Granderson really had an amazing season. Even putting aside the 20/20/20/20 thing and 84 extra base hits, he was 26/27 in steals and grounded into only 3 DPs in over 650 PAs.

They certainly don't need Maybin. Might as well dump him for a LOOGY.

Is this guy willfully ignorant?

The main reason that J-Roll is getting an MVP push and Granderson isn't is because Rollins isn't playing in the same league as Alex Rodriguez.

If Alex Rodriguez had had this season in the NL, no one would be advocating for Rollins, either.

EDIT: I should refresh these before posting.

The main reason that J-Roll is getting an MVP push and Granderson isn't is because Rollins isn't playing in the same league as Alex Rodriguez.

I suppose that's the main reason, but Ordonez was considered AROD's main competition if the Tigers made the playoffs. I can't recall one word about Granderson as MVP, not that I was paying much attention. Will be interesting to see where he ends up in the balloting. I could easily see him coming in 5th or worse -- AROD, Ordonez, Ortiz, Posada, Martinez, Vlad are all candidates to get more votes. Guys like Thome, Lowell, Pena might (but I'd guess won't) outpoint him.

20 homeruns, 20 doubles, 20 triples, 20 stolen bases

When is someone going to call bulls**t on this? I mean, I'm not denying they did it, but throwing the twenty doubles in there is really stupid. Hell, why not credit them for 20-20-20-20-20 seasons? They each had 20 singles too, right? And twenty walks? Why not 20-20-20-20-20-20?

Seriously, Rollins played 162 games. Granderson played 158. Between the Phillies and Tigers, 16 players played more than 125 games, which is enough for two stints on the DL and and a bunch of days off. All but one of them had more than 20 doubles, and that was Abraham Nunez, who (and I admit to not following the Phillies) somehow barely averaged 2 plate appearances per game (defensive replacement?). I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that the vast majority of major leaguers who played at least 125 games (let alone 158) finished with 20 or more doubles.

Take triples out of the equation. How many players have ever managed twenty homers and twenty stolen bases and DIDN'T amass twenty doubles?

I'm not trying to question their achievements. They both had tremendous seasons. But throwing the "20 doubles" thing in there is really quite superfluous.

It is a terrible article. They're both very good players. I love triples.

Curtis Granderson does not need the made up 20-20-20-20 stat, he needs to be acknowledged more for the achievement of 23 triples in one year. The last time anyone had that many triples was in 1949-the last time anyone had more than 23 in a year was Kiki Cuyler in 1925. He was only the 15th player to hit 23 or more triples since 1900.

I love triples.

Hey, great impersonation of Prince Fielder at Wendy's!

Best Regards

John

Is the (Finkle is Einhorn) refernece part of the original article, or did Repoz add that in himself?

I'm guessing it's part of the original article, but if it was a Repoz reference I wouldn't have gotten it

It's not as if Alex Rodriguez lapped the entire MLB field in performance this year. He had a 7 run edge on Hanley Ramirez in VORP and about an 8 run edge on David Wright in RARP, but was only third in WARP1, just behind Pujols and Wright. I don't think Granderson is any worse a candidate than Rollins.

It's not as if Alex Rodriguez lapped the entire MLB field in performance this year. He had a 7 run edge on Hanley Ramirez in VORP and about an 8 run edge on David Wright in RARP, but was only third in WARP1, just behind Pujols and Wright. I don't think Granderson is any worse a candidate than Rollins.

Hanley, Wright and Pujols are 100% irrelevant to the AL MVP. Nor would including them in the discussion -- which, again, is completely nonsensical -- even particularly support Granderson's candidacy anyway.

Hanley, Wright and Pujols are 100% irrelevant to the AL MVP. Nor would including them in the discussion -- which, again, is completely nonsensical -- even particularly support Granderson's candidacy anyway.

Read the comments in this thread again. Right there at #2, the case was made that Rollins is a deserving candidate while Granderson is not because Granderson had Alex Rodriguez to compete with.

Granderson really had an amazing season. Even putting aside the 20/20/20/20 thing and 84 extra base hits, he was 26/27 in steals and grounded into only 3 DPs in over 650 PAs.

What's amazing is that he did all of it against righthanders. Curtis was pretty close to useless against lefties.

How many players have ever managed twenty homers and twenty stolen bases and DIDN'T amass twenty doubles?

Leaving triples in, there was a guy who missed by hitting only 19 doubles. Can't remember the name, I think it was in the 1920's.

Right there at #2, the case was made that Rollins is a deserving candidate while Granderson is not because Granderson had Alex Rodriguez to compete with.

Yes. Are you disagreeing that that is logical?

Of course, Rollins put up those numbers without the benefit of having a DH in the lineup. With the DH Rollins would have had 183 Runs and 135 RBIs. Granderson's problem is he doesn't get to the plate as much as Rollins. He needs to work on that in the offseason.

Right there at #2, the case was made that Rollins is a deserving candidate while Granderson is not because Granderson had Alex Rodriguez to compete with.

Yes. Are you disagreeing that that is logical?

Uh, since I just posted numbers indicating that Rollins is going up against players who were probably every bit as valuable as Alex Rodriguez was, yes.

If the case is being made that the voters are too ignorant to recognize that Pujols, Wright, and Rodriguez all had comparable seasons, I'll concede that point, but reading the article it's pretty clear that the sabermetric case for Granderson is the focus of this article, not lamenting sportswriters' ignorance.

Right there at #2, the case was made that Rollins is a deserving candidate while Granderson is not because Granderson had Alex Rodriguez to compete with.

With fielding, Granderson is way closer to ARod than Rollins is to Wright, Pujols, Utley, Chipper, or any of another handful of NL players. I'd even say Reyes was a more productive SS.

Why don't people realize Rollins isn't an MVP candidate (well, as long as you don't factor in things like team, intangibles, heart, etc?) I didn't mention park effects in my article, but that's another thing people ignore about Philadelphia.

Re: park effects. For 2007 at least, it looks like Detroit and Philly played fairly similar. Detroit hit +40 OPS at home vs road, the Phillies +39 OPS Home vs Road.

How many players have ever managed twenty homers and twenty stolen bases and DIDN'T amass twenty doubles?



Leaving triples in, there was a guy who missed by hitting only 19 doubles. Can't remember the name, I think it was in the 1920's.

Buck Freeman in 1899 went 25 HR, 25 3B, 19 2B, 21 SB.

Re: park effects. For 2007 at least, it looks like Detroit and Philly played fairly similar. Detroit hit +40 OPS at home vs road, the Phillies +39 OPS Home vs Road.

Even ignoring the flukiness of one-year park factors, how did Tiger and Philly opponents do at Tiger stadium versus other ballparks? That's important, too.

But yes, Tiger Stadium has been playing just about league-average recently. Didn't they move the fences in a couple years ago?

Uh, since I just posted numbers indicating that Rollins is going up against players who were probably every bit as valuable as Alex Rodriguez was, yes.

Problems, in order of significance:

- You're using crap stats to determine that the NL guys are comparable to A-Rod.
- You've still got A-Rod as being about a win better than any of them.
- You haven't shown Granderson is as good as Rollins.
- If we're talking who will win rather than who should win, then it's pretty obvious just from that why no one is talking about Granderson... or Hanley... or Pujols.

Why not say that the 20 2b was 35 (or 38)? They were both 2 doubles short of 40.

BaseRuns has Granderson creating 121 runs (438 outs) and Rollins creating 128 runs (527 outs). Not park adjusted.

I used custom linear weights for the Tigers and Phillies and got 122 and 127, respectively, which is nice to see. Park adjusted is 125 to 124. Although, my outs totals were a few less for each guy, using AB-H+SH+SF+CS+GIDP -- must be missing a few baserunning outs.

I just took the outs listed on B-R, I didn't calculate them myself.

How many players have ever managed twenty homers and twenty stolen bases and DIDN'T amass twenty doubles?

Three since 1900: Tommy Leach (14 doubles, 22 triples, 25 stolen bases) in 1902, Vic Saier (15, 21, 26) in 1913, and Pie Traynor (19, 19, 28) in 1923. 10 guys in the 1800s have done it. Harry Davis had only 10 doubles to go with 28 triples in 1897.

Three since 1900: Tommy Leach (14 doubles, 22 triples, 25 stolen bases) in 1902, Vic Saier (15, 21, 26) in 1913, and Pie Traynor (19, 19, 28) in 1923.

The initial question was:

How many players have ever managed twenty homers and twenty stolen bases and DIDN'T amass twenty doubles?

None of those guys ever hit 20 homers.

Whoops! I misread the question. 20 homers and 20 stolen bases while less than 20 doubles? That Buck Freeman 1899 season was the only one.