AL CY YOUNG: HALLADAY VS. SANTANA

(Originally posted Sunday, Aug. 27.)

It started out innocently enough. It was one of those questions you throw out there as a conversation starter, but it soon took on a life of its own. And from it, comes this post.

The American League Cy Young race is boiling down to two men: the Blue Jays' Roy Halladay, the 2003 winner, or Minnesota Twins left-hander Johan Santana, the '04 winner. This Jays fan and good friend Pat Pearce of View From The Nosebleeds, who's a Twins fan, are eager to debate Halladay vs. Santana.

Both of us are so committed to never being on the side of the majority -- growing up in the vicinity of Napanee, Ont., will do that to you -- that you shouldn't expect either of us to argue for the guy who pitches for our favourite team. We are contrarians by nature -- oddball Canucks who revere baseball above hockey, despite all those Molson commercials that tell you it's treasonous to worship any sport before that one played with a puck.

Here's how it went down on a fine Sunday afternoon:

Sager: So Johan Santana has the flashy numbers, but at the end of the day, I've been watching Roy Halladay all season and this looks like a Cy Young Award season. He has had maybe one bad start all season. He's 16-4 with a low ERA in a hitter's ballpark for an average team. He could easily have 20 wins already. Pat, don't you think he passes the litmus test for a Cy Young winner?

Pearce: You say "flashy" numbers for Santana, I say solid. Santana is 15-5, with an even lower ERA, more strikeouts and is leading his team to a wild-card berth, and dare I say, a division crown.

Sager: Don't get too far ahead of yourself there. The Twins still have to win it, and regardless, this is an individual award. Halladay's numbers reflect his importance to the Blue Jays -- take him away and the Jays are probably a sub-.500 team, like they were when he missed major parts of the previous two seasons.

Pearce: Okay, we will leave the Twins run out of this for the moment. Indeed, the Cy Young is an individual achievement given to the best pitcher in the league. And Santaña's numbers speak for themselves: first in ERA, first in WHIP (walks and hits allowed per inning pitched), first in strikeouts. After starting the season 0-3, he has won 15 of his last 17 decisions.

Sager: Well, the Twins didn’t score runs early on in the season, hence Santana’s 0-3 start. As for the slightly lower ERA, put it in context. That 0.11 difference between them amounts to two, three runs over nearly 200 innings, and you haven’t even begun to discuss park effects or the quality of the opposition. Their ERAs are essentially the same.

Pearce: If you are talking about style, would Halladay's numbers be worse if he were on a team with weaker defence? No one argues that the guy is a horse (four complete games this season), but he also puts a lot of balls in play. The regular Jays starters have a combined .986 fielding percentage (to the Twins’ .979), so with weaker defence, would some of those 6-4-3 double plays actually be hits?

Sager: There’s no defence that’s good enough to make a pitcher better than he really is in the long run. (Funny: Right as I wrote that, Aaron Hill and John McDonald botched a sure inning-ending double play in the Jays-Royals game, reducing an 8-4 Jays lead to 8-6.) Here’s my question to you, Pat: Are Halladay’s numbers in the AL East with the smaller ballparks and the Evil Empires superior to Santana’s stats in the AL Central, which has bigger parks, the majors’ worst team, Kansas City, and at least one good team that doesn’t have a reputation for patient hitting? (cough, Detroit Tigers.)

Pearce: Absolutely not! Here’s why. The Jays, to date, have played the Red Sox and Yanks 23 times, but the Twins have played the Tigers and White Sox a combined 30 times. It should be noted that the Tigers still have the best record in baseball while the White Sox actually have a better record than the Red Sox. Moreover, The Twins have played 24 games against the Royals, Orioles and Devil Rays, while the Jays, not including today, have played 40 games against that the AL’s unholy trinity of mediocrity. When you consider Tampa Bay is only five wins better than the Royals, the notion of a weaker schedule for the Twins and Santana falls a bit flat.

Santaña, by the way, is 6-2 against the Tigers and White Sox.

Sager: Well, if you’re talking best-on-best competition, consider that the Jays are 6-0 in Doc’s starts against Boston and both New York teams. (He only got the decision three times.)

Pearce: However, Santana's ERA against the Tigers and White Sox is 2.12 while Halladay's is 3.00 against the Yankees and Red Sox.

What’s more, in the games Halladay started against the Yankees and Boston, the Jays averaged 6.8 runs per game. In the games Santaña has started against the Tigers and White Sox, the Twins have averaged 4.5 runs per game. What this indicates is that against their respective divisions’ top teams, Doc gets better run support, while Santana, despite putting up wins, has less margin for error in his pitching.

Sager: What I’m wondering, though, is if we’re wrong to talk about what each guy has done to date and not look at where he’s headed. Santana is on a 15-2 roll. Halladay was 8-1 out of the gate.

Is Santaña going to keep this up as the Twins pursue a playoff berth? How is Halladay going to fare in September, when the Jays will be playing for pride and have a schedule loaded with contenders? (Their last 13 games of the season are all against Boston, Detroit or New York.)

Pearce: Here, I think I have to go with Halladay's perserverance. It doesn't hurt Santaña that his team is still in the hunt, but given Halladay's history, he is as good as it gets down the stretch, even with a team that is out of it. As mentioned, the guy is a horse. Back in 2003, when he won his first Cy Young, he was two years removed from a minor league stint that saw him re-define himself as a pitcher.

This year is eerily similar. He missed most of last year with a broken leg, and it just seems that he always has something to prove and is the best when that's the case.

And just take a look at his record down the stretch: since 2003, he is 7-3, despite missing some significant time in two seasons. Combine that with the aforementioned fact that his plays well against the Red Sox, Yankees, and Tigers, and he will likely to put up great numbers from here on in.

And consider this, in 2003, after pitching four complete games in the season's first five months, he tore through September, finishing the season with five complete-game wins in his final six starts.

Sager: So can I mark you down tentatively for Halladay, I take it? It’s funny, the question I keep asking of myself is, ‘What if the records were reversed – Santana was 16-4 and Halladay was 15-5?’ If that was the case, there would be no Cy Young debate, and Santana, not his batterymate Joe Mauer, might be getting the Sports Illustrated cover.

So yes, based on the stats and how he’s overcome his team and his own slow start, Santana is the guy here, especially since he’s pitching in a playoff race, which should help him keep his focus. However, can we agree on one thing? That this season has two very compelling candidates for the AL Cy Young, which is about two more than in 2005 (when Halladay was injured and Santaña finished third largely since his record was only 16-7.)

Pearce: Ya, I agree. There wasn't a whole lot happening from AL mounds last year.

Sager: The other aspect we can agree on is that it could just easily be you backing Santana and me backing Halladay.

Pearce: Absolutely. Their numbers are so close in every category except for strikeouts. But as you mentioned, Halladay's quickness and ground-ball pitching is surely beneficial to his team. And of course, it gets the job done, which is the end goal.

Related:
Doc's Different Kind of Dominance (Aug. 21)
If All Pitchers Could Be Playing Halladays: Why Doc's Too Good To Throw A No-Hitter (July 26)

That's all for now. Send your thoughts to neatesager@yahoo.ca.