More awards banter: Looking at

More awards banter: Looking at the CY in the AL, it seems increasingly clear (however biased I am), that your call on Pedro was very close to correct. I am not sure he will win, what with the emphasis the voting dingbats put on one single category (wins), but if you compare his performance with that of Loaiza (until 10 days ago the leading candidate), Halladay (maybe the new favorite), or Hudson (no chance, but deserving of serious consideration), he falls short in one or two columns to each other guy. To Halladay he loses the “workhorse” race – RH’s stamina and performance, along with the wins (I won’t say again how overrated I think the wins category is in this day of specialty bullpens) make him a serious contender.* To Loaiza (at least two weeks ago), he was neck-neck in ERA, and Loaiza had him beat in wins. Loaiza’s faded. Hudson has also been a workhorse, has a great ERA, potentially 17 or 18 wins, but he ends up being second to almost everyone – that hurts him. Mulder would have been up there, the injury doomed him. BUT: Pedro leads the league in ERA, strikeouts, has made 27 starts (and with a better Sox bullpen would be 17 or 18-4). He’s been the best pitcher in the AL this year, again, and has 3 CGs, by the end of the year perhaps 4, only 3 fewer than Halladay. His ERA differential is staggering, subtract his 10ER start from April and his ERA is approaching 2.00, an almost unfathomable number. His weakness is the press’s perception of his fragility, which to some degree is not deserved: he will make 30 starts this year, with 23 QS among them (good for 2nd in the league after Halladay), in 17 he has gone 7,8, or 9 innings. SO: My hunch is that Halladay is going to win it, but Pedro would be the first guy in history to deserve it with only 14-16 wins who wasn’t a reliever. (Full Disclosure: I hated Bob Welch) *You could argue that Halladay has more wins because he pitches longer in games, and he’s the only guy in contention that I buy that with, as he’s thrown a ton of innings.