The NL Cy Young Showdown
It’s almost that time of year again, when individual hardware is bestowed on the best players in each league, complete with the requisite hue and cry from constituencies exhorting the merits of their respective choices. In general, I tend to not get too worked up about such things, but will dip my toe into such discussions when my interest is piqued. Last year, I thought that Felix Hernandez deserved to win a close decision over Corey Kluber in the AL Cy Young race. This year, the NL Cy race is a particularly interesting one, a three-way dogfight among Dodgers Zack Greinke and Clayton Kershaw and Cub Jake Arrieta. Today, let’s utilize the batted-ball data at our disposal and try to make a call on this exciting race.
For the two Dodger aces, this is not their first Cy Young rodeo: Kershaw has won the award in three of the last four seasons, and Greinke won one with the Royals back in 2009. As for Arrieta, well, this is the first time he has even pitched enough innings to qualify for the ERA title. Kershaw, 27, and Greinke, 32, were slam-dunk, top-half-of-the-first-round high school blue chippers. Though Greinke has had some unique roadblocks along the way to perennial excellence, there likely aren’t many scouts who’ve watched either him or Kershaw from the beginning who are very surprised by what either has accomplished in the game.
Arrieta, 30, on the other hand, was a humble fifth-round Oriole draft pick out of TCU in 2007 who had previously been drafted out of high school and junior college. His progress through the minors was glacial compared to his Dodger peers, and he was eventually, famously dealt from the O’s to the Cubs along with Pedro Strop in exchange for Steve Clevenger and Scott Feldman in the summer of 2013. Now Clevenger has done a nice job for the Orioles of late, but I’d still surmise that they would like to have a do-over on this deal.
Each year, I compile my own ordered minor league lists of top full-season-league position player and starting pitcher prospects based on performance and age relative to league and level. These basically serve as follow lists, with the orders then tweaked based on traditional scouting methods. Greinke was the #1 starting pitcher prospect on my list in 2003; Kershaw ranked in the top 12 in both of his minor league campaigns, peaking at #9 following the 2008 season, before he mastered the strike zone. Both the eye test and performance-oriented metrics such as mine were in agreement; those two were sure things.
Arrieta? He qualified for my list twice, ranking #127 following the 2008 season, and #54 after 2009. This marked him as a pitcher with promise, possessing the potential to remain in a major league rotation, but the star power that he has shown this season would have seemed a bit farfetched back then. He showed flashes of brilliance as an Oriole, especially when posting a strong 109/35 strikeout-to-walk (K/BB) ratio in 114.2 innings in 2012 that was hidden behind a scary 6.20 ERA. Still, his career ERA was pushing 5.50 when he made the move west from Baltimore to Chicago. Almost immediately afterward, Arrieta’s potential was unlocked, with dueling out pitches, his sinker and slider, quickly emerging.
Let’s take a detailed look at the 2015 performance of these hurlers, through Tuesday night’s games, by examining their plate appearance frequency and production by ball-in-play (BIP) type data. First, the frequency information:
| FREQ – 2015 | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Arrieta | % | REL | PCT |
| K | 26.6% | 132 | 93 |
| BB | 6.0% | 80 | 39 |
| POP | 2.0% | 63 | 22 |
| FLY | 21.8% | 71 | 13 |
| LD | 22.0% | 105 | 68 |
| GB | 54.3% | 120 | 85 |
| ———— | ———— | ———– | ———– |
| Greinke | % | REL | PCT |
| K | 23.9% | 118 | 69 |
| BB | 4.5% | 60 | 13 |
| POP | 3.2% | 100 | 59 |
| FLY | 29.9% | 98 | 49 |
| LD | 19.9% | 95 | 35 |
| GB | 47.0% | 104 | 52 |
| ———— | ———— | ———– | ———– |
| Kershaw | % | REL | PCT |
| K | 33.1% | 164 | 99 |
| BB | 4.8% | 64 | 18 |
| POP | 2.7% | 84 | 39 |
| FLY | 25.1% | 82 | 30 |
| LD | 20.5% | 98 | 43 |
| GB | 51.7% | 114 | 74 |
Right off the top, it’s clearly apparent that these three are among the game’s K/BB royalty. All three have well above MLB average K and BB rates, a lethal combination. Arrieta routinely ran high BB rates in his Oriole auditions, but his control blossomed in 2014, when his K and BB rate percentile ranks of 96 and 44 were in the same ballpark as this year’s 93 and 39 marks. Greinke’s K rate percentile rank of 69 is actually quite low for him, narrowly better than his 2010 career low of 68, though his BB rate percentile rank of 13 also nearly matches his career low of 11 in 2009. As for Kershaw, he has never had a seasonal K rate percentile rank below 93, and this is his second straight season with a MLB-leading K rate and percentile rank of 99. After struggling with his control early in his career, Kershaw’s 2015 BB rate percentile rank of 18 puts him on track for his fourth season at 20 or better.
Prior to this season, Arrieta never really had a defined batted-ball tendency of any type, but he has emerged as an elite grounder generator in 2015. His grounder percentile rank of 85 places him near the top of the NL. Interestingly, Arrieta has broken through this year despite a fairly high line drive rate (68 liner rate percentile rank). Liner rates fluctuate more so than those of other BIP types, so one might expect some positive regression in the future. One word of caution, however: he has posted liner percentile ranks of 66 or higher in four of his last five MLB seasons. Might he actually be one of the relatively few hurlers who actually has a propensity for giving up liners? I wouldn’t bet on it, but it’s something to keep in mind moving forward.
Speaking of guys who give up liners, Greinke’s 2015 liner rate percentile rank of 35 actually represents a career low, by far. He actually allowed an above league average liner rate each year from 2009 to -14, and has clocked in at 82 or higher in three of the last four seasons prior to 2015. This season could well be the outlier. Greinke has never posted an extreme BIP profile in any regard; he showed a slight grounder tendency in the 2010-12 time frame, but has been pretty neutral before and after.
Unlike Arrieta and Greinke, Kershaw has never allowed many line drives. His liner rate percentile rank has been below average in five of the last six seasons, and was in single digits in two of them. On top of that, Kershaw has at times shown the rarest of BIP frequency abilities: he has simultaneously induced high numbers of pop-ups and grounders. His pop-up percentile rank was above average each year from 2009-14, as was his grounder percentile rank from 2012 to -14. In 2015, his pop-up rate percentile rank has dropped to 39, while his grounder percentile rank is at 74, matching its 2014 level. Still, this is an elite profile.
Frequency rates can only tell us so much; to fill out the rest of the picture, let’s get a read on the authority level allowed by each pitcher by examining their production by BIP type data:
| PROD – 2015 | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Arrieta | AVG | OBP | SLG | REL PRD | ADJ PRD | ACT ERA | CALC ERA | FIP | TRU ERA |
| FLY | 0.232 | 0.580 | 136 | 71 | |||||
| LD | 0.542 | 0.808 | 67 | 90 | |||||
| GB | 0.185 | 0.218 | 57 | 83 | |||||
| ALL BIP | 0.269 | 0.404 | 70 | 81 | |||||
| ALL PA | 0.192 | 0.241 | 0.289 | 56 | 64 | 1.99 | 2.17 | 2.52 | 2.46 |
| ———— | ———— | ———– | ———– | ———– | ———– | ———– | ———– | ———– | ———– |
| Greinke | AVG | OBP | SLG | REL PRD | ADJ PRD | ACT ERA | CALC ERA | FIP | TRU ERA |
| FLY | 0.100 | 0.250 | 25 | 47 | |||||
| LD | 0.572 | 0.890 | 78 | 99 | |||||
| GB | 0.196 | 0.217 | 61 | 94 | |||||
| ALL BIP | 0.253 | 0.368 | 60 | 82 | |||||
| ALL PA | 0.189 | 0.226 | 0.275 | 50 | 66 | 1.61 | 1.93 | 2.69 | 2.56 |
| ———— | ———— | ———– | ———– | ———– | ———– | ———– | ———– | ———– | ———– |
| Kershaw | AVG | OBP | SLG | REL PRD | ADJ PRD | ACT ERA | CALC ERA | FIP | TRU ERA |
| FLY | 0.121 | 0.397 | 52 | 44 | |||||
| LD | 0.596 | 0.869 | 80 | 93 | |||||
| GB | 0.225 | 0.246 | 79 | 79 | |||||
| ALL BIP | 0.299 | 0.442 | 85 | 90 | |||||
| ALL PA | 0.195 | 0.233 | 0.287 | 54 | 57 | 2.12 | 2.07 | 2.10 | 2.19 |
The actual production allowed on each BIP type is indicated in the batting average (AVG) and slugging (SLG) columns, and is converted to run values and compared to MLB average in the REL PRD column. That figure is then adjusted for context, such as home park, team defense, luck, etc., in the ADJ PRD column. For the purposes of this exercise, sacrifice hits (SH) and flies (SF) are included as outs and hit by pitchers (HBP) are excluded from the on-base percentage (OBP) calculation.
You’ll notice the preponderance of numbers under 100 (league average) in the REL PRD (Unadjusted Contact Score) and ADJ PRD (Adjusted Contact Score) columns: specifically, every single number except Arrieta’s fly ball Unadjusted Contact Score. Not only are these guys K/BB aces possessing varying levels of BIP frequency excellence, they also suppress batted-ball authority to a fairly significant level.
Arrieta has actually been quite unlucky on fly balls this season; his 136 Unadjusted Contact Score is adjusted way down to 71 for context. Not only does he induce tons of grounders, they are also hit quite a bit more weakly than league average, though his 57 grounder Unadjusted Contact Score is marked up to 83 once adjusted for context. His overall Adjusted Contact Score of 81 on all BIP is narrowly the best among the three hurlers.
The most eye-catching item on Greinke’s line is his absolute throttling of fly ball authority. He has allowed a mere .100 AVG-.250 SLG in the air this season, for a 25 Unadjusted Contact Score, which is still stellar at 47 after adjustment for context. His liner (99) and grounder (94) Adjusted Contact Scores are much more, well, human, but his overall Adjusted Contact Score of 82 ranks only fractionally behind Arrieta.
Kershaw’s fly ball authority suppression has been almost as good as Greinke’s, with Unadjusted and Adjusted Contact Scores of 52 and 44, respectively. In addition to running a high grounder rate, Kershaw has also allowed weaker grounder authority than either of his peers (79 Adjusted Contact Score). His overall Adjusted Contact Score of 90 is a bit higher than theirs, in truth in large part to the inclusion of the actual results of batted balls that didn’t register on StatCast, on which he allowed more damage than either other pitcher.
Let’s add back the Ks and BBs to the context-adjusted BIP data and see where we are. Kershaw leads the pack with a 2.19 “tru” ERA, followed by Arrieta at 2.46 and Greinke at 2.56. That’s the order my gut would have placed them in, as well. In this particular instance, FIP has it pretty much pegged, though the race gets a little closer once Arrieta and Greinke’s slight BIP authority data advantage is factored in. There are still a few starts to go, but Kershaw’s lead is likely to hold up.
In any event, this is a race to remember, including two of the game’s recent greats, one (Kershaw) at the apex of his powers, and another (Greinke) showing slight attrition in his K rate and a heavy reliance on unsustainably extreme levels of fly ball authority suppression (factors which point to likely near-term decline). They’re joined by Arrieta, a late bloomer whose skill set is very, very real. If he can eliminate his liner rate weak spot, he could get even better moving forward. Let’s enjoy the show down the stretch, and into the postseason.
I’d give Greinke the Cy Young even though I think the evidence once again indicates Kershaw is the best pitcher on the planet.
Run prevention uber alles.
Agreed, even though I’m sure it is an unpopular opinion on a site like fangraphs.
Greinke and Kershaw have both had great years, and in that case I’d prefer the tiebreaker be ERA (what actually happened) and not FIP (their projected ERA), especially since they’re on the same team.
FIP is what actually happened, though.
FIP is what happened… Except for all the balls that were actually hit but not HRs. Those are pretty important it turns out.
Given that we don’t know how to assign responsibility for those, giving the pitcher 100% responsibility is exactly as wrong as giving him 0%.
Which is to say your rationale for preferring ERA is incoherent.
are you high
The fact that both Greinke and Kershaw pitch for the same team means, to me at least, that it is okay to use run prevention as your yardstick, since you can (mostly) take out the variable of how much of the run prevention was due to the team defense.
This is simply not true. Defense from game to game is incredibly variable. A higher proportion of great plays could have been made when Greinke has been on the mound.
Re: Table…
I find if hard to believe that the defensive abilities and performance varied *that* much between Kershaw’s and Grienke’s starts. Dunno the lineup and or matchup differences in their starts, but I find it only mildly plausible that there is anything more than a passing difference.
FIP also controls for the placement of BIP and luck, not just the defense behind them.
FIP is not “projected ERA”.
I don’t see Arrieta’s case, at least right now. His only real advantage over Kershaw is a slightly better ERA; but if you are such a huge ERA guy, you’d have to go with Greinke instead.
Of course, reality is different, and his W/L record and the fact that there is one of him and two Dodgers might allow his to swoop in and take it.
I think it should go Kershaw, Arrieta, Greinke.
To say that Arrieta doesn’t have a case is to say that no one other than Kershaw does. Because other than the ERA and BB Greinke is lesser than Arrieta.
Point strikes me as more: Kershaw has the advanced metrics on his side, Greinke has the old school metrics on his side. Arrieta’s not first in either, so there’s no case to be made for him from either POV.
Best case for Arrieta I see: gets old school love for most Ws; voters see sub-2.00 as a milestone and don’t differentiate from there (even though Kershaw is closer to Arrieta than Arrieta is to Greinke); voters put special emphasis on the no-hitter; and they like that he’s the most valuable player on a team that people are rooting for. None of which are particularly hard-headed, but aggregate opinions rarely are.
You’re probably right on the “don’t see a case for Arrieta” thing. Didn’t think of it like that.
Arrieta has given up 9 runs in the 2nd half. Is it possible that voters see the historic 2nd half (and no slouch 1st half) and vote Arrieta on the strength of a huge finish and pennant race results?
I think Kershaw gets it, but Arrieta and Greinke are more than deserving of the award. In any other year, either would be the best pitcher in the league.
Also, holy crap, Kershaw is only 28?!
*only 27
Ah, thanks. I was going off the age listed in the article.
No way Kershaw gets it. The other 2 have ERA’s below 2 and Greinke is 17-3 or something while Kershaw “only” has 14 wins.
It’ll probably be Greinke unless the 2 Dodgers’ votes get split, in which case Arrieta wins narrowly.
Kershaw’s the best and probably deserves to win, but voters won’t pick him.
*only 27
Greinke has a 1.68 ERA. The race isn’t going to be close.
Idk Bartolo Colon won in 2005 with an ERA 60 points higher than Santana. I think it’s going to be fairly close.
2005 was 10 years ago.
Also, Greinke has the best W-L% of the three, by a significant amount, and the second highest rWAR (which is the version most of the voters who care about WAR use, since it’s on ESPN) in baseball, after Harper.
Whether or not it should be close, it won’t be.
The person with the lower ERA is going to win 9 out of 10 times. I agree.
He also has a 41 RA9- per B-Ref (with defense taken out), to Arrieta’s 52 and Kershaw’s 58.
And the fewest losses, for voters who care about that crap.
Greinke’s gonna win in a landslide.
*only 27
This. Its going to be a short discussion that starts with Greinke posting the lowest ERA in so and so many years and that is going to be it. All 3 have been excellent, but all the analysis isn’t going to overcome a good narrative, particularly when he is deserving of recognition.
Typo in your table — you list FIP for Greinke and Kershaw as CALC ERA.
Great breakdown.
Really informative breakdown. In a perfect world where voters base their vote solely on the available data I think Kershaw would win. Unfortunately we do not live in that world, as most of the Pundits have been pegging the Cy Young as Greinke’s to lose (and unfathomably, debating whether he should get the MVP) and have lately discussed whether Arrieta’s surge has put him ahead of Greinke. It feels like Kershaw would have had to really distance himself from the pack this year in order to win again.
If you deem that an MVP must come from a playoff team, which I can’t stand but hey a lot of people do, then Greinke is a totally fine choice. Using either type of WAR gives either Greinke or Kershaw as the most valuable player on a playoff team.
I think Greinke and Kershaw cancel each other out in the MVP race, because how could either be Most Valuable in the league when it’s hard to choose which is most valuable to the Dodgers? Also, Harper is having such a huge season, usually a pitcher doesn’t get it when there is an obvious choice among hitters.
That being said, I’m voting for Cespedes. Let’s Go Mets!
Oh for the days when Max Scherzer was a Cy Young lock *sniff*
It’s funny – I get the feeling Kershaw is approaching that same place Bonds or Pujols were at with the MVP award (or LBJ or Jordan in the NBA) where people are almost just looking for excuses not to give him the award. I mean the guy leads in WAR by a good amount, leads in FIP by a lot, leads in xFIP by even more than that, leads in K/9 and K% by a LOT, is 5th or 6th in BB/9 and BB% which means he is 2nd only to Scherzer in K/BB. He is even 8th in HR/9. He leads the league in IP. He’s 2nd in WHIP and OPS against. He even controls the running game and is 6th in CS%. He’s 3rd in QS% if that;s your thing.
Greinke and Arrieta can hang with him in some of these but not in all of them and rankings don’t necessarily do it justice because he leads by a LOT in several of these categories. There simply is not a good statistical argument against Kershaw.
Even if Kershaw wasn’t Kershaw, he would still lose this award to Greinke. The voter’s preferences are pretty clear, and Greinke’s ridiculous ERA is enough for them. If anything I think his status may help him. It seems like most people still recognize that he’s the best pitcher in baseball, and that might be enough to push him into second place.
The good argument for Greinke is that post season awards are for what DID happen, not what should have happened. Its one thing to cite something like wins, but I have no issue with ERA being used in Award decision making. Like it or not ERA is a statistical argument for Greinke and this type of thing does not require FIP or better predictive measures.
I’m a Cubs fan, I think Grienke will in it, Arrieta could win it, and Kershaw should win it… but it doesn’t matter who does win it, it’s pretty clear that Kershaw has been and still is the best pitcher in the game. He’s followed up a historic season with one just as good and doesn’t seem to be slowing down. I know people here appreciate him… I hope our fellow fans enjoy what he’s doing as well. This is Koufax’s peak that we’re seeing… and Kershaw hasn’t been abused. It sucks that he’s had a couple of rough innings in the playoffs, because people should be in awe of what they’re seeing.
Why look at batted ball data for this award? Runs and wins are what it really boils down to, and even if ERA or wOBA against contain a large element of luck, they are equal to what did happen in a game even if they don’t measure “true talent.”
When we’re making projections about what will happen in the future, then these peripheral stats are really important and useful, but if we are looking retrospectively, as awards do, then what really matters is “how many runs/base runners did a pitcher allow?”
Then you’d probably prefer rWAR from Baseball Reference, which has Grienke leading NL pitchers with 8.4 rWAR, comfortably ahead of both Arreita (7.5) and Kershaw (6.6).
He, and the vast majority of awards voters.
ERA makes Greinke and Arrieta seem closer than they really are, too. Arrieta’s allowed 7 unearned runs, giving him a 2.26 RA9 to Greinke’s 1.70.
Pitchers don’t allow runs/base runners.
Teams allow runs/base runners.
Wait a minute. You’re making the argument that defense matters. That’s crazy talk!
Yea you’re absolutely right. So perhaps FIP works better. But I stand by my original point that what actually happened is more important than what should have happened when it comes to awards voting.
Yup. Regardless of whether we’re pretending that pitchers have no control over quality of contact, the voters don’t.
Forget this idea of what “should have happened”. That’s not what FIP is. That’s not what anyone is talking about.
FIP is what happened. It’s just not *all* of what happened: it’s only what we are certain the pitcher was exclusively responsible for.
ERA is all of what happened – but that includes team performance in an individual metric. It’s noisy and imprecise.
Definitely understand what FIP is, and the fact that it’s not “all” of what happened is precisely why it’s not fit for a retrospective award. Just because a pitcher doesn’t control *all* of an easy 2-hopper to 2B, doesn’t mean that he had *no* part in it, and it fact he had *most* of it. You could put 1000 different schlubs at second and the out would be recorded, because of the weak contact that these 3 aces got. This is still a sport and those non-FIP outs are real and important in the act of winning a baseball game. Keep FIP in the prediction business, not the description business.
It’s not about what should have happened vs. what did happen … but rather who is primarily responsible for that event.
Putting all of the hits allowed (or none of them) on the pitcher is like blaming all walks (or no walks) on the catcher.
The key/trick, then, is finding a way to examine the situations and assign a “primary responsible” value and then being able to compare sums of values to the average or “replacement level value”.
There’s a high level of certainty implied in that statement, and I do not agree with that high of a level of certainty in FIP and what the pitcher is “exclusively” responsible for.
How do people on fangraphs keep saying things like this.
*Teams* allow baserunners; that’s the issue. It’s an individual award for individual performance. Incorporating team performance necessarily reduces the precision of the measure. FIP is excluding team performance.
While I personally would it count it towards cy young consideration, if we count hitting WAR Bumgarner is in the conversation. I think Dave Cameron was leaning towards counting it.
Total War (Fangraphs)
Kershaw 7.4
Bumgarner 6.4
Arrieta 6.3
Greinke 6.1
Whether you want to count hitting towards Cy Young or not, its does obviously matter for value/wins added. Its interesting because Bumgarners name doesn’t really come up with the other guys listed in the conversation of best pitchers, even for advanced metric guys….and they are right if you just look at pitching. However in terms of overall helping his team win Bumgarner is very much in the conversation and is technically number 2 in the NL (still a ways behind Kershaw).
sorry first line meant to say “While I personally wouldn’t count it…”
I think Cy Young should be strictly pitching, but pitcher’s hitting should count towards MVP voting as he is adding value with his bat, but fielding and holding runners should count as well.
He was probably talking about Greinke, who has 2 HR & .5 WAR on offense.
Dave was just talking about whether in general he should count hitting stats for cy young. http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/on-the-cy-young-and-pitcher-hitting/
If you read the article he is leaning towards counting them. I don’t see how it could ever cause Bumgarner to get a first place vote for CY Young considering fWar has Kershaw so far ahead and rWar has Greinke so far ahead that Bumgarners hitting doesn’t really come close to making up for that. However, counting hitting could definitely put Bumgarger in your top 5 where as if you didn’t count hitting he wouldn’t be.
Great article. I assume Greinke gets downgraded for clutch? A reasonable assumption, although his clutch index has averaged a shade under 0.5 during his career (only two years out of 12 at 0.00 or less).
Are people forgetting the Kluber/Hernandez conversation last year? Didn’t a bunch of writers come out afterwards explaining their choice of Kluber by placing more weight on his K/BB numbers rather than Felix’s better ERA?
Greinke is probably still the favorite right now but I don’t think it’s nearly as forgone a conclusion as a lot of people think.
BTW, another thought – I’m really liking the comparison to a Johnson/Schilling 2001 with Kershaw/Greinke. Unit was amazing which makes some people forget how good Schilling was then. ALso remember that Unit had some serious doubters about his post-season cred after some bad outings earlier in his career. I could totally see Kershaw/Greinke carrying the Dodgers through the playoffs. . . .
Not that they should, but I wonder if CY voters will take into account Arrieta’s late-season success during the Cubs’ playoff push: 0.43 ERA in August, 0.75 in September so far.
I pointed that out in regards to Wainwright vs. Lincecum some years back.
Keep a heads up, FG commenters in general don’t give any weight to such thing.
Regarding Kluber/Hernandez-
It’s one thing to have a debate between 2.14 and 2.44 ERA’s- and this year with Greinke/Kershaw where it’s 1.61 and 2.12.
I just think especially if Greinke got it down to 1.55 or lower- it’s going to be awfully tough to keep him from winning.
As you show, based on the BIP data, Arrieta probably belongs in third place. But, if the voters give some weight to Arrieta’s performance as the Cubs stopper, he’ll get some bonus points. And it’s looking like he’ll get a high visibility start in a one-game playoff against the Pirates, which could sway some voters, who may lean toward the new kid on the block. Time will tell whether the is any movement in BIP data in the threesome’s last few starts.
Voting is done prior to the Wild Card Game, so that start won’t mean anything.
I could simply admit “my bad”, instead of lamely trying to claim that all the publicity Arrieta will get prior to the Wild Card game might give his candidacy a boost in some voters minds.
Arrieta is 29, not 30.
Kershaw has surrendered more runs than Greinke this year somehow, but there is something to be said about the way he utterly dominates lineups. Yes, Greinke dominates lineups, but Kershaw does something beyond that. He has games, lots of them, where he completely takes the bats out of his opponents’ hands. To me, that’s what makes him the best choice for Cy Young. It’s not just about the results to me, it’s about how the results were achieved.
No one in the game has that combination of greatest best games and consistency of performance that Kershaw does. Sale and Kluber are the only two who really match him in terms of single-game dominance potential, and Arrieta, Greinke, Keuchel, Gray, Scherzer, and Price are the only ones to compete with him in consistently pitching excellent games. No other pitcher has the same overlap between those two different types of elite Kershaw does. That’s what makes him the best.
Arrieta just went perfect through 6 against the Pirates. No runs in 7 innings. If you don’t think this vote will be close you’re wrong. Arrieta has more innings, more complete games. I’m not completely convinced that Greinke skipped his start at Coors field to protect his Cy Young. It’s between Arrieta and Greinke at this point. Offense bailed Kershaw out of a loss in Colorado. He’s out.
I thought research explained that the higher the talent of the pitcher the more consistency you wanted. Whereas with the lower quality pitcher you wanted more inconsistency. The logic being the talented pitcher’s consistent performance will very often win, whereas the lesser talented guy needs to “pitch his ass off” to be the reason his team wins (in general).
It kills me because when I hear fans say “He needs to be more consistent” what they really mean is “that guy needs to pitch better more often”, as if he’s capable of that and just chooses not to.
————————————–
FWIW
SP — bWAR + fWAR = tWAR
JA — 8.4 + 7.1 = 15.5
KC — 6.7 + 7.9 = 14.6
ZG — 8.7 + 7.9 = 14.3
Just another data point. I prefer to sum or average the two WARs rather than look at one or the other.