Nationals Baseball: Max and the Terrible, Not-Good, Very-Good, Excellent, Just Good, Passable Cy Young Season

Monday, November 21, 2016

Max and the Terrible, Not-Good, Very-Good, Excellent, Just Good, Passable Cy Young Season

Max Scherzer won the Cy Young last Wednesday and I was taken to task for not celebrating it in verse and rhyme. Cy Young! That's great! We must gather together and feast in his name! Right?

Well I can give you three big reasons why the celebration was a head nod and not a shout. First, there isn't anything particularly compelling about this. We've been pretty much talking about Max on and off all year. We know he's been very good. We realized he was a Cy Young contender and before the awards we noted he was a likely favorite. As a previous winner who wasn't short-changed in front of us it's hard to get all that excited for "excellent player gets his due, which he has also gotten before because he was an excellent player then as well". Second, Max was objectively better last year. No, he didn't win more games but other than a few Ks (and just a few 8 more in one fewer third of an inning) he walked a lot fewer, gave up fewer homers, and threw 4 complete games, 3 shutouts, and 2 no-hitters*. Third, let's face it Max got the "Clayton Kershaw got hurt, so who do we give it to now" Cy Young award.

So there's why we're not jumping up and down in the aisles. But that's not to say Max doesn't deserve his due. So how did Max end up with a Cy Young? The short answer is the meat of the Max Scherzer season was amazing.

As you probably remember, Max's season started pretty poorly. Seven starts in and his ERA sat at 4.60.  He had flashes of his dominant 2015 self but something was off. He wasn't unhittable. He wasn't as in control. And most disturbingly he was getting bombed, capped off by a four homer game against the Cubs. Giving up homers while not keeping guys off base - that's not just a bad combination - it's a losing one.

Max had to get it together and he mostly did. Over the next few games he got unhittable again. He got back in control. He... well he kept getting bombed but as he let fewer and fewer guys on base those homers mattered less and less. Solo homers don't kill you. He didn't have perfect games, but he gave the Nats games they should win. Max seemed to be getting back into form.

By mid-season, Max would conquer the HR issue as well. In June and July he'd have almost as many homerless games (5) as games with a homer (6) and only one multi-homer game.  He was on the top of his game. In 13 starts from June 1st through August 9th he put up these numbers. A .163 / .209 / .288 line against him. 1.7 BB/9, 11.8 K/9, 0.9 HR/9.** This was about as good as a pitcher can be over an extended period.  This 40% of an historic season is what got Max the Cy Young.

Why do I say that? Because things starting to unravel a bit as the season drew to a close. While he kept the homers down, he started to get hit a bit again. He started to walk a bit again. It wasn't a big deal. Without the homers he was still keeping offenses down and it was still Cy Young caliber type pitching, but it was a break from the dominance we had started to become accustomed to. For instance, during that 13 game stretch Max had allowed more baserunners than IP twice. In the next 7 games he did it 4 times. As much as Max was rounding into form to during the end of May, he was falling out of it now.

As the season ended all of issues that plagued Max to start the year were back. He was walking too many. He was getting hit more than he had all year and now the homers were back. It took guile and luck to keep the runs from getting on the board but he managed to mostly do that. It was a poor finish (4.38 ERA over last 4 games) but it could have been worse. While I still hold that it was that awesome middle that got Max the Cy Young, not falling apart at the end helped a lot too. He's not just a thrower, he's a pitcher and pitching well when he didn't have his best stuff kept the team in the game and the team rewarded him.

See the funny part of Max's season is that while he was falling out of form to end the year the team really had his back. They would win every single one of his last 10 starts and he would pick up the W in 8 of them. Wins don't mean what they used to, but it couldn't hurt voters to see that big 20 next to his name.

Max's season wasn't ideal. It did have some valleys, but they weren't so low to take away from the towering peaks. It was a deserved award and in a season where three other Nats members just lost out to slightly more deserving candidates, it's glad to see Max not get minorly screwed out of his rightful award.

*And a 9 inning, 1 hit, 16K game that proceeded a no-hitter. That's the best back-to-back pitching performance you are going to see. 

**I know I keep harping on this but I feel like some people may still not get it so let me note here that Clayton Kershaw's worst 13 game stretch was better than Max's best. That is how good Kershaw was last year and really the last 3 seasons. Not that he deserved to win the Cy Young. He didn't. 80 IP is a big difference.

9 comments:

G Cracka X said...

I understand why the Cy Yound award might not be exciting this year for the reasons you mentioned, but I think one of your points does make the award at least interesting: the fact that Max had a 4.6 or something ERA after seven starts and still won the NL Cy Young. How many times has a scenario like that played out? Probably not the first time, but I imagine it is rare.

SM said...

So, how about some Monday fun?

Who would you say is the worst choice, the most undeserving winner in the history of Cy Young voting?

I don't mean winners who narrowly beat someone equally deserving of the award. I mean real stinkers who had no business even being considered.

I'll open with Pete Vuckovich, the 1982 AL winner, whose name has circulated for years as the worst choice ever.

Harper said...

I've always thought Willie Hernandez was an iffy one. He won that right? Or Just MVP? I'm going to of course formalize this.

SM said...

He won both in '84! (You may very well be right, though.)

Harper said...

Vukovich was probably the worst starter - you can go back to teh very early voting to find some other bad choices. Relievers as Cy Youngs are almost always questionable choices even considering things like leverage. They just can't make up 100+ IP.

Probably the biggest robbery was Clemens losing in 1990. Led ERA by almost a half a run (1.93 to Finley's 2.40), 2nd in WHIP, 3rd in H/9, 3rd in BB/9, 3rd in K/9, tied for most shutouts. Lost to Welch 2.95 ERA, 9th WHIP, not in top 10 of the others. The difference? Welch was 27-6 to Clemens 21-6. In games where he allowed 3 or 4 runs Welch was 8-2, one ND. In games that he allowed 2 or fewer 19-1, 1 no decision. Clemens in same game types 3-1, 1 ND (yes only had 5 of these types) and 18-4, 3 ND.

Basically Welch won because he pitched well, was on a great offensive team, his manager tossed him out there 35 times, and the A's almost never failed to have the decision settled when he was pulled. Only one of those things did Welch really control.

Fun fact about that year - 1st in WHIP, K, H/9? 43 yo Nolan Ryan. Guy was a MACHINE


SM said...

Just looking at Clemens that year. His 10.6 WAR was higher than EVERY major leaguer's, pitchers and position players alike. Wow.

Anonymous said...

I thought Scherzer had a better year in 2016 than in 2015. Scherzer's struggles in late July though early September, in the heat of the pennant race, were costly.

Jay said...

I thought Scherzer was better this year overall. Sure he had 2 no hitters last year, but he struggled when they were trying to catch the Mets in August.

I've also read several different places that the Nats are going to be "very aggressive " this offseason. This could be click baiting on the part of several sites. It sounds like the Nats may go after Cespedes or another outfield bat and a big SP. We all expect Strasburg to come back healthy, but it was an elbow scare. If he blows out his elbow next year that really hurts the Nats. I also saw several articles about the Nats trading Gonzalez. Finally, yet another article stated the Nats may go after Wieters as well. Thus they may sign Cespedes or trade for McCutcheon, trade for a big SP, sign a closer, and sign Wieters. I'm all for all in, but sounds like people building up rumors to me.

Blogger said...

If you want your ex-girlfriend or ex-boyfriend to come crawling back to you on their knees (even if they're dating somebody else now) you got to watch this video
right away...

(VIDEO) Want your ex CRAWLING back to you...?