Roy Halladay for Cy Young

by royalsreview on Sep 29, 2008 3:18 AM EDT Comment 53 comments

Of AL pitchers with at least 180 innings pitches in 2008, guess who faced the weakest competition according to BP's Quality of Hitters Faced Report?

Cliff Lee.

26th out of 26th. Lee's average challeger was a .262/.330/.405 hitter.

At play here is the unbalaced schedule and an additional dose of good fortune. Lee faced the Royals five times, his most common opponent. His second most common foe was Minnesota, who he battled with on four occasions. Lee also snuck in two starts against both Oakland and Seattle each, as well as matchups against Oakland and San Diego. Really, all that was missing was a game against the Nats.

Halladay on the other hand, faced the second toughest set of hitters out of the 26 ALers who had over 180 IP. Slogging through another season of hell in the AL East (even Baltimore had a weirdly good offense this year). Halladay's average hitter was a .266/.342/.425 guy. Sure, that's not hugely different, but remember, we're talking about hundreds and hundreds of individual pitcher-hitter confrontations over five months.

Just something to think about when you cast your nonexistent Cy Young ballot.

0 recs | Comment 53 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

i'd vote halladay anyways

i’m too tired to remember all the stats he was better than lee in, but it was quite a few. most notably innings pitched (i think, not looking it up).

Rowdy Hardy Fan Club member.

by doublestix on Sep 29, 2008 4:20 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

come on now

Cliff Lee faced AL hitters, Roy Halladay faced AL hitters. You can say Cliff Lee faced the Royals 5 times, so maybe those numbers should mean less, but as Rany pointed out the other day, the Royals have been death to lefties this year, so maybe Lee should get extra credit for doing so well against them. If you’re in the Majors, you’re facing MLB competition. You can break it down into AL/NL level competition if you want, but for most awards, that’s irrelevant. Beyond that, it doesn’t make sense to try to adjust for level of competition any further. Cliff Lee got to face Mark Teahen a couple extra times, but who knows, Mark might have been feeling great those days and Lee just shut him down. Full credit to Lee for getting an AL hitter out.

by kcdc1 on Sep 29, 2008 5:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

sure you can break it down more than AL/NL. there are better and worse ways to do it, but it's fair to do

just like park adjustments are fair.

I do agree that a R/L analysis is in order.

Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.

by Sky Kalkman on Sep 30, 2008 4:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Lee still wins in VORP,

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/statistics/sortable/index.php?cid=204030

…which can be a bit of blunt stat when it comes to evaluating pitchers. Lee faded a little (relatively speaking) in the second half, and his small VORP lead might well be totally negated by what RR is talking about above. By the way, Johan Santana is still good.

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Sep 29, 2008 5:00 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Just because you're not allowed to use VORP on MVP discussions

doesn’t mean you’re allowed to drag it into Cy Young talks, you dirty VORPy.

Kansas City Royals: your 2006 and 2007 NL Central champions!

by mazoboom on Sep 29, 2008 5:05 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'll drag VORP

into whatever discussion I want. I use it in pickup lines, actually.

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Sep 29, 2008 5:15 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

...and the myster unravels!

But let me tell you about why +/- is better than FRAA!

OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG

by devil_fingers on Sep 29, 2008 9:13 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

VORP is based on RA, which like ERA, isn't a great stat

Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.

by Sky Kalkman on Sep 30, 2008 4:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I prefer SNLVAR for starting pitchers

And clearly BP does too.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by NYRoyal on Sep 30, 2008 6:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

What's the best BP stat for relievers?

My interest in how BP rates Soria in relation to Ramirez this year. As you and I have discussed (to a resounding silence from the rest of RR), NYRoyal, FIP, xFIP, tRA+, and pRAA all say Ramirez was better than Soria this year.

OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG

by devil_fingers on Sep 30, 2008 7:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Their premier reliver stat is WXRL

Wins Expected above Replacement, Lineup Adjusted

In the AL

3. Soria
20. Ramirez

However, the way this stat is computed (relying on win expectancy) inherently favors closers. Being the guy who gets the ball with the lead in the 9th really helps you with this stat.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by NYRoyal on Oct 1, 2008 7:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Does that mean it incorporates something like WPA?

(which I also don’t quite get)

(baby steps)

OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG

by devil_fingers on Oct 1, 2008 10:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Not exactly, but kinda

I’m not an expert on WXRL. But whether or not the team could/would/should win given the situation the pitcher comes into is important to that metric. And if you’re coming into a lot of games in medium-to-low leverage situations, where you also have the opportunity to lock down a win (such as to start the 9th inning with a 2+ run lead), you are in a situation where the team is likely to win and no other pitcher can change the team’s win expectancy. I think that’s one reason that so many closers are in the top 10 and top 20 in that stat.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by NYRoyal on Oct 2, 2008 1:19 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Hmmm...

I’ll have to read up on it more.

OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG

by devil_fingers on Oct 2, 2008 11:09 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Halladay got my vote

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by NYRoyal on Sep 29, 2008 5:12 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

2. Lee
3. Lester

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by NYRoyal on Sep 29, 2008 5:12 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Those three are pretty much

head and shoulders above the competition. I can’t believe how high Dice-K’s value turned out. After watching him walk a tightrope this year, it boggles the mind he ended up with a sub-3.00 ERA.

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Sep 29, 2008 5:16 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Next year

10.54 ERA as he lets all those baserunners score?

Although, I guess he really does have the stuff to get out of the situations, maybe he just won’t get into the situations.

Kansas City Royals: your 2006 and 2007 NL Central champions!

by mazoboom on Sep 29, 2008 5:40 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Not that extreme, (duh)

but he’s got to fall back a bit.

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Sep 29, 2008 5:45 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Lester?

Ervin Santana for me.

Rowdy Hardy Fan Club member.

by doublestix on Sep 29, 2008 3:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Numbers games

More evangelism for Stat Corner and their park-and-league adjusted version of FIP, tRA+

CLIFF 158 tRA+ (1st in the AL although this doesn’t take into account quality of competition, to it’s Doc for me, too)
Doc 140 (2nd)
“Choker” Vazquez 131 5th in AL, has been in top 6 last three years)
Beckett 129 (7th)
Lester 124 (8th, tied with Danks, who is listed 9th due to a lower pRAA)
Greinke 123 (10th)
ol’ Gil 119 (13th out of 60 makes him the best no. 2 in the league, or for the less optimistic, OMFG Dayton Moore gave 5/55 for the worst no. 1 in the AL!!!1111)
Scott Baker 119 (15th due to lower pRAA)
Dice-K 113 (19th)

OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG

by devil_fingers on Sep 29, 2008 9:22 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Defending Lee

Good case can be made for both Halladay and Lee (and probably Lester as well), but I think discounting Lee for having to face the Royals 5 times is a gross misjustice. Yes, the Royals are a weak offensive club, but VERSUS LEFTIES, they had the FIFTH highest OPS in the American League this season. (I’ve been pointing out the outlandish team platoon gap with the Royals all year; finally somebody elsed noticed too – see Rany’s column this weekend). Royals also finished 36-24 against lefty starters this year, so perhaps Lee should receive CREDIT for beating them five times!

by loyal2sdad on Sep 29, 2008 12:13 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

rany made a similar point

OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG

by devil_fingers on Sep 29, 2008 12:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

hmmm... weird

i’m not used to the royals being good at anything

I wanna know what love is, I want you to show me

by LeoBloom on Sep 29, 2008 4:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Or ever recognizing or admitting it

Ever

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by NYRoyal on Sep 29, 2008 5:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

The delayed game gets delayed further with a rain delay

Woo baseball on an offday! Anyone watching? This game is important to all the teams in the Central except for the .500 Cleveland team. Especially us: ending in 4th and second-to-last is much better than ending in 4th and last.

Kansas City Royals: your 2006 and 2007 NL Central champions!

by mazoboom on Sep 29, 2008 2:08 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I hope it gets rained out

And then I guess the Sox would have to play a potential double header tomorrow against the Tigers and Twins?

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by NYRoyal on Sep 29, 2008 2:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

They said it's clearing up I think

But theoretically they could do the tiebreaker on Wednesday right? I mean, the Rays series is the the one that doesn’t start until Thursday.

Kansas City Royals: your 2006 and 2007 NL Central champions!

by mazoboom on Sep 29, 2008 2:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

That wouldn't be fair

to the White Sox at all. Minny has a fresh bullpen, and Chicago theoretically could have several bullpen guys unavailable because of the 1st game.

I hate the White Sox, but would have to agree with them bitching if this were to actually happen.

I still think Selig needs to build in more off days between the end of the season and the 1st round of the playoffs. Start the playoffs on the weekend after the last Sunday, and surely this would eliminate all potential scheduling disasters. In addition, it would ensure all teams can lineup their pitching rotation the way they want, regardless of whether they clinched in the middle of Sept or on the last day.

And, no – I don’t care if this drags the World Series into the 1st week of November. As one who has worked in baseball in both the spring and the fall, I can assure you the weather in late March/early April is more likely to be bad than it is in late October/early November.

by loyal2sdad on Sep 29, 2008 3:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I think the World Series goes into November next year if it goes the full 7.

Kansas City Royals: your 2006 and 2007 NL Central champions!

by mazoboom on Sep 29, 2008 3:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I don't care what's fair to the White Sox

I hope god hates the Sox as much as I do and let’s it rain (frogs and locusts) on Chicago all day long.

The schedule is the schedule. They can bitch all the like, but the schedule was created long ago and it only as so much flexibility. And the weather is the weather.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by NYRoyal on Sep 29, 2008 4:07 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well, if they want

they could just not play the game. And forfeit the division.

Kansas City Royals: your 2006 and 2007 NL Central champions!

by mazoboom on Sep 29, 2008 4:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

That'd show Selig!

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by NYRoyal on Sep 29, 2008 4:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I still give it to Lee

What about MVP? I can think of a good case for about 6-7 guys.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Sep 29, 2008 3:02 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

AL MVP?

Only considering position players, frankly, both sheer batting runs above average and VORP, A-Rod is frankly way ahead. Scary, considering he has about 150-200 less plate appearances than most other contenders.

Nick Markakis is actually second in bRAA (which corrects VORP’s OBP issue), but that doesn’t adjust for position. Also up there in bRAA and VORP depart from each other rapidly after A-Rod, though, due to positional adjustments in VORP (the advantage of that stat) and bRAA’s better accounting for OBP. VORP says Sizemore, Pedroia, Huff (!!), Hamilton, Bradley, Mauer, and so on up there. bRAA has Markakis, Bradley, Youkilis, Quentin, Huff, Cabrera, Mauer, Abreu, and so on. Pedroia is up there.

I guess if you don’t care about who is contending (and I don’t know what to make of WPA yet, I’m an idiot), I guess A-Rod is still the clear choice.

If you care about contenders, I’d say Mauer or Pedroia, due to the positions they play.

OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG

by devil_fingers on Sep 29, 2008 3:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I lean towards Pedroia

But I can see a really strong case for Mauer, Hamilton, Sizemore, Youk, and even Quentin and Bradley.

A-Rod though is a bid choke-arist!

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Sep 29, 2008 3:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

i'd still vote A-Rod

I know he missed a little time though. How much might affect the vote.

Rowdy Hardy Fan Club member.

by doublestix on Sep 29, 2008 3:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

that's what's scary

well, of course, what’s scary is that the voters will go Hamilton or Morneau

what I meant to say is that by “counting” stats like bRAA and VORP, A-Rod still had the best offensive season in the AL, despite the time he missed…

Holy shit.

OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG

by devil_fingers on Sep 29, 2008 3:48 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

130 RBIs!!!!

Case closed!

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Sep 29, 2008 4:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Alex Rodriguez

Highest VORP by more than a little. And I don’t think MVP awards should have anything to do with how many games the players team won or whether they are in the playoffs or not.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by NYRoyal on Sep 29, 2008 4:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Mauer

I wanna know what love is, I want you to show me

by LeoBloom on Sep 29, 2008 4:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I thought my "holy shit" summed A-Rod's oddly under the radar performance quite well

Seriously, look at his VORP and/or bRAA, and then notice how many plate appearances he has relative to the people right under him…

He’s sort of the Mantle/Mays of this generation — could win MVP almost every year, but they just won’t do that.

OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG

by devil_fingers on Sep 29, 2008 10:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

But he didn't get his team into the playoffs

If his stats didn’t translate into sufficient wins for his team to get into the playoffs, then apparently his stats really weren’t that valuable. That’s why it is called the Most Valuable Player. You stat geeks with all of your stupid acronyms just don’t get it.

[This message brought to you by the channelled spirit of Joe Morgan or more than 90% of MSSM commentators.]

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by NYRoyal on Sep 30, 2008 12:42 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs