Lincecum is certainly the right choice and he would have gotten my vote if I’d had one. Nobody on there is unworthy, though I always have a hard time seeing any reliever—even one of ours—as worthy for that award. But Hamels’ exclusion has vastly less to do with his “inferior” performance than the 8-9 games in which he pitched brilliantly but lost or took a no-decision because of offensive quietude… I’m surprised that Santana, who was equally screwed by the Mets (more his bullpen than his hitters), placed as highly as he did.

Also, I love the 1995-era user-friendliness of the BBWAA site…

Definitely the right choice. I’m surprised how little support Sabbathia got, considering Sutcliffe’s win at least set the precedent that the award could go to someone traded mid-season.

Lincecum would have gotten my vote too, but I’d have been torn between him and Santana. Their numbers were remarkably similar — Santana had a lower ERA and threw more innings, but Lincecum gave up fewer hits and had more strikeouts.

Whatever the case, both put up superior seasons to Brandon Webb. I know he had the 22 wins, and I’d kill to have him on my team, but just because the Mets generally sucked when Santana pitched doesn’t mean he wasn’t a better pitcher. It’s all academic, but it shows that the BBWAA still cares about things like wins.

But anyway, congrats to Brad Lidge. Normally I agree with you on relievers, dajafi, but Lidge’s incredible season deserved some Cy Young love.

I think a vote for either Lincecum or Santana would have been defensible. Webb was a stretch.

Santana faced tougher competition (I think he faced the WORLD F’ING CHAMPION Phillies six times) than Lincecum and had a better ERA, while Lincecum had more strikeouts and gave up fewer home runs.

I’m actually pleased that the voters saw past W-L enough to put the two best pitchers 1-2 in the vote and didn’t get blinded by Webb’s glittery 22 wins.

Well deserved. I expected as much. Lincecum is a stud and a half and his fastball and curveball are effing filthy.