NL Cy Young: Is it really even a question who is the leading candidate?

[Fishercat]

That's a very skewed stat. For example, if Clemens and Carpenter both last 9 innings in a game, and both allow no runs to score. The Astros score 1 run, and the Cardinals score 8 runs. It appears that Carpenter benefited by the Cardinals offense, but it didn't matter, because he would have won the game even if his team only scored one run. The additional 7 runs just pad the stat. Last time I had checked, both pitchers had an equal ratio of quality starts. It's not like Clemens is dominating every game, and Carpenter is getting a lot of cheap wins. I haven't followed each pitcher that closely, but by looking at Carpenter's stats, I don't see many (if any) cheap wins.

*sigh* Then if you go back to ERA, on average, Carpenter would allow (if you could allow fractional runs) around 2.3 earned runs per 9 and Clemens a fair amount below 2 earned runs per 9 innings.

I've done the math before on the effect of the bullpen. Even with the worst pen in baseball, the difference between the two ERAs was enough to still give Clemens more value with the ERAs merged.

The difference between Carpenter and Clemens out-wise is about 2 to 3 outs (2/3 to an inning) a game. In that 2/3-1 difference, the bullpen would need to allow enough runs to boost Clemens ERA about 7/10 of a point, which means about 2 runs every 3 innings, maybe a 6 ERA. If the Astros pen does not have a 6 ERA, logically, the difference does not hurt enough to justify ignoring the ERA difference.

QS are a not a precise stat. A 6 IP/3 ER game, a game that if a pitcher had it over a season would be average (4.5 ERA), is a QS. Likewise, a game with 9 IP/0 ER is also a QS. For Clemens sake, here are some games he didn't get wins in (IP and ER), his team may have won but he didn't.

7/0
7/0
7/0
7/3
7/2
6/2
5/0 (I wonder if he got injured there, only 70 pitches or so)
8/2
7/1
7/1
7/2
7/1
8/0
8/2
6/0

That's 15 QS (and one that was too short) in which he did not get a win. In comparison, Carpenter has had 6 quality starts in which he did not receive a win. The difference is 9 QS. Oddly enough, that difference is the same difference between their win totals. I don't like QS since it is not precise, it counts a 7/2 the same as a 6/3 or 9/1. But if you want to give some significance, there it is.

Carpenter isn't getting cheap wins at all (I think he had one or two max this year) and this is a superb pitching season only matched by the likes of Randy Johnson, Jason Schmidt, and only a select few others over the past years, and if he won, it wouldn't be bad. They are close pitchers, closer than the ERA suggests, but Clemens is having the best season since Pedro Martinez (arguably Bob Gibson purely on ERA, but 1999-2000 were huge offensive years with Pedro in an offensively superior AL).

The Run Support does matter although alone it isn't worth a whole lot, you have to transfer a whole team to make it significant, as even if you swapped their RS, you need to swap at least bullpens to make it a fair cross-team comparison since the Stros seem to choke when Clemens leaves the game.

They are both pitching fantastically...just Clemens has been more fantastic than Carpenter.

[Fishercat]

The Cardinals are scoring 5 runs a game for all of their pitchers. Are all their pitchers 20 - 4? No. Do all of them have an ERA of 2.2? No. So you can say all you want about his huge run support (.4 higher than the league average and equal to his team's runs per game total), but the fact remains the guy has dominated the National League just as much as Clemens...he just has more wins to show for it and Clemens has had 2 chances to beat Carpenter and both times he failed.

How did you come up with that conclusion from that reasoning? Because he is the best pitcher on the Cardinals, he is just as dominant as Clemens? He hasn't been and the stats show such a thing. He's been nearly as good, but not as good. Just because he got wins in 9 quality starts that Clemens offense couldn't pull out a few runs for him for doesn't make him much better, if at all.

Also, 2 chances is too small of a sample size. It's like saying the Royals are better than the Sox or A's because they took 2 of 3 in a series in August. Obviously a larger difference between A's/Royals than Clemens/Carpenter, but you get my drift.

[Fishercat]

The object of a pitcher is to not allow runs. He only has, at best, half the control over whether his team wins a game and it's only half if he only allows defensively-independent outs/runs (HR, walks, strikeouts) and he goes the whole game. That percentage goes down when you allow the fielders to get involved (the more you weight defense, that directly effects the pitcher's influence on a game) and when the bullpen gets involves. The hitters, the other half of a pitcher-win has been covered.

Take a league average pitcher who gives up one run every two innings and that never fails. If his team scores 6 runs a game, he'll go 30-0, if his team scores 3 runs a game, he'll go 0-30, if his team scores 4 runs or 5 runs, then who knows which way the game goes. He could be taken out for either Mariano Rivera or Mike Remlinger, it doesn't effect the caliber of a pitcher.

At the very least, wins should have (at most) half the weight of any pitcher-dependant statistic (and those don't include RA or ERA, since RA and to a lesser extent ERA depends on your defense. If Edgar Renteria botches a ball, sure it's an error and won't add to ERA, but it will both tire the pitcher out and make him earn another out.).

There's no perfect stat and there never will be, and if two pitchers are near equals I can see using W-L (sure, if you want to compare Santana and Colon, then use wins and losses since the difference is nearly negligable), but when one pitcher is about 7 ER per 90 innings better, that's a noticeable difference.

As I said, either pitcher is a fine choice, I just think Clemens is better.

[Providence A's]

I came to that conclusion because Carpenter is in the top 5 in the majors for wins, strikeouts, ERA, CG, SHO, innings pitched, winning %, WHIP, and OBA. And Clemens is not in the top 5 MLB for all of those categories. Carpenter is also in the top 10 in MLB for opponent average and K/BB.

[Fishercat]

CG and SHO are covered by the SHO effect on ERA and IP and CG's effect on IP. OBA is covered by WHIP, or WHIP is covered by OBA, they're the same stat essentially except one is made for the amount of H+BB+HBP per PA and the other is for IP (or with ratio, 9 IP).

That brings it to Wins, Ks, ERA, IP, W% (which I think is well enough covered by wins in this case, but whatever), and WHIP. We've covered ERA (Clemens) and Carpenter (Wins and WP% due to wins). Carpenter has more IP, Clemens has a better WHIP. This isn't the he has more top 10s, so he's better, it's the best pitcher, some stats deserve more weight. It's how one determines the weight.

It's kind of funny how much wins change public perception. Roger Clemens had thirty less innings than Randy Johnson last year, his ERA was about 3/10 of a point higher, and because he had wins and only wins over Johnson, he won the Cy Young. I argued for Johnson last year and I'll argue for Clemens this year, and both years the people who somehow got voting rights will vote the higher wins total. I'll note, if the difference between Carp and Clemens was the .3 like last year, then I'd have troubles.

[Providence A's]

winning percentage also includes losses, which Clemens has more of, too.

[Porter]

On the contrary, all too many people underate WINS, and give far too much credit for all the other useless stats. WINS are the reason the games are played, and a pitcher earning WINS for his team, is the single most important thing he can do in the game of baseball.

When this thread was first started, I had no question Clemens should not be considered in the top five for the Cy Young, I still see it that way, now however, even more so.

This is how underrated Wins.....you can get one without throwing a pitch......end arguement.

[Fishercat]

Allowing less runs and having more losses and less wins shows how fallible W-L record/percentage is.

[Providence A's]

perhaps he's allowing less runs because he's pitching less innings.

[Fishercat]

His ERA or RA (whatever floats your boat) is lower, hes allows less runs on a basis of rate as well

[Providence A's]

Rates are not absolutes and would no doubt go up if he pitched longer when he was obviously not as strong as he was earlier in the game.

[Fishercat]

Then it was the right decision to remove him from the game and he should not be penalized for it. If you say "But Carpenter pitched longer", then if they let Clemens pitch longer, who knows, he may have still been good to go. I don't think it's fair that because Garner is somewhat conservative with Clemens and LaRussa is quite aggressive, Carpenter wins the Cy Young. An individual award based on a team's decisions and abilities is not an individual award. They have rewards for very good players on great teams, it's a World Series Ring.

[Providence A's]

If Clemens was the best pitcher in the league, then they wouldn't take him out put in someone not as good. If Clemens was giving his team a better chance to win games, then they would. Carpenter has given his team a better chance as they've won more of his games and lost less of them with the same run support they give all of their pitchers...5 runs a game as that is their team average.

[Fishercat]

That's a fine comparison...when comparing Carpenter to Mulder, Marquis, Suppan, whoever in the rotation. Carpenter is the best pitcher on the Cardinals, nobody is denying this. If you put Clemens in Carpenter's place, then what happens? Or Mulder, or Marquis?

A lot of the time, managers don't understand how good their pitcher is and how taking them out early can hurt their team. There have been numerous times this year in which Clemens had a great outing, was under 100 pitches, and was taken out inexplicably. Garner being an idiot doesn't mean Clemens isn't the best pitcher. Even if Pedro couldn't go past 100 pitches, he may still have been the best pitcher in the game, maybe not.

Carpenter still gets 1.6 more runs per game than Clemens on average. Most of the time, Carpenter doesn't need it, that's true. However, he can use it, much like Clemens could use at least 4 per, or even two in those games his team lost 1-0 when he gave up no runs.

When push comes to shove, if Clemens bullpen (or if you prefer, league average) gives up 19 more ER in 23.2 innings than Carpenter would, then Carpenters IP overrules Clemens ERA. If not, Clemens ERA overrules Carpenters Innings.

[Providence A's]

Have you watched every one of Clemens' and Carpenter's starts? Did you also interview each manager? If not, then how can you pretend to know the reason(s) for Clemens exiting early and Carpenter staying in? Obviously, you cannot.

When Clemens loses the Cy Young this year, he can take comfort when he goes home in the offseason and dusts off his 2001 and 2004 Cy Young Awards knowing he didn't deserve them.