ever be easy to compare starters and relievers. I might have mentioned that once or twice, righever be easy to compare starters and relievers. I might have mentioned that once or twice, righ | Forum

Stanford has been making a whole lot of waves lately by getting verbals from four talented recruits for its 2017 class. Custom Hurricanes Jersey China .On Sunday, coach Tara VanDerveer and the Cardinal got good news for their 2018 class.Twins Lexie Hull, the No. 17 prospect in the espnW HoopGurlz Super 60, and Lacie Hull visited the Palo Alto, California, campus this past weekend and gave verbal commitments to the Cardinal on Sunday night.This has been a childhood dream -- to attend Stanford -- and it is actually happening, said their mom, Jaime Hull. The combination of academics and athletics made us know this was the right fit.Lexie, a 6-foot-1 guard at Central Valley (Spokane Valley, Washington); and Lacie, a 6-2 forward, are both versatile players who can hit the jumper to the 3-point line, execute in a system and provide leadership. They helped lead Central Valley to a 28-0 record and a Washington state championship last season as sophomores.Both play their AAU ball for the Spokane Stars, under the direction of Ron Adams, who advises his players to make campus visits to avoid the transfer bug.We took that advice, Jaime Hull said.The Hulls, who are competitive both on and off the court, both carry 4.0 GPAs.Stanfords four commitments for 2017 are No. 8 Kiana Williams, No. 11 Maya Dodson, No. 44 Estella Moschkau and three-star Alyssa Jerome. The Cardinals 2017 class is currently ranked second in the nation.The signing period for the 2017 class is Nov. 9-16.How do you say no to Stanford? Jaime Hull said. Custom Hurricanes Jerseys .2 billion agreement with Rogers Communications for the leagues broadcast and multimedia rights. Custom Hurricanes T-shirts . Both players have lower body injuries that will keep them out of the lineup until at least January 31, which is the first game they can be activated from IR. http://www.customhurricanesjersey.com/ .  The 19-year-old Olsen played 34 games with the Kelowna Rockets of the WHL this season. In that time, hes recorded 17 goals and 17 assists with 36 penalty minutes. The last time a relief pitcher won the American League Cy Young award (Dennis Eckersley, 1992), the Baltimore Orioles current closer, Zach Britton, was still in preschool. But now that we find ourselves in the midst of a season in which no AL starter has emerged as a clear Cy Young kind of guy, Britton might just have a shot to break that streak. Which is fine with Jayson Stark. But not so fine with Keith Law. So we decided to let these two deep thinkers debate whether a reliever should finally win the Cy Young.Check out their conversation below, then cast your vote at the bottom of the page.Stark: Keith, the other night, I tweeted that Zach Britton had been so good, he belonged in the AL Cy Young conversation. From the tweet you fired back at me, I gathered youre not a big fan of that idea. Youd better explain yourself! Whats wrong with mentioning a guy with an 0.54 ERA as a Cy Young candidate? Youre turning this into the baseball version of Brexit!Law: When I saw your tweet, I wasnt sure if you were saying he should win the award, or if, because theres no clear front-runner among starters, that he might win the award. If its the latter, then yeah, he might. Weird stuff happens in years without clarity at the top of the ballot. Whether we like to admit it or not, voters seem to be swayed by public debates.But if its the former, then you can count me out. Theres no way a pitcher who has thrown just 50 innings -- and might not even reach 70 -- is going to be as valuable as even the 10th-best starting pitcher in the league who throws 200-plus innings. Last year, Dellin Betances threw 84 innings with a 1.50 ERA, punched out 40 percent of the guys he faced ... and Baseball-Reference.com had him 24th in the majors in pitcher WAR, behind 23 starters, 11th in the American League. Britton wont even touch Betances workload and he wont even be a top-10 pitcher in the AL, let alone worthy of a spot on a Cy Young ballot.Stark: Ill get to his credentials -- and why youre wrong (haha) -- in a moment. But we cant even mention him in the conversation? Im apparently a bigger fan of wide-ranging conversation than you are.Law: I dont see why wed mention him at all. Hes effectively disqualified because he throws so few innings -- he wont even get halfway to qualifying for the ERA title! There are so many starters who are more deserving than Britton is that he doesnt belong in the conversation to begin with.Stark: OK, let me tell you why hes not disqualified. Im the guy who proposed to the Baseball Writers Association about five years ago that we should take relief pitchers out of the Cy Young competition and start an award just for them. Why? Because of exactly the factors you just mentioned. And because nobody votes for them anymore. For anything.Since Eckersley won both the Cy Young and MVP in 1992, only seven relievers have even gotten a first-place vote in the Cy Young. And no relief pitchers have finished in the top five in the MVP voting since 1995. OK, fine. I get why. But when you look up at the end of Mariano Riveras career and realize he has never won any of our awards and barely been a factor in any vote, thats embarrassing, I think.So I proposed we start a new award. And what happened? I was told theres no need, because relief pitchers are eligible for the Cy Young, so if a reliever has a great year, vote for him. Thats not all I was told, but thats another story. At any rate, Im just following orders. To not even consider them is now officially irresponsible, just like the voters who wouldnt put Pedro Martinez on their MVP ballot in 1999 because they arbitrarily decided no pitcher should even get a top-10 vote. So Keith, thats why. Refute that!Law: Thats a straw-man argument: I didnt say Britton was ineligible, but that hes not qualified -- he has simply not done enough to merit inclusion on a ballot over five starters.And thats really the crux of the argument: Should a failed starter -- which is what Britton and most major-league relievers are -- be rewarded for doing less in a job that requires less total work? If Britton were asked to shoulder (pun intended) the workload of a great 200-inning starter, like Jose Quintana, would he be close to as effective? If Quintana were shifted to a 60-inning short relief role, wouldnt he likely fare just as well as Britton and other elite relievers?Quintana is a good example here, because hes got 101 more innings than Britton and 45 more earned runs allowed (43 if we just use all runs). So Quintana has done what Britton has done plus thrownn another 101 above-league-average innings. Cheap Custom Hurricanes Jersey. (The AL league-wide ERA this year is 4.22, 4.45 for starters and 3.81 for relievers. So Quintana is way above league-average for a starter.) Do I need to demonstrate that Britton plus 101 innings of a 4.00 ERA is worth more than just Britton alone?Stark: Did you just call me a straw man? Look, if were drawing straws, I think we agree its not a fair fight to compare starters and relievers because of workload. But I didnt set up these ground rules. The BBWAA did. So all Britton can do is the job hes asked to do.And hes headed for the lowest ERA by any reliever in history (0.54). He hasnt allowed an earned run since April 30. He has allowed one stolen base in two years. He hasnt given up a home run at Camden Yards all season. Hes crushing the rest of the league in Win Probability Added, so hes had a gigantic impact on his teams presence in first place. And he has ripped off 40 straight innings without an earned run, the longest streak by any reliever in 36 years.You want dominance? I do, in my Cy Youngs. And thats total dominance, in a season in which no starter has been anywhere near as dominating at his job as Britton has been at his. If he goes 50 or 60 or 70 straight innings without allowing an earned run, were still not allowed to think seriously about this?Law: Britton gave up three runs in a mid-June outing when he surrendered a single, a single, a bunt groundout, a walk and a single. They werent earned because of an error earlier in the inning, but calling this some sort of streak is Enron-level accounting. He gave up some runs.Nor is that especially impressive; weve seen starters go 40-plus scoreless innings at least eight times, while having to face hitters three or even four times per outing, and without the loophole of the unearned run.But thats really trivial compared to the bigger picture: Even with that 40-inning no-earned-run streak, he has still been less valuable than about a dozen starters in the AL, because theyve done what hes done PLUS the added value of 100 or so better than league-average innings. If five starters did what Britton has done plus something more, why would you rank Britton above them, in effect crediting him with value for doing less?Stark: Im getting a little bummed that you wont even acknowledge theres another side to this argument. Im not sure how many different ways I can make it clear that I get what youre saying. But because the BBWAA set up this apples/oranges competition, I dont think its one where we should be allowed to use Wins Above Replacement to pick the winner. That fight is fixed before it starts. A decent starter will always pile up more WAR than a great reliever.But I got lectured by my fellow writers and voters to evaluate both starters and relievers based on how well they did their jobs, not imagine how theyd do in the other guys jobs. Its a dumb way to do this, but Im not responsible for that. I tried to save us all from this mess. But I got voted down. So I havent saved you. I havent saved me. And after arguing this all day, you know what Ive figured out? Wed better agree to disagree! Otherwise well be running on this treadmill for the next century. Deal?Law: Ive never said WAR was the rationale behind the vote, though. Im saying giving a reliever who had a great season the Cy over a bunch of starters is akin to giving a utility infielder who had a great season the MVP over a bunch of regulars. The jobs are entirely different.By the way, I agree with you that it would be better to give relievers their own award -- if the current paradigm of one-inning relievers going 65-70 innings a year is permanent. But I dont think it is; I think the new emphasis on times through the order for starters and using some relievers for more than an inning is going to lead to another paradigm shift, at least for teams trying to find a new way to build a pitching staff. And maybe then there will be a reliever who throws enough to match a starter for value and still satisfy your criteria too.Stark: Hmmm, I need a paradigm tide chart to see where thats heading. But either way, itll never be easy to compare starters and relievers. I might have mentioned that once or twice, right? That might be the only thing we actually agree on here. But Im still glad we thrashed this out. Even if we didnt settle anything, at least we saved ourselves a few thousand tweets! ' ' '