Rivera>Cy Young????

[Lofunzo]

tongue.......I apologize for the mistake. I mixed up the previous year because he had the exact same IP.

It's all fixed now.

[thetongueofire]

tongue.......I apologize for the mistake. I mixed up the previous year because he had the exact same IP.

It's all fixed now.

no problemtito.

[Tavish]

As for Tavish's comment, there's some validity to that argument but since there was a precedent for awarding relievers the Cy Young there is absolutely no way they could overlook Gagne last year.

Sure they could have, they just choose not to. There is always time to set a new precedent, something along the lines of "You need to pitch alot more than 1 inning every other game to be considered the best pitcher. Work on your stamina for next season and try again. Here's your Rolaids award."

[AKhomebrewer]

Santana at #1 and Schilling at #2. After that, it really doesn't matter.

The Kegler rolls another strike.

I am willing to concede third place to Rivera, however.

[Registered_Guest]

Santana is more likely to win both the Cy Young and MVP awards than Rivera is to win the former.

[Rkiivs]

I think Joe Nathan deserves the Cy Young more than Rivera.

agree with all 3 points

Oh, I dunno. Let me get out of the way that I don't feel a closer should get this award.

But specifically to the above: can you tell me how Nathan is better than Rivera? I can give Nathan some props but they're both flip sides of the same coin. Some of Natan's stats are a little better but Rivera got the stat that counts the most: saves.

[thetongueofire]

Rivera has a 2.05 era while Nathan has 1.61. Rivera's also allowed a higher slug and more guys on base. he also has a much lesser K/9 (Nathan's 10.9 vs. Rivera's 7.7). and while it is true that Rivera has more saves, its cos the Yankees have given him more save opps. Rivera has also blown more saves than Nathan, two of them in important games agaisnt the Red Sox which is a strict no-no and the definition of anti-cluth if youre a Yankee. Nathan has converted a slightly higher percentage of his save opps. than Rivera and thats what counts. save opportunities depend mostly on the team and random luck.

[Rkiivs]

Alright, the save opps is a neutral point that we'll throw out as a non-factor since it's outside the closer's control.

I don't think it's fair to use a one team sample either. The Twinkies didn't face the Bosox as many times as the Yanks. (What closer is not getting dismantled by the Sox bats this year, ouch.)

I quickly counted (so apologies if the numbers are wrong as I'm in the middle of work) and I see that Nathan had more BS result in losses for the team than Rivera (only by 1 loss so it's a minor quibble).

Thanks for the response, ttof. When I get home from work I'll crunch some numbers to see how they actually measure up.

[thetongueofire]

no problem. i concede theyre real close. but the point is that if someone is going to consider Rivera for the Cy Young, i could make just as good or even a better case for Nathan. just that closers and players in general in big markets get so much recognition while the small market guys go largely unnoticed.

and as for the Red Sox thing, i know its not fair to use just that, but for a Yankee closer thats a big deal. but if youre suggesting that Rivera has had to face tougher opposition, Nathan's dips is still half a point lower than Rivera's.

[mikcou]

Santana at #1 and Schilling at #2. After that, it really doesn't matter.

The Kegler rolls another strike.

I am willing to concede third place to Rivera, however.

I agree here as well