Best Pitcher in the Game

It's hard to believe he was pretty much overlooked this past season.

The poll gave Tim Lincecum the most votes with Johan Santana and Roy Halladay tied for second. I was a little surprised to see no love for CC Sabathia because I think he deserves to be a part of the discussion. Jake Peavy received a vote, and I think the backlash against him is just because he's up for being traded and has been overanalyzed. Brandon Webb might deserve to be here as well. What makes this discussion more difficult is that Lincecum is so young. I'm sure if you looked at this discussion after a couple years of Dontrelle Willis, you would have mentioned him here. Santana, Halladay, Sabathia, Webb and Peavy have been doing it for a little longer. There are a lot of differences between Lincecum and Willis, but it's pretty uncertain that he can keep this up. We know the others can. Regardless, what makes a good pitcher? Let's start with striking out a lot of hitters, walking few, pitching a lot of innings, being a groundball guy, and, of course, keeping the other team off the scoreboard. Let's take a look.

ERA --> Lincecum 3.16, Webb 3.24, Peavy 3.25, Halladay 3.52, Santana 3.11, Sabathia 3.66
This is a tough discussion. ERA isn't the most perfect stat. How do you rank these guys here? Santana has the best ERA, and considering he pitched most of that in the AL, he should be number one. Lincecum is second, but is he the 4.00 or 2.62 ERA guy? Webb and Peavy are close, but considering Webb pitches in a pitcher's park, he has to be the better choice. I would also put Halladay above Peavy considering the difference in leagues and parks. Sabathia may have to be last in this group.
Santana -> Lincecum -> Webb -> Halladay -> Peavy -> Sabathia

FIP --> Lincecum 3.01, Webb 3.48, Peavy 3.50, Halladay 3.53, Santana 3.34, Sabathia 3.62
FIP should be more accurate as far as pitching talent is concerned, but it still doesn't account for leagues and parks. Lincecum seems far-and-away the best here, but his two years again make me hesitate. Santana has to be next. Webb again is better than Peavy, but Halladay jumps him here due to the difference between the AL East and NL West. Sabathia beats Peavy.
Lincecum -> Santana -> Halladay -> Webb -> Sabathia -> Peavy

IP/season --> Lincecum 186.2, Webb 219.1, Peavy 180.1, Halladay 192, Santana 202, Sabathia 207.1
This is tricky considering some of these guys have been relievers/starters before becoming full-time starters (Halladay, Santana), but don't say anything about partial seasons because all but Sabathia have had a few. Halladay's is low because he had some short seasons in '04 and '05. Santana, Webb, and Sabathia are the head guys here ratio-wise, and even though Halladay is considered the perfect inning-eater, he's had his durability concerns as well. Sabathia has also become a horse, but he wasn't before the past two seasons.
Webb -> Santana -> Halladay -> Sabathia -> Lincecum -> Peavy

K/9 --> Lincecum 10, Webb 7.27, Peavy 8.96, Halladay 6.41, Santana 9.26, Sabathia 7.56
This one's easier to figure out. Strikeouts are important because there really isn't any chance the other team gets on and can do damage (I realize it's possible, but it doesn't happen enough to be a concern). Lincecum gets the victory, but Halladay had a much lower ratio than I thought he would have.
Lincecum -> Santana -> Peavy -> Sabathia -> Webb -> Halladay

BB/9 --> Lincecum 3.59, Webb 2.96, Peavy 2.90, Halladay 2.09, Santana 2.49, Sabathia 2.84
Walks kill, and whatever Halladay lost in the K/9, he regained in the BB/9. You wonder if Lincecum's will come down any the longer he goes.
Halladay -> Santana -> Sabathia -> Peavy -> Webb -> Lincecum

K/BB --> Lincecum 2.79, Webb 2.45, Peavy 3.09, Halladay 3.06, Santana 3.72, Sabathia 2.66
You had to know Santana would be dominant here. Having a big ratio is good because strikeouts can make up for those pesky walks. Halladay beats out Peavy because of the whole pitchers suck at hitting thing.
Santana -> Halladay -> Peavy -> Lincecum -> Sabathia -> Webb

GB/FB --> Lincecum 1.25, Webb 3.57, Peavy 1.08, Halladay 2.36, Santana 0.90, Sabathia 1.26
Groundballs are important because they can't go out of the park. Being a flyball-pitcher makes one susceptible to the variations of HR/FB that can wildly change your ERA and to the type of ballpark you pitch in. Getting groundballs is a surer way of getting outs even though it does mean that you need a good defense behind you. Preferably, the best pitcher would both strikeout a lot of guys and get groundballs. The two best at getting groundballs are the worst in strikeouts. Interesting (more double-plays? more inclined to put the ball over the plate?). This is the first category Santana has been deficient in, but his amazing change-up will get more flyballs but that aren't hit as hard.
Webb -> Halladay -> Sabathia -> Lincecum -> Peavy -> Santana

LD% --> Lincecum 18.6, Webb 17.7, Peavy 19.7, Halladay 18.8, Santana 19.7, Sabathia 20.5
The reverse of hitting, a lower line-drive percentage is good for pitchers. It indicates (not proves) that a pitcher is better because guys aren't able to hit him hard. If they don't hit him hard, they are less-likely to get hits, home runs. Webb's sinker seems to be doing the trick here. I'll give Halladay the edge over Lincecum because Halladay doesn't get to face pitchers, who generally can't hit (Santana beats Peavy for the same reason)
Webb -> Halladay -> Lincecum -> Santana -> Peavy -> Sabathia

WHIP --> Lincecum 1.21, Webb 1.24, Peavy 1.19, Halladay 1.21, Santana 1.10, Sabathia 1.24
Baserunners are the only way to score, so keeping them off the basepaths is a good thing. The pitchers are surprisingly close, with the exception of Santana, but I guess it shouldn't be too much of a surprise. Halladay and Sabathia leap-frog the NL guys because of the DH.
Santana -> Halladay -> Sabathia -> Peavy -> Lincecum -> Webb

BABIP --> Lincecum .306, Webb .294, Peavy .295, Halladay .297, Santana .286, Sabathia .297
BABIP can be wildly inconsistent from year-to-year, but theoretically over a career, it should even out (maybe the reason Lincecum's is so much higher). Santana, again, is dominant. Halladay and Sabathia get to skip ahead, but Halladay wins because the AL East is a bit better offensively, generally.
Santana -> Halladay -> Sabathia -> Webb -> Peavy -> Lincecum

LOB% --> Lincecum 74.4, Webb 72.6, Peavy 77.6, Halladay 71.4, Santana 77.3, Sabathia 72.6
Leaving guys on base is good because they don't score, but this metric can be quite volatile as well as BABIP. Halladay surprisingly won this. Does that mean he's better at keeping guys from scoring?
Halladay -> Sabathia -> Webb -> Lincecum -> Santana -> Peavy

This isn't an exact science. We all know that. Defenses, leagues, and divisions can make big differences in this discussion. As for the final analysis, it gets difficult. Lincecum was the best pitcher in the NL this season (based on the Cy Young Award -- a poor way to tell I know, but hold on), and if he was better than Santana and we can agree that Santana was the best in the AL, then isn't Lincecum the best? But how can we really tell? Lincecum got pretty lucky this past season (5.6 HR/FB), but his FIP says his ERA is right on target. Lincecum's tenure makes this difficult. Given that, Santana might be better because he's done it for longer (even though his FIP was almost a run higher this past season). As for the others, can we discount Sabathia because he wasn't that good before this past season? Can we discount Peavy and Webb because they frequently come up at the end of these metrics? Can we take Halladay out because it always seemed that Santana was indeed better? If you want the immediate "Who's better right now?", then Sabathia cannot be discounted. The thing is that track record does matter. Doing it for one or two years isn't enough to say you are the best pitcher, otherwise Cliff Lee and Ryan Dempster have to be in the discussion as a result of their past seasons. But that's kind of a poor way to look at it. Sabathia comes in third. Halladay does get kicked out because Santana was always clearly better. I doubt you could make the argument that Webb or Peavy are better than Santana.

So it comes down to Santana and Lincecum. When we look back at the stats, Santana is almost always in the top 2 pitchers while Lincecum bounces around a lot. I know Lincecum was voted the best in the NL Cy Young voting, but Santana is the better pitcher, even if he may not have been over the past season. In fact, this past season seems to have made things closer.

Addendum (2:50 PM): I just realized there might be a more mathematical way of doing this. Let's give the pitcher 6 points for being the best, 5 for second, and so on. The rankings end up.

Santana: 50
Halladay: 49
Webb: 38
Lincecum: 36
Sabathia: 33
Peavy: 25

Interesting. I have no idea what this means, if anything at all.