MLB 2016

[buckchuckler]

I don't think being in contention should matter.  I find their arguments lacking. 

Was that difficult for you to understand?

The fact that you fail to understand the reality of the situation is difficult to understand.  Bitching at people about something that isnt their doing and is evidently true is ridiculous, but as you already know everything, I'm sure you knew that.

[GGGG]

The fact that you fail to understand the reality of the situation is difficult to understand.

What reality?  That baseball writers use poor metrics?  I fully understand that.

[brandx]

There isa difference between best player and most valuable player.

[GGGG]

There isa difference between best player and most valuable player.

The most valuable is the one who had the best season.  The player who had the best season may not be the best player..which is best measured over multiple seasons.

[buckchuckler]

What reality?  That baseball writers use poor metrics?  I fully understand that.

Golly Sultan, if only everyone were as intelligent and enlightened as you are. Sigh, that is a dream world.

[Lennys Tap]

MVP = player with the best season.  Really how is Betts more "valuable" than Trout?  Because his team was better?

That's nonsense.


That's where it should always start and usually end.

The Angels accomplished nothing. Their season's "value" was zero. How much value can any player give to a team if the sum of all the teams player's values is zero?

[buckchuckler]

The Angels accomplished nothing. Their season's "value" was zero. How much value can any player give to a team if the sum of all the teams player's values is zero?

Haha, multiply the players WAR by their teams winning percentage. 

[GGGG]

The Angels accomplished nothing. Their season's "value" was zero. How much value can any player give to a team if the sum of all the teams player's values is zero?

Again, I am not punishing Trout because the front office got him worse teammates.  You seem to want individuals awards to be partially based on whatever guys sitting on the bench with him are better.  That's nonsense.

Trout had the better season.  He is MVP.

[GGGG]

Golly Sultan, if only everyone were as intelligent and enlightened as you are.

It's the cross I must bear.

[MerrittsMustache]

MVP = player with the best season.  Really how is Betts more "valuable" than Trout?  Because his team was better?

That's nonsense.


That's where it should always start and usually end.

Why is it nonsense to say that the most valuable player on one of the best teams in MLB had more value than a player whose team finished 20+ games out of 1st place? Trout put up big numbers but what did they accomplish? His team was basically out of contention by mid-June. He wasn't playing for anything. That's not his fault, but I don't see how you can just ignore that his gaudy numbers basically came in glorified exhibition games and helped his team get no where.

[GGGG]

Why is it nonsense to say that the most valuable player on one of the best teams in MLB had more value than a player whose team finished 20+ games out of 1st place? Trout put up big numbers but what did they accomplish? His team was basically out of contention by mid-June. He wasn't playing for anything. That's not his fault, but I don't see how you can just ignore that his gaudy numbers basically came in glorified exhibition games and helped his team get no where.

Again, because I don't think he should be punished for having bad teammates.  You do.

And really unless you can show me that Betts was somehow much "clutch," the "games that mean something" line is meaningless.

[Lennys Tap]

Again, I am not punishing Trout because the front office got him worse teammates.  You seem to want individuals awards to be partially based on whatever guys sitting on the bench with him are better.  That's nonsense.

Trout had the better season.  He is MVP.

Mike Trout had very slightly better numbers but his numbers had much less significance, much less impact, much less VALUE. That's not his fault but it is a fact.

Three run homers when your team is down 8-0 in the 7th inning are not as "valuable" as contributions that help win games that actually matter. Want nonsense? Looking at numbers without any context. Now that's some serious nonsense.

[GGGG]

Mike Trout had very slightly better numbers but his numbers had much less significance, much less impact, much less VALUE. That's not his fault but it is a fact.

Three run homers when your team is down 8-0 in the 7th inning are not as "valuable" as contributions that help win games that actually matter. Want nonsense? Looking at numbers without any context. Now that's some serious nonsense.

This is the last time I am going to say this.

Most valuable = Best season.  That is how I view it.  Others don't.  I think they are wrong.

Trout had a better season.  Not going to punish him because of his teammates.  He should be MVP.

[buckchuckler]

This is the last time I am going to say this.

Thank God for small favors.  We are all well aware of your opinion.  But that is all it is.  It carries no more weight than anyone else's.  Stop pretending it does. 

[GGGG]

Thank God for small favors.  We are all well aware of your opinion.  But that is all it is.  It carries no more weight than anyone else's.  Stop pretending it does. 

If you don't like what I have to say or how I say it, you can ignore me. 

[Lennys Tap]

This is the last time I am going to say this.

Most valuable = Best season.  That is how I view it.  Others don't.  I think they are wrong.

Trout had a better season.  Not going to punish him because of his teammates.  He should be MVP.

This is the last time I will say this. Most valuable does not just equal best numbers. Numbers are a large component of value but not the entire component. People who are incapable seeing numbers in context are myopic.

I'll be shocked if there are enough people full of enough nonsense to give Mike Trout this years MVP. Only happens if Betts and Ortiz spilt the "winning means something" vote.

[MerrittsMustache]

Again, because I don't think he should be punished for having bad teammates.  You do.

And really unless you can show me that Betts was somehow much "clutch," the "games that mean something" line is meaningless.

So in your mind, a HR for a team that's 20 games out and is trailing 6-0 in the 8th inning means just as much as a game-winning HR for a team that's tied for 1st in late September?

"Clutch" stats aren't exact but here's a glimpse at a few...

RISP
Betts: 165 PA, 80 RBI, .355
Trout: 171 PA, 72 RBI, .328

2 Out RISP
Betts: 67 PA, 34 RBI, .404
Trout: 62 PA, 32 RBI, .306

Late & Close
Betts: 97 PA, .283/.320/.500
Trout: 98 PA, .257/.429/.405

Men on Base
Betts: 299 PA, 96 RBI, .327/.378/.575
Trout: 310 PA, 83 RBI, .311/.448/.527

[GGGG]

Now *that's* what I am talking about.  Thanks Merritts.  That is the type of stuff that would lead me to reconsider my position.  It has to be better than "he was on a better team."

[robmufan]

So in your mind, a HR for a team that's 20 games out and is trailing 6-0 in the 8th inning means just as much as a game-winning HR for a team that's tied for 1st in late September?

"Clutch" stats aren't exact but here's a glimpse at a few...

RISP
Betts: 165 PA, 80 RBI, .355
Trout: 171 PA, 72 RBI, .328

2 Out RISP
Betts: 67 PA, 34 RBI, .404
Trout: 62 PA, 32 RBI, .306

Late & Close
Betts: 97 PA, .283/.320/.500
Trout: 98 PA, .257/.429/.405

Men on Base
Betts: 299 PA, 96 RBI, .327/.378/.575
Trout: 310 PA, 83 RBI, .311/.448/.527

The splits are the most important part of this post based on the "teammates sucking" conversation. If the people around you suck, the RBI chances won't be there...

Again, the splits support Betts, so its hard to argue against him based on above for "clutchness"

[MU82]

Good stats, MM. I was going to look up some myself but I was too lazy. I did notice that Ortiz had a 1.017 OPS, 7 HR and 25 RBI in September, when the Red Sox surged to the division title. (Betts was .762-1-17 in September.)

I also think there are intangibles beyond numbers in determining "value." I remember Stargell won the MVP back in '79 despite only very good (not great) numbers because he was the unquestioned leader and "heart and soul" of a team that exceeded expectations. Some voters might feel the same about Ortiz this season, and I wouldn't blame them.

Sultan, you obviously are entitled to your opinion. Most MVP voters disagree with you, and that's OK. Unfortunately for you and others that share your viewpoint, they have the votes and you don't. So you'll have to be content arguing that everybody who disagrees with you is "wrong."

I wouldn't have voted for A-Rod the year he won MVP for a crappy team, wouldn't have voted for Dawson, wouldn't have voted for Banks, etc. That's my opinion -- and it also differed from how the majority of BBWAA voters cast their ballots those seasons.

[Lennys Tap]

So in your mind, a HR for a team that's 20 games out and is trailing 6-0 in the 8th inning means just as much as a game-winning HR for a team that's tied for 1st in late September?

"Clutch" stats aren't exact but here's a glimpse at a few...

RISP
Betts: 165 PA, 80 RBI, .355
Trout: 171 PA, 72 RBI, .328

2 Out RISP
Betts: 67 PA, 34 RBI, .404
Trout: 62 PA, 32 RBI, .306

Late & Close
Betts: 97 PA, .283/.320/.500
Trout: 98 PA, .257/.429/.405

Men on Base
Betts: 299 PA, 96 RBI, .327/.378/.575
Trout: 310 PA, 83 RBI, .311/.448/.527

And who was batting behind both hitters for most of the year? Who provides better "protection"? Dustin Pedroia or Albert Pujols?

The numbers for Trout and Betts are close. Because of vastly different circumstances the "value" of those numbers isn't close. If two QBs have similar stats which one gets the MVP in the Super Bowl? How about the same situation in the NBA finals? There is simply more "value" in winning than losing. The best player is often on the losing team. The most valuable player almost never is.

[brandx]

This is the last time I am going to say this.

Most valuable = Best season.  That is how I view it.  Others don't.  I think they are wrong.

Trout had a better season.  Not going to punish him because of his teammates.  He should be MVP.

Of course it is a crime that the best player of our generation has only 1 MVP Award. It was also a crime that Ted Williams didn't win the MVP when he hit over .400 with 37 homers, 135 runs and an OBP of .553. Or when he won the Triple Crown twice without getting the award.

So, hypothetically, if the top two hitters in the league played for Colorado and SF (and the guy from the Rockies had slightly better numbers), you would vote for the guy from Colorado? Cuz he had the better season.

[Lennys Tap]

So, hypothetically, if the top two hitters in the league played for Colorado and SF (and the guy from the Rockies had slightly better numbers), you would vote for the guy from Colorado? Cuz he had the better season.

Actually, WAR adjusts numbers for ballparks.

[brandx]

Actually, WAR adjusts numbers for ballparks.

So highest WAR = MVP?

I am not arguing against Trout, BTW. He could well be going for his 5th MVP this year and would have been deserving every time.

Best player =Trout. Hands down for 5 years.

Most Valuable ???? I don't have a definitive answer. each person has their own criteria for the award. I just don't think a player can be the MOST valuable when his team doesn't even make the playoffs.

The game the other night affirmed something about Britton. His team would not have made the playoffs without him have. Is that "valuable"?

[Lennys Tap]

So highest WAR = MVP?

I am not arguing against Trout, BTW. He could well be going for his 5th MVP this year and would have been deserving every time.

Best player =Trout. Hands down for 5 years.

Most Valuable ???? I don't have a definitive answer. each person has their own criteria for the award. I just don't think a player can be the MOST valuable when his team doesn't even make the playoffs.

The game the other night affirmed something about Britton. His team would not have made the playoffs without him have. Is that "valuable"?

No, highest WAR does NOT mean MVP. It's an imperfect (but likely the best we have) metric to indicate the best player. As I've argued this entire thread, many other factors enter the "most valuable" discussion. so, I'm with you.