Felix Hernandez wins AL Cy Young

[Gil Dobie]

My selective stats? I haven't provided any stats other than season long statistics. You know, statistics that measure a pitchers entire season.

Is ERA a ridiculous stat? Are K's a ridiculous stat? Are men on base a ridiculous stat?

You provided some ridiculous singular event.

You haven't changed my mind, and I'm not going to change yours, TTL

[BlueHen86]

August 15 vs Cleveland, Figgins commits an Error, Felix loses it and gives up 6 runs that don't count against his ERA. Little things like this pop up that don't figure in his stats, even though he is not responsible for the error, he still needs to step up and keep pitching.

lol, are you freaking kidding me with this stuff?

THIS is how you are supporting this argument?...

One bad inning + 6 unearned runs = no Cy Young

[Gil Dobie]

lol, are you freaking kidding me with this stuff?

THIS is how you are supporting this argument?...

One bad inning + 6 unearned runs = no Cy Young

Where did I say no Cy Young in that post?

[JoltinJoe]

A win is a hard stat. It gets counted in the standings.

ERA is a predictive stat. A low ERA for a starter is a predictor for a high number of wins.

Wins get counted in the standings. ERA does not.

If you want to believe that the predictor stat is more important than the hard stat, go ahead.

Stop yourself already, you're in a huge hole. ERA isn't any more predictive than wins are - both stats are based on what's already happened. They're both based on what a pitcher has done, not what he's going to do. Sure you can use ERA to predict future outcomes, but you can do the same with wins if you want - it doesn't change where the number comes from.

Seriously, how old are you and did you cry when Gehrig retired?

Let me speak slowly so even you understand.

A "win" is hard stat because it actually gets counted in the standings.

A low ERA is a predictive stat because it predicts a high win count. ERA does not get get counted in the standings.

Win = hard stat. Baseball = game where hard stats matter.

What matters is not a low ERA. What matters is how many WINS did that low ERA create.

[BlueHen86]

Stop yourself already, you're in a huge hole. ERA isn't any more predictive than wins are - both stats are based on what's already happened. They're both based on what a pitcher has done, not what he's going to do. Sure you can use ERA to predict future outcomes, but you can do the same with wins if you want - it doesn't change where the number comes from.

Seriously, how old are you and did you cry when Gehrig retired?

Let me speak slowly so even you understand.

A "win" is hard stat because it actually gets counted in the standings.

A low ERA is a predictive stat because it predicts a high win count. ERA does not get get counted in the standings.

Win = hard stat. Baseball = game where hard stats matter.

What matters is not a low ERA. What matters is how many WINS did that low ERA create.

That matters in the standings, but no so much with individual post season awards. If you want to base the Cy Young strictly on wins there would be no need to have sports writers vote on it.

[BlueHen86]

One bad inning + 6 unearned runs = no Cy Young

Where did I say no Cy Young in that post?

So now you do think Felix should have won the Cy Young. Got it.

[Jibjab]

Wow, looks like the geek stat boys go their way on this one.

[Gil Dobie]

Where did I say no Cy Young in that post?

So now you do think Felix should have won the Cy Young. Got it.

Ah, no, I would have chosen Buchholtz.