Monkey rodeo.

I'll answer your questions:

1. The closer threw 85IP.

2. Pitcher #3 was injured on opening day and missed 2 weeks. He was active for the pennant race which didn't really exist since the division was clinched in early September

I still think #3 deserved the Cy Young but the media would have voted for #2.

Then #3 starter then. I was only gonna give it to the reliever if it was a Bob Gibson type ERA. 1.91 is good, just not preposterous enough for a reliever to win the award.

I'm not completely opposed but, it has to be something truly outstanding like a Bob Gibson ERA to go along with the saves. And preferably usage more along the lines of the old-time relievers who have won the award. Pitching 2-3 innings often. Something the AI is opposed to with closers (though quite partial to do with LOOGYs :confused:)

And it probably has to be a weak year for starters. Which this example kind of was. But, 2and 3 were definitely impressive enough for consideration in a weak year.

+1

Well, I'll start using a "Fireman of the Year" award (The Mariano Rivera Award) in my historicals when the position of closer starts to become relevant (probably around the start of the 1960's). Before then, relievers were really just failed starters.

EDIT: I know this stat drives those opposed to the alphabet soup set of sabermagician (saw that the other day on the Twitter page for "Fake Cito Gaston" [hilarious page]) stats crazy, but do you have the VORP for each player? I probably would still choose #3 and definitely would if VORP has him at the top of these four pitchers.

Player #1 - Vorp - 34.7 Quality Starts 17/31
Player #2 - Vorp - 36.5 Quality Starts 22/34
Player #3 - Vorp - 41.1 Quality Starts 22/30
Closer 12.6

Ding ding ding - #3 ("The Freak") winner winner chicken dinner.

Also relating to the above post, here's the Fake Cito Gaston Twitter page.