Dustin Pedroia is a wrap as Rookie of the Year [Merged - Mod]

[Nick Day]

Not unless he wears a hat.

And shaves.

[blwalks]

Here's his gamelog. Looks like he was up for the entire month of April and then came back up in August for the remainder of the season, so, yeah, more than 45 days.

He was AL Rookie pitcher of the month this june, so I would assume he would qualify. His august callup was late in the Month, and the September days wouldn't count because of expanded rosters.

Aritcle

Also entertaining because of how much mets fans beat up on the guy.

[blumj]

And shaves.

If he shaves, he can get into the movies for half price.

[Nick Day]

If he shaves, he can get into the movies for half price.

but he'll also be denied getting into PG-13 movies

[Lucen]

I like baja chicken wraps.

Seriously, what does it mean that he's a wrap for the award?

[NyQuil]

Maybe he intended to write lock but was hungry?

[LuckyLopez]

Here's his gamelog. Looks like he was up for the entire month of April and then came back up in August for the remainder of the season, so, yeah, more than 45 days.

It look like he spent a considerable amount of that time between April and August on the ML DL. Which I believe counts. So that's what would kill it for him, I think.

[YASS]

It look like he spent a considerable amount of that time between April and August on the ML DL. Which I believe counts. So that's what would kill it for him, I think.

If that was DL time, I believe you're right.

[LuckyLopez]

Yeah, he was put on the 15 and then shifted over to the 60. Some of that time was spent rehabbing in the minors but it looks like he used up his rookie eligibility on the DL.

[Dave Visbeck]

I've given this some thought. Here is a what if for Matsuzaka:

Seven more starts ... and from a Red Sox fan prospective -- the way I see it could go for him:

Aug 28 W
Sept 2 vs Balt W
Sept 7 @ Balt n/d
Sept 12 vs Tampa W
Sept 17 @ Toronto W
Sept 22 @ Tampa L
Sept 27 vs Min ..... the W to clinch

Matsuzaka 18-11
Does Matsuzaka win the award instead then? Especially if he wins that last start in August against someone?

[Jilali]

Matsuzaka 18-11
Does Matsuzaka win the award instead then? Especially if he wins that last start in August against someone?

Really, I think Matz is still the front runner right now. What he's doing seems more abnormal for rookie pitchers than what DP is doing compared to rookie infielders.

I hope I'm wrong because I think the writers should take it on themselves to boycott the ridiculous notion that Japanese veteran All-Stars are "rookies." Still, I think most of them play it by the rules, and I think most will still see Matz as the more impressive this year.

[Dave Visbeck]

Really, I think Matz is still the front runner right now. What he's doing seems more abnormal for rookie pitchers than what DP is doing compared to rookie infielders.

I hope I'm wrong because I think the writers should take it on themselves to boycott the ridiculous notion that Japanese veteran All-Stars are "rookies." Still, I think most of them play it by the rules, and I think most will still see Matz as the more impressive this year.

You know Jilali, I agree with what you say completely. Thinking back to Masanori Murakami -- who was the only one that maybe was a real rookie in a way -- by Japanese professional standards we've seen for the age of players when they get over here to play ... and the level they play at.

Murakami should of got some votes in his day and deserved them. Wonder where the Japanese press was then? Not the same for sure. New York writters were still a little PO'd maybe at the time when voting happened then? Still thinking about losing the New York teams to the Left Coast maybe?

Why the American writters aren't still the same makes me wonder about the modern press. Really really Liberal now maybe!

[NelsonMuntz]

Although I think it is ridiculous that Dice-K is considered a rookie, that is really not for the sportswriters to decide. As long as Matsuzaka is eligible for the award he should win it.

[Lucen]

Although I think it is ridiculous that Dice-K is considered a rookie, that is really not for the sportswriters to decide. As long as Matsuzaka is eligible for the award he should win it.

I agree. It's a shame he's considered a rookie. He really isn't.

[JeffWeaverFan]

Although I think it is ridiculous that Dice-K is considered a rookie, that is really not for the sportswriters to decide. As long as Matsuzaka is eligible for the award he should win it.

Matsuzaka: 3.76 ERA, 1.27 WHIP, 2.73 K/BB, 0.94 G/F - 26 starts, 26 games.

Jeremy Guthrie: 3.46 ERA, 1.13 WHIP, 2.81 K/BB, 1.20 G/F - 22 starts, 28 games.

It's not even close. Guthrie has been better. The only thing Matsuzaka has done better than Guthrie is he's pitched 16 more innings.

[JeffWeaverFan]

Really? Did you not even bother to look his minor league numbers up? In his MiL career he hit .308/.392/.453 He had one season where he hit below .300, and that was when he suffered a shoulder injury. Despite whatever people think of Pedroia and their view of his size and "tools" He has hit like this at every level of his career.

That's not .323 last I checked.

[JeffWeaverFan]

Camden Yards is a neutral park offensively. Guthrie is 28 years old (and his peripherals suggest that he's not a 3.44 era pitcher). I really can't see him winning the award

Just one last thing about his peripherals, they are better than Matsuzaka's.

[YASS]

That's not .323 last I checked.

It's ballpark, though, and there are hundreds of examples of players having substantially better ML numbers than they had in the minor leagues. It's really not rare at all.

[JeffWeaverFan]

It's ballpark, though, and there are hundreds of examples of players having substantially better ML numbers than they had in the minor leagues. It's really not rare at all.

I'd bet the house he won't be a .323 ML hitter for the rest of his career. I bet next year he'll go down to around .280 to be honest.

edit: By the way, this was just in reponse to someone saying that Guthrie's peripheral's don't match his ERA. My only point was that that doesn't matter - it's based on what you actually did, not on what you should have done.

[hunter05]

I'd bet the house he won't be a .323 ML hitter for the rest of his career. I bet next year he'll go down to around .280 to be honest.

Based on what? There is every reason to believe that Pedroia is a .300+ hitter.

[Lucen]

Matsuzaka: 3.76 ERA, 1.27 WHIP, 2.73 K/BB, 0.94 G/F - 26 starts, 26 games.

Jeremy Guthrie: 3.46 ERA, 1.13 WHIP, 2.81 K/BB, 1.20 G/F - 22 starts, 28 games.

It's not even close. Guthrie has been better. The only thing Matsuzaka has done better than Guthrie is he's pitched 16 more innings.

I'm sorry, but what?

Matsuzaka
K/9 9.11, fip 3.83, xfip 4.18, Pitching WS 13.5

Guthrie
K/9 6.10, fip 4.43, xfip 4.38 Pitching WS 12.2

Matsuzaka has done more than one thing better than Guthrie. And again, you're ignoring that almost all of Guthrie's success came before the All Star Break. Recent performance, whether you like it or not, is taken into account by the voters. It's human nature to have recent trends impact your impression of something.

You simply don't want to credit Matsuzaka as being better than Guthrie because he wears a B on his cap. And that's fine. It's a Yankees website, and Yankees bias is to be expected. But your attempt to paint this as a picture only a moron would see any other way but yours is kinda silly.

[JeffWeaverFan]

I'm sorry, but what?

Matsuzaka
K/9 9.11, fip 3.83, xfip 4.18, Pitching WS 13.5

Guthrie
K/9 6.10, fip 4.43, xfip 4.38 Pitching WS 12.2

Matsuzaka has done more than one thing better than Guthrie. And again, you're ignoring that almost all of Guthrie's success came before the All Star Break. Recent performance, whether you like it or not, is taken into account by the voters. It's human nature to have recent trends impact your impression of something.

You simply don't want to credit Matsuzaka as being better than Guthrie because he wears a B on his cap. And that's fine. It's a Yankees website, and Yankees bias is to be expected. But your attempt to paint this as a picture only a moron would see any other way but yours is kinda silly.

The difference in their K's is made up for the fact that Guthrie walks much less.

Guthrie has a better ERA, a better WHIP, a better K/BB, and a better G/F. And it isn't that close.

I don't care about the moronic way of how some sports writers vote. I am not arguing who will win the award, rather who should win the award. As I already said, the majority of these "experts" voted for Justin Morneau last year for the MVP, so it shows how much they know.

You simply don't want to look at the facts. Guthrie has allowed less runs per 9 innings than Matsuzaka. Guthrie has allowed less walks+hits per 9 innings than Matsuzaka. Last I checked, the way you judge if a pitcher has been better than another pitcher (not future success, just what they have done), would be to see how many runs, per 9 innings, the two pitchers have given up (as long as the innings are similar). Guthrie has clearly given up less.

I'm just not sure how you can be so sure that Matsuzaka has been better than Guthrie since, you know, he's given up more runs than Guthrie...

[Lucen]

You simply don't want to look at the facts. Guthrie has allowed less runs per 9 innings than Matsuzaka. Guthrie has allowed less walks+hits per 9 innings than Matsuzaka. Last I checked, the way you judge if a pitcher has been better than another pitcher (not future success, just what they have done), would be to see how many runs, per 9 innings, the two pitchers have given up (as long as the innings are similar). Guthrie has clearly given up less.

I'm just not sure how you can be so sure that Matsuzaka has been better than Guthrie since, you know, he's given up more runs than Guthrie...

First of all, the first part of my response was to prove your assertion that Matsuzaka only pitches more innings, and does nothing better to be false. I did that.

Second, if you're going to try and use ERA as the epitome of pitching stats, you're not worth arguing with. ERA is actually a pretty poor way to judge a pitcher. If I need to explain why to you, then I'm wasting my time.

[the_coach]

The dopey sportswriters didn't vote Matsui as the rookie of the year five years ago (after giving it to Ichiro a few years before) because he wasn't a true rookie...whatever that means...they all have an agenda.

[hunter05]

Judging a pitcher by how many hits they've given up isn't effective either.

[DjarDjar]

Second, if you're going to try and use ERA as the epitome of pitching stats, you're not worth arguing with. ERA is actually a pretty poor way to judge a pitcher.

Not really. It's a poor way to judge future performance, not so poor for judging what a pitcher has done. Of course you're better served with a combination of stats, but if you're looking for quick and dirty, not too many basic stats will give you as full a picture of a pitcher's performance than ERA.

And please, curb the condescention. It wasn't too long go that you were asking for help calculating ERA.

[Lucen]

Not really. It's a poor way to judge future performance, not so poor for judging what a pitcher has done. Of course you're better served with a combination of stats, but if you're looking for quick and dirty, not too many basic stats will give you as full a picture of a pitcher's performance than ERA.

And please, curb the condescention. It wasn't too long go that you were asking for help calculating ERA.

There's no condenscention there. But if he's not willing to look beyond, ERA, there's no reason to keep arguing with him. I brought up a couple of stats that are better ways to look at a pitcher than ERA... and that's the point. Basic stats don't really cut it.

And if anything, I'm an example of expanding your view beyond the "basic stats" when looking at baseball. So take a shot at me if you want, but I've gone from someone who didn't know how to calculate ERA to someone who understrands the short comings of that stat and many others. And that's my point... JeffWeaverFan needs to take some time and expand his horizons if he wants to discuss this topic in a way that has any real meaning.

[JeffWeaverFan]

First of all, the first part of my response was to prove your assertion that Matsuzaka only pitches more innings, and does nothing better to be false. I did that.

Second, if you're going to try and use ERA as the epitome of pitching stats, you're not worth arguing with. ERA is actually a pretty poor way to judge a pitcher. If I need to explain why to you, then I'm wasting my time.

When judging future performance or if a pitcher was lucky or unlucky, yes, ERA is a poor stat.

When judging what a pitcher actually did in a certain amount of time, and how much he helped his team, looking at his ERA and how many runs he gave up is a great way to look at it.

For example, lets take two pitchers at an extreme. Pitcher A threw 200 innings in the 2007 season and had a 1.95 ERA with a 4.00 K/9, a 3.00 BB/9 with an average, say, 1.20 G/F ratio. Pitcher B threw 200 innings in that same season and had a 4.6 ERA with a 9.00 K/9, a 3.00 BB/9, and a 1.20 G/F as well.

Pitcher A got extremely lucky while pitcher B got unlucky in terms of how many runs the pitchers gave up. For the future, I think we both would want Pitcher B. For that one 2007 season though, I think we would both want the pitcher that gave up less runs. Pitcher A, because he got lucky, was the more effective and much more valuable pitcher in that season.

Of course, this example doesn't make any sense with Matsuzaka and Guthrie. Guthrie has the better K/BB and Guthrie has the better G/F ratio. As I already stated, the fact that Matsuzaka K's more is negated by the fact that he walks much more. Going forward, his ability to miss bats is a great thing, but for this season, when comparing him to Guthrie, his walks discount his advantage in K's.

Fact is, for this season Guthrie has been the better pitcher. Not only has he given up less runs and has a better WHIP, but he also has an advantage on the more important stats (when looking for future success) like K/BB and G/F.

[Lucen]

When judging future performance or if a pitcher was lucky or unlucky, yes, ERA is a poor stat.

When judging what a pitcher actually did in a certain amount of time, and how much he helped his team, looking at his ERA and how many runs he gave up is a great way to look at it.

For example, lets take two pitchers at an extreme. Pitcher A threw 200 innings in the 2007 season and had a 1.95 ERA with a 4.00 K/9, a 3.00 BB/9 with an average, say, 1.20 G/F ratio. Pitcher B threw 200 innings in that same season and had a 4.6 ERA with a 9.00 K/9, a 3.00 BB/9, and a 1.20 G/F as well.

Pitcher A got extremely lucky while pitcher B got unlucky in terms of how many runs the pitchers gave up. For the future, I think we both would want Pitcher B. For that one 2007 season though, I think we would both want the pitcher that gave up less runs. Pitcher A, because he got lucky, was the more effective and much more valuable pitcher in that season.

Of course, this example doesn't make any sense with Matsuzaka and Guthrie. Guthrie has the better K/BB and Guthrie has the better G/F ratio. As I already stated, the fact that Matsuzaka K's more is negated by the fact that he walks much more. Going forward, his ability to miss bats is a great thing, but for this season, when comparing him to Guthrie, his walks discount his advantage in K's.

Fact is, for this season Guthrie has been the better pitcher. Not only has he given up less runs and has a better WHIP, but he also has an advantage on the more important stats (when looking for future success) like K/BB and G/F.

But being lucky isn't a skill, it's luck. ERA is not a great way to look at how a pitcher has performed. Fielding independant pitching stats like fip, xfip, dips are far better, and none of them show Guthrie to be the better pitcher.

ERA relies far too much on things the pitcher cannot control to be a great indicator of how a pitcher has performed. It's crude and out dated.

[JeffWeaverFan]

There's no condenscention there. But if he's not willing to look beyond, ERA, there's no reason to keep arguing with him. I brought up a couple of stats that are better ways to look at a pitcher than ERA... and that's the point. Basic stats don't really cut it.

And if anything, I'm an example of expanding your view beyond the "basic stats" when looking at baseball. So take a shot at me if you want, but I've gone from someone who didn't know how to calculate ERA to someone who understrands the short comings of that stat and many others. And that's my point... JeffWeaverFan needs to take some time and expand his horizons if he wants to discuss this topic in a way that has any real meaning.

Jesus Christ. It's amazing how you so quickly judge me when I probably have a thousand posts on this site that specifically point to "non basic" stats when judging pitchers. Given that you recently didn't know how to calculate ERA, I have had knowledge of these other stats for much longer than you have. So please don't try to "expand my horizons" when I know much more about the subject than you do.

To be honest, this post is quite humorous.

As DjarDjar stated, ERA is a poor way to judge future success. Nobody said otherwise. But, once again, when judging how much value a pitcher actually had for a specific time period, then yes, you should look at how many runs he gave up. That's the whole name of the game for a pitcher.

Just to explain this one more time to make sure you understand what I am saying: ERA is a terrible way to look at future success. There are tons of other stats that give a better indication of future success. That has NOTHING to do with who has been of more value for a certain season.

[JeffWeaverFan]

But being lucky isn't a skill, it's luck. ERA is not a great way to look at how a pitcher has performed. Fielding independant pitching stats like fip, xfip, dips are far better, and none of them show Guthrie to be the better pitcher.

ERA relies far too much on things the pitcher cannot control to be a great indicator of how a pitcher has performed. It's crude and out dated.

Cool. ERA also shows how many runs the pitcher has given up and thus, shows how much value that pitcher had for a certain time period. Given that Guthrie's K/BB and G/F are better than Matsuzaka's, it's not like he's getting all that lucky to have a better ERA.

[Lucen]

Cool. ERA also shows how many runs the pitcher has given up and thus, shows how much value that pitcher had for a certain time period. Given that Guthrie's K/BB and G/F are better than Matsuzaka's, it's not like he's getting all that lucky to have a better ERA.

Again, there are far better metrics to look at. I've pointed them out a couple of times now. All of them indicate Matsuzaka has had the better season. Your refusal to even acknowledge them is proof I was right when I said I'd be wasting my time here.

Cling to ERA if you want... but you're wrong.

[Prickly Pete]

VORP for rookie pitchers:

Matsuzaka: 41.6
Guthrie: 36.6
Bannister: 35.3
Okajima: 32.7

[YASS]

VORP for rookie pitchers:

Matsuzaka: 41.6
Guthrie: 36.6
Bannister: 35.3
Okajima: 32.7

Have we confirmed that Bannister is rookie-eligible?

[Prickly Pete]

Have we confirmed that Bannister is rookie-eligible?

Pretty sure he's not eligible for the Rookie of the Year award. BP just uses the innings cutoff, not the service time rule, to determine rookies for its purposes.

[LuckyLopez]

Guthrie isn't eligible either. Last season he was in the majors from Apr 22nd to May 16th (24 days), Jun 13th to June 20th (7), Aug 12th to 13th (1), and Sept 5th to 30th (25). That's 57 days by my math (but it was quick). He also had pitched in 7 games prior to 2006 so I'm pretty confident he's well over his service time.

[Nick Day]

The Sept. days don't count, as they're September Call up days. If he was there say, Aug. 31 and on, it would count, though

[LuckyLopez]

I didn't realize that. Thanks.

I guess that takes him down to 32 days in '06. It looks like he got a day in 2005 and then was a Sept call up. But he was added to the roster Aug 27th '04 and I see no mention of him being demoted. So presuming that counts since he was called up before Sept 1st it looks like he used up his 45 days between '04 and '06.

[Prickly Pete]

Regarding Guthrie's eligibility, I found this on a Baseball America blog:

Q: Is it really possible that Cleveland used up Jeremy Guthrie’s options but didn’t have him in the majors for 45 days so he still qualifies?

A: We checked with the Orioles, and it is accurate: Guthrie is still rookie eligible. The Indians signed him to a big league contract after drafting him from Stanford in 2002—though his option clock didn't begin until 2003, the first year covered by the deal.

Guthrie appeared in seven big league games for the Indians in 2004 and 2005, and nine more in 2006, prompted largely by his being out of options. While he had made just five of his 16 appearances prior to September—when expanded rosters mean service time doesn't count against rookie eligibility—it was enough to keep Guthrie in the running for the AL rookie of the year award.

[Nick Day]

So....if a player still has options, what they do in September, even if called up prior to September 1, it doesn't count against their 45 days? That ain't fair. What about if that rookie ends up being put onto a contending teams Playoff roster? Do the October days count? Or is October considered.....September 2.0 in the eyes of a Rookie?

[DiMaggio56Mantle]

That's not .323 last I checked.

Our very own Derek Jeter hit .308 in the Minor Leagues with a worse On-Base Percentage and Slugging Percentage than Dustin Pedroia. He might be small but he can play ball. Several things can account for stats higher than Minor League totals, especially a statistic as unreliable as Batting Average.

1. Hanley Ramirez Syndrome: A player just gets bored of the competition down there.

2. Pure luck. Balls might be getting through and falling that usually won't.

3. Improved batting eye leading to seeing better pitches to hit, but I'm not sure this applies to our friend Dustin as he has probably had a top notch batting eye since tee ball.

4. The fluctuation a player has from year to year. You seem like a smart kid and I'm sure you know as well as anybody that a player can hit .305, .340, .310, .330 in any four years.

[DiMaggio56Mantle]

The dopey sportswriters didn't vote Matsui as the rookie of the year five years ago (after giving it to Ichiro a few years before) because he wasn't a true rookie...whatever that means...they all have an agenda.

Angel Berroa was better than Matsui that year. I'll give you that Matsui didn't deserve to lose the way he did (being left off of several ballots) but he still should have lost.

[Meecham4ever]

The difference in their K's is made up for the fact that Guthrie walks much less.

Guthrie has a better ERA, a better WHIP, a better K/BB, and a better G/F. And it isn't that close.

I don't care about the moronic way of how some sports writers vote. I am not arguing who will win the award, rather who should win the award. As I already said, the majority of these "experts" voted for Justin Morneau last year for the MVP, so it shows how much they know.

You simply don't want to look at the facts. Guthrie has allowed less runs per 9 innings than Matsuzaka. Guthrie has allowed less walks+hits per 9 innings than Matsuzaka. Last I checked, the way you judge if a pitcher has been better than another pitcher (not future success, just what they have done), would be to see how many runs, per 9 innings, the two pitchers have given up (as long as the innings are similar). Guthrie has clearly given up less.

I'm just not sure how you can be so sure that Matsuzaka has been better than Guthrie since, you know, he's given up more runs than Guthrie...

The Guthrie dude and Matsoo-saka have ZERO home runs dude...PEACE!!!!...OUT!!!!!!

[JeffWeaverFan]

Our very own Derek Jeter hit .308 in the Minor Leagues with a worse On-Base Percentage and Slugging Percentage than Dustin Pedroia. He might be small but he can play ball. Several things can account for stats higher than Minor League totals, especially a statistic as unreliable as Batting Average.

1. Hanley Ramirez Syndrome: A player just gets bored of the competition down there.

2. Pure luck. Balls might be getting through and falling that usually won't.

3. Improved batting eye leading to seeing better pitches to hit, but I'm not sure this applies to our friend Dustin as he has probably had a top notch batting eye since tee ball.

4. The fluctuation a player has from year to year. You seem like a smart kid and I'm sure you know as well as anybody that a player can hit .305, .340, .310, .330 in any four years.

Our very own Derek Jeter did it at a much younger age than Mr. Pedroia.

1. Believe me, I was thinking about Hanley Ramirez when I made the post. I may be wrong, but I am of the belief that Mr. 5 foot 7 is not the type that takes some time off because he is bored by the league.

2. Exactly. That's exactly what I think that is happening with Pedroia. And it won't happen to this extent again.

3. Agreed. Dustin will take his walks. That will make him an effective offensive player for a while - just not this good IMO.

4. Yep, and I think that Pedroia will hit .325 or whatever this year and might hit .280 next year - with his OBP and SLG going down with the BA.

[JeffWeaverFan]

Again, there are far better metrics to look at. I've pointed them out a couple of times now. All of them indicate Matsuzaka has had the better season. Your refusal to even acknowledge them is proof I was right when I said I'd be wasting my time here.

Cling to ERA if you want... but you're wrong.

Lucen, please don't explain to me those metrics again. I know what they are.

Go back to the extreme I showed you. If you had to pick one of those pitchers for the ROY, which would you choose?

The best stats to look at for future success, by the way, are K/9, K/BB, and G/F. Guthrie leads in 2 of 3 of those.

Once again, to "who had the better season" please explain why someone that gave up more runs than the other guy had the better season. If you want to go with he got unluckier than the other guy, that's fine. But, in this case, Guthrie has the better peripheral's with his K/BB and G/F - the two most important stats when judging pitchers.

Don't worry Sox fans - The sports writers will not make the right decision and there's a possibility one of your guys wins. It happens literally every year.

[LuckyLopez]

If Guthrie's not eligible as a rookie, as seems to be contested? His eligibility seems to be based on whether his September time counts.

[b-ball-lunachick]

Cool taunting thread.

seriously...just tried to read and couldn't get past page 3... no big surprise...

[hunter05]

Our very own Derek Jeter did it at a much younger age than Mr. Pedroia.

1. Believe me, I was thinking about Hanley Ramirez when I made the post. I may be wrong, but I am of the belief that Mr. 5 foot 7 is not the type that takes some time off because he is bored by the league.

2. Exactly. That's exactly what I think that is happening with Pedroia. And it won't happen to this extent again.

3. Agreed. Dustin will take his walks. That will make him an effective offensive player for a while - just not this good IMO.

4. Yep, and I think that Pedroia will hit .325 or whatever this year and might hit .280 next year - with his OBP and SLG going down with the BA.

You still haven't provided one reason for a pretty dramatic decline in Pedroia's production aside from the fact that he's 5'7 (I'd bet the house that he's 5'6 max). All you've given is one of those "gut feeling" arguments. Fact is, and I'll say it again, at every level Pedroia has been at, he's hit like this.

[Lucen]

Lucen, please don't explain to me those metrics again. I know what they are.

Go back to the extreme I showed you. If you had to pick one of those pitchers for the ROY, which would you choose?

The best stats to look at for future success, by the way, are K/9, K/BB, and G/F. Guthrie leads in 2 of 3 of those.

Once again, to "who had the better season" please explain why someone that gave up more runs than the other guy had the better season. If you want to go with he got unluckier than the other guy, that's fine. But, in this case, Guthrie has the better peripheral's with his K/BB and G/F - the two most important stats when judging pitchers.

Don't worry Sox fans - The sports writers will not make the right decision and there's a possibility one of your guys wins. It happens literally every year.

Either you don't understand those metrics or you're just trolling here. Because fip, xfip and dips are all better indicators of how a pitcher has performed than ERA, and it's not even close. ERA is flawed, crude and outdated.

You keep spinning the same tired argument here, and you've yet to even try and address the concerns several people have brought up about your conclusions. You want to cling to ERA, K/BB and G/F (and I don't see why having a lower groundball rate is such a great indicator of who will be better... I'd rather have a high strikeout guy who gives up more fly balls than a low K guy who keeps it on the ground in most cases... you need a pretty extreme G/F rate to make up for a 6.11 K rate, IMO), but you ignore fip, xfip, dips, WS, VORP, WARP, and a slew of other metrics which favor Matsuzaka.

These are all more refined metrics that are better indicators than ERA when trying to determine who has been the better player. You've been proven wrong here. Why do you keep ignoring all of this?

[Yankeesfan811]

Clay Buchotlz is throwing a no hitter at the moment, and Pedroia just made a REDICULOS play to keep it alive in the 7th....

wow