Baseball fans love debates about greatness. Few awards spark more emotion than the Cy Young, given each year to the best pitcher in the league. For decades, it was not unusual for a reliever to take home the honor. Legends like Dennis Eckersley, Rollie Fingers, and Bruce Sutter all proved that dominance at the end of a game could rival what starters did at the beginning. Yet it has now been more than 20 years since a reliever won. The last was Eric Gagne in 2003. Since then, closers have posted historic seasons but watched the award go elsewhere.
This raises a question that fans asked on Reddit: why do relievers no longer win the Cy Young? The answers revealed how much the game has changed, how statistics shape perception, and how voters see value on the mound today.
Why Innings Pitched Keep Relievers out of the Cy Young Conversation
One of the biggest reasons is simple math. Relievers just do not pitch enough innings. A dominant closer may throw 70 to 80 innings, while even a mid-level starter can reach 180 or 200. As one fan bluntly put it, “You simply can’t be the best pitcher only throwing 70 innings when lots of pitchers throw 180 to 200 innings.”
That gap in workload makes comparisons tough. A reliever may be nearly perfect in limited outings, but voters often lean toward pitchers who carry a team for months. Another commenter compared it to giving MVP to a hitter who only played 60 games. No matter how great those games were, it is hard to overlook the players who produced all season long.
The fans pointed out that this was not always the case. From the late 1970s through the early 1990s, relievers often won. That was the era when closers routinely worked 100 innings or more and were seen as unique weapons who finished what starters began.
Why even Historic Relief Seasons Rarely bring Cy Young Recognition
Relievers have not disappeared from the Cy Young conversation, but history shows how hard it is for them to actually win. The clearest example came in 2016, when Zach Britton had a season that looked nearly perfect. He posted a 0.54 ERA, converted every single save chance, and anchored Baltimore’s playoff push. Many fans argued it was one of the best relief seasons in modern baseball. Yet when awards season came, the honor went to Rick Porcello, a starter with a 3.15 ERA.
Fernando Rodney’s 2012 season told a similar story. He posted numbers that seemed almost unreal, finishing with an ERA under 1.00 and racking up strikeouts at an elite pace. But despite his dominance, he was never seen as a real contender for the award. The same happened with other closers who struck out 100 or more batters in limited innings while keeping runs off the board.
As impressive as those relief stats were, the deciding factor was always workload. Starters threw far more innings, and that difference carried the vote.
The Slim Chance a Reliever Could Win the Cy Young in Today’s Game
Fans are split on whether a reliever will ever win again. Some believe the rise of starters throwing fewer innings may create an opening. If the average starter logs 150 innings and a reliever hits 90 with staggering numbers, the gap could narrow. A few even imagined a modern Josh Hader type throwing multiple innings, striking out 150, and closing games for a playoff team. In that perfect storm, voters might be swayed.
Others are less hopeful. They argue that sabermetrics has only strengthened the case for starters. Advanced stats like WAR show the true gap in value. Even the best relievers usually rate well below the top 5 starters in any season. As one user wrote, the award would make more sense if there were two categories, one for starters and one for relievers.
For now, the Cy Young remains tilted toward volume and consistency. Unless baseball changes again, Gagne’s 2003 run may stand as the last great closer Cy Young season for a long time.
