MLB awards thread

[chrisih8u]

AL ROY: Huston Street

NL ROY: Ryan Howard

AL Cy Young: Nov 8th

AL Manager of the Year: Nov 9th

NL Manager of the Year: Nov 9th

NL Cy Young: Nov 10th

AL MVP: Nov 14th

NL MVP: Nov 15th

[twikoff]

what about all the awards that have already been given out
hank aaron award, clemente award, silver sluggers, etc...
have the gold gloves gone out yet?

[chrisih8u]

what about all the awards that have already been given out
hank aaron award, clemente award, silver sluggers, etc...
have the gold gloves gone out yet?

Meh. I didnt feel like lookin em up. And the gold gloves were given out last week. Jason Varitek, Derek Jeter, and some other guys won.

[lemieux66c]

The Gold Glove award has basically turned into a joke anyway.

[Jericho]

Plus, isn't the Hank Aaron ward voted on by the fans now? I'm sure that's a great way to pick a deserving winner

[wildcatlh]

what about all the awards that have already been given out
hank aaron award, clemente award, silver sluggers, etc...
have the gold gloves gone out yet?

You just know that's the only chance any Braves will be mentioned on any of the awards. :)

[LurkerDan]

The Gold Glove award has basically turned into a joke anyway.
you have a suggestion for improving them?

[El Scorcho]

you have a suggestion for improving them?

Sure, incorporate fielding statistics into it along with a BBWAA vote. Gold gloves are so based on reputation nowdays that it has become a serious joke.

[LurkerDan]

Sure, incorporate fielding statistics into it along with a BBWAA vote. Gold gloves are so based on reputation nowdays that it has become a serious joke.
It's voted on by managers and coaches, you think changing it to BBWAA is going to ADD legitimacy? :lol:

What other award has stats in it? ANd how do you incorporate stats into it? And what stats? The problem with fielding is it's very poorly defined by stats, fielding percentage is the easiest and most quantifiable, but we all know it isn't the best measure. Zone rating and range factor are a little better, but more subjective, and people still object to them.

[Deftones]

I'm assuming that NL managers only vote for NL players and vice versa w/ the AL right?

[LurkerDan]

I'm assuming that NL managers only vote for NL players and vice versa w/ the AL right?
pretty sure that is the case, and you can't vote for someone on your team...

[wildcatlh]

Bartolo Colon wins the AL Cy Young

Voting totals (in 1st-2nd-3rd-Points):

Colon 17-11-0-118
Mariano Rivera 8-7-7-68
Johan Santana 3-8-12-51
Cliff Lee 0-2-2-8
Mark Buehrle 0-0-5-5
Jon Garland 0-0-1-1
Kevin Millwood 0-0-1-1

[Josh H]

Damn, I figured Colon would win, but not by that large a margin!

[LurkerDan]

Jayson Stark had a good column on ESPN explaining why he thinks Santana should have won, which I agree with.

Anyone claiming that RJ should have won last year should agree as well.

[Mr. Cinema]

I read the Stark column as well. Excellent points made.

[El Scorcho]

Rivera was my choice to win it this year. But voters are douchebags when it comes to the Cy.

[DVDGamer]

So why are baseball awards given weeks after the end of the season? NBA gives this during postseason. I thought they also vote for these by end of the regular season.

[twikoff]

You just know that's the only chance any Braves will be mentioned on any of the awards. :)

mentioned? ha!
francouer was mentioned as a top candidate for rookie of the year
bobby cox is always mentioned as a top candidate for manager of the year
andruw is mentioned as one of the two leading mvp candidates..

so while its possible neither of the three will win.. but all 3 will be top 2 or 3 in the final voting. -ptth-

[twikoff]

So why are baseball awards given weeks after the end of the season? NBA gives this during postseason. I thought they also vote for these by end of the regular season.

keep the mlb talk alive after the season/post season

awards given out during the post season kindof get buried on the 2nd or 3rd page and the players dont get the recognition they may deserve

case and point.. look at the responses about the hank aaron award winners, clement award winner, silver sluggers, gold gloves, etc...

[fumanstan]

keep the mlb talk alive after the season/post season

awards given out during the post season kindof get buried on the 2nd or 3rd page and the players dont get the recognition they may deserve

case and point.. look at the responses about the hank aaron award winners, clement award winner, silver sluggers, gold gloves, etc...

Yeah, we're absolutely flooded with AL Cy Young discussion now! ;)

[Setzer]

I read the Stark column as well. Excellent points made.

I disagree with Stark's column. I understand that Johan had the better numbers but he didn't lead his team to post season, Colon did. Without Colon the Angels may have not won the West. The right guy got the trophy.

[Joe Molotov]

The right guy got the trophy.

Man, out of nowhere, a dig against lefties. -ohbfrank-

[Setzer]

:lol:

I'm a lefty myself...ain't gonna dis my own kind. ;)

[Quake1028]

I disagree with Stark's column. I understand that Johan had the better numbers but he didn't lead his team to post season, Colon did. Without Colon the Angels may have not won the West. The right guy got the trophy.

Because he wears an Angels uniform, right? If the shoes were on the other foot, I am positive you wouldn't be saying that. The Angels were a better team, im a weaker division (IMO) than were the Twins, that's why they made the postseason, not because of any fault of Johan Santana, who cleary had the best season of any AL starting pitcher.

[Setzer]

Because he wears an Angels uniform, right? If the shoes were on the other foot, I am positive you wouldn't be saying that. The Angels were a better team, im a weaker division (IMO) than were the Twins, that's why they made the postseason, not because of any fault of Johan Santana, who cleary had the best season of any AL starting pitcher.

No, I would be saying that. If Colon was a 15-16 game winner and his team didn't make the play-offs then he doesn't deserve to win it. Not against someone else who had solid numbers, 21 wins, and playing for a team that went to the post season. Not saying Johan didn't have a good season or that he didn't post numbers that deserve consideration for the award but when you compare what Colon did for his team and the numbers he put up, I think it's obvious he deserves the award.

I guess Jake Peavy should win the NL Cy Young award because even though he won only 13 games he had better stats than Chris Carpenter, Roy Oswalt, or Dontrelle Willis? Heck, even Pedro had better numbers than Carpenter and Oswalt....maybe he should win the award.

[Quake1028]

No, I would be saying that. If Colon was a 15-16 game winner and his team didn't make the play-offs then he doesn't deserve to win it. Not against someone else who had solid numbers, 21 wins, and playing for a team that went to the post season. Not saying Johan didn't have a good season or that he didn't post numbers that deserve consideration for the award but when you compare what Colon did for his team and the numbers he put up, I think it's obvious he deserves the award.

I guess Jake Peavy should win the NL Cy Young award because even though he won only 13 games he had better stats than Chris Carpenter, Roy Oswalt, or Dontrelle Willis? Heck, even Pedro had better numbers than Carpenter and Oswalt....maybe he should win the award.

Did you even read the column? Did you see how much better Santana's numbers were than Colon's?

[Setzer]

Did you read my reply?

And yes I did read the article. Still doesn't change how I feel about who should win the award and its quite obvious the majority of the Baseball's writers feel the same way I do and that's why he won the award.

[Quake1028]

He won the award simply because 99% of the voters look at wins, and nothing else. It's a proven fact. The last NINE pitchers in the AL who led the league by 3 wins or more have all won the Cy Young, other stats be damned.

[Rockmjd23]

I still think Rivera should have won, if not Cy Young, then MVP.

[Quake1028]

I still think Rivera should have won, if not Cy Young, then MVP.

You know the guy had a lights out season when two diehard Yankee haters call for him to win those awards :).

[Deftones]

I hate the Yankees too and I feel that Rivera got screwed. Stark does make some great points about Santana. I've given up getting mad at these things since that year a few years ago when Randy Johnson was by far the best pitcher in the league and he got screwed over for the award.

[Y2K Falcon]

Preemptive congrats to Chris Carpenter. :up:

Too bad your team got punked in the post season

[LurkerDan]

I hate the Yankees too and I feel that Rivera got screwed. Stark does make some great points about Santana. I've given up getting mad at these things since that year a few years ago when Randy Johnson was by far the best pitcher in the league and he got screwed over for the award.
I knew you had to agree with Stark.

But, "a few years ago"? Wasn't that just last year? :lol:

[Mad Dawg]

I guess it depends on how you look at the Cy Young award. If you look at it as "best pitcher," either Rivera and Santana should take the honor. IMO, Rivera should have walked away with it. If you look at it as "pitcher who won the most games and took their team to the playoffs," then I guess you'd have to give it to Colon. Doing so means assigning all sorts of silly rules to the award that were never meant to be. Colon didn't deserve to win. Hell, he wasn't even the best pitcher in the AL playoffs if you want to factor that in. Giving it to Colon shows an extreme laziness on the part of writers, although, given their history, it should surprise no one.

The NL Cy Young is a little different. When you have Carpenter, Clemens, Willis, and the guy no one ever mentions, Andy Pettitte, all with fantastic seasons, I understand going to the win column to make a decision. I think that's also lazy, but not as damnable as yesterday's vote. Carpenter had a great year, and it won't bother me when he wins. Both Willis and Pettitte (and the case can still be made for Clemens) are deserving as well, if not more so. Hell, even if Peavy or Pedro got the award, I don't think anyone could be justifiably angry. The NL is damn close. The AL was not, and shame on the writers for copping out.

[Deftones]

I knew you had to agree with Stark.

But, "a few years ago"? Wasn't that just last year? :lol:

Shit, was it last year? Having a shitty team two years in a row leads me erase all memory of that past season from my mind. ;)

[Y2K Falcon]

The NL Cy Young is a little different. When you have Carpenter, Clemens, Willis, and the guy no one ever mentions, Andy Pettitte, all with fantastic seasons, I understand going to the win column to make a decision.
Do you mean the win column, tempered by the loss column? Or do you only include pitchers who "led their team to the playoffs"?

Which way do you use to eliminate Dontrelle?

Certainly not ERA. ;)

[Mad Dawg]

Do you mean the win column, tempered by the loss column? Or do you only include pitchers who "led their team to the playoffs"?

Which way do you use to eliminate Dontrelle?

Certainly not ERA. ;)

Shut up. :mad: I mean winning percentage. Obviously, the writers are going to punish a guy for double digit losses. Of course, Carpenter also had more run support than anyone in the race. Obviously, that negatively affected the other pitchers' winning percentages, especially in the case of Houston and worst of all in the case of Clemens.

[El Scorcho]

No, I would be saying that. If Colon was a 15-16 game winner and his team didn't make the play-offs then he doesn't deserve to win it. Not against someone else who had solid numbers, 21 wins, and playing for a team that went to the post season. Not saying Johan didn't have a good season or that he didn't post numbers that deserve consideration for the award but when you compare what Colon did for his team and the numbers he put up, I think it's obvious he deserves the award.

I guess Jake Peavy should win the NL Cy Young award because even though he won only 13 games he had better stats than Chris Carpenter, Roy Oswalt, or Dontrelle Willis? Heck, even Pedro had better numbers than Carpenter and Oswalt....maybe he should win the award.

W-L ERA RA IP VORP SNLVAR K/9 K/BB OPS HR/9
Colon 21-8 3.48 3.74 223.2 51.1 6.7 6.35 3.65 695 1.04
Santana 16-7 2.87 2.98 232.2 73.0 7.6 9.25 5.29 594 .85


Yeah, Colon did everything better as a pitcher. -rolleyes-

Colon did no more than Santana to get his team to the playoffs. The bottom line is wins are a horribly outdated stat that meant a lot more 50 years ago when most starters pitched 8 or 9 innings. Now a pitcher's W/L (which unfortunately CY Award voters still have a big massive hard-on for) relies a lot on his offensive run support AND his bullpen's ability to save games.

Colon finished 21-8 despite having an expected Win/Loss record (theoretically calculated by Baseball Prospectus) of 14-10. His bullpen blew none of his potential wins. His team scored 6+ runs a game in his starts.

There is a world of difference between pitching your team to the playoffs and being the beneficiary of good team support.

I hate to bring Fantasy stats & games into play, but looking at the 2005 season and being forced to draft only ONE AL pitcher, would anyone seriously take Colon over any of the other also-rans?

For what it's worth, Peavy's and Carpenters #s are pretty much equal. Both have edges on each other on various categories.

[LurkerDan]

The NL is much tougher, stats arguments can be made for many different players. And the "value" arguments can be made as well. Carpenter didn't have a bad streak until the division title was locked up, Clemens pitched relatively poorly during the stretch run when his team was fighting, Willis also had a few blow ups towards the end when his team was still in it. Pettite was outstanding, the best pitcher of the second half, but he suffers from the fact that many people had already given the award out in their minds.

The NL is close, very close. Even ignoring wins doesn't help. Clemens has some big stats on his side, but there are non wins and losses arguments against him. I suspect Carpenter will win, and have no problems with that; I'd maybe even vote for him. But I'd be ok with a number of pitchers winning.

[El Scorcho]

My voting would have been:

AL: 1) Rivera 2) Santana 3) Colon
NL: 1) Carpenter 2) Clemens 3) Dontrelle

It's such bullshit that the only pitcher in the league (Rivera) that makes opposing fans go "ohhhh fuck, he's in" for several years doesn't have a Cy yet.

They really need to make "broken bats allowed" part of pitchers stats ;)

[Jobronie]

And yes I did read the article. Still doesn't change how I feel about who should win the award and its quite obvious the majority of the Baseball's writers feel the same way I do and that's why he won the award.Well, that must mean you're right then. -ohbfrank-

I hate to count the number of writers, columnists, commentators, color-men, 'experts', etc. who, in the same breath, have said the CY is supposed to go to the best pitcher, X was obviously the best pitcher this year, but they would give it to Y because he had more wins and it's wins that matter (apologies if that's too close to Joe Morgan's quote from a month back).

[Mad Dawg]

After looking at the stats, I don't know if I wouldn't put Pettitte in the top spot if I had a vote. It's shocking just how badly he, Oswalt and Clemens were screwed over by their offense. They received about 1 run, 1.5 runs, and 2 runs respectively less per game than Carpenter. Carpenter and Pettitte both led the NL with 27 quality starts. But while Carpenter only took the loss in 2 of those starts, Pettitte lost an amazing 7 (considered "tough losses"). Oswalt lost 6 out of 25 QS, and Clemens lost 5 of 26. And we all know that the Astros were shut out in a record 8 games that Clemens started. I can't find those numbers for Oswalt or Pettitte.

All things considered, it would be tough to punish Carpenter and Willis for the Astros' futility with the bats. But Pettitte was truly fantastic, and had he pitched for the Cardinals, we probably wouldn't even be having this discussion. He may very well have finished the year 22-4, and that doesn't even account for the fact that his home park wouldn't have been Minute Maid.

[chrisih8u]

Guillen and Cox for Manager of the Year.

[Mad Dawg]

Guillen and Cox for Manager of the Year.

Voting went like this:

AL - 1) Guillen, 2) Wedge, 3) Torre
NL - 1) Cox, 2) LaRussa, 3) Garner

[Y2K Falcon]

(1st place votes, 2nd place votes, 3rd place votes, total points)

Ozzie Guillen, White Sox 17 5 5 105
Eric Wedge, Indians 6 11 8 71
Joe Torre, Yankees 4 7 2 43
Ken Macha, A's 1 3 7 21
Mike Scioscia, Angels 0 1 4 7
Terry Francona, Red Sox 0 1 1 4
John Gibbons, Blue Jays 0 0 1 1 :hscratch:

Bobby Cox, Braves 28 4 0 152
Tony La Russa, Cardinals 2 13 3 52
Phil Garner, Astros 0 9 11 38
Frank Robinson, Nationals 2 4 7 29
Ned Yost, Brewers 0 0 7 7
Charlie Manuel, Phillies 0 1 2 5
Bruce Bochy, Padres 0 1 1 4
Willie Randolph, Mets 0 0 1 1 :scratch2:

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2218718

[das Monkey]

Willie Randolph rotfl

das

[Jericho]

I've always thought the Manager of the Year award was a joke. Partly because I think baseball managers don't really have much of an impact on actual win totals. But mostly because the award isn't really "best manger", but the "manager on the team who most exceeded expectations". That's not to say anything about the managerial qualities of these managers. But the award seems based solely on preseason predicitions. And as we all know, preseason predictions are often flat out wriong. Just look at preseason poll in college football for example. So if a team is underestimated, that manager will likely win the award (or come close). The fall back is always to give the award to a good team.

[Mad Dawg]

You always have to wonder why, when it seems like every writer laments the use of wins to determine a Cy Young winner, it always comes down to that stat. Luckily, Mike Celizic shows us the way, in this article demanding that Carpenter, not Clemens, deserves the Cy Young (a bold statement, considering people stopped making the arguement for Clemens in August):

I agreed with the voters last year, and if I ever want to be accused of being consistent, the same rule has to apply this year. You win just 13 games, you don’t win the Cy Young; no starting pitcher, in fact, has ever won it for a full season with fewer than 16 wins.

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/9974727/page/2/

His earlier article insisting that Rivera should have won the AL Cy Young argued that there was no dominant AL starting pitcher, pointing to the fact that Santana only won 16. :lol: Don't get me wrong, he's right about Rivera, but it is just mind boggling how guys who follow this game day in and day out clutch to that win stat so desperately. Then again, Celizic is really a twat, so maybe he's a bad example.

[das Monkey]

• Jericho •

I've always thought the Manager of the Year award was a joke. Partly because I think baseball managers don't really have much of an impact on actual win totals. But mostly because the award isn't really "best manger", but the "manager on the team who most exceeded expectations". That's not to say anything about the managerial qualities of these managers. But the award seems based solely on preseason predicitions. And as we all know, preseason predictions are often flat out wriong. Just look at preseason poll in college football for example. So if a team is underestimated, that manager will likely win the award (or come close). The fall back is always to give the award to a good team.
:hscratch: Braves were supposed to win the division, Braves won the division, Cox wins in a landslide.

das

[shizawn]

:up: to Cox. Totally deserved.

[LurkerDan]

:hscratch: Braves were supposed to win the division, Braves won the division, Cox wins in a landslide.

das
Um, I think most people didn't pick the Braves, and those who did, picked them because of the "I'm not picking against the Braves because they have proven me wrong over and over".

Regardless, I think Cox deserved it, how many rookies did he play this year? Guy is the best in the league, and as a Mets fan it isn't easy to admit that.

As for AL, it's hard to argue with Guillen. I don't like the guy, but really, nobody expected his team to do what they did, and if you are going to have a manager of the year award, he makes a strong case. Look at their roster even now, and tell me whether that looks like the roster of a team that has the best record in the league and a team that goes 11-1 in the postseason.

[Josh H]

Cox definatel deserved. Was an amazing feat to win the division again with all the injuries and rookies starting.

[Jericho]

:hscratch: Braves were supposed to win the division, Braves won the division, Cox wins in a landslide.

das

Well I'd disagree with you that the Braves were supposed to win the division. A lot of people loved the Marlins remember (and to a lesser extent the Phillies). Not to say I agreed with those predictions, but the Braves were far from unanimous choice in the East. Plus, you forgot the back-up rule. If no team overachieves, then you go to the top teams. The only team that really stood out as a "surprise" might be the Astros, although they were considered good and won only 89 games. Cox won over LaRussa among the good teams, probably because Cox played more rookies. I stand by my statements.

[Jericho]

Oh, and Atlanta was more of a surprise than LaRussa. Or Atlanta was more of a surprise than St. Louis. That was a big factor too.

[Quake1028]

I have no problems at all with the MotY winners.

FWIW, I would have voted this way for the Cy Young Races:

AL: 1)Rivera 2)Santana 3)Colon
NL: 1)Pettitte 2)Willis 3)Carpenter 4)Clemens

[Y2K Falcon]

http://img273.imageshack.us/img273/191/car2ti.jpg (http://imageshack.us)http://www.asahi-net.or.jp/~hw8m-mrkm/nonch/people/penn/penn.jpghttp://medialit.med.sc.edu/25grea15.jpg


http://img250.imageshack.us/img250/4774/nlcy3oi.jpg (http://imageshack.us)


http://mlb.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/news/article.jsp?ymd=20051110&content_id=1267003&vkey=news_mlb&fext=.jsp&c_id=mlb

[Jericho]

Carpenter's late season swoon made it interesting, but I'd still have chosen him. Florida is a great pitcher's park, so he doesn't have quite the benefit that Willis had. And Clemens didn't really pitch better than Carpenter, he just had a ridiculously low BAA - mostly due to luck. I can't complain about a guy who threw tons of innings, got the Ks, and overall did a great job.

[LurkerDan]

Carpenter's late season swoon made it interesting, but I'd still have chosen him. Florida is a great pitcher's park, so he doesn't have quite the benefit that Willis had. And Clemens didn't really pitch better than Carpenter, he just had a ridiculously low BAA - mostly due to luck. I can't complain about a guy who threw tons of innings, got the Ks, and overall did a great job.
How is it lucky to have a low BAA? :hscratch:

I have no problem with Carpenter, either, his swoon may have come at the end of the year but it was after the Cards had the thing sewn up, it wasn't during crunch time.

Pettite should have gotten more votes, though, he was easily the best pitcher in the second half of the season.

[Mordred]

While my vote probably would have gone to Willis, Carpenter was certainly deserving as well. Glad to see that only two writers thought Clemens deserved it.

[Y2K Falcon]

I can't complain about a guy who threw tons of innings, got the Ks, and overall did a great job.Maybe my pics confused you. You do realize that Peavy did not win, right? :hscratch:

I don't even know what to do with that "due to luck" statement. -screwy-

[LurkerDan]

Maybe my pics confused you.
I think your pics confused everybody. :shrug:

[El Scorcho]

The best storyline out of this is "Who's the retard that voted Chad Cordero?"

Revoke his voting privileges.

[Mad Dawg]

A single vote for Pettitte is pretty much a joke, but I don't think the outcome is any sort of surprise. Carpenter and Willis almost had to be 1-2, whichever finished first. I very well may have put Pettitte at #1, but I think the CGs and Shutouts from Carpenter and Willis are pretty impressive. Unlike the AL, the NL could have finished in several different ways and still have been reasonable.

[Jericho]

How is it lucky to have a low BAA? :hscratch:

I have no problem with Carpenter, either, his swoon may have come at the end of the year but it was after the Cards had the thing sewn up, it wasn't during crunch time.

Pettite should have gotten more votes, though, he was easily the best pitcher in the second half of the season.

I slight misspoke when I said BAA. I meant to say BABIP (Batting Avergae on Balls In Play), which is pretty much constant for every pitcher in the league (not 100% exactly). When a pitcher has a ridiculously low BABIP, it's due to luck. The next year they regress to the mean (for example Pedro has run the full gamut from league best to league worst BABIP)

[Jericho]

Maybe my pics confused you. You do realize that Peavy did not win, right? :hscratch:

I don't even know what to do with that "due to luck" statement. -screwy-


I'm not part of your Peavy circle jerk, though the luck statement is a proven fact

[LurkerDan]

ok, the luck statement is a proven fact if you apply it to the right freaking statistic!!!

[fumanstan]

I would have voted for Willis.

[Quake1028]

I'm not part of your Peavy circle jerk, though the luck statement is a proven fact

Peavy's stats, across the board, were equal to or better than anyone's in the NL.

3 more K's in 38 less IP than Carpenter
ERA a wash
WHIP a wash
Peavy had a better BAA

Not saying Peavy should have won, but he did have some great stats.

[Jericho]

Peavy's stats, across the board, were equal to or better than anyone's in the NL.

3 more K's in 38 less IP than Carpenter
ERA a wash
WHIP a wash
Peavy had a better BAA

Not saying Peavy should have won, but he did have some great stats.

Oh, I'm not saying Peavy isn't a good pitcher. But he had signifcantly less innings pitched while pitching in an extreme pitcher's park. But the Cy Young isn't about having a good year, it's about the best year. And Peavy doesn't come close to the best (at least for this year), so I don't see why he should need mentioning.

[Jericho]

ok, the luck statement is a proven fact if you apply it to the right freaking statistic!!!

well BAA does account for BABIP. And an extremely low BAA by Clemens was partly due to his lucky BABIIP. So I was partly right :)

[Quake1028]

Oh, I'm not saying Peavy isn't a good pitcher. But he had signifcantly less innings pitched while pitching in an extreme pitcher's park. But the Cy Young isn't about having a good year, it's about the best year. And Peavy doesn't come close to the best (at least for this year), so I don't see why he should need mentioning.

How can you say he didn't have the best year when almost every stat of his is equal or better than those of the Cy Young winner?

[LurkerDan]

How can you say he didn't have the best year when almost every stat of his is equal or better than those of the Cy Young winner?
Inninigs pitched is a hugely important stat, and 38 innings is a big difference.

[Jericho]

How can you say he didn't have the best year when almost every stat of his is equal or better than those of the Cy Young winner?


What Lurker Dan said, plus ballpark effects strongly favor Carpenter.

[El Scorcho]

WTF, the litter box is one of the most pitcher friendly parks in the game. How was Busch Stadium even close to being a pitchers park compared to that vast expanse known as Petco Park.

[LurkerDan]

WTF, the litter box is one of the most pitcher friendly parks in the game. How was Busch Stadium even close to being a pitchers park compared to that vast expanse known as Petco Park.
that's the point that is being made, yes.

[El Scorcho]

Never mind, misread it

This is what happens when I actually work :(

[Quake1028]

So, today we finally get the answer to the AL MVP question today. Olney said on Mike & Mike that he thinks ARod will win. He also said he thinks some voters could drop Ortiz as low as 5th on their ballot due to the DH issue, and that might cost him the award.

[LurkerDan]

I expect Ortiz to be left off at least one ballot, and some will drop him down significantly. If everyone rated him without a DH penalty, I believe he'd win. But since I am sure he will be "penalized", I expect ARod to take it.

[LurkerDan]

It's ARod and there was no real DH penalty either. :shrug:

[El Scorcho]

Hooray for A-Rod!

It just goes to show you kids, that if you play hard the entire game -- even when you're ahead 13-1 in the 8th inning -- you, too, can mount up some serious stats and win yourself an MVP!

[neiname]

Hooray for A-Rod!

It just goes to show you kids, that if you play hard the entire game -- even when you're ahead 13-1 in the 8th inning -- you, too, can mount up some serious stats and win yourself an MVP!

lol

[Mr. Cinema]

I'm glad Arod won. I like players who play offense and defense the entire game.

[Jobronie]

Biggest controversy seems to be the writer who voted Vlad-Tiz-ARod.

Right now Dan Patrick is going off on all of ARod's $ bonuses for the year and how for $25M you sorta expect him to win SS, AllStar, and get MVP consideration.....

[huh?]

Hooray for A-Rod!

It just goes to show you kids, that if you play hard the entire game -- even when you're ahead 13-1 in the 8th inning -- you, too, can mount up some serious stats and win yourself an MVP!


:lol:

[Aphex Twin]

Biggest controversy seems to be the writer who voted Vlad-Tiz-ARod.

Right now Dan Patrick is going off on all of ARod's $ bonuses for the year and how for $25M you sorta expect him to win SS, AllStar, and get MVP consideration.....

He gets $1,000,000 for winning the MVP.

Anyone have the complete list of voters for the MVP award?

[chrisih8u]

At least Papi has a ring. :up:

And someone left Manny off the ballot completely. :confused:

[Rogue588]

http://members.aol.com/rogue588/DVDTalk/mvp.jpg

[fumanstan]

Cool, I would have voted for ARod as well.

[Y2K Falcon]

2005 AL MVP Award
Player, Club 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th 10th Points
Mariano Rivera, NYY 1 1 1 3 3 1 3 2 59
Bartolo Colon, LAA 1 1 3
2005 AL Cy Young Award
Player, Club 1st 2nd 3rd Points
Bartolo Colon, Angels 17 11 118
Mariano Rivera, Yankees 8 7 7 68
:hscratch:

[raven56706]

congrats AROD..... too bad you freaking suck in the post season

[Jericho]

:hscratch:

I guess the people who liked Rivera, really liked him. If the same people vote for MVP and Cy Young (and I'm pretty sure they do) and assuming the people who voted Rivera 1st in the Cy Young also voted on him for MVP, it could make some sense. Not 100% sense, but possible. Still, I think we all know there are some dicotic voters out there.

[Jericho]

I would also add that despite A-Rod's mostly underserved label for not being "clutch", it's extremely hard to find a reason why he shouldn't win the MVP. He just did more than Ortiz over the regular season.

[wildcatlh]

I would also add that despite A-Rod's mostly underserved label for not being "clutch", it's extremely hard to find a reason why he shouldn't win the MVP. He just did more than Ortiz over the regular season.


It's hard to find a reason against either of them. Would've voted Papi, but there's nothing wrong with ARod winning it.

That being said, to say that "ARod just did more than Ortiz over the regular season" is silly at best (and kinda shows your bias).

[davidh777]

Some people consider the Cy Young a "starter's award." And some people consider a closer a better MVP candidate because he pitches more games, more like an everyday position player.

[Goat3001]

Good for A-Rod. Other than the whole clutch hitting thing there was no reason for Ortiz to win over Rodriguez. I'm glad it went to A-Rod.

[El Scorcho]

Biggest controversy seems to be the writer who voted Vlad-Tiz-ARod.

Right now Dan Patrick is going off on all of ARod's $ bonuses for the year and how for $25M you sorta expect him to win SS, AllStar, and get MVP consideration.....


For $25M, I expect that cocksucker to walk on water, not just win the MVP.

Either way, A-Rod still has 0 rings and I hope to god it stays that way.

[El Scorcho]

Other than the whole clutch hitting thing

yeah this is one tiny minor detail in regards to determining the best player, we should just kinda skip by it and not mention it again

[wildcatlh]

yeah this is one tiny minor detail in regards to determining the best player, we should just kinda skip by it and not mention it again

Nah. I agree with him. I mean, other than the whole single season hits record thing, there's no reason that Ichiro is a better hitter than ... well, anyone.

[Jericho]

It's hard to find a reason against either of them. Would've voted Papi, but there's nothing wrong with ARod winning it.

That being said, to say that "ARod just did more than Ortiz over the regular season" is silly at best (and kinda shows your bias).

To really simplify what I'm saying is this:
A-Rod hit better (only by a small amount, but he's in a worse hitter's park)
A-Rod fielded better
A-Rod ran the bases better
A-Rod played a more difficult and harder to obtain position
A-Rod's team won the division

The question is, what did Ortiz do better? If you break down hitting into sub-sections (because as mentioned A-Rod hit better overall), than Ortiz has advantages in certain sub-sections, such as late and close hitting. But saying Ortiz is better late and close isn't enough in my book because: (1) its just a small sample of at bats and one can't ignore overall hitting for a small subsection of it; and (2) it ignores the fact that A-Rod was better earlier in games. And hitting better earlier in games has advantages that can't be ignored. That is all. They're just too many areas A-Rod is better in.

[El Scorcho]

Replace A-Rod with a .270/15/70 hitter and the Yankees still make the playoffs.

Replace Ortiz with a .270/15/70 hitter and Boston doesn't have to worry about playing the White Sox.

[Quake1028]

Replace A-Rod with a .270/15/70 hitter and the Yankees still make the playoffs.

Replace Ortiz with a .270/15/70 hitter and Boston doesn't have to worry about playing the White Sox.

Only because we know Baltimore (snicker) isn't going to win the division anytime soon ;).

[twikoff]

and you lose votes for just being half a player ;)

[Mad Dawg]

Personally, I'm not surprised or annoyed that ARod won (other than in the general, everyday course of my ARod-hate). I would have voted for Ortiz, but so be it.

I think Jayson Stark's column today sums up the Ortiz case better than anyone I've seen, and certainly provides reasons why there was reason to vote for Ortiz over ARod. ARod put together a fantastic statistical season, but Ortiz was the AL's most valuable player.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/story?columnist=stark_jayson&id=2224114

...The MVP award wasn't about defense the year Jose Canseco won it.

The MVP award wasn't about defense the years Juan Gonzalez won it.

The MVP award wasn't about defense the years Frank Thomas won it.

But suddenly, this year, defense mattered. And Alex Rodriguez will be eternally grateful, we're sure.....

....In the 20 games each of their teams won by six or more runs, A-Rod hit .549, had an OPS of 1.793 and racked up 46 of his 130 RBI (35 percent). Ortiz, on the other hand, batted .277, had an OPS almost 800 points lower than A-Rod's (.999) and drove in only 33 runs (22 percent of his overall total).

But in close games (games that either went to extra innings or were decided by one or two runs in regulation), the numbers look a whole lot different.

In those games -- and each team played exactly 65 of them -- A-Rod batted only .243, had an OPS of .805 and drove in just 38 runs (29 percent). Ortiz, meanwhile, clearly tapped some mysterious force that made him even better in moments like that -- batting .321, running up an OPS of 1.116 and knocking in nearly a run a game (62 -- or 42 percent of his overall total). ....

It's certainly a hell of a case.

[Pharoh]

Personally, I'm not surprised or annoyed that ARod won (other than in the general, everyday course of my ARod-hate). I would have voted for Ortiz, but so be it.

I think Jayson Stark's column today sums up the Ortiz case better than anyone I've seen, and certainly provides reasons why there was reason to vote for Ortiz over ARod. ARod put together a fantastic statistical season, but Ortiz was the AL's most valuable player.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/story?columnist=stark_jayson&id=2224114



It's certainly a hell of a case.



Were those 20 games close though when A-Rod got his hits and RBI?

Were any of the 65 'close' games headed for blowout wins by the Sox/Yanks before the opposition made it a close game?

I am not suggesting anything, merely asking.

[Jericho]

You shouldn't ignore defense simply because there may have been MVP votes in the past that ignored defense. I don't know the facts behind the years Canseco, Gonzaelez, and Thomas off the top of my head. I do know they did all play the field at least. And Gonzo never should have won that year anyways. But I suspect Canseco and Thomas were pretty dominant offensively. So much so that their lack of defense wasn't enough to win the award.

I think the knock on A-Rod has always been that he puts up lots of stats in meaningless situations. I tend to think the idea has been exaggeratted. Even if A-Rod's numbers aren't as good as Ortiz's in close and late situations, plenty of A-Rod at bats were in close games. And you can do a lot of beneficial things with no one on base or without runners in scoring position to help you team win.

Even in the above stats, you're talking 20 games out of 162. Or about 1/8 of the season. And even then, not all of those at bats were taken with the game out of hand. Hitting a HR with the score 0-0 is important, even if the final score ends up to be 11-3. A-Rod was clearly better in those "blowout" games, games that his team easily won. Of course his team easily won those games partly because he was so good. But 7/8th of the season is remaining, and A-Rod would have to have been pretty good in those games to put up the final stats he did. I still believe that the idea that A-Rod puts up all his stats in meaningless situations is greatly exaggerated. He may do better in blowout situations, but then again most players do.

[Mad Dawg]

Were those 20 games close though when A-Rod got his hits and RBI?

Were any of the 65 'close' games headed for blowout wins by the Sox/Yanks before the opposition made it a close game?

I am not suggesting anything, merely asking.

Great points, but I can't tell you. Obviously the case has been made, and rightfully so, that if ARod hits a solo shot in the first inning of a game that ends up being 12-0, that is just as important as a late inning, close game HR. The stats weren't broken down further than that. I should point out that those stats were also compiled by a stathead on a Sox forum, but he has never been afraid to prove a Sox player statiscally weaker in his writings before.

There are plenty of other statistics, like the big ones, that show ARod as the better hitter this year. I would agree with Stark that being the better hitter (or all-around player) does not equal most valuable. The writers disagreed, and that is no skin off my nose.

[Jericho]

Here's an example. A-Rod hit .293 with a .938 OPS close and late. Those are pretty damn good numbers. So it's not like he always choked close and late like some believe. Ortiz hit better in these situations. So people give an edge to Ortiz. And rightfully so. But each player had only 75 and 78 at bats in such situations, hardly a huge sample size. That's why looking at overall numbers is better. A larger sample size shows more accurate numbers. Plus, there's obviously a lot more to a game than close and late situations. People might remember them more. The walk-off homer or the 4th quarter drive. People don't tend to remember the runs or scores that put a team up initially, which are often as important, if not more so. Perception often plays tricks like that.

[Jericho]

Were those 20 games close though when A-Rod got his hits and RBI?

Were any of the 65 'close' games headed for blowout wins by the Sox/Yanks before the opposition made it a close game?

I am not suggesting anything, merely asking.

These are good questions. I would add one more. If you're using statistic to back-up an argument (and baseball is very statistically driven unlike other sports), then you have to ask how accurate are the statistics. Sample size is important in providing accurate assessments of any statistics. I know most people here aren't statisticians and don't care, but unless a player has enough at bats, the stats don't necessarily reflect anything. 600 at bats is a significant sample size. 40 at bats is not.

[fumanstan]

Out of curiosity, who were the other MVP candidates when Canseco or Thomas won? If they were significantly better offensively then the next candidate, then defense doesn't matter as much. In a close race between statistically similar guys, I'd pick the guy that's actually on the field over a DH.

[Deftones]

I just want to say that I'm shocked that Jorge Cantu didn't get more votes.

[Jericho]

Out of curiosity, who were the other MVP candidates when Canseco or Thomas won? If they were significantly better offensively then the next candidate, then defense doesn't matter as much. In a close race between statistically similar guys, I'd pick the guy that's actually on the field over a DH.

I just came across this, but in the year Frank Thomas won, Paul Molitor finished 2nd while playing mostly DH.

[Josh H]

Pujols won the NL MVP. :(

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2224756

[B.A.]

Damnit - Albert wasn't Bar-roided this season. -ohbfrank-

[LurkerDan]

Pujols deserved it. :up:

And credit to the writers that Pujols, Jones, and Lee were 1-2-3 (in some order) on every ballot.

[Jericho]

I do feel bad for Derrek Lee, who was even better than Pujols, but stuck on a mediocre team. Could only finish 3rd.

Note: I also like how Derrek Lee is still wearing a Marlins hat in the above ESPN link. I mean they even got Delgado in a Marlins hat, what's the hold up on Lee?

[Aphex Twin]

I do feel bad for Derrek Lee, who was even better than Pujols, but stuck on a mediocre team. Could only finish 3rd.


Yeah...Jimmy Rollins and Brian Giles got votes, while Jeff Kent got none.

[Jericho]

Yeah...Jimmy Rollins and Brian Giles got votes, while Jeff Kent got none.

And Jason Bay couldn't even crack the Top 10. It's the anti-Canadian bias! :)

[Y2K Falcon]

Yeah...Jimmy Rollins and Brian Giles got votes, while Jeff Kent got none.
Wrong....

However...

BBWAA voters who should lose their voting card
----------------------------------------------
Whoever has Eckstein as the 6th most valuable player in the NL -ohbfrank-



http://img38.imageshack.us/img38/5323/nlmvp9zl.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
Source: http://mlb.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/news/article.jsp?ymd=20051115&content_id=1268475&vkey=news_mlb&fext=.jsp&c_id=mlb#results

[HydroX2]

I call BS, Andruw should have won the MVP. His average was the only thing that hurt him in the long run but even so, he carried a rookie team on his back to another division title. C'mon, no love for the Braves except for coach of the year.

[das Monkey]

Yeah, but he won the Hank Aaron Award, so the confusion is at least balanced. Pujols and Lee were better hitters, and Andruw was more valuable to his team, so naturally, they do the awards this way.

das

[shizawn]

I'm actually not surprised Andruw didn't get the award. He totally slumped in September.

[Aphex Twin]

Wrong....

However...


Oh...didn't look at the entire list. Just looked at what ESPN had. Thanks.

[Jericho]

I call BS, Andruw should have won the MVP. His average was the only thing that hurt him in the long run but even so, he carried a rookie team on his back to another division title. C'mon, no love for the Braves except for coach of the year.

I think the fact his overall hitting was not on the same level as Pujols and Lee also hurt him. Really Jones is a good player who had a very good year. But one in which he still was only like the 10th best player in the NL. In the past, his defense might have helped him make-up the difference in hitting. But no longer. Instead, the only reason Jones was an MVP candidate was because of the team he was on. Just like the only reason Derrek Lee didn't win was the team he was on. And there's something pretty unsatisfying about an award that is based on who your teammates are. It should be about how much impact you individually have.

[AndyCapps]

Finally.

[Josh H]

It should be about how much impact you individually have.

And he led the league in game winning RBIs and homeruns and pretty much single handedly got the Braves into the post-season in the strongest top to bottom division in baseball.

Pujols had a great year, but the Cards were stacked and would have made the playoffs without him in all likelihood. Thus he wasn't as valuable.

They should just call it most outstanding player instead of MVP if they're going to give it out in this regard. Same with A-Rod winning it over Ortiz.

[Jericho]

And he led the league in game winning RBIs and homeruns and pretty much single handedly got the Braves into the post-season in the strongest top to bottom division in baseball.

Pujols had a great year, but the Cards were stacked and would have made the playoffs without him in all likelihood. Thus he wasn't as valuable.

They should just call it most outstanding player instead of MVP if they're going to give it out in this regard. Same with A-Rod winning it over Ortiz.

Jones also hit .207 with RISP on the year, and that's over 184 at bats. He's part of the reason the Braves didn't score more, and a better player would have helped the Braves out more (i.e. Pujols). While it's true that the Braves likely would not have made the playoffs without Jones, the Padres likely wouldn't have made the playoffs without Jake Peavy. Nor the Astros without Morgan Ensberg. Where do you draw the line? And are you going to penalize Lee for playing on too poor of a team while penalizing Pujols for playing on too good of a team? By that criteria, the MVP has to come from one or two teams, automatically disqualifying most players unfortunate enough to not be on the "right" team.

Besides, don't the most outstanding players provide the most value? Doesn't Pujols provide more wins to the Cards than Jones provides to the Braves. Is that the very definition of value, providing wins?

I mean you knock A-Rod for winning the award, when the Yanks wouldn't have made the playoffs without him. And yet you give the award to Jones for the same logic. That doesn't seem to make sense.

[Y2K Falcon]

I'm actually not surprised Andruw didn't get the award. He totally slumped in September.
Can anyone confirm when exactly these ballots are due? And possibly when the majority of them are sent?

[Josh H]

Doesn't Pujols provide more wins to the Cards than Jones provides to the Braves. Is that the very definition of value, providing wins?


Jones had more game winning RBIs, so that's not clear.


I mean you knock A-Rod for winning the award, when the Yanks wouldn't have made the playoffs without him. And yet you give the award to Jones for the same logic. That doesn't seem to make sense.

I don't think Arod was undeserving per se, just that Ortiz was more important to the Red Sox than Arod was to the Yankees with all his clutch hits IMO.

Neither the Yankees or the Sox made it without them, but Ortiz was more important IMO.

[fumanstan]

No problems with Pujols winning. I probably would have voted for Andruw though.

[Jericho]

Jones had more game winning RBIs, so that's not clear.



I don't think Arod was undeserving per se, just that Ortiz was more important to the Red Sox than Arod was to the Yankees with all his clutch hits IMO.

Neither the Yankees or the Sox made it without them, but Ortiz was more important IMO.

I think you're oversimplying the stats. Jones had game winning RBIs, but that doesn't mean he won them the games. Even an 11-1 game has a game winning RBI. Isn't that the knock on A-Rod, that he's not as productive in close games as Ortiz? I don't know the GWRBI leaders this year as MLB doesn't even bother to keep track of it anymore. But it's hardly a tellin stat by itself.

As for Ortiz and A-Rod, you seem to be giving a lot of weight to what happened late of games, but you're ignoring what players did in the first six innings. And many plays are made in those innings that either win a game or set-up a team for a late inning comeback. Both Ortiz and A-Rod hit 19 HRs that gave their team the lead or tied the game. It's just that Ortiz did them late in the game, where as A-Rod did them early.

[Brian Gentz]

Derrek Lee was the best fielding NL first baseman (Gold Glove)
Derrek Lee was the best hitting NL first baseman (Silver Slugger)

so how does a different NL first baseman win the MVP?

[Jericho]

Derrek Lee was the best fielding NL first baseman (Gold Glove)
Derrek Lee was the best hitting NL first baseman (Silver Slugger)

so how does a different NL first baseman win the MVP?

Because he was unfortunate enough not to play for either Atlanta, Houston, or St. Louis.

[Mordred]

And he led the league in game winning RBIs and homeruns and pretty much single handedly got the Braves into the post-season in the strongest top to bottom division in baseball.

Pujols had a great year, but the Cards were stacked and would have made the playoffs without him in all likelihood. Thus he wasn't as valuable.Earlier in another thread about a week before the season ended I showed the Braves and Cardinals offensive stats with and without Pujols and Jones in the lineup.

The Cardinals had the better offensive team total, but subtracting the two big sluggers from each lineup changed the story. In that case the Braves had the advantage in BA, SLG, RBI and maybe HR (I can't remember). Jones may have been surrounded by a revolving cast of oldtimers and no-namers, but they pulled their weight even more than the Cardinals lineup.

Pitching of course wasn't close so it evens out somewhat.

I think the voters got it right on both counts re: Pujols and A-Rod.

[B.A.]

Derrek Lee was the best fielding NL first baseman (Gold Glove)
Derrek Lee was the best hitting NL first baseman (Silver Slugger)

so how does a different NL first baseman win the MVP?Because that other National League first baseman has been doing the same thing for the last five seasons. That - and Barry didn't play this year.

:D

[Kaiser Soze]

Because that other National League first baseman has been doing the same thing for the last five seasons. That - and Barry didn't play this year.

:D

What he said.

[AndyCapps]

Derrek Lee was the best fielding NL first baseman (Gold Glove)
Derrek Lee was the best hitting NL first baseman (Silver Slugger)

so how does a different NL first baseman win the MVP?

That different NL first baseman didn't play for a 4th place team that probably would've still been a 4th place team without him. Shit, Lee didn't even get second in the voting, which surprised me. When it's close, the voters seem to like to give it to the guy whose team makes the playoffs. See 1998 NL MVP.

As far as the comment about the Cardinals lineup being stacked goes, half of the Opening Day starters spent a significant amount of time on the DL. Scott Rolen, the team's 2004 MVP, only played about 1/3 of the season(and much of that hurt or ineffective). He wasn't there to provide protection behind Pujols. They were lucky they got what they did out of guys like Abraham Nunez and John Rodriguez.

[LurkerDan]

People saying the Cards have a stacked lineup are living in 2004.

[neiname]

Derrek Lee was the best fielding NL first baseman (Gold Glove)
Derrek Lee was the best hitting NL first baseman (Silver Slugger)

so how does a different NL first baseman win the MVP?

Baserunning?

[davidh777]

DLee: .335 + 199 hits + 50 doubles + 46 home runs + terrible top of lineup = only 107 RBI