Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Hall of Merit > Discussion
Hall of Merit
— A Look at Baseball's All-Time Best

Thursday, February 23, 2012

Most Meritorious Player: 1969 Results

The last ballot counted switched the leaders around for the final time.

Congratulations to 1969’s Most Meritorious Player, Reggie Jackson!

		1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12	Pts
Jackson		4	5	3										169
Petrocelli	2	3	4	3				1					168
McCovey		4	2	1	4		1							159
Gibson		2	3	2	3			1			1	1		154
Aaron				1	2	5	2	1		1				128
Wynn						2	4		2			1		 83
Frobinson						1	3	2	2	2		1	 83
Killebrew			1		1			3	1	1	2	2	 79
Marichal						1	3		3	2		2	 78
Bando							1	3	1	2			2	 67
Dierker						2		1	2			3		 62
Seaver						2		1	1				1	 43
Rose						1			2	3				 42
McLain						1	1				1		2	 35
Hands									1	2	1		1	 32
Howard											1	4	1	 30
Perez		1												 15
Carew				1										 13
Jones					1									 12
Cuellar							1							 10
Clemente										1			  6
Bonds												1		  5
Carlton												1		  5
Santo													1	  4

Willie McCovey takes the MMP prize in the NL, while Bob Gibson is the MMPitcher in the NL and Denny McLain in the AL.

 

fra paolo Posted: February 23, 2012 at 09:32 AM | 19 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Related News:

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.

   1. fra paolo Posted: February 23, 2012 at 10:23 AM (#4066880)
Sorry for the delay. My internet connection threw a wobbly last night.
   2. DL from MN Posted: February 23, 2012 at 11:17 AM (#4066928)
13 ballots is pretty disappointing. This was a highly contested election with lots of good candidates in a recent time period. I don't have a high level of confidence that we got the result "right".

We don't have the critical mass to keep this going when we need to analyze Negro League MLEs or the Federal League. I'm inclined to keep it going until we hit the present day and then shut it down if we can't get more interest.
   3. DL from MN Posted: February 23, 2012 at 11:19 AM (#4066931)
Killebrew didn't place 6th - didn't get moved down the list when the numbers were fixed.
   4. fra paolo Posted: February 23, 2012 at 02:54 PM (#4067163)
I fixed the Killebrew problem.

I was expecting an influx after the HoM ballot. I'm not sure we gained anyone. Either the election cycle is too long, or people just aren't interested.
   5. DL from MN Posted: February 23, 2012 at 03:41 PM (#4067208)
Rico is NOT the AL MMP - Reggie is. McCovey is the NL MMP.
   6. pikepredator Posted: February 23, 2012 at 04:33 PM (#4067243)
I would participate, but the idea of having to build a decent system sounds like it might suck up more time than I can afford (family/job/fishing/blah blah blah). I really enjoy following the discussions and recognize the amount of work you all put into your ballots. I don't trust myself to find a middle ground between over- and under-analysis.

It's like fantasy baseball, I don't participate in part because I know I'd really enjoy it and might end up spending too much time on it, or else just kind of mail it in because the rest of my life comes first. The former isn't so hot for my job and family, and the latter isn't fair to the rest of you . . . there may be others like me, spectating respectfully but concerned about the time commitment.

If a simple system (I work with spreadsheets every day so I'm no stranger to modeling) is OK, I could be sucked into these threads . .
   7. DL from MN Posted: February 23, 2012 at 04:43 PM (#4067256)
The idea is to get as many perspectives as possible. I guarantee there are people voting for the MVP that aren't using complicated value systems.
   8. fra paolo Posted: February 23, 2012 at 06:05 PM (#4067322)
I have now fixed the NL MMP problem. Sorry, I'm playing single-parent this week, with mrs fra paolo visiting a sick brother. I am not concentrating well on anything.

To pikepredator, most people seem to have a go-to system, like BB-ref WAR, as a basis. Then they look at the close calls by comparing other systems or the plain statistics. I complicate my life by designing my own systems, which sometimes throw up odd answers, like Tony Perez being a better fielder in 1969 than other systems give him credit for.

Why not give it a go one time, and see how much time it takes up?
   9. Howie Menckel Posted: February 23, 2012 at 10:19 PM (#4067561)

I think our answer here, even with 13 ballots, is that we couldn't decide on the best player this year (for the first time, I think).
More ballots would be better, but I think we've learned who the best four players are, collectively. That's an interesting answer, to me. Which one comes out on top off 13 or 17 or 25 ballots, well, I think the answer would remain that we're not sure of which of the four was best.

Did Jackson and McCovey really each have one voter who didn't put them in the top 12?

   10. Rafael Bellylard: Built like a Panda. Posted: February 23, 2012 at 11:26 PM (#4067607)
Tony Perez was named on only one ballot, and it was a 1st place vote?

Weird.
   11. DL from MN Posted: February 23, 2012 at 11:38 PM (#4067614)
9&10; - same voter. Look at the ballot thread.
   12. Mr. C Posted: February 24, 2012 at 01:06 AM (#4067664)
Hi all

Just a few thoughts about my first experience in the MMP voting. Although there seems to some concern about the lack of voters. Ideally, I suppose more voters would be better, but I think that the variety of strategies used to choose the top players gives a good idea of the best players of 1969. There is no guarantee that more voters would separate the top players more than they are now.

Over all I enjoyed the experience, and although my work schedule is quite full right now, I hope to continue to participate in the votes in the future. Thank you.

   13. lieiam Posted: February 24, 2012 at 01:25 AM (#4067673)
I agree that 13 is a disappointing number, especially for such a close election.
But I have to say I think it's pretty damn cool how close this election was, with 4 people close together and the top 2 only 1 point apart.
I think there was one previous election where there really wasn't a consensus choice (and that may have ended up also being 1 point separation.. I'm not sure about that, but I believe Koufax won).
Anyway, I'm enjoying the project and do hope that more people join in. I'm kind of hoping that the more I mess about with the MMP project the more likely it is that I will actually manage to construct a HOM ballot.[Oh, and my highest ranked player who didn't receive any votes is Phil Niekro who I placed 14th].


   14. bjhanke Posted: February 24, 2012 at 08:13 AM (#4067725)
Thinking about it, we may gain more participants as we progress through time. I like this project partially because it gives me a reason to go back and revel in the seasons of my youth. I've tried to recruit a baseball fan or two, but they are all younger than me, and have no memories of 1960s baseball. They do remember the 1980s, some even the 1970s. A couple of them have said that, when we get to years they remember, I should ask them again. - Brock
   15. DL from MN Posted: February 24, 2012 at 04:29 PM (#4068044)
We did continue the trend of having a HoM inductee win the MMP election. That looks like it might continue all the way until 1985.
   16. eric Posted: February 26, 2012 at 05:48 PM (#4069113)
I agree with #6. I'd love to participate, but I feel like I wouldn't be able put in 1/10th the amount of work of some of these guys. My "system" would be checking out war, win shares, my gut, shrugging and putting together a list from that.
   17. DL from MN Posted: February 26, 2012 at 06:24 PM (#4069124)
My "system" would be checking out war, win shares, my gut, shrugging and putting together a list from that.


That - plus a little ballot discussion - is about all that is necessary.
   18. Roger McDowell spit on me! Posted: February 26, 2012 at 06:45 PM (#4069145)
I might get involved too. I really enjoy the discussion threads and it's up to the point where my some of my personal recollections kick in. And maybe this can be a trial run for getting involved in the regular HOM discussions and voting.
   19. eric Posted: February 26, 2012 at 07:04 PM (#4069156)
That - plus a little ballot discussion - is about all that is necessary.


If so, count me in! I love these things, especially since it will be almost 20 "years" before my own personal recollections can come into play....it'll allow me to study relatively unfamiliar players and seasons, for at least a little bit.

FWIW, my vote for 1969 would have gone to Jackson...

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Guts
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Syndicate

Page rendered in 0.2476 seconds
49 querie(s) executed