Has there ever been a Cy Young election like this?
There's Zack Greinke, a man with a Greg Maddux ERA (1.66). Doesn't Greinke have to win?
There's Jake Arrieta, a man who just had the greatest second half in the history of second halves. How could he not win?
And there's Clayton Kershaw, a man who just finished piling up 301 strikeouts. He's the best pitcher in baseball. He owns three Cy Youngs. Who would be crazy enough not to vote for him?
Three aces. Three historic seasons. One award. What could possibly go wrong?
You know those tests in school in which the correct answer is: "All of the above?" That's what this National League Cy Young election really is. Except for one minor catch.
When the results are announced Wednesday night, only one of these men can win. Which means many of you out there will be outraged, but that will be your inner fan talking. Rationally, this is a quiz with no wrong answers.
Three aces. Three historic seasons. Two studs who won't deserve to lose. That's not fair. But as we were saying, has there ever been a Cy Young election like this?
Only twice since the dawn of the modern Cy Young voting format (which began 45 years ago) have we had an election in which three different pitchers received more than five first-place votes apiece -- in 1998 and 2009. Those races were so tight that in each case, the pitcher with the most first-place votes didn't even win.
So will this be another three-headed free-for-all? It wouldn't be shocking. And when we re-examine the case for all three of these men, it's clear exactly why.
Zack Greinke
Led the league in: ERA (1.66), WHIP (0.84), Adjusted ERA-Plus (225), winning percentage (19-3, .864), quality starts (30) and Wins Above Replacement (9.3), according to the Baseball Reference formula.
His place in history: Greinke was the first pitcher with an ERA as low as 1.66 since Greg Maddux two decades ago. ... His 0.84 WHIP was the fourth-best in the entire live-ball era. ... And since baseball started handing out Cy Youngs in 1956, only two pitchers have had an ERA that low and a WHIP of 1.85 or better. One was Maddux in 1995. The other was Bob Gibson in his season of legend, 1968. They both won the Cy Young. Unanimously.
Why he'll win: If the question is, "Who did the best job of preventing the other team from scoring, start to finish?" the answer has to be Zack Greinke. Doesn't it? His ERA never began with a "2" after any start all season. His ERA for every month of the season (except August) was under 2.00. He spun a quality start in 30 of his 32 starts -- the third-highest percentage (93.8) in modern history. He never allowed more than 10 runs in any month. He never had a WHIP higher than 1.00 in any month. So basically, his case comes down to this: There was never a time when he wasn't great. That's what Cy Youngs are made of.
Why he won't win: We've seen a massive evolution in Cy Young voting over the past six years. So could that shift away from traditional stats hurt Greinke? Absolutely. Once, it would have been unthinkable to see a pitcher who went 19-3, with a 1.66 ERA, not win the Cy Young. Greinke did not lead the league in Fielding Independent Pitching. He finished fifth. He had the largest differential between his ERA and FIP (1.10 runs per game) of any pitcher in the NL. His batting average on balls in play (.229) was way below the league average -- and more than 50 points lower than Kershaw's in front of the same defense. So even though Greinke remains the favorite, those sabermetric indicators will, at the very least, make this a much tighter election than it would have been 10 years ago.
Jake Arrieta
Led the league in: Wins (22), home run stinginess (just 0.39 per nine innings), opponent batting average (.184), opponent slugging (.271), shutouts (tied, with three).
His place in history: OK, here we go. Arrieta's 0.75 ERA after the All-Star break was the lowest since the invention of All-Star breaks, which began in 1933. ... His 0.27 ERA and .132 opponent batting average over his final nine starts are unmatched by any pitcher in modern history over any span of nine starts, according to Elias Sports Bureau research. ... His 0.41 ERA from Aug. 1 on is also unmatched in modern history. ... His 0.86 ERA over his final 20 starts was the best by anyone since earned runs became an official stat more than a century ago. ... And, aw, you get the idea. This guy had, basically, the most dominating finish ever.
Why he'll win: Voters often vote according to what they saw last, as opposed to what they saw over six long months. Arrieta ought to sweep the voting among that crowd. Heck, over his final 17 starts, the Cubs went 16-1 and he hit as many home runs as he allowed (two). But even the big-picture voters should know this: Arrieta had a 1.77 ERA and 0.87 WHIP, allowed only 5.9 hits per nine innings and averaged more than a strikeout an inning. In the Cy Young era, just two other pitchers ever matched or beat those numbers in the same season: Sandy Koufax in 1965 and Pedro Martinez in 2000. They both won Cy Youngs. Yep, also unanimously.
Why he won't win: All right, let's just say it: The season started in April. It didn't start in mid-June. Or at the All-Star break. Or Aug. 1. And over the full season, Arrieta's ERA and WHIP still sat behind Greinke (barely), even though they're up there with the 10 best campaigns by anyone since the mound was lowered in 1969. Even the sabermetric leader board actually helps Kershaw more than it helps Arrieta, with just a couple of exceptions. So is it possible that Jake Arrieta just had the greatest season of any pitcher who didn't win a Cy Young award? It totally is.
Clayton Kershaw
Led the league in: Strikeouts (301), strikeouts per nine innings (11.64), innings pitched (232.2), shutouts (tied, with three), Wins Above Replacement (8.6) according to Fangraphs' calculations, and that spectacular FIP (1.99).
His place in history: Let's keep this simple. Here's the complete list of pitchers in the Cy Young era who rolled up 300 strikeouts and an ERA as low as Kershaw's (2.13) in the same season: Koufax (1963, '65 and '66), Pedro (1997 and '99), Steve Carlton (1972) and Vida Blue (1971). Guess what they all had in common? Right you are. Every one of those amazing seasons translated into a Cy Young trophy.
Why he'll win: If Kershaw had to compete with only himself, he'd be a lock. By that, we mean he has won the past two Cy Youngs by the combined margin of 59 first-place votes to 1, and you could argue he was at least as good -- maybe better -- compared with either of those two seasons. Best strikeout rate of his life. Lower opponent average. Identical opponent OPS. More quality starts. More shutouts. Yada yada yada. But, of course, this vote doesn't work that way. What we really need to determine is whether he was better than Greinke and Arrieta. And if you just hone in on the sabermetric categories that factor out elements a pitcher can't control, Kershaw looks better and better. The Fielding Independent Pitching numbers at Fangraphs say he was a stunning 77 points better than Greinke (2.76) and 36 better than Arrieta (2.35). If you go by xFIP, which carries a different weighting of home runs, Kershaw (2.09) lands at 52 points better than Arrieta (2.63) and more than a full run better than Greinke (3.22). And according to the Fangraphs Wins Above Replacement formula, Kershaw was worth 1.3 more wins than Arrieta and nearly three more than Greinke. So are voters ready to go that deep and ignore ERA as willingly as they now ignore wins? It's a good question.
Why he won't win: If Kershaw's case is built around strikeouts and new-age metrics, here's his problem: Do voters look at stats such as FIP and xFIP as measures of what did happen or what the metrics say should have happened? Kershaw's massive strikeout rate and unfortunate average on balls in play were real. But if xFIP is telling us Kershaw should have allowed a run fewer per game than Greinke -- after a season in which Greinke actually allowed a half-run per game fewer than Kershaw -- I'm not sure there are enough Cy Young voters ready to buy that. Because xFIP loves strikeouts and de-emphasizes home run rates for pitchers who aren't ordinarily gopherball-prone, it's almost inherently skewed toward Kershaw's strengths while softening the one area in which he struggled (at least by his standards) -- the long ball. So to win, he'd need an awful lot of voters who are all-in on his favorite metrics or voters who believe 301 strikeouts trump every other number on the stat sheet. Does that describe the Baseball Writers' Association of America you know and love?
So that's the field, ladies and gentlemen. It's pretty awesome. Almost awesome enough to make you root for a three-way tie. But sorry. That's not where this is heading. It's heading for jubilation for one of these men, heartbreak for the other two.
But look at it this way: No matter who wins, it's justice. And no matter who loses, it's injustice. Can't help that. Three aces. Three historic seasons. Only one award to be handed out. Has there ever been a Cy Young election like this?