cheesemoney

OK. Off the bat, I'm an A's fan. They own your high paid favorite team, and have a 50 mill payroll. Its ridiculous, but they beat the Yanks head to head, and could possibly go all the way even with Mulder on the dl indefinitely. But here's my case why Tim Hudson is SO much better than Halladay, and even Loiza, and, due to the DL, Pedro.

Here's Hudson's line for 2003.
G GS CG IP H R ER HR BB SO W L Sv P/GS WHIP BAA ERA

28 28 3 202.1 154 65 54 12 50 129 13 4 0 103.2 1.01 .210 2.40

He has 4 or 5 quality starts more than Halladay.
(a quality start is defined as going over 6 innings with under 3 runs allowed).

His era is a FULL POINT below Roy's.

The only reason Halladay is even being considered for this award is because his team averages OVER 6 runs of support per game for him.

By contrast, Hudson's team averages well under 4 runs per game for him

LAST... in his career, when the Oakland A's get him 4 runs or more, tim hudson's record is AN UNBELIEVABLE 62 - 2.

THATS RIGHT.
62-2.

Give the dude the cy young. He is the best pitcher in the league this year.

For Christ-sake, the guy has over 10 games where he left up and then were blown, 8 or so wins became no decisions...

AND HE DID NOT EVEN MAKE THE FREAKING ALL STAR TEAM!

Yeah, I'm pissed.

And yes, Pedro does rule, but he missed too much this year.
Hudson, also, has the 2nd most innings in the AL.

That said, who's your pick? Loiza? Pedro? or (ick...) halladay?
Cheese