No CY for BW: is Webb's biological clock ticking?
Tim Lincecum deservedly won the 2008 Cy Young award for the National League, with Webb finishing second.
| Pitcher, Club | 1st | 2nd | 3rd | Points |
| Tim Lincecum, SF | 23 | 7 | 1 | 137 |
| Brandon Webb, ARI | 4 | 15 | 8 | 73 |
| Johan Santana, NYM | 4 | 8 | 11 | 55 |
| Brad Lidge, PHI | 1 | 7 | 10 | |
| CC Sabathia, MIL | 1 | 1 | 1 | 9 |
| Ryan Dempster, CHC | 4 | 4 |
I can't really argue with the top three, though it seems somebody can - one writer opted to leave Lincecum off his ballot entirely. Mind you, five chose to dump Webb too. I suspect it may have been the same idiot who voted for Sabathia as number one, and likely also for someone who threw less than seventy innings, in Brad Lidge. Lidge threw more innings, with a better ERA and an OBA twenty-four points lower, in 2004, and got only a single third-place vote, because he didn't have the gaudy saves to show for it.
[Edit. I was wrong. It was actually a former Giants season-ticket holder, Chris De Luca of the Chicago Sun-Times, whose ballot apparently went Webb, Santana, Lidge. His reasoning was: "I thought Webb's victories (22) stood out to me more than anything, and Lincecum didn't have the victories. Twenty victories was a big deal. We had a stretch there where no one was hitting 20." A mob with pitchforks and torches is leaving San Francisco for Chicago as we speak]
Webb's second-place could theoretically end up costing the team more money down the road, as the buyout for the team option year (2010) goes up by half a million dollars, each time Webb finishes in the top five for Cy Young voting. With three consecutive top two finishes, the buyout now sits at two million, though it would currently seem like insanity for any team to use that, rather than paying Webb $8.5m to pitch in 2010.
On the other hand, it would seem likely his non-victory will maybe shave a bit off the price of any Webb contract extension, though finishing so high three years in a row [the first NL pitcher to do so, since the Big Unit's four straight victories from 1999-2002] means he won't come cheap. But better one win and two runners-up spots, than two wins and one runner-up, from the team's points of view. A report last week has occasional SnakePitter Jonathan Maurer saying that the previous offer, yanked by the team for unspecified [but, I suspect, medical] reasons during the season, would not longer cut it.
That contract was supposedly three additional years, plus a team option for 2014, at a cost of $54m, but there's no information on whether that also included a structuring of the current one [$6.5m next season, plus the $8.5m team option in 2010] to include more money for those years. Maurer points out that Webb turns 30 in May, and will be 32 when he becomes a free-agent. "This is the contract; this is the deal for him. The next deal we do is his big deal."
However, an unpalatable part of the equation for the Diamondbacks is, at what age will Webb cease to become worth ace money, as he gets older? When should the team step away and let someone else pay for his decline? Clay Davenport looked at this, and found that the average age of a pitcher's best season was 27.21 years - seems surprisingly young, to me, but the figure agrees with other studies. He found that only 16% of pitchers had their best year when they were aged older than 30. Of course, someone like Webb, whose peak performance puts him among the very best pitchers in baseball, the decline will take longer, since he has further to go. It likely also helps that his pitching action does not appear to be particularly stressful.
Contracts typically do not take this into account. Johan Santana, for example, will be 34 in 2013, but gets the highest-paid year of his current deal, at $25.5m. Similarly, the same year will see Barry Zito get his big payday, even though he turns 35 in May of that season. The odds are very much against either man having seasons commensurate with their salaries at that point. Now, to some extent, this counters underpayment earlier in the contract, and is a necessity required to get pitchers to sign. And I'm not suggesting we implement a Logan's Run-style policy, eliminating everyone over the age of thirty. But one wonders about the fiscal efficiency of paying too much at the end of a contract, for a pitcher who is probably no longer going to be worth it.
Comments
You just beat me :)
I had a fanshot for a holder for you, but you were around! Hehe.
by snakecharmer on
Nov 11, 2008 3:06 PM EST
reply
actions
0 recs
LOL
That why I went with ‘analysis later’. :-)
by Jim McLennan on
Nov 11, 2008 3:08 PM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Interesting comment
in the Mercury News article:
Lincecum was named on 31 of 32 ballots.
Who wouldn’t name Lincecum AT ALL?? That seems so strange.
by snakecharmer on
Nov 11, 2008 3:10 PM EST
reply
actions
0 recs
No love for Santana.
Lincecum’s a deserving winner though.
by Azreous on
Nov 11, 2008 6:09 PM EST
reply
actions
0 recs
Congratulations to him
I think Webby had this one through the first several months of the year, but like many other things, it slipped away in September…
So, that’s what, eight of ten NL Cy Young winners from the NL West? Not bad.
"I'm here to advise you on dispensing horror in this modern military climate. I understand you're a demigod, that's fantastic!"
by kishi on
Nov 11, 2008 6:10 PM EST
reply
actions
0 recs
Come on Webb
next year at least try to win the award? Lazy jerk.
We are gonna get drunk with Adam Dunn and we're gonna head-butt some damn kangaroos.
by soco on
Nov 11, 2008 6:59 PM EST
reply
actions
0 recs
I know.
I mean, he let a damn crybaby win. It’s supposed to be like taking candy from a baby, not the other way around.
by Azreous on
Nov 11, 2008 7:12 PM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Maybe
if he didn’t spend so much time hating Arizona and being greedy he’d have won the Cy Young.
We are gonna get drunk with Adam Dunn and we're gonna head-butt some damn kangaroos.
by soco on
Nov 11, 2008 7:47 PM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Yeah, he clearly slacked off
After going 9-0 to start the year. There’s no reason he didn’t finish the season 34-0, except for sheer laziness.
by Jim McLennan on
Nov 11, 2008 8:11 PM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I'm no math whiz, but . . .
By my calculations 5 writers didn’t place Webb anywhere in the top 3, not 3 writers. Idiots. The voters/writers, not you Jim. That boring Webb, he just keeps cranking out more wins year after year. What a bum.
by TwinnerA on
Nov 11, 2008 9:40 PM EST
reply
actions
0 recs
[Shakes fist at pesky National League]
Yeah, managed to space the fact there were sixteen teams in the league somehow. Duly corrected!
by Jim McLennan on
Nov 11, 2008 10:20 PM EST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
By jove
you may be onto something, Jim. According to the Tribune, the offer to Webb was tabled in June following a medical exam. Now I’m curious as to the exam results.
by TwinnerA on
Nov 12, 2008 1:15 AM EST
reply
actions
0 recs
Ok with Timmy ...
He had some Gaudy numbers for a team that did so bad, but it kinda disappointments me to the 04 season where the losses hurt RJ. The worst thing has been Peter Gammons on The Four Letter talking about how great Santana was. Was he REALLY that good? I am not saying I wouldn’t want him on my team, but I feel he’s getting a lot of hype for being from New York more than anything.
by Captain D Bag on
Nov 12, 2008 10:01 AM EST
reply
actions
0 recs

















