And the Winner Is …

C.C. Sabathia. Dang.

61 comments… add one

  • For regular season performance, I think Sabathia deserved it. But a Beckett win wouldn’t have been a miscarriage of justice, so I was hoping he’d get it, particularly in light of the completely irrelevant yet totally awesome postseason he had. Ah well.

    Paul SF November 13, 2007, 2:09 pm
  • I am shocked. Wrong choice, Beckett was the best pitcher in the game this season, not just the AL. At this rate I wonder who wins the AL MVP, Magglio Ordonez?

    John - YF November 13, 2007, 2:10 pm
  • Paul you are showing very good sportsmanship, but you can let it out, that outcome is BS. Sabathia was very good, but not as good as Beckett.

    John - YF November 13, 2007, 2:11 pm
  • Yeah, C.C. had slightly better K’s and ERA, but I think Beckett was more dominant. When he was on he was on.
    A shame Beckett missed a few starts while on the DL, or he would have gained a couple more W’s and put it out of reach from Sabathia.

    Atheose November 13, 2007, 2:12 pm
  • Oh, Ok then.
    *begins breaking things*
    *is escorted out of his office*

    Paul SF November 13, 2007, 2:13 pm
  • Why don’t they have the voting breakdown online?

    Atheose November 13, 2007, 2:13 pm
  • Not just the W’s, Atheose. The IP would have been closer and probably put him over the top in the voting. *sigh* Ah well. I feel like Beckett hasn’t peaked yet, so there will be other opportunities.

    Paul SF November 13, 2007, 2:14 pm
  • Sabathia pitched 40 more innings basically at a similar level to Beckett. In the regular season, I say Sabathia was probably the more slightly valuable pitcher. By no means is this a shockingly wrong choice.

    Nick-YF November 13, 2007, 2:15 pm
  • I wonder how Sabathia feels right now. I bet Beckett punched something, then glanced up at his ALCS MVP trophy and laughed his ass off.

    Devine November 13, 2007, 2:16 pm
  • Beckett got the hardware that really counts so I dont feel to bad for him. I guess voters saw the slightly better ERA, IP, Ks, and BB to tip the balance. Its pretty even so I cant fault them. These awards are very frustrating and subjective in so many ways. I still am pissed about the AL MVP last year. The 6th place vote for Jeter still gets me hot under the collar!

    sam-YF November 13, 2007, 2:16 pm
  • Sabathia 19 8 0 — 119
    Beckett 8 14 4 — 86
    Lackey 1 5 16 — 36
    Carmona 0 1 4 — 7
    Bedard 0 0 1 — 1
    Halladay 0 0 1 — 1
    Santana 0 0 1 — 1
    Verlander 0 1 1 — 1

    Paul SF November 13, 2007, 2:17 pm
  • My main problem is the four jokers who apparently figured Lackey should get second-place votes. That’s just silly. Lackey was great, but the race by ANY measure was Beckett-Sabathia.

    Paul SF November 13, 2007, 2:19 pm
  • the voting is a joke, BECKETT WAS LEFT OFF TWO BALOTS! WOW Pathetic!!!!!!

    TJ November 13, 2007, 2:23 pm
  • Sabathia was even left off a ballot. Bizarre.

    Paul SF November 13, 2007, 2:24 pm
  • Yeah, who the hell gave Beckett 4 third-place votes? And Carmona a second-place vote?
    I can’t believe Lackey got so many votes.

    Atheose November 13, 2007, 2:24 pm
  • Where do you guys see this? Can you post a link?

    Atheose November 13, 2007, 2:25 pm
  • I recall looking at this at the end of the season and before the playoffs, and thinking the extra 40 innings was the deal-breaker in favor of CC. But during the playoffs it occurred to me that Beckett repeatedly faced the Yankees, the best offense in baseball–including that shutdown game against Wang in Sept–and CC never did once. I don’t know. In fairness, CC did shut down the Yanks in the playoffs.
    A reasonable result that could have gone the other way, much like the NL ROY.

    YF November 13, 2007, 2:26 pm
  • Sabathia was left off one himself. Total joke.

    sam-YF November 13, 2007, 2:26 pm
  • Atheose, it’s listed in the post’s original link. The Globe’s Extra Bases blog.
    Do you think some moron actually left Beckett AND Sabathia off his/her ballot?

    Paul SF November 13, 2007, 2:27 pm
  • im sure said moron works in Anaheim or Cleveland.

    sam-YF November 13, 2007, 2:28 pm
  • I think the innings difference did it for CC. Indeed, I wonder if he simply ran out of gas in the post-season. The kid wound up pitching 256 innings – 46 more than his previous high in 2001 and 64 more than last year.
    Not sure if Beckett can pitch better than he did in the post-season. Still, if he does that for a whole year he’ll easily grab a Cy Young.

    NH Rob November 13, 2007, 2:28 pm
  • Beckett pitched 11 games against playoff teams compared to 4 for Sabathia, even if you take out the Yankees it was still 7-4 for Beckett.
    Beckett also pitched more games against winning teams 17-11

    TJ November 13, 2007, 2:29 pm
  • “Not sure if Beckett can pitch better than he did in the post-season. Still, if he does that for a whole year he’ll easily grab a Cy Young.”
    He’d grab an MVP too lol

    TJ November 13, 2007, 2:30 pm
  • Ahh, thanks Paul.
    I can’t believe Sabathia and Beckett were both left off ballots. When the top 3 all make it to the postseason, they should take playoff performance into consideration.

    Atheose November 13, 2007, 2:30 pm
  • “they should take playoff performance into consideration.”
    Sorry I dont agree with this at all. This is a regular season award and how far a team goes in the playoffs would effect this voting quite alot.

    sam-YF November 13, 2007, 2:32 pm
  • Well Lackey did have a 151 ERA+ vs.
    Sabathia – 143 ERA+
    Beckett – 145 ERA+
    Carmona – 151 ERA+
    Innings, K’s, and ERA did it for Sabathia. Any of the four would have been good picks though. Can’t say the writers got it too wrong unless they voted for anyone else (though Bedard – 146 ERA+ – probably deserved fifth).

    NH Rob November 13, 2007, 2:35 pm
  • I’m with Sam. Anyway, Beckett got some pretty sweet hardware himself, so no reason to feel to sorry for him!

    YF November 13, 2007, 2:35 pm
  • Yup, playoffs are about one thing only – the ring. And Beckett has two now.

    NH Rob November 13, 2007, 2:37 pm
  • Sam, that’s why I said “When the top 3 all make it to the playoffs”
    I mean, when there is no clear-cut winner (compared to past years, at least) then why NOT take the postseason into consideration? Even if you only look at the ALDS (and ALCS, if you compare Beckett-Sabathia) it still gives an equal chance to all candidates.

    Atheose November 13, 2007, 2:40 pm
  • Doh, forgot to un-bold it.

    Atheose November 13, 2007, 2:41 pm
  • Better?

    Atheose November 13, 2007, 2:41 pm
  • Lackey had ERA going for him and little else. Sabathia had the innings edge, which in turn gave him the edge in other stats. If I remember correcctly, no one pitcher was higher in all three main rate categories — K/9, BB/9 and H/9 — than Beckett. I could be wrong though; no time to check.

    Paul SF November 13, 2007, 2:43 pm
  • i saw what you said Atheose and I was saying i disagree. If the Indians were knocked out in the first round even though CC pitched great in the series and then Beckett pitched great for all 3 rounds does that mean he should have an advantage. Its a regular season award. They have post-season awards for the post-season. Plus the guys who are in the top 3 arent known until the voting is done, are you saying they should open it back up for a second vote if these guys are in the post-season?

    sam-YF November 13, 2007, 2:43 pm
  • Yeah, it does create logistical problems. I’m speaking mainly out of frustration, even though the smarter part of me knew that Sabathia would win it.

    Atheose November 13, 2007, 2:47 pm
  • CC gave up 3 less walks in 40 more innings.

    sam-YF November 13, 2007, 2:47 pm
  • I think I’d probably have given it to Sabathia.
    Too bad about the missed start or two for Beckett…I think that would have done it.

    Devine November 13, 2007, 2:48 pm
  • Don’t see how you can say a pitcher “had ERA going for him and little else”. That’s exactly his job – more than anything else.
    I understand people are upset. But Lackey was a decent choice especially because of that ERA and across 224 innings.
    My choice would have been Sabathia, with Josh a close second. But the writers actually did a decent job this year – much better than Colon in 2005.

    NH Rob November 13, 2007, 2:49 pm
  • Don’t see how you can say a pitcher “had ERA going for him and little else”. That’s exactly his job – more than anything else.
    I understand people are upset. But Lackey was a decent choice especially because of that ERA and across 224 innings.
    My choice would have been Sabathia, with Josh a close second. But the writers actually did a decent job this year – much better than Colon in 2005.

    NH Rob November 13, 2007, 2:50 pm
  • Ugh – sorry. And what is this – if you post too often it thinks you’re spam????

    NH Rob November 13, 2007, 2:54 pm
  • Yeah, it’s not a bad vote. Better also than Zito in 2002.

    Paul SF November 13, 2007, 2:55 pm
  • Atheose! No code in the comments, please! PLEASE. *PLEASE!!!!*

    YF November 13, 2007, 3:07 pm
  • Not sure I can agree on 2002. Pedro losing, I think, had more to do with Lowe have a spectacular season too. Still can’t believe that team didn’t make the playoffs though.
    But Zito was very, very good – 23-5 229 IP 2.75 ERA 1.13 WHIP. Yeah, both Pedro and Lowe were better, but I’m not sure it was a travesty.
    Colon in 2005 was all about the wins. Santana was on another plane.

    NH Rob November 13, 2007, 3:08 pm
  • I guess I hate the inconsistency of the voting. One year they will take W’s above all else (Zito in 2002, Colon in 2005) and then another year they’ll ignore them. Beckett could have had 24 wins if he had as many starts as Sabathia.
    But I do agree with Devine and Rob–I would have voted for Sabathia too. Sadly.

    Atheose November 13, 2007, 3:08 pm
  • Sorry YF!

    Atheose November 13, 2007, 3:09 pm
  • I understand the vote based off of the regular season stats. Carmona would have deserved the votes in my opinion over Lackey.

    Rob SF November 13, 2007, 3:14 pm
  • I agree – but on the inconsistency of the “writers”. That’s the travesty. If anything, they should make them explain their picks then publish that commentary.

    NH Rob November 13, 2007, 3:15 pm
  • Either that or use something like ERA+ and an innings minimum. But then what would have have to argue about?

    NH Rob November 13, 2007, 3:17 pm
  • Also, 2002 was the first time in history a pitcher led the league in ERA (2.26), strikeouts (239) and WHIP (0.92) and did not win Cy Young. It was definitely a travesty.

    Atheose November 13, 2007, 3:17 pm
  • These votes are cast before the postseason starts, so they can’t possibly take the postseason into account. Right?

    Ron Newman November 13, 2007, 3:26 pm
  • Rob with the ERA+ argument, and making statements like “if Beckett can do this all year” type stuff….
    Man, I’m having my doubts on you, Rob.

    Brad November 13, 2007, 3:32 pm
  • Right Ron.

    LocklandSF November 13, 2007, 3:32 pm
  • I know the postseason doesn’t count, and that there are reasons for that.
    But the stark contrast between their postseason performances should nevertheless make those voting feel a little bit sheepish and defensive.
    Sabathia simply looked like crap while Beckett was lights out against the best teams in the league.

    Hudson November 13, 2007, 7:19 pm
  • I would have had no problem with Beckett winning the CY. He definitely merited the award this year. That said, I’m happy C.C. won it because now I’ll get some much-needed points in Paul’s upcoming pre-season predictaroo scoring.

    attackgerbil November 13, 2007, 7:21 pm
  • I’m much better looking than Rob! Smarter too.
    And Sabathia deserved it more. Ha!

    Mike YF November 13, 2007, 7:57 pm
  • On the bright side, maybe this will motivate Beckett to win 30 games and have a sub-3.00 ERA in 2008.
    Except that 30 wins is even more impossible in a six-man rotation, natch. ;^)

    Hudson November 13, 2007, 8:17 pm
  • The fact is, the award is strictly about the regular season. By those stats, Sabathia and Beckett had very simlar stats, but Sabathia pitched 40 more innings. I’d have liked Beckett to have won, but I can’t get too exercised about this.
    If Pedroia had lost ROY to Young, on the other hand, then I would have been pissed.

    academic-SF November 13, 2007, 10:18 pm
  • B.W.A.A. HAHAHAHAHAHA
    The success of Boston area sports teams has sports fans around the country celebrating the failures of our athletes and hissing at us fans when we complain.
    Well to all you fans out there who are in that group, prepare to hiss.
    Josh Beckett was robbed of the Cy Young Award today. Beckett finished the season 20-7 one win better then C.C. Sabathia. The other statistic categories were practically identical with Beckett pitching about 40 innings less. Many point to the gap in innings, which was caused by Beckett having a stint on the disabled list as the reason Sabathia won.
    The first reason to complain about the voting of the 2007 Cy Young is the fact that Beckett was left off two ballots completely, Sabathia was also left off one ballot, this shows that the voters are either totally clueless or failed to vote for each of them for personal reasons.
    Were the two New York voters bitter that the Sox prevailed in the East? Perhaps the two Cleveland voters wanted to give the edge to Sabathia in what was thought to be a close race? Was there a Boston voter who did the same?
    Voters need to be held accountable by the public for how the cast their votes and the ballots should be released to the public.
    The other side to this whole argument uses pure fact to show that Beckett deserved the Cy Young more. He pitched 11 times this season against teams that would end up in the playoffs and 17 times against teams who would finish above .500 at seasons end.
    On the other side of this was Sabathia who pitched only four times against eventual playoff teams and 11 times against winning teams.
    Cleveland fans, and Red Sox haters are quick to point out that Beckett had a lot more starts against playoff teams because the Yankees made the playoffs.
    And that is actually the whole point. Beckett faced tougher competition and still succeeded at a similar rate to Sabathia, so shouldn’t the one who had the tougher road end up on top at the end?
    Sabathia faced divisional opponents 18 times in 2007 and aside from Detroit, the teams in the AL Central were very bad offensive teams. Detroit was third in runs score in the majors while the other three, Minnesota, Kansas City and Chicago were ranked 25th, 27th and 28th respectively.
    Meantime up in the AL East Beckett had to face the top run scoring offense in baseball four times. Tampa Bay, Baltimore and Toronto meantime were ranked 15th, 16th and 17th in runs scored.
    Beckett by far had the tougher road and in the end he lead his team to the World Series title. Sabathia got an award he didn’t deserve.

    TJ November 13, 2007, 10:25 pm
  • TJ its pretty easy to come up with arguements for either of these pitchers. One could argue that Beckett didnt deserve it because he finshed 6th in the league in ERA. The arguements could go on and on. Its hard to argue that Sabathia didnt have a great season. Im not sure why you are so upset about this. Take the WS win and be happy.
    I also highly doubt that an anti- red sox bias is to blame here. The guys who vote really arent fans and for the most part take this responsibility very seriously. Some YFs have been complaining about about anti-Yankee bias for years and I just dont buy it. This is the same.

    sam-YF November 13, 2007, 10:36 pm
  • Yeah TJ, there isn’t much of an anti- Red Sox bias. Even if both of those voters had given Beckett 1st-place votes it wouldn’t have made a difference.
    Plus, even if there is a little bit of bias, it evens out. Like a certain sportswriter giving Jeter a 6th-place vote for the 2006 MVP. Or New York writers leaving Ortiz off the ballot in 2005 because they felt a DH doesn’t deserve to be MVP, despite voting for Clemens in previous years.

    Atheose November 14, 2007, 8:33 am
  • Or, King from the Post saying in 1999 he doesn’t vote pitchers for MVP except that he had done so in the past.

    Paul SF November 14, 2007, 9:27 am
  • Exactly Paul. It happens on all sides, so I’d say it probably evens out over the long run.
    Here’s an interesting article about the Yankees possibly trading for Freddy Sanchez and Damaso Marte.
    http://nyyinsider.com/?p=63

    Atheose November 14, 2007, 9:32 am

Leave a Comment

Next post:

Previous post: