Palodios

Wins has been used as a major statistic since the creation of the award, it is not a new thing. Its incredibly rare for a bad pitcher to have a very good winning season anyway-- remember when Dice-k went 18-3, and everyone was saying that he was one of the statistically worst pitchers to ever do that? Even with his low inning count, he still had very very few ER. He has recently been the shining example of why wins are a bad statistic, but I value Dice-k a lot more than other people, because lucky or not, when he's on the mound, the team usually gets a win and that's the only thing I care about. I also think his inconsistent innings (getting out of 30 minute bases loaded situations, mixed with five minute 1-2-3 innings) disrupts the opposing pitcher, which is why he gets such great run support. Is Wins an oversimplified statistic? Yes. Does it give a complete picture of how good a pitcher is? No. But there is no reason to disregard a statistic that is so explicitly tied in with how the team performs while the pitcher is on the mound.

Whether or not you view the award as "MVP for pitchers" or not is irrelevant. That's how the writers view it. I am not suggesting that advanced statistics do not tell you things about the pitcher. They tell you everything. I am simply emphasizing the point that in the grand scheme of things, they do not matter to the team. We've become obsessed with individual records, but this is still a team sport. A loss is a loss, and when it comes to the value of the pitcher, it does not matter how it happens.

In actuality, the stat junkies seriously undervalue wins. I get attacked on all sides when I even suggest that the only stats that matter are wins, and to a lesser extent runs scored, and innings pitched. The Cy Young is widely viewed by writers as the counterpart of the MVP for pitching. Most valuable pitcher, essentially. I think with the steroid era, we lost the idea that baseball is a pitcher's game. It is the pitcher's game to win, not the batters. How can a pitcher be considered valuable if the team loses when he's on the mound? This award is not about who tried the hardest, its about who succeeded.

It has trouble dealing with relief pitching, but I'm assuming the formula is based on a series of trends from previous Cy Young winners, and since the precedents of winning relief pitchers are very short and few. Its not perfect, but its not flawed as you might think, pretty much all the right pitchers are in there, except for Lee.

Maybe they realized JJ is available, and they wanted a more Putsy closer?

Espn's Cy Young Predictor has him at second right now. Its usually very good, although I think as writers have begun to devalue wins, it isn't quite as accurate as in year's past. http://espn.go.com/mlb/features/cyyoung

The concern I have is... will it be worth having an injured Pedroia over a hot Lowrie? No pun intended haha.

Home/away by year 2010 1.060/.800 2009 .902/.857 2008 .835/.887 2007 .837 .890 I don't think its a make-or-break it factor, especially since Fenway is a pretty good hitter's park anyway.

Mr. Glass... from Unbreakable, right? I don't remember the character.

What is the point of posting stats from his first two years? I don't think you're looking at the big picture of his career. Ignore his first two seasons, and his OPS by season was .825, .711, .863, .861, .879, .924. How can you obsess over two seasons where he played less than 50 AB each?

There are times you simply have to applaud your opponent. Clap clap Torii Hunter, clap clap.

I don't think I'd call it foolish. In all honesty, most Red Sox fans aren't even that optimistic.

Yeah, I wasn't sure since he hasn't played in a few games if he's okay or not.

Are Arod/Swisher DTD, or are they playing tonite?

Two base runners, and somehow Buchholz only threw 7 pitches, no runs. Weaver will have to be tough to get through them tonite. And does anyone know the availability of Lowrie? I know that with Pedroia back, he has no spot in the lineup today, but I'm just curious.

Wow, the pitch zone showed where Buch is hitting, and he got both the top and bottom corners, pretty much right on there, and Abreau still crushed that ball. Even if a run scores here, Buchholz is still looking solid.

Youk started at first base in Boston with a .810 OPS in 2006. His first three years he hit .780, .805 and .810 at a big bat position. Werth played 40 games in his first two seasons, and after that he had only one sub .800 OPS season. I don't really think that's a lot of time to be inconsistent.

Other great news! Patterson is gone, and Nava's coming! This offense will be pounding again!

I think its looking like Werth may be closer to the Sox's agenda right now, actually. Between Crawford and the 6 outfielders the team has, only Mcdonald and Cameron are righties. Some are wary of Werth, but he has strung together 4 great seasons, with great RHH power, and decent speed. Plus he'll likely be a bit cheaper, replace Drew in RF well, and the team has already expressed a good amount of interest toward him. Crawford and Ellsbury fill similar purposes, and will create a L-L matchup in the very beginning of the lineup, and displace the team's laser show MVP. For all purposes, I think Werth is much better suited for the team right now.

I think McDonald has earned himself the rights to be on a major league roster. He deserves to be a guaranteed 4th outfielder somewhere, but he has no shot at it here.

Do you really believe that between Ellsbury/Cameron/Drew, they're all going to be healthy next year? Even if the situation with Ellsbury is just a freak accident, and he'll be effective next season, the other two guys are incredibly frail. I want another outfielder that will play 140 games.