Cy Young for Wang?

**MPMEYER1982** · 08-30-06, 07:45 PM

I personally think it's Halladay's to lose. He's been the most consistent pitcher all year. Wang has had a tremendous season but I see Halladay winning it.

**austintx05** · 08-30-06, 07:57 PM

I definately see your argument. The reason I do not think Wang would/should get it is the same reason why Verlander should not. Lack of strikeouts. For as many innings as both of those pitchers have pitched this year, they lack in the K's.

I just think it shows a lack of dominanace in that category which, IMO, is a crucial category in winning the Cy Young.

I would have to say Halladay & Santana are the top 2.

I can't really argue them out of it.

**jesterson** · 08-30-06, 09:45 PM

Originally posted by bigboydan

Whenever a discussion on the AL Cy Young award comes up, one outstanding pitcher is left out of the conversation. Curt Schilling, Justin Verlander, Johan Santana, Roy Halladay, and Jon Garland are always the top picks. But why do we always forget about Chien-Ming Wang of the Yankees?

Below, I stack up his numbers ( as of Wednesday) against the other, more popular picks:

Wins
Wang: 16
Halladay: 16
Santana: 15
Garland: 15
Verlander: 15
Schilling: 14

ERA
Santana: 3.01
Halladay: 3.12
Verlander: 3.42
Wang: 3.66
Schilling: 3.95
Garland: 4.47

Innings Pitched
Halladay: 193.0
Santana: 191.1
Schilling: 186.2
Wang: 186.1
Garland: 165.0
Verlander: 158.0

HR Allowed
Wang: 11
Verlander: 16
Halladay: 17
Santana: 21
Garland: 23
Schilling: 26

Even if Wang doesn't lead each category, he's at least in the top 4.

The only real difference between Wang and the rest of the group is the strikeouts. Wang only has 62 K's, far behind the rest of the group ( Garland is second with 85).

Is this a good reason to deny Wang the award?

"The Cy Young Award is an honor given annually to the best pitchers in the Major Leagues."

What's your thoughts?

It is in fact the BEST reason to deny him the award. If, say, he was heads and shoulders above everyone else in the other categories, then the Ks may not matter as much (doubtful, but a water-holding arguement for Wang). But when you say the "best" pitcher, and everyone's right around the same numbers in many categories except Ks (traditionally a measure of the best pitchers in a given year and all time) then you have to almost immediately drop from serious consideration the guy with 3 K/9 and defer to those with 7+ K/9.

By the way, I think it is absurd that wins are used as a major factor in determining a Cy Young winner. They are really only a measure of the run support a pitcher got in his starts. Granted, if you give up 6 runs per game, you're not going to win many games (unless you're Jason Marquis...) but a guy with a 3.xx ERA and 20 wins beats out a guy with 16 wins, a
2.xx ERA and dominant SO numbers (Last year's AL was a great example, Colon and Santana). I forget where I read it, but someone came up with the idea to calculate how many wins a guy would get assuming exactly 4 or so runs of support per start, eliminating how good or bad a team's offense was during his starts. Anyone who says wins are the best way you can measure the best pitcher is a complete moron.

**Illusion** · 08-30-06, 10:31 PM

Imagine how much better Santana's numbers would be if he didn't start off so slow. Wang has the numbers, but either Halladay or Santana will win it.

**dcheng** · 08-31-06, 01:44 AM

wang has no chance. 0%

**Bulldog** · 08-31-06, 05:55 PM

Interesting thread bbd.
I also think that Halladay will win it but Wang certainly has some good numbers. If he has a brilliant September you never know but its a longshot
Im sure that the Yankees dont care if he wins it, this guy could be the X factor in October...