NL Cy Young Award Race

[chancellor]

Well, we can all agree that more HR are hit in Cincinnati than NY, and if Dickey and Cueto switched parks, Dickey would allow more HR and Cueto would allow fewer. Is that in dispute?

GABP allows more of all hits, not just HR, compared to Citishea.

[Judge Jude]

Hey, I'm building from the ground up here!

[Moonlight J]

I'm sorry that calculators turn you on. New doesn't mean better. Unless it's the homerun king one single stat isn't the end all be all for evaluation.

ERA+, by it's definition, adjusts to the player and the league. He's that's much better than every other pitcher in his league, even when taking park factors into play. League ERA divided by player ERA and adjusted for park and league. In the AL, Verlander leads at 153 followed by Felix at 150 and Price at 149....Cueto is 18, 20, and 21 points better than all 3 of them.

He's 11% better than Verlander.

[Moonlight J]

How does win probability/leverage play into this discussion? I'd still imagine that Cueto would outrank Chapman, but I'd also imagine that none of Chapman's 70 IPs occurred with a 6 run lead, while some of Cueto's occurred with a 6 run lead.

Win Probability Added:

Chapman 3.28
Cueto 3.43

Win Probability added/Leverage Index
Cueto 3.2
Chapman 2.4

RunExpectancy24 = Base minus out runs saved
Cueto 36.1
Chapman 23.6

Cueto has permitted one stolen base all season as a RHP, Chapman has allowed 5 as a LHP

Adjusted Pitching Runs:
Cueto 34.3
Chapman 20.5

[gcstomp]

If ERA+ shows Cueto is 11% better than Verlander, what does Chapman's ERA+ of 345 mean? Looking over arguably the greatest closer of all time, Mo, who will be an easy HOF, his highest ERA+ of any of his crazy awesome seasons was 316. Does that mean that Chapman is having a 10% better year that Mo's greatest year. No, of course not, I dont believe that, all we did there is selectively picking and choosing numbers to make an argument, no?

The thread topic was about who in NL will win CY. That will be Dickey. If we ask from a roto perspective, it would be Dickey, Chapman, then Cueto. But if we muddle about we can find numbers that will show Cueto is clearly best. Unless we use other numbers, like pitching traditional triple crown stats, or roto $ earned.

[Judge Jude]

ERA+ breaks down at the point of great relief pitching, in large part because you have spectacularly talented pitchers asked to do such easy duty.

While Chapman may not be able to be a Cueto-level SP, he probably can be more effective for his team pitching 110 IP instead of 75, and skipping the mop-up 6-3, 9th-inning SV duty. The 1st manager to figure THAT out will be hailed as a "pioneer" of the obvious.

[gcstomp]

While Chapman may not be able to be a Cueto-level SP, he probably can be more effective for his team pitching 110 IP instead of 75, and skipping the mop-up 6-3, 9th-inning SV duty

I could say "wow, that is without any evidence beyond belief" but that would be dismissive, & disrespectful, and the few people who have addressed me thusly have had the perceived value of all their future words diminished, after all, an early lesson for all humans is "with all due respect". Even though I have tried to present a point/counter point, I am encountering a very selective cherry pick of non central points, glossing over my main ones.

On one hand, we know Chapman is a "failed" starter, not because he was ever given a chance to fail as an sp, but because he was put in role of closer by team. As the team would know better than us, this has to mean if he would have been a successful sp but currently is in role of star closer, he must be a failed sp.

On other hand, we should absolutely ignore the basic framework of MLB where closers are stars, closers earn CY Young awards, they go to the HOF, they make AS teams, & make a multples of what middle relief hanger on type players earn. But we should yank Chapman out of closer role & put him in that middle relief role for a few extra ip, in vastly lower leverage positions, because the teams do not know what they are doing, and it would be more valuable to do it that way. "The 1st manager to figure THAT out will be hailed as a "pioneer" of the obvious. "

While Chapman may not be able to be a Cueto-level SP The evidence for this point was what? That he has excelled in only role given to him, closer, a position that Reds had a couple of failed bodies in prior to him this year but could not fill. A position that has a much higher turnover than SP, but is "such easy duty". Again, such easy duty, that the ones who do succeed in it for a few years are the greatest stars of the game, & earn the rewards I outlined above.

[Judge Jude]

"But we should yank Chapman out of closer role & put him in that middle relief role for a few extra ip, in vastly lower leverage positions, because the teams do not know what they are doing, and it would be more valuable to do it that way."

I looked through the thread, and could not find anyone who suggested that he pitch in middle relief instead of closing.
Closest thing I could find was someone suggesting that his talents not be wasted trying to get 3 outs with a 3-run lead. That doesn't match your straw-man argument at all, though. Maybe someone posted something like you're talking about on a different message board, and you are responding to it here?

"Again, such easy duty, that the ones who do succeed in it for a few years are the greatest stars of the game,"

they are?

[gcstomp]

While Chapman may not be able to be a Cueto-level SP, he probably can be more effective for his team pitching 110 IP instead of 75, and skipping the mop-up 6-3, 9th-inning SV duty

Here, the part I included in my response, your words, the post right before my post. 110 ip instead of 75. I read that as not an sp, as sp's get more ip. I read that not as closer, as he is currently a closer. I read that as a role not an sp nor as a closer, meaning middle relief. It is possible you meant remain closer, but just pitch more. Yes, he would be worth more if he could pitch on short/no rest, and do multiple ip with same effectiveness.

[gcstomp]

I have to ask, as you again miss my main points, and then misread side points JJ, you are just messing with me for some odd reason? In any case, I have encountered this type of quirky disconnect with maybe 2 or 3 people, among the many thousands of people I have known in my life, that we just cannot effectively communicate with each other. I read your "strawman" label as again disparaging me. In any case I will accept we genuinely cannot get the mess of firing neurons in our separate different coded systems to interpret each other and leave it at that.

[Moonlight J]

If ERA+ shows Cueto is 11% better than Verlander, what does Chapman's ERA+ of 345 mean? Looking over arguably the greatest closer of all time, Mo, who will be an easy HOF, his highest ERA+ of any of his crazy awesome seasons was 316. Does that mean that Chapman is having a 10% better year that Mo's greatest year. No, of course not, I dont believe that, all we did there is selectively picking and choosing numbers to make an argument, no?

The thread topic was about who in NL will win CY. That will be Dickey. If we ask from a roto perspective, it would be Dickey, Chapman, then Cueto. But if we muddle about we can find numbers that will show Cueto is clearly best. Unless we use other numbers, like pitching traditional triple crown stats, or roto $ earned.

What Jude said...ERA+ should compare starters to starters and relievers to relievers. Look at the all-star game as an example of what a starting pitcher could do as a closer. Pedro 1999 anyone?

[gcstomp]

Moonlight, compare relievers to relievers, as in "Looking over arguably the greatest closer of all time, Mo, who will be an easy HOF, his highest ERA+ of any of his crazy awesome seasons was 316. Does that mean that Chapman is having a 10% better year that Mo's greatest year. No, of course not, I dont believe that, all we did there is selectively picking and choosing numbers to make an argument, no?"

Am I not comparing Mo to Chapman, a reliever to a reliever?

[Moonlight J]

You are -- I'm just saying we can't use ERA+ to compare Chapman and Cueto

[Moonlight J]

A couple things:

- I agree with Glen in that there is no real grounds for saying that Chapman is a "failed starter". Aroldis does not fit the bill assigned to him by Jason and neither do many other very successful relievers throughout baseball history.

- I also think I agree with Glen when he asserts that Chapman's getting shorted on what he could have done as a starter. He's clearly "starting pitcher material", despite assertions to the contrary. I'd argue that he's being misused right now, although his own massive success will be to his own detriment if he wants to get out of that role. I'd probably say that he COULD be having a peak Randy Johnson type year and I'd be saying that without the slightest sense of hyperbole.

- I still think that Cueto is having a better year than Dickey, but it's pretty close. Dickey's "story" will win him the award if it remains close.

Nobody is groomed to be a closer. It's where you end up when you can't stay healthy, can't develop secondary pitches, or can't develop stamina.

Rivera -- was a starter
Wagner -- was a starter
Gossage - same
Sutter - same
Quisenberry - arm angle dictated role

Somewhere, along the development track, an organization decides to change the guy's role. The only pitchers that are drafted to close are guys in later rounds or teams trying to fill immediate needs and the track record on the latter type is not very strong (see Wagner, C. Cordero)

[Moonlight J]

...or where you end up if your organization is stupid and yanks you around for no reason.

...or where you've always been (see Hoffman, Trevor).

...or where you end up because of a specific team need (see Smoltz, John and Lowe, Derek).


That's the problem with absolutism --- one exception kills your argument.

Hoffman was drafted as a shortstop

Lowe spent 4 seasons in relief until Boston realized his sinker was good enough to work fulltime
Smoltz was coming back off injury and did so well in the role, they left him there

You've nearly made my case for me.

Closers are not drafted, they are developed