I'm going to win my next 10 starts, strike out another 90 guys and carry my team into the playoffs. Where's the love?

Thanks Jordan. Tomorrow I'll re-post the charts so they're more readable (Who me thinking about baseball at work?).

Pedro, 10 more wins would leave you at 17. Here in the Box we wouldn't hold that against you, but the BBWAA is still in the dark ages.

Mick, you said in the Open-Mike thread that you're still thinking Halladay won't win. Who then? Note that I'm not committing to Halladay just yet, I'm saying he's neck-and-neck with Mulder.

I think he won't win for all the reasons I posted originally.

There's no dominant closer in the AL this year -- I still think Smoltz is going to breeze to the NL Cy Young Award. (Alert: I did NOT say "should" -- I said "is going to") ... so strike that from the competition.

Now consider the likely playoff teams -- all but one (Kansas City) have one or more legitimate candidates:

Yankees: Mussina
White Sox: Loaiza
A's: Mulder
Red Sox: Martinez
Mariners: Moyer, Pineiro, Meche

With Ponson off to the Bay area, candidates among non-contenders include Halladay and uh ... uh ... that's pretty much it.

Second-tier candidates from contenders -- guys who did more than enough in the first half that a strong finish gets them on some ballots -- include Wells, Pettitte, Hudson and Lowe.

Keep in mind that there are 32 ballots, each with three spots on them, for a total of 96 possible votes.

A certain number of writers will use up the #3 slot on their ballot for the league leader in saves -- happens every year -- especially if he pitched for a playoff team (Foulke is the leading candidate, but MacDougal would suck away many votes on the gee whiz factor).

A certain number of other (or maybe the same) writers -- maybe fewer than in the past, but who knows? -- will dismiss Halladay because he didn't pitch "for a winner" in "games that matter" so his wins "count less."

Just in this brief, off the top of my head recap I've named 14 pitchers who have an excellent chance of earning Cy Young votes, about half of which, as the Tom Berenger character in Major League declared, could still "win the whole flaking thing."

In the original story I posted waybackwhen, Coach projected a 22-7 season for Halladay. That sounds like it's going to be right about exact. So let's give Halladay 22-7 for the 82-80 Jays.

With so many candidates, many playing in major media markets (New York, Boston, Chicago), even if all the Yankees and Mariners cancel each other out, I think it is unlikely he will find room on enough ballots to win.

UNLESS, as the original artical postulated, he puts up stupid win numbers -- the crooked number that seems to be the cutoff point for "definitely will win no matter what" has been 23. Can he get there? Sure. I think the odds are he won't. And he won't win the Cy.

Here's another caveat ... even if Halladay rips off a terrific second half, finishes a Clemens/Gooden/Guidry season at 25-4 or somesuch, if Loaiza reaches 20 wins -- even if he cools off and finishes, say 20-13 -- and the White Sox make the playoffs, Loaiza will win the award. The "overnight success" factor will be too much for the American press to ignore.

What if Halladay sets the new AL record for consecutive wins? You don't think that will garner some votes in his favour?

In the years Clemens and Guidry won all those games, their respective teams made the playoffs. Gooden's 1985 Mets didn't qualify -- though they won 98 games -- but his numbers were so good (226 ERA+, other nice peripherals) that he won the award over John Tudor anyway, even though it was the Cardinals and their 101 wins that sent the Mets on their hunting and fishing trips. Plus Guidry and Clemens were fairly high above their competitors; Halladay has been great this year, but it's not like he's been significantly better, if at all, than some of the players Jonny charted.

Here's another famous high win=Cy Young story. In 1990, when Bob Welch won 27 games -- much to the angst of Bill James, I seem to recall -- his ERA+ was only 126, whereas runner-up Roger Clemens's ERA+ was 211. Clemens went 21-6, the Red Sox won the AL East, but in the end it was those 27 wins by Welch that the voters could not ignore. But the A's also won their division, so he had that going for him. My hunch, however, is that if the A's had not won the AL West, Clemens would have won the Cy. Pointless speculation, to be sure, but Roger's other numbers, including strikeouts, were so superior to Welch that the voters surely would have selected the Rocket over him if the A's didn't make the playoffs.

Which is why Halladay won't win even if he wins 25 games this year. If things go as they are going now -- i.e. Loaiza does not fall off a cliff, gets 20 wins, and the ChiSox overtake the Royals -- then, as Mick says, he's going to win the award. Unless ...

Mulder reels off 10 in a row of his own and finishes with more wins than Loaiza (and assuming the Sox make the playoffs). Then's it a no doubter: Mulder wins the award for all the reasons Jonny said. In fact, Mulder doesn't even have to do that. All he has to do is do what he's been doing, end up with more wins that Loaiza, and the voters will respond in kind, even if Loaiza's E.R.A. and other peripherals are better and even if the White Sox make the playoffs. Then it won't matter how much better Loaiza's E.R.A./"overnight success" story is. The lure or More Wins will give Mulder the Cy, even if Loaiza (or even Mulder's teammate, Tim Hudson), will have proven to be the better pitcher. It will be 1990 all over again, except this time there will be at least two pitchers who were jobbed -- Loaiza and Hudson -- intstead of one, because of the Magic Super Duper Category Of Wins.

Bottom line: Roy Halladay won't win this year, because the Jays aren't contenders. Right, wrong, yadda, yadda, yadda, that's the reality. And, at any rate, as I say above, other than innings pitched and his nice K/BB ratio none of his numbers are dominant -- like some of Gooden's were -- to warrant Roy taking home the trophy -- this year. If Halladay was putting up the numbers Clemens did when he won his awards with the non-division-winning Jays, while racking up the Ws, it'd be a different story.

Whatever the case, assuming the Jays do contend in 2005 or so, there's a Cy Young in Halladay's future, despite the massive amount of pitching talent in the American League right now.

Obviously, the A's need to get to the playoffs in the above scenario. There should have been something in there about Mulder winning all those games AND the A's making the playoffs. Proceed.

At his current pace, Roy is going to finish with 265 innings, a 23-3 record, 192 strikeouts and just 35 walks. If it weren't for his 32 homer pace, he'd easily be the hands down winner.

It's probably just as well Roy doesn't win it, since it will only hurt the Jays when they try to sign the big guy long term.

Hands-down? That's a big leap.

Hudson's on pace for 251 innings, 201 hits allowed, 64 walks, and 159 strikeouts. His E.R.A. is half a run lower than Halladay's. He doesn't have the wins.

Loaiza's on pace for 228 innings, 194 hits allowed, 50 walks, and 185 strikeouts. His E.R.A. is nearly a run lower than Halladay's. He's on pace to win 20 games exactly. Sure, he's pitched against the Tigers and D-Rays, et al, but you can't simply dismiss him out of hand.

Mulder's on pace for 242 innings, 227 hits allowed, 51 walks, and 168 strikeouts, to go along with 21 wins, and an E.R.A comparable to Halladay. If the A's had gone with a four-man rotation, Mulder and Hudson would both receive a few extra starts, thus neutralizing Roy's advantage in innings and strikeouts. Ball park factors would give the edge to Halladay, I am sure, but I doubt many BBWA folks will take those into consideration.

You can say "Halladay is one of many pitchers who could stake a claim to the AL Cy Young," but it's not accurate to say "he'd easily be the hands down winner." Assuming all goes as above, and discounting who "should" win, if Mulder wins 21 games and the A's win the AL West, he "will" win.

If it weren't for his 32 homer pace, he'd easily be the hands down winner.

I really don't think that the BBWAA cares about HR allowed.

I keep reading all this stuff about how Roy won't deserve consideration for the Cy since he isn't on a contending team. Garbage. I'd accept that argument if this were the MVP award, because writers seem to vote only for players on playoff bound teams, but the Cy Young is an entirely different story.

In 2000, Johnson won the award when the DBacks finished 3rd.
In 1998, Clemens won the award when the Jays finished 3rd.
In 1997, Clemens, Jays were 5th.
In 1997, Pedro, Expos were 4th.
In 1995, Hentgen, Jays were 4th.
In 1994, Cone, Royals were 3rd.

More than any other award, the Cy Young still goes to the player who puts up good numbers in the most traditional categories, especially victories. Unless someone finishes with an ERA light years away from the pack, the Cy Young will likely go to the pitcher with the most wins, regardless of where that player's team finishes. That might well mean Roy earns his first. But if Mulder, Mussina or Wells has even one more win than Roy, it's likely that Halladay will take home no hardware. It's as if the team's result only comes in to play in case of a very close Cy Young race.

Hi-Jack

Dustin McGowan last night

7IP 3H 0R 0BB 8K

now that is domination

this guy is hot right now, looking like the move up hasn't fazed him one bit.

Three reasons why Doc probably won't win the Cy:

- Lots of Jays have won the Cy recently: Clemens twice, Hentgen once. I'm thinking that's got to be a factor.

- Do the writers vote on the Cy first, then the MVP? If Delgado is likely to be an MVP candidate, some writers might vote for him and then not vote for Halladay, since they don't want both awards going to the same team.

- Halladay is one of a bunch of pitchers having good years, and his ERA is significantly higher than the leader (Loaiza).

As I've said before, I will be most annoyed if Loaiza wins the Cy. During the last two years, the Jays paid him a total of $10,300,000, and he pitched crappily. Then, he leaves, and suddenly he looks like Pedro Jr. Arrrarrrarrgh.

We're trying to guess what guys like Richard Griffin will be thinking months from now. You know, the ones who put the capital letters in "Magic Super Duper Category Of Wins." The same writers who preferred Tejada to A-Rod for that other award. My limited mind-reading skills are more effective when the pages aren't blank.

Agreed that Mulder has a better chance than Loiaza and is the frontrunner. I think Roy will have to go 25-4 to win the Cy (in a close vote, not "hands down") but don't underestimate the power of the Streak. Doc's already getting plenty of notice in the U.S., and as Jon Siegel points out this morning in the Washington Times, a W tonight would make him the second pitcher in 60 years to win 16 straight decisions. I love this quote:

"There's no panic, no overthrowing, no stress — just conviction and strength," Toronto pitching coach Gil Patterson said. "Our job is simple: just go on the mound and throw a baseball. But everyone always sees the hitter in the box, the score of the game — he doesn't. He says, 'My job is to make pitches. That's all I'm going to do.' Umpires, errors, runs, who the hitter is doesn't affect him."

I don't care what the writers decide, or for that matter what the stats say. I love to watch Halladay work, and wouldn't trade him straight up for anyone. Regardless of how much longer his MSDCOW streak continues, Doc is a Winner.

Jonny, sorry for the chart misalignment -- something didn't translate when I copied-and-pasted your post. Just more confirmation that HTML is not spoken here.

Here are the charts again, avec formatting.

AL pitchers with more than 10 wins.

Pitcher	IP	W	ERA	WHIP	K/BB
Roy	175	15	3.29	1.10	5.52
Ponson	148	14	3.77	1.28	2.33
Mulder	160.1	14	3.03	1.15	3.26
Moyer	138.2	14	3.50	1.24	1.96
Loaiza	143.2	13	2.19	1.06	3.48
Pettit.	138.2	13	4.41	1.33	3.70
Pineir.	144.2	12	3.17	1.20	1.88
Ortiz	127.2	12	4.44	1.45	1.53
Wells	139.2	12	3.80	1.20	6.55
Lidle	144	11	5.81	1.44	2.02
Meche	130.2	11	3.86	1.29	2.12
Lowe	134	11	4.84	1.48	1.61
Mussina	138.2	11	3.38	1.06	5.08

Top Cy Young candidates.

Pitcher	W	L	CG	IP	ERA	WHIP	BAA	HR/9	BB/9	K/9	K/BB
Roy	15	2	2	175	3.29	1.10	0.248	1.08	1.18	6.53	5.52
Ponson	14	6	4	148	3.77	1.28	0.258	0.61	2.61	6.08	2.33
Mulder	14	7	7	160.1	3.03	1.15	0.251	0.73	1.91	6.24	3.26
Moyer	14	5	0	138.2	3.50	1.24	0.243	0.85	2.93	5.73	1.96
Loaiza	13	5	1	143.2	2.19	1.06	0.226	0.69	2.07	7.23	3.48
Wells	12	3	3	139.2	3.80	1.20	0.284	1.16	0.71	4.66	6.55
Mussina	11	6	0	138.2	3.38	1.06	0.234	0.98	1.69	8.60	5.08

(Obviously I made these charts before the Ponson trade)

Gitz, I think you're stretching when you talk about how Mulder and Hudson would have had more starts if the A's went to four-man rotation. This is the BBWAA we're talking about, their track record is to be baffled by the numbers in front of them - Never mind considering how circumstances helped or hurt a particular pitcher. If anything they'll give Halladay credit for being a horse who can handle the short rest, and they won't necessarily be wrong in that.

Dave, interesting points, but I'm afraid I'm not buying any of them. Recent wins: They weren't recent enough to be fresh in the minds of non-Toronto fans (5, 6, and 9 years ago, by pitchers who have moved on), and I don't see the evidence of the voters caring about that. Wasn't it in the early 90s that the Dodgers had 4 or 5 ROYs in a row? MVP: If A-Rod didn't win the MVP in 2002, then Carlos in 2003 is nothing more than a fringe candidate, especially with Wells and Halladay also having great seasons. Both awards to the same team? How about Zito and Tejada 2002, both hugely undeserving? And our old pal Loaiza: He's the only one with a big ERA edge, and I won't believe he can hold it until he's pitched his last game of 2003. Subjective, yes, defensible, yes. Further, the writers have shown that they care about wins far above anything else, a full run of ERA is probably only worth 2 Wins to them.