Batter's Box Interactive Magazine Batter's Box Interactive Magazine Batter's Box Interactive Magazine
Returning from the flooded plains of Corpus Christi to the silicon prairie that is Dallas, it's time to get back to baseball, Toronto-style with the Star's baseball stars.

Eighth in a 10-part series

One of the astonishing things about online communities -- whatever they may be called -- is something a former boss of mine liked to call "synergy." Note that I no longer work there and also avoid workplaces that use terms like "out of the box" and, ironically given my profession, "let's take it offline."

So, yes, Mr. Burley, "a lot of people will be doing [it] this week... talking about the Cy Young Award candidates in both leagues," that is. Seems like we've been up to that here on Batter's Box for, oh, the whole season.

After all, doesn't the Blue Jays' entire 2003 campaign have the potential to be summarized by the single phrase, Roy Halladay, Cy Young Award winner?

Sure it does. And while the argument has raged back and forth here on Da Box, Toronto Star baseball guys Richard Griffin and Geoff Baker weighed in on the topic themselves recently.

Just keep in mind ... a lot can happen between "recently" and "ballots are due."

***


Would you believe the argument dates back to March 11?

That's the day that the erstwhile Coach started a thread called Cy's the Limit in which he noted somewhat incredulously that for that day, anyway, "Richard Griffin has only nice things to say about Roy Halladay."

Regardless of those nice things, when Batter's Box originally sat down (virtually speaking) with Griffin and Toronto Star cohort Geoff Baker a couple of weeks ago, the columnist was pretty blunt in his opinion that Halladay would not take home the 2003 American League Cy Young Award.

"I've had a vote on the A.L. Cy Young the last four years," said Griffin. "I would love for it to be Doc."

But while Griffin noted that he might have "trouble voting for [former Jay Esteban] Loaiza," personally speaking, he concluded -- hang on to your Batters Box Helmets, roto geeks and SABR rattlers -- "… if the numbers say so …"

But as noted above, the thing about numbers is that they can change quite a bit in the space of two or three weeks.

Or in spring training, in a matter of two or three hours. In fact, within half a March day of Coach's original posting, another Batter's Box regular -- who shall remain nameless here -- posted an extremely well-thought-out, deeply developed and brilliantly written argument entitled Why Roy Halladay Won't Win the 2003 Cy Young Award.

Of course, the door was left open just the tiniest crack for a Halladay trophy, and Coach charged through, claiming that over 36 starts, "With just average luck and support this season, I figure he'll be 22-7 or thereabouts." And almost eerily, heading into start #36, the man Griffin referred to as "Doc" -- in spite of recent umpire antics -- sported a mark of 21-7. Been channeling Dionne Warwick, Coach?

So through the attention-grabbing winning streak, a brief flirtation with contention, a mercurial MVP effort first by Carlos Delgado and now, more quietly, by Vernon Wells, the question has remained ... "Roy Halladay, Cy Young Award winner?"

It's a question that kept Boxers throwing jabs through late July when Jonny German's terrific analysis lit the flame anew, and then, of course, this week's "Cy Guys" post points toward the homestretch.

Back when Da Box originally asked Baker about Halladay's candidacy, he echoed Griffin's reluctance and said, "I really hate to say it, but Esteban Loaiza will win. He will be pitching in meaningful games throughout September and his ERA lead over Halladay is so big that only a complete collapse would bring them close."

In fact, said Baker at the time, "All Loaiza has to do, in my mind, is win 20 games and he's got it. Halladay has to pitch his remaining starts the way he did against [the Yankees on September 1] to have a shot."

But ... hang on a moment, said Baker just this week. "Obviously things have changed in the weeks since we [originally] answered the questions." Referring back to his original caveat, Baker said, "Halladay has pitched just like he did against the Yankees earlier in the month and, in my mind, has done enough to overtake Loaiza and win."

In fact, said Baker, "I think there was a real anti-Loaiza movement brewing among some voters anyway and he would have had to outdistance Halladay by at least a half-run of ERA to have a chance." The former Jay's ERA lead over Halladay is now just about a third of a run and could conceivably shrink still further.

"I have to admit, I never envisioned [Halladay] being this good in September," said Baker. "And Loaiza, well, has collapsed. With Halladay so far ahead in other categories like innings pitched and complete games, I think he is a lock," Baker concluded.

Anti-Loaiza movement?

Halladay a lock?

Well, wait a moment.

Loaiza is still going to get plenty of votes -- sure, you can claim he had a real "1976 Randy Jones" season -- the Padre lefty started the All-Star Game with a 16-3 record then collapsed to finish 6-11 in the second half. Oh by the way ... Jones' 22-14 overall mark earned the hardware that season.

Mike Mussina is getting some mention here on Da Box, but nary a blogging would-be-voter has mentioned veteran southpaw Andy Pettitte, who like Jamie Moyer, quietly won his 20th game of the year this week. And 20-game winners on big-market (don't kid yourself, Seattle -- with that ownership, you're big market) playoff teams will get plenty of votes.

Tim Hudson has probably been the "best" pitcher in the American League, but that of course has rarely correlated perfectly with award-winners. But haven't voters gotten used to voting for the big winner with the emerald "A" on his chest, whether the name across the back be Mulder or Zito ... or Hudson?

And Pedro Martinez is … well, he's Pedro Martinez.

It really comes down to what Spicol wrote back on July 31: "I'm more interested in trying to get into the minds of voters to figure out who will win and voters aren't the most objective bunch."

Yes ... yes, that's the key point right there.

A couple of weeks ago, Griffin -- who has a vote -- was ready to cast it for Loaiza. Just this week, Baker was waffling on his concession to the former Jay and indicated the hometown ace was now a "lock."

There are similar arguments being made by newspaper columnists, and by beat writers (and on blogs) based in Seattle ... and Boston ... and New York ... and Oakland.

And yes, right here in Toronto. Where ultimately, finally, a split vote among several big-name candidates is precisely -- to coin a phrase -- "Why Roy Halladay Won't Win the 2003 Cy Young Award."
Cy Halladay? Baker, Griffin Offer Thoughts | 15 comments | Create New Account
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
Coach - Wednesday, September 24 2003 @ 10:17 AM EDT (#14075) #
Welcome back, Mick.

And no, I haven't been "channeling Dionne Warwick," it is Casey Stengel who whispers in my ear from time to time. I apply the wisdom of the Ol' Perfesser's favourite, one Lawrence Berra, when I occasionally observe a lot by watching.

As to the Halladay "debate," it's a shame that none of the other candidates will be denied a fifth consecutive complete game (and a chance at a club record for victories) by a guy who failed umpiring school three times. I didn't see that coming.
_Mick - Wednesday, September 24 2003 @ 02:00 PM EDT (#14076) #
Some other folks are starting to weigh in ... getting back to the true origins of blogging, let's take a look.

King Kaufman: Tim Hudson. ("Pitching victories, a highly overrated stat, weigh heavily in the Cy Young voting, so Roy Halladay of the Blue Jays (21-7, 3.22), Jamie Moyer of the Mariners (20-7, 3.27) and Esteban Loaiza of the White Sox (19-9, 2.92) all have their supporters, but Hudson and Martinez have outpitched all of them.") Note: why not mention Pettitte in the victories recap?

Fox Sports/The Sporting News: Roy Halladay. ("Up until a couple of weeks ago, we thought Loaiza was going to be a lock. But look at Halladay's September.") Notes: Same argument as Baker. Also, please ... Pettitte ninth? This is clearly a "who deserves it?" list, not a "How will the voting go?" list.

Who else have you all been reading?
_Jonny German - Wednesday, September 24 2003 @ 02:31 PM EDT (#14077) #
Note: why not mention Pettitte in the victories recap?

Note: Pettite stinks.

That's right Mick. I'll give a nod to Mike Mussina, a good pitcher, though never good enough. But Andy Pettite is just a tired old lefthander whose only real talent is logging innings. From outside Yankee-dom, the only thing not boring about him is that he's a Yankee. Hint: he'd be better off just being a bore. You keep plugging him, we'll keep ignoring him.

Busy working on your follow up entry, "I was wrong on Halladay and the Cy Young"? You're not fooling me with your rhetoric, I know you know and you're just trying to get the collective dander up.
Coach - Wednesday, September 24 2003 @ 03:13 PM EDT (#14078) #
Who else have you all been reading?

Aaron Gleeman: Hudson.

"...Hudson has done his pitching in a good pitcher's ballpark and his quality of batters faced is slightly less than Halladay's. In the end however, I don't think Halladay's 24 inning advantage, along with park factors and batters faced differences, is enough to make up for Hudson's significantly better ERA."
_Andy Pettitte - Wednesday, September 24 2003 @ 03:26 PM EDT (#14079) #
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/stats?statsId=5331
At the tender age of 31 I'm washed up?

I'm going to post my career high for K/9 this year. Other than 1999, my OPS against has been in the low 700's for my entire career.
_Mick - Wednesday, September 24 2003 @ 03:45 PM EDT (#14080) #
Just for the record, I didn't post the Pettitte comment above ... and please keep in mind that I'm focusing on who WILL get votes, not who SHOULD get votes.

If Pettitte, and yes he is a personal favorite of mine as I have admitted before, gets another win this week and ends up tied for the AL lead in victories, many votes will go down Joe Morgan Boulevard and vote for the guy.

But -- someone said this recently, I forget who -- if it's true that Jeter's Yankees have tended to not win post-season awards, how did Clemens (who started 19-0 but didn't deserve the hardware) win two years ago?

Guidry, Lyle and Ford are actually the only other Yanks to win a Cy, though ... however, they are all lefties. And so is Pettitte. Therefore, QED, Pettitte will win this year. My logic professor in college would be so proud ...
Craig B - Wednesday, September 24 2003 @ 04:23 PM EDT (#14081) #
Therefore, QED, Pettitte will win this year. My logic professor in college would be so proud ...

Harrumph. As a former teacher of logic, I will tell you, Mr. Doherty, that "QED" goes *AFTER* the conclusion and not before it.

I want this paper cleaned up and resubmitted by Friday if you wish to receive credit for it.
_Jonny German - Wednesday, September 24 2003 @ 05:27 PM EDT (#14082) #
No offense intended Mick, I just felt like taking a pot shot at Pettite. He's always seemed like a real Joe Pitcher to me, though obviously his numbers have been better than average throughout his career. I think the root of it may be that he had the nerve to challenge Pat Hentgen for the Cy Young in 1996... I had similar otherwise unfounded negativity for Chuck Knoblauch for being compared to Alomar as the best second baseman back in the early 90s.

Who are these winners who post with somebody else's name? If your comment is so lame that you're afraid to put your name on it, it's not worth posting. Simple.
_Matthew Elmsli - Wednesday, September 24 2003 @ 06:18 PM EDT (#14083) #
Who are these winners who post with somebody else's name? If your comment is so lame that you're afraid to put your name on it, it's not worth posting. Simple.

I've done it, on occasion. My motivation was always comic effect and not fear, though. If the comment is innocuous enough I don't see how it's a problem.
_Not the real Jo - Thursday, September 25 2003 @ 03:41 AM EDT (#14084) #
Who are these winners who post with somebody else's name? If your comment is so lame that you're afraid to put your name on it, it's not worth posting. Simple.

Come on winners, let's hear your argument!

Only I, NTR Jonny German, will always post comments that are never lame. That is why I, NTR Jonny German, can declare such things to be true.

P.S. Has anyone seen my missing H?

P.P.S Don't mention the War...

:-)
Craig B - Thursday, September 25 2003 @ 08:51 AM EDT (#14085) #
I was thinking about deleting your comment, NTRJG, but I think I'll leave it up there instead - as a monument to your surpassing stupidity.

I'd like to warn people, though, that too many posts like that baiting others anonymously will get you banninated so quickly your *ass* will spin, not just your head.

I put up with enough of that crap at Primer, where I don't have a choice. Here, I get to play tinpot two-penny dictator, subject to the whims of Superpower Kent of course.
_Jonny German - Thursday, September 25 2003 @ 09:33 AM EDT (#14086) #
NTRJG, you're making a real good case-in-point.

Matthew Elmslie posts regularly, and he made an intelligent reply to my whining about anonymous posters. He and I can agree to disagree on the amount of comic effect gained by posting with something other than your usual handle vs. the accountability that goes with putting your reputation behind what you're saying. My opinion is that the Box provides plenty of humour without those type of comments, and that they add more noise than they're worth.

"Not the real Jonny German", to the best of my knowledge, has never before made a comment in the Box. I can't agree to disagree with you, because I have no idea who you are, and you haven't established that you've got a brain in your head. Why are you hiding behind an anonymous handle? I can only guess, but I for one wouldn't want to be associated with:

a) Not recognizing trash-talking when you see it. Let me explain it clearly for you: I don't actually believe that Andy Pettite stinks. I ripped him up because Mick is a Yankee fan and I don't believe that Mick actually thinks Roy won't win the Cy.

b) Making blind assumptions. My name is Jonathan. When I shorten it, it becomes Jon or Jonny - why would I add an H? The last time I was told that I didn't know how to spell my own name was by a classmate in Grade 2.

c) Making vague references which smack of complete ignorance at best. I'm going to leave it to you to explain why Germans today should feel personally responsible for the actions of a maniac who was dead before they were even born. If you can't explain that, I'll have to assume that you have an unfounded prejudice against Germans.

I've definitely made some lame comments, and I've been taken to task for several of them. I've also typed plenty of lame comments in the comment box, but realizing they were lame I deleted them - rather than posting them anonymously.
_Scott - Wednesday, October 01 2003 @ 02:27 AM EDT (#14087) #
Jamie Moyer is my pick for Cy Young. Why? Because unline Loaiza who faded in meaningful games, and Halladay who pitched like Cy Young in 6 meaningless September starts, Moyer was with Halladay step by step the entire season. The only difference is that during the month of September when his team was fading, Moyer was the lone rock that stepped up and delivered everytime he took the mound. Check the stats, Halladay keeps getting all of this hype for shutting down the D Rays and Indians in games that amounted to nothing, while Moyer battled to keep his team in the race. Throw out K's, an out is an out, and my vote would go to Moyer.

1)Moyer
2)Hudson
3)Halladay
4)Loaiza
5)Pedro
_benum - Wednesday, October 01 2003 @ 05:31 AM EDT (#14088) #
NTRJG, you're making a real good case-in-point. etc. etc.

The post was intended to be humurous in nature. Your point-by-point rebutal is somewhat disturbing (to me anyway).

Is there not an annoying level of hubris in this statement?

Who are these winners who post with somebody else's name? If your comment is so lame that you're afraid to put your name on it, it's not worth posting. Simple.

Simple?

"Not the real Jonny German", to the best of my knowledge, has never before made a comment in the Box.
Correct. You never came across as a pompous ass before though :-)

To respond to your points:
a) Yeah, I got that. Yikes. The post was an (intended) satircal response to one particular sentence (quoted above)

b) That would have been a simple (I admit child-like-simple) joke.

c) Holy Crap! I can't even respond to that one. Your last name is (presumably) German. Another lame joke was inserted (A Faulty Towers reference). From this you think that a demand of emotional reperations from Germanic peoples in Canada for WWII was demanded????

I've posted this one under my somewhat more known 'handle'. If you were offended by the NTRJG, I appologize. I still think your last two posts were poor (the first one in whining response to someone, not me, who sabermetrically bitch slapped you under the handle of Andy Pettite. You then proclaimed them to be a loser. Your second post (in response to mine as NTRJG) was an insecure screed against a post which simply teased you about the tone of your original rant)

At any rate, let's just move on.

P.S. I forgot that I posted that one and didn't notice your response until today.
_Jonny German - Wednesday, October 01 2003 @ 10:17 AM EDT (#14089) #
Benum, apologies for over-reacting. It's a knee-jerk of mine which I don't always manage to restrain. No I'm not German or of German descent, and I haven't seen Faulty Towers. I stand by my point that anonymous posts are generally lame. I'm not the only one who gets zero satisfaction out of the discussions at Primer because they are so full anonymous noise.

Apologies to the Box in general for my part in propagating this stupidity. I'm done.
Cy Halladay? Baker, Griffin Offer Thoughts | 15 comments | Create New Account
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.