BBTF's Newsblog Discussion :: Rosenthal: You want politics? Just look at NL MVP race

Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Saturday, September 06, 2008

Rosenthal: You want politics? Just look at NL MVP race

Using his dynamite Trekker SRF04 Ultrasonic Scanner...Robothal looks into the MVP race.

Factor in the animosity between the various constituencies — sabermetricians, bloggers, fanboys and mainstream baseball writers — and the potential exists for a nastier debate than anything Obama and McCain will deliver.

We all have our own definition of MVP. Many sabermetric types hate the subjective aspect, the seemingly ever-changing standards of the voting baseball writers. I love the ambiguity, the arguments, the angst. If the award were for highest OPS or highest VORP, the process would not be nearly as fun.

The longshots

Ryan Howard, Phillies. Not all that he appears. Howard leads the league with 39 homers and 119 RBIs, but his .236 batting average would be by far the lowest ever by an MVP, “beating” Marty Marion, who batted .267 in 1944. Howard’s .325 OBP and .502 SLG also would be among the lowest ever by a 40-homer man, and he’s no Pujols at first base.

David Wright, Mets. Difficult to compare with Reyes, who is an entirely different type, but Wright falls short when compared to Braun, a more similar player. Braun has a higher OPS and is far better with runners in scoring position; Wright is batting only .238 in those situations. Wright is a better defender at third than Braun is in left, but Braun fares well in the Bill James Online plus-minus ratings, ranking eighth among qualifiers at his position.

Repoz Posted: September 06, 2008 at 09:18 AM | 29 comment(s)
Related News: General, Awards

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 1 of 1 pages

1. Blackadder Posted: September 06, 2008 at 10:12 AM (#2931054)

Even weirder is the mention of Stephen Drew. He's having a nice little season, and I know people like division winners to have at least one MVP candidate, but come on...

2. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: September 06, 2008 at 10:47 AM (#2931062)

Albert is the obvious choice. But if the Cards swoon continues I can somewhat understand a writer looking elsewhere. Not that Albert has anything to do with St. Louis finally waking up and realizing, "Hey, we have Kyle Loshe in the rotation. Holy sh#t!"

I am a Reyes guy. Like David. Fine player. But I think Jose means just a hair more.

Braun? Best player on the Brewers. Has a real fire in his belly. Plays hard. Hits the ball all over the place despite a strike zone that starts at the top step of the dugout. Surprisingly solid defense.

Worthy of a top 5 finish. NL MVP? Only if he lights it up the last three weeks and they scare the living bejeesus out of Chicago.

That would be fun. Knowing that jockey sales in Chicago would skyrocket from guys wetting their pants for a week straight.

Ha!

3. Chuck Van Den Corput Posted: September 06, 2008 at 11:01 AM (#2931070)

Even weirder is the mention of Stephen Drew. He's having a nice little season, and I know people like division winners to have at least one MVP candidate, but come on...

This is in keeping with the popular theme where those clever media types truly in the know (not like we impostors), identify the real MVP candidates. Pujols may be an obvious choice for us poor schlubs who don't know any better. Damn we're stupid.

I love this line about Ramirez: "I can't support his candidacy, not after he quit on the Red Sox to force his way out of Boston."

That's the reason? Not the fact that he will finish with about 200 AB?

4. frannyzoo Posted: September 06, 2008 at 11:32 AM (#2931086)

The truly disturbing thing is that many, many folks use the same twisted combination of moral superiority and dumb-ass logic when deciding who to vote for in Presidential elections, etc. Maybe the best thing sports has going for it is "scoreboard". Human beings are sorry judges of pretty much ####### anything, baseball MVPs & Presidents included.

5. Boots Day Posted: September 06, 2008 at 11:35 AM (#2931091)

Drew deserves as much consideration for MVP as Troy Tulowitzki got last year (he finished 18th):

Tulowitzki, 2007: .291/.359/.479, 108 OPS+
Drew, 2008: .286/.325/.489, 105 OPS+

Drew, 2007: .238/.313 /.370, 72 OPS+
Tulowitzki, 2008: .245/.318/.374, 76 OPS+

They've had virtually identical seasons two years in a row, just not at the same time.

6. Greg K Posted: September 06, 2008 at 11:40 AM (#2931094)

What's Drew's defence like?
I seem to recall Tulowitzki had that going for him last year

7. Blackadder Posted: September 06, 2008 at 11:50 AM (#2931097)

According to +/-, Drew is +2 plays this year, -1 in 2007, +2 in 2006. He looks about average. Tulo, on the other hand, was a mind-boggling +35 in 2007, which is a GIGANTIC difference. I am skeptical that he was quite that good, but if he was, he was certainly a reasonable MVP candidate. Drew, while having a good year, is just not worth talking about. Barring any late season shocks, if Pujols doesn't win it will be the most robbed he has ever been, which is saying something!

8. David Concepcion de la Desviacion Estandar (Dan R) Posted: September 06, 2008 at 11:59 AM (#2931106)

Rosenthal got me wondering what the lowest SLG by a 40-HR man was. I would have thought it would be a Dave Kingman season, but in fact it was Adam Dunn's .490 in 2006 (the only one below .500). Next-worst are Jay Buhner in 1997 and Carl Yastrzemski in 1969.

9. haplo53 Posted: September 06, 2008 at 12:22 PM (#2931120)

Wright has quietly entered "Jose Reyes September 2007" territory. His swing is all sorts of messed up right now.

10. Jeff K. Posted: September 06, 2008 at 12:35 PM (#2931124)

The truly disturbing thing is that many, many folks use the same twisted combination of moral superiority and dumb-ass logic when deciding who to vote for in Presidential elections, etc.

I know I'm going to regret this, but who actually does this? There are (really) two choices. What sort of game are you playing by voting on "moral superiority"? The only way you can do that is if you agree with the positions of the party you're voting for, and then you'd be voting for them anyway. This only makes sense if, like the MVP discussion, there are a bunch of candidates. Then you can have two candidates who are extremely similar but with slight differences. That allows you to show a "moral superiority" of, say, home runs by voting for the guy with 2 more HRs even though you really think the other guy is a slightly better choice.

But "I'm a pro-life, small government, prayer in schools voter. I'm going to show those Democrats and vote Republican!"? That's not a game. That's voting.

11. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: September 06, 2008 at 12:38 PM (#2931128)

Drew's defense isn't within the same universe as Tulo's. Not even close.

12. AlouGoodbye Posted: September 06, 2008 at 01:01 PM (#2931135)

Barring any late season shocks, if Pujols doesn't win it will be the most robbed he has ever been, which is saying something!

I think Pujols has only been "robbed" once. He's had a good arguable case about every year he's been in the league, which is what happens when you're as consistently excellent as he is.

13. chick-a-DOOM chick-a-DOOM Posted: September 06, 2008 at 03:18 PM (#2931229)

it's too bad for Uncle that the award is not just "best all around baseball player" because he would win it every year

the cards might could not win it all but they would be the pirates if Uncle and laroche switched places

14. Booey Posted: September 06, 2008 at 08:49 PM (#2931423)

#12 - True. 2006 was the only year Pujols was "robbed", and to be honest, it sort of balanced out because Derek Lee may have been slightly better the year Albert actually won.

15. Blackadder Posted: September 06, 2008 at 08:53 PM (#2931430)

Yeah, I guess you guys are right. He may have been better than Bonds in 2003 as well, but that one is pretty close, and I probably would have voted for Bonds. I guess he was just unlucky to come up at the same time that Bonds was going ape-shyte on the league.

16. Booey Posted: September 07, 2008 at 12:08 AM (#2931636)

Even in 2003, the only reason it was close is because Bonds missed so many games. But since many of those games were due to his fathers death, it seems the voters decided it would be kind of heartless to hold that against him. And honestly, I can't say I blame them.

But Albert's still only 28. He'll win more. A-Rod had even worse luck in MVP voting to begin his career - he's been the best player in the American League ever since his first full season in 1996 (not every season, but overall), and he didn't win until his eighth full season. And he was flat-out screwed twice - in 1996 and 2002.

17. Blackadder Posted: September 07, 2008 at 12:58 AM (#2931650)

ARod had a pretty good case in 1998, 2000, and 2001 as well. He was in particular by far the best position player in 2000, which may be his greatest season, but I could see someone voting for Pedro. He could easily have won 8 MVPs by now. But then, that tends to be true of all time greats--Bonds probably should have won even more, Mantle could have won pretty much every year from 1955 to 1962, etc.

18. Exploring Leftist Conservatism since 2008 (ark..) Posted: September 07, 2008 at 02:47 AM (#2931669)

Albert was robbed in 2002, 2003, and 2006. He should be coming up on MVP #5.

19. Master of Karate and Friendship (Kyle C) Posted: September 07, 2008 at 03:03 AM (#2931672)

Albert was robbed in 2002, 2003, and 2006. He should be coming up on MVP #5.

You could give Bonds 63 extra AB in 2002 (so he'd have the same number of PA as Pujols) with no hits and he still would have had a higher BA, an OBP over 100 points higher, and a SLG over 100 points higher.

Pujols primarily played LF as well, and while he was probably a better defender than Bonds at that point, I don't think there's any way it would make up for the difference in their bats.

2003 I could see since Pujols had 135 more PA than Bonds, was much better in 2003 than 2002 , and Bonds wasn't as good as he was in 2002.

20. Padraic Posted: September 07, 2008 at 07:23 AM (#2931676)

I don't see what's wrong with Rosenthal's point. He basically says that Pujols is clearly the best player, but that it would take a combination of the Cards falling out of the playoffs and a great stretch-run from someone else to beat him. I'm fine with that.

I also agree with his point that it makes it a more interesting conversation to factor in the story. For example, last year Rollins did not have the best season overall, but his prediction, his incredible play against the Mets (1057 OBP, 15 runs, 15 RBI in 18 games) and the Phillies winning the division by one game made him a justifiable candidate.

I can't ague with the literal logic of awarding the MVP to Pujols almost every year, but I don't see why something as enjoyable as baseball should be approached with such limiting literalness.

21. Zuvella! Posted: September 07, 2008 at 10:22 AM (#2931707)

I also agree with his point that it makes it a more interesting conversation to factor in the story. For example, last year Rollins did not have the best season overall, but his prediction, his incredible play against the Mets (1057 OBP, 15 runs, 15 RBI in 18 games) and the Phillies winning the division by one game made him a justifiable candidate.

But every team, every player has a compelling story, even if the national media do not choose to make it one of the major stories. Pujols's brilliance from year to year, the fact that he always is carrying his team, could be spun as a compelling story every year. I have no problem with a story helping frame the awards discussion. But I think sportswriters can be uncreative people--especially when they participate in the group thinking that creates and sustains silly stories (check the A-Rod narrative)--and that a lot of good stories are ignored as a result. In this way, the "literalists" can help introduce deserving stories to the debate. Sometimes the symbol people (as George Carlin called them) can be too symbol-minded.

22. Blackadder Posted: September 07, 2008 at 10:29 AM (#2931711)

But even if you care about those things, Pujols has a decent story this year: leading a team no one expected to do anything to contention, plus playing through an injury that would cripple most other ballplayers. I can see some case for considering more context specific things a player does for the MVP, although you do have to be careful, unless you want to end up concluding that the 1978 MVP was Bucky Dent and the 1951 MVP Bobby Thompson. Personally, I like the way they give the hockey MVP; Gretzky was obviously the best hockey player around, and so he won the Hart trophy each of his first 8 years!

23. David Concepcion de la Desviacion Estandar (Dan R) Posted: September 07, 2008 at 10:35 AM (#2931712)

I always thought it would be cool to have a "playoff probability added" stat--just multiply a player's Win Probability Added in each game by the effect that game has on the team's probability of making the playoffs (per BP or Coolstandings or whatever). That would accurately capture the "leading your team down the stretch to the pennant" that we think of with Chipper Jones in 1999 or Miguel Tejada in 2002, particularly given the added weight that would result to performance against division rivals. However, it can be taken to extremes--Trevor Hoffman's negative playoff probability added in less than one inning of work in last year's NL play-in game may have exceeded his positive "PPA" in his entire career up to that point!

24. Blackadder Posted: September 07, 2008 at 10:57 AM (#2931716)

Right, that's what I was thinking, but that's why I brought up Thompson and Dent. Dent, in terms of PPA, probably had a better season than any Bonds season, which is a little funky.

25. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: September 07, 2008 at 11:22 AM (#2931721)

PPA divided by LI, like WPA / LI, would correct for those weirdnesses, while still putting a number to the greatness of Yaz in '67.

26. Padraic Posted: September 07, 2008 at 11:46 AM (#2931729)

Pujols has a decent story this year: leading a team no one expected to do anything to contention,

Well, part of what Rosenthal said, and what I agreed with, was that the other names don't become possible contenders unless the Cards fall seriously out of contention.

And you can equivocate as much as you want about what makes a compelling story, but the case of Rollins - a player calling out the top team in the division, playing great against them, and then catching that team in the last weeks of the season - was truly special. You need overall performance too - it wouldn't have been the same if Abe Nunez had done this - but Rollins had a pretty damn good year, story or no story.

I can see some case for considering more context specific things a player does for the MVP, although you do have to be careful, unless you want to end up concluding that the 1978 MVP was Bucky Dent and the 1951 MVP Bobby Thompson.

Really, we really have to be careful about this? Bobby Thompson had a 150 OPS+ that year, and hit probably the most famous HR in baseball history...and finished 8th. Dent didn't get a single MVP vote.

If writers were smart enough then - back in the dumb old days when all people cared about were wins, RBI, and batting average - then I don't think it's a concern today.

27. SkyKing162 Posted: September 07, 2008 at 10:24 PM (#2932519)

Regarding Braun having a better OPS than Wright -- it's a .933 to .897 advantage. And once you weight OBP as much as SLG and adjust for ballpark, the advantage is an OPS+ of 139 to 137. Yay.

28. Russlan is an overhyped Met BTFer Posted: September 07, 2008 at 10:28 PM (#2932525)

Delgado hit two homers today and now has 65 RBI in 64 games. It'd be a travesty if he did win it this year when he most certainly doesn't deserve it but he's been coming with a lot of big hits recently. There's too much hype around him to dismiss the story entirely.

29. McCoy Posted: September 07, 2008 at 11:03 PM (#2932611)

Manny Ramirez

Page 1 of 1 pages

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

<< Back to main

Saturday, September 06, 2008

Rosenthal: You want politics? Just look at NL MVP race

Reader Comments and Retorts

Support BBTF

My Bookmarks

Hot Topics