Carpenter wins NL Cy Young

[Providence A's]

agree with CRF here. Clemens ERA should have gotten him the win alone. Yet, he lost due to his inability to get the Ws. Was this his fault? A few times, yes, but the majority of the time absolutely not. Yes pitching wins championships, but you still have to have an offense to help you win games. Clemens ERA porves that.

Congrats to Carpenter and the Cards making this a team win. Not an individual effort.

ERA is not the only stat. Luck can play a role in ERA just like it can in wins.

A team can be tearing the cover off the ball against a pitcher, but every ball is hit right at someone for an out. Did the pitcher shut them down? Technically he did, but those outs could have very easily turned into hits and an early exit. So quit it with the ERA is the be all / end all of statistics. That is only your opinion. Just like I could say that batting average should be the only statistic for MVP. Bottom line is that both ERA and BA are averages and luck plays a role in those as well.

[love_that_reefer]

Carpenter was clearly the best pitcher in the league and had far too many innings than Clemens to be ignored. That plays a huge factor in Clemen's ERA being lower. 21-5 people and his team's offense didn't play that much importance if you actually look at the stats that you guys keep saying are out there. He was the first pitcher in the 76-season live-ball era to make 16 starts in a row in which he went at least seven innings and never gave up more than three earned runs. 22 straight quality starts and he only had five losses. He threw more innings and had less walks than Clemens for Joek's sake. Clemens' slight lead in WHIP and other categories just don't matter because Carp pitched three more games and beat Clemens twice head to head. The voting was correct.

[HuskerFan2002]

Hey look on the bright side-maybe Clemens or Willis will win it next year.

[Providence A's]

Clemens has won enough of them already. Sometimes he's deserved it. Sometimes he hasn't. Sometimes he lost when he should have won. Sometimes he lost when he should have lost. Thems the breaks.

[CincyRedsFan30]

It has everything to do with it because you've been saying that Carpenter only got the wins he did because of his offense. The point I made shows that offense doesn't always equal wins. So Carpenter played a role, too.

Boo hoo, Clemens lost Thems the breaks.

I didn't say he ONLY got the wins because of his offense. He was AIDED by a talented offense behind him, and when using a comparitive metric between himself and Clemens, he certainly had a more than negligible benefit of playing behind a great Offense.

Why do you act like I'm crying about Clemens losing anyway? It's not like Clemens is my favorite pitcher in the world. I'm just trying to be fair. In fact, I like Carpenter a lot. I praised the Cards for making the great deal of signing him in the first place. I respect the Cards' organization in a big way, so there would be no reason for me to have something against Carpenter.

[CincyRedsFan30]

ERA is not the only stat. Luck can play a role in ERA just like it can in wins.

A team can be tearing the cover off the ball against a pitcher, but every ball is hit right at someone for an out. Did the pitcher shut them down? Technically he did, but those outs could have very easily turned into hits and an early exit. So quit it with the ERA is the be all / end all of statistics. That is only your opinion. Just like I could say that batting average should be the only statistic for MVP. Bottom line is that both ERA and BA are averages and luck plays a role in those as well.

The goal is to attain Outs at a rate that is greater than baserunners(and ultimately Runs) given up per innings pitched. Clemens was more effective at doing that. Wins and Losses are based more on the team than ERA. Even if a pitcher is getting a lot of line drives that are Outs in a game, he still is recording Outs, which is the goal of the game. He isn't depending on the hitting of his Offense to get him a win.

[CincyRedsFan30]

Carpenter was clearly the best pitcher in the league and had far too many innings than Clemens to be ignored. That plays a huge factor in Clemen's ERA being lower. 21-5 people and his team's offense didn't play that much importance if you actually look at the stats that you guys keep saying are out there. He was the first pitcher in the 76-season live-ball era to make 16 starts in a row in which he went at least seven innings and never gave up more than three earned runs. 22 straight quality starts and he only had five losses. He threw more innings and had less walks than Clemens for Joek's sake. Clemens' slight lead in WHIP and other categories just don't matter because Carp pitched three more games and beat Clemens twice head to head. The voting was correct.

You are using a lot of small sample size stats. here and unimportant ones as well. You already know about what "Wins" and "Losses" does for me.

Going seven innins while giving up three or fewer ER is a very specific stat. that isolates situations to make them more desirable in favor of one pitcher or another. Twenty two straight Quality Starts is nice, although 3 ER in 6 IP will get you that. You pointing out that he had fewer Walks than Clemens really doesn't mean much either, as the stat. you concede Clemens led in(although slightly) indicates that Clemens gave up fewer Walks AND Hits per Innings pitched, which is more important than just one component or the other. Head to head matchups of a total of two involves a small sample size and really shows nothing at all.

[CincyRedsFan30]

Clemens has won enough of them already. Sometimes he's deserved it. Sometimes he hasn't. Sometimes he lost when he should have won. Sometimes he lost when he should have lost. Thems the breaks.

This should be well known, but just to confirm, my whole point isn't to say what should have happened in the past or say who did or didn't deserve something in particular in the past, but rather what should have happened this year.

[Providence A's]

This should be well known, but just to confirm, my whole point isn't to say what should have happened in the past or say who did or didn't deserve something in particular in the past, but rather what should have happened this year.

it should be pointed out that not every single one of my posts is directed at you. You should stop acting like they are all directed at you because they're not.

[ATLien]

lololol at all the reds fans thinking wins are overrated.

[CincyRedsFan30]

The obsession with Reds fans continues. Wins and Losses for pitchers don't tell the story. That's the point. Plus, we know more about winning baseball based on number of World Series Championships, which I consider to be the most important stat. in baseball.

[ATLien]

it's just hilarious. the reds are one of the worst run organizations in the league right now. and there is about three or four different reds fan on this thread coming in how wins are over-rated.

No more WS talk BS. It doesn't matter how many Championships your team won 30 years ago. It's irrelevant. The whole "my team has more WS than yours so you can't talk" attitude needs to be dropped ASAP because it is getting quite annoying. All it is really is Reds fans' excuse for their crappy performance in the 21st century.

[CincyRedsFan30]

it's just hilarious. the reds are one of the worst run organizations in the league right now. and there is about three or four different reds fan on this thread coming in how wins are over-rated.

No more WS talk BS. It doesn't matter how many Championships your team won 30 years ago. It's irrelevant. The whole "my team has more WS than yours so you can't talk" attitude needs to be dropped ASAP because it is getting quite annoying. All it is really is Reds fans' excuse for their crappy performance in the 21st century.

"Wins" are not overrated. Using Wins and Losses as a metric for showing the individual talents of a particular pitcher is what is overrated. There is a big difference.

And IMO, the number of World Championships is what matters. I don't look at small sample sizes to determine how good an organization is. I look at the overall picture.

[ATLien]

Small sample sizes... like WINS? LOL, why look at those. How pointless.

[CincyRedsFan30]

I never said that Wins and Losses over the course of a season is a small sample size. I said that it doesn't say a lot about a pitcher because of what the stat. conveys.

Looking at a certain period of a franchise to determine its worth is an entirely different situation and involves a small sample size.