CHRIS CARPENTER DESERVES THE CY YOUNG AWARD BUT DOES BARTOLO COLON DESERVE HIS PRIZE?
Johan Santana should have won the AL's top billing for hurlers
It's hard to argue against Chris Carpenter winning the Cy Young Award. Even his competitors for the honor, Dontrelle Willis and Roger Clemens, would be deserving recipients.
However, a strong argument could be made that Bartolo Colon was not the best AL pitcher in 2005. Was he good? Yes. Was he great? Possibly. Was he the best? Not so much. The award should have been given to Johan Santana.
Yes, Bartolo Colon got 21 wins, impressive. But, he had great run support which is a significant determining factor when it comes to Wins. ERA is probably the best (but not the only) barometer of figuring out which starting pitcher (don't get me started on flame-throwing-one-inning-at-a-time relievers) deserves the Cy Young.
Compare the stats of Johan Sananta, Bartolo Colon and Colon's teammate Jarrod Washburn
ERA
Santana 2.87 (2nd in the AL)
Washburn 3.20 (4th)
Colon 3.48 (8th)
W-L
Santana 16-7 (Colon and Santana both started 33 games)
Washburn 8-8 (started 29 games)
Colon 21-8 (Colon had 1 more loss than Santana did)
RUN SUPPORT
Santana 4.70
Washburn 3.81
Colon 6.02 (probably the best reason why Colon had 13 more wins than Washburn)
WHIP (another great barometer)
Santana 0.97 (1st)
Washburn 1.33 (26th)
Colon 1.16 (3rd, Colon acquits himself well here, but Santana is the best!)
The numbers don't lie. Pitchers on mediocre teams get penalized because of the lack of wins. But no one can doubt that if Johan Santana was on the great Angels team, he would have won a lot more than 16 games. Who would you rather have as your ace, Santana or Colon? I thought so.
Johan Santana was far more deserving than Bartolo Colon of the 2005 American League Cy Young Award.
PS: Don't get me started on 2004 NL's Cy Young... Randy Johnson deserved it way way more than Roger Clemens!
It's hard to argue against Chris Carpenter winning the Cy Young Award. Even his competitors for the honor, Dontrelle Willis and Roger Clemens, would be deserving recipients.
However, a strong argument could be made that Bartolo Colon was not the best AL pitcher in 2005. Was he good? Yes. Was he great? Possibly. Was he the best? Not so much. The award should have been given to Johan Santana.
Yes, Bartolo Colon got 21 wins, impressive. But, he had great run support which is a significant determining factor when it comes to Wins. ERA is probably the best (but not the only) barometer of figuring out which starting pitcher (don't get me started on flame-throwing-one-inning-at-a-time relievers) deserves the Cy Young.
Compare the stats of Johan Sananta, Bartolo Colon and Colon's teammate Jarrod Washburn
ERA
Santana 2.87 (2nd in the AL)
Washburn 3.20 (4th)
Colon 3.48 (8th)
W-L
Santana 16-7 (Colon and Santana both started 33 games)
Washburn 8-8 (started 29 games)
Colon 21-8 (Colon had 1 more loss than Santana did)
RUN SUPPORT
Santana 4.70
Washburn 3.81
Colon 6.02 (probably the best reason why Colon had 13 more wins than Washburn)
WHIP (another great barometer)
Santana 0.97 (1st)
Washburn 1.33 (26th)
Colon 1.16 (3rd, Colon acquits himself well here, but Santana is the best!)
The numbers don't lie. Pitchers on mediocre teams get penalized because of the lack of wins. But no one can doubt that if Johan Santana was on the great Angels team, he would have won a lot more than 16 games. Who would you rather have as your ace, Santana or Colon? I thought so.
Johan Santana was far more deserving than Bartolo Colon of the 2005 American League Cy Young Award.
PS: Don't get me started on 2004 NL's Cy Young... Randy Johnson deserved it way way more than Roger Clemens!
Extra Innings: Baseball Crank examines previous league leaders in ERA.
posted by Mel Ott at 12:52 AM
<< Home