I can't forgive Cubs fans for being surprised.  After spending
most of his career as a crappy starter (he only posted an ERA below
4.00 once in seven years) and a so-so one as a reliever (his best
season coming in 2005 when the Cubs weren't in position to do anything), ole Red Beard
made the improbable switch back to being a starter before the season
and has become our most dependable starting pitcher.  He's been the
anchor of the rotation, giving up more than three runs only four times
this season, with only one bad start (his June stinker against the
White Sox two months ago). 

Big Z's temper can flare up and
make him self-destruct and Rich Harden is gold but has only made a
handful of starts; this season, I feel safest when Dempster has the
ball in hand.  He's pitched excellently against our Central rivals
(3-0, 2.37 ERA vs. Milwaukee, 1-0, 2.70 ERA vs. St. Louis) and about
the only thing he hasn't done well is hit the ball.  He's the best
pitcher on the best team in the NL (and arguably, the league), and
voters love that kind of stuff.  But is discussing him as a Cy Young
candidate a valid idea or just a fanboy's pipe dream?

Well...believe
it or not, it is.  Dempster is not only a valid candidate but a
possible one, because there hasn't been any one dominant pitcher in the
NL, not one voters would overwhelmingly support anyways.  There's no
sexy closer option (like K-Rod and Rivera in the AL, no matter how
silly you might consider them) and only a handful of top pitchers in
the NL play on good teams.  So, I'm going to break each candidate down
and talk about why they should or shouldn't win the prestigious award,
and try to pick my best guess at who the voters will actually go for.

Tim Lincecum (San Francisco Giants)
Ah, the prodigal son. Like Mark Prior
in 2003, Lincecum springboarded off a successful rookie half-season to
become a strikeout machine and overall one of the best pitchers in the
game.  His stats quickly single him out as the front-runner for the Cy
Young Award - 2.60 ERA (lowest in the NL), 192 strikeouts (most in the
league), and a 13-3 record (totally respectable for having the NL's
third worst offense behind him).  He's also been durable - 169.2
innings pitched and only one brief injury scare,
when Brad Ausmus hit a pitch off his leg and forced him to leave a
start early.  Given that he just turned 24 this year, Lincecum could be
a top pitcher for years, assuming his unconventional throwing delivery doesn't eventually backfire on him. 
He's the best statistical candidate in a crowded field, but
unfortunately for Tim, stats aren't always what the voters go for. 
They usually favor winning records (See Bartolo Colon in 2005 or Roger
Clemens in 2001) and Lincecum is only tied for fifth in the NL for
wins.  They only seem to go for pure stats when a pitcher is far, far,
far, far ahead of the field...which he's not.  Furthermore,
they also like giving awards to pitchers on good teams, and the Giants
are just flat-out terrible, with one of the worst records in the
league.  But Bay Area fans shouldn't despair: In 2006, Brandon Webb won
the Cy Young on a Diamondbacks team that finished 76-86, but he was
tied the most wins in the NL.  If Lincecum can win a few more games,
he's got to be one of the front-runner.

Brandon Webb (Arizona Diamondbacks)
When did pitchers from Arizona get so good at the award game?  The
Diamondbacks have taken half of the Cy Young Awards in the last ten
years...granted, four of those came from Randy Johnson in the best
stretch of his career, but still, there must be some magical pitching
drug out in the desert.  Webb is the second best candidate next to
Lincecum - he's got great stats, but more importantly, an astounding
18-4 record, best in the league.  I don't think wins are a good way of
measuring a pitcher's worth, but that's a debate for another day; it's
impressive because the Diamondbacks, despite being leading their
division, have a crappy offense.  Webb gets less than five runs of
support in every game he pitches, and barely gets more than Lincecum,
but he's compiled a better record from it, which voters love looking
at.  With a month left, Webb could become the NL's first 20-game winner
since 2005, and if it's still good for most in the NL (a likely bet)
then it's hard to imagine the award not falling his way.  It might not
seem fair if his record puts him over the top, considering his award in
2006 was a little undeserved (by my count, both Chris Carpenter and Roy
Oswalt were better candidates).  But he certainly wouldn't be a bad
choice, and at this point I see him as the front-runner in the eyes of the voters.  

Edinson Volquez (Cincinnati Reds)
Another
baseball newcomer, Volquez has been one of the few good points of the
somewhat botched start of the Dusty Baker era over in Ohio.  He's got
good enough stats (15-5 record, 2.73 ERA, 150 strikeouts), but he's
behind Lincecum in most areas and also plays for a crappy team.  If a
bad team standout gets the award, it isn't going to be Volquez.  The
Giants and Reds have equivalent records when each ace pitches - 17-9 -
and if it came down to picking between the two, I think voters would
mostly go for Lincecum, given that the minor difference in wins could
be even by the end of the season.  Sorry, Edinson - you're just not
winning it this year, but if it makes you feel better, you could be
pitching for the Yankees in a few years.  Of course, your arm will
probably be blown out by then, if Dusty has his way (damn, Mark Prior
could have been so good).

C.C. Sabathia (Milwaukee Brewers)
An
unlikely but possible candidate: the burly Brewers thrower is 8-0 in
nine starts in the NL (his one non-decision coming in a mediocre effort
against the Cubs, whoo!) and boasts a 1.60 ERA.  But is a dominant
half-season good enough for voters?  If you mix in his stats from the
AL, Sabathia's just in the middle of the pack, and if the Brewers miss
the playoffs (not super likely but the Cardinals are right behind them,
and the Brewers faded hard last year), Sabathia's
accomplishments might not look so good.  But if Lincecum and Webb split
the voters (one the better stats guy, one the better record guy),
Sabathia could emerge as a third candidate because he has the best of
both worlds, in the NL at least.  I think it would be kind of bogus if
he won, because he was terrible at the beginning of the season until it
looked like he was going to be traded, and plus, he won a far more
deserving award last year.  I don't think that means anything to
voters, who are blinded by veneers (See: Eric Gagne in 2003).

Johan Santana (New York Mets)
Always
a factor in Cy Young voting.  But he doesn't have a great record and
his stats aren't as flashy as they were in previous years, with less
strikeouts and a higher WHIP.  The Mets are good, but his stats are the
same as Volquez's and he's not even in the top 10 for wins in the NL. 
Johan, this is one year yo hand won't be in the running.

Carlos Zambrano (Chicago Cubs)
He
was a more likely candidate until he bombed hard against the Cardinals
and saw his ERA leap by almost a run.  If he has a string of scoreless
outings his ERA will dip again, but Z has never been great at uniform
consistency.  I'd like to see him win, for obvious reasons, but I'm
afraid this won't be the year - again.

So...does Dempster have a shot?

I
think so.  I think he'll be the third-best candidate after Lincecum and
Webb in voter eyes, and if the Diamondbacks miss the playoffs and
Dempster gets past the 15-win mark, his status as the best pitcher on
the best team with (breathe deep for a second) the best chance to make
the World Series in the NL could push Dempster over the top.  It would
be nice to see him get his shot in the spotlight after all of those
years of mediocrity and obscurity.  I guess we'll see come the end of
the season.

What did you think of this post?

To start your own blog on The Windy Citizen, write to us at windycitizen@gmail.com.