good, but didn't look as good as the perfect save % made it seem.
November 17, 201114 yr QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Nov 17, 2011 -> 09:16 AM) I am sure he won't, not just because of the odds, but because I think he was unusually lucky (which is what you are getting at I think). His stuff was good, but didn't look as good as the perfect save % made it seem. You can say the exact same thing about Verlander.
November 18, 201114 yr QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 17, 2011 -> 12:41 PM) You can say the exact same thing about Verlander. No, because Verlander actually did look that dominating to me. Valverde didn't. Call it the eye test or whatever.
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.