Who Would Have Won the OTHER Cy Young Award?

[LouGehrig]

From 1956-1966, there was only one Cy Young Award given. Who would have won the other award if it had been given?

Some interesting conclusions.

http://baseballpiggies.blogspot.com/

[Baseball Guru]

I think the author is pretty much right on with his conclusions of who the "other" winner would have been...

[leecemark]

--I think he is probably right, except possibly the 1960 AL. Either of his choices could well have been the winner, but so could half a dozen other guys in an extremely weak field. The best pitcher in the league (and probably baseball) was Jim Bunning, who posted a 2.79 era in 252 IP (the top 3 guys in IP gave up nearly a run a game more and the era champ pitched 70 less innings). However, Bunning's 11-14 record was unlikely to win him the award.

[RuthMayBond]

I think the author is pretty much right on with his conclusions of who the "other" winner would have been...

I might disagree with almost every one
56-EWynn
58-Ford
59-Wilhelm
60-Bunning
61-O'Toole
62-Kaat
63-GPeters
64-Drysdale
65-SMcDowell

[Calif_Eagle]

Perhaps a poll or a year-by-year election among all interested Baseball Fever members is called for to settle the question ? Many of the years surely feature some very heated and close competition. And we all know the best pitcher in a given year doesnt always necessarily win the award (see 1981 Seaver 14-2 W-L vs. Valenzuela 13-7 W-L just as one possible example.) I noticed the list on the link often gave reasons to steer away from someone that might have been the highest profile candidate in a given year.

[LouGehrig]

It would be fascinating to go through 1967-2005 and see who would have won if there had been only ONE winner, as was the situation from 1956-1966.

How many Cy Young Awards would Clemens have won? And Randy Johnson?

The Marichal case is amazing. One of the greatest pitchers of all time never came close to winning a Cy Young Award.

[Baseball Guru]

I might disagree with almost every one
56-EWynn
58-Ford
59-Wilhelm
60-Bunning
61-O'Toole
62-Kaat
63-GPeters
64-Drysdale
65-SMcDowell

You'd pick Wynn over Score in "56"?

Identical records, identical WHIP but Score's hits to IP are gaudy.. He gave up 162 hits in 249 IP and struck out 263.... Wynn gave up 233 hits in 277 IP with 158 K's....

In 1958, I am confused... You think Ford should have won it over Turley? I was thinking this thread was more of who the pitcher in the other league would have won it... So it would have been a NL pitcher...

Same with "59"

Bunning in 1960? His overall #'s were good but he was 3 games under .500 and the rest of his overall #'s weren't gaudy enough to warrant a pitcher winning the Cy Young with a losing record over a guy that won over 20 games unless you are now referring to an AL pitcher... I just think there is some confusion here...

I still think Spahn was better than O'Toole in "61".

I also think Terry was better than Kaat in "62"...

I can agree on Peters over Ford in "63"

In "64" I guess you really couldn't go wrong with Koufax or Drysdale... Both had great seasons... Koufax's #'s based on his IP are great but Drysdale was a horse with over 300 IP...

"65" you McDowell had a very good season, epecially from an ERA standpoint but I'd still go with Mel who led the AL in IP and complete games and was 2nd in wins and shutouts..

I'd love to hear your arguements for the pitchers you choose...

[Baseball Guru]

The Marichal case is amazing. One of the greatest pitchers of all time never came close to winning a Cy Young Award.

His downfall was playing during the same time as Koufax, Gibson and Seaver

[RuthMayBond]

You'd pick Wynn over Score in "56"?

Identical records, identical WHIP but Score's hits to IP are gaudy.. He gave up 162 hits in 249 IP and struck out 263.... Wynn gave up 233 hits in 277 IP with 158 K's....

It's really close, and TB5 has Lemon over both of them

<In 1958, I am confused... You think Ford should have won it over Turley? I was thinking this thread was more of who the pitcher in the other league would have won it... So it would have been a NL pitcher...>

My bad, Spahn

<Same with "59">

My bad, SJones

<Bunning in 1960? His overall #'s were good but he was 3 games under .500 and the rest of his overall #'s weren't gaudy enough to warrant a pitcher winning the Cy Young with a losing record over a guy that won over 20 games unless you are now referring to an AL pitcher... I just think there is some confusion here...>

With you? Law won the NL CY so we're looking for the AL candidate. Bunning led the AL in ERA+ & was only 22 IP behind the IP leader.

<I still think Spahn was better than O'Toole in "61".>

Spahn only had a ten-IP advantage but O'Toole had a seven point ERA+ lead.

<"65" you McDowell had a very good season, epecially from an ERA standpoint but I'd still go with Mel who led the AL in IP and complete games and was 2nd in wins and shutouts..>

Stottlemyre 129 ERA+
McDowell 160 ERA+
Not even that close. Gotta stop looking at team stats.

[dgarza]

1965

Sandy Koufax was the best pick for the singular award and the NL award if given.

In the AL, I have Mel Stottlemyre only as good as Mudcat Grant (both tied no better than 3rd).
When looking to the award, I can only see 2 Cleveland pitchers who are mostly in the running. Sonny Siebert gets my 2nd place vote and Sam McDowell gets 1st place by almost a mile.

[DoubleX]

Perhaps a poll or a year-by-year election among all interested Baseball Fever members is called for to settle the question ? Many of the years surely feature some very heated and close competition. And we all know the best pitcher in a given year doesnt always necessarily win the award (see 1981 Seaver 14-2 W-L vs. Valenzuela 13-7 W-L just as one possible example.) I noticed the list on the link often gave reasons to steer away from someone that might have been the highest profile candidate in a given year.

In Valenzuela's defense, he actually did have a slightly lower ERA (2.48 to 2.54). Yeah Seaver had a better ERA+ (140 to 134), but it's not like the voters consider that, especially in 1981. A lower superficial ERA is what they care about. Valenzuela also had a better WHIP than Seaver and almost 100 more strikeouts than Seaver (Seaver didn't even break 90 despite pitching 167 innings). Valenzuela also had being an exciting rookie phenom and a winning LA Dodger team going for him, which is a bigger bonus than being old news and playing on a good team in Cincinnati, which is what Seaver was doing that year.

[RuthMayBond]

In Valenzuela's defense, he actually did have a slightly lower ERA (2.48 to 2.54). Yeah Seaver had a better ERA+ (140 to 134), but it's not like the voters consider that, especially in 1981. A lower superficial ERA is what they care about. Valenzuela also had a better WHIP than Seaver and almost 100 more strikeouts than Seaver (Seaver didn't even break 90 despite pitching 167 innings). Valenzuela also had being an exciting rookie phenom and a winning LA Dodger team going for him, which is a bigger bonus than being old news and playing on a good team in Cincinnati, which is what Seaver was doing that year.

And I don't have EITHER of them in '81

[DoubleX]

And I don't have EITHER of them in '81

Carlton or Ryan?

[RuthMayBond]

Carlton or Ryan?

The silent lefty

[DoubleX]

The silent lefty

I'd probably agree with that. If Ryan could have squeezed out 30 or so more innings, I might be persuaded to go for him.