Tuesday, May 14, 2013
Most Meritorious Player: 1981 Results
(bbtf)
Congratulations to our unanimous MMP Mike Schmidt! I don’t have a template set up for putting results in a tabular format but figured we needed results posted.
Player pts ballots 1sts Mike Schmidt 165 11 11 Dwight Evans 146 11 0 Rickey Henderson 131 11 0 Andre Dawson 128 11 0 Bobby Grich 112 11 0 Fernando Valenzuela 84 9 0 Robin Yount 72 8 0 Buddy Bell 56 6 0 George Foster 49 9 0 Steve McCatty 48 7 0 Nolan Ryan 47 7 0 Steve ...Read More...
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 2 pages
1 2 >well, its been so long since anyone won it i had forgot that there had been more than a couple of winners back in the day. it turns out rogers hornsby won it in 1922 and 1925. i guessed him. but i missed the other one. it was ted williams in '42 and '47.
but here's the thing. williams did NOT win MVP in either of those years. (i don't know about hornsby). my thinking lately has been that since the triple crown is such a bright shiny stat, there was no way the voters would deny cabrera the MVP if he makes it. but i didn't realize there was a precedent for a triple crown winner not winning MVP.
actually, i have no idea if robinson won it in 66 or if yaz won it in 67, now that i think about it.
no NL MVP in 22, but hornsby won it in 1925.
robinson and yaz both won in their respective years.
now you've done it.
But I suspect your point is that they would instead argue it was further evidence that WAR is getting this one wrong. Could be, I dunno.
Perhaps Mays in his prime would be more likely to hit 40 homers and steal 25 bases. I have not looked deeply into the AL MVP issue but Cabrera has decent fielding numbers at 3B this year. Only Moustakas is appreciably better in the AL, maybe Lawrie but he has far fewer innings played and more errors. Cabrera is better in all offensive categories except steals, by a lot, and triples, by a few. Cabrera has about 100 more total chances in the field, Granted, this is the nature of 3B versus CF, but isn't that the point: outs.
1934
1. Mickey Cochrane DET .320 2 HR 76 RBI 3.7 WAR
2. Charlie Gehringer DET .356 11 HR 127 RBI 8.1 WAR
3. Lefty Gomez NYY 26-5 2.33 ERA 7.4 WAR
4. Schoolboy Rowe DET 24-8 3.45 ERA 6.6 WAR
5. Lou Gehrig NYY .363 49 HR 165 RBI 10.1 WAR
The Tigers won the pennant. Cochane was maybe the fourth best player...on that team. Gehrig won the Triple Crown for the second place 94-win Yankees. WTF?
Chuck Klein in 1933 was third, behind Carl Hubbell, the MVP, and Lon Warneke.
Cochrane was also the manager, and the team went from 75 wins to 105 in his first year there. He almost certainly got a massive intangibles bonus.
That rule was dumped in 1929.
more this than the other, but mostly i was just suggesting that you are opening up a whole new WAR debate thread that could get tedious. :)
Paul Hines.
Ties count.
Yes. Yaz and Killer tied for the HR crown in Carl's 1967 Triple Crown season. And, if Cabrera happens to share the lead in one of the TC categories, it most likely would be with the same number of home runs as in the 1967 race.
texas has been in the playoffs for a while now. whether they win or lose the next two days won't have much affect will it? do they care who they face?
if all those are true, does josh hamilton go up to bat swinging for the fences for the next two days? or does he just play his game, or what? do the players care that much about making cabrera 'earn' the TC?
I'm pretty sure Texas cares a great deal about winning the division as opposed to being forced into a coin-flip WC game.
Happened to me too. I knew the A's had been fairly close the last few weeks, but never thought the outcome was in doubt. That was until I saw the headline this morning about them clinching a playoff spot and only being 1 game out.
Who's the only player to hold a single season franchise triple crown? (single season team records in AVG, HR, and RBI). The totals don't all have to be from one season.
And both MVP votes were controversial, especially the 1947 vote. In the latter vote Williams lost to Joe DiMaggio by one point and always claimed it was because Boston writer Mel Webb didn't like him and intentionally left him off the ballot. Webb didn't have a vote in 1947; the reason Williams lost by only one point is that three Yankees (DiMaggio, Joe Page, and George McQuinn) split the first-place votes.
-- MWE
Luis Gonzales
Well, Eric Davis in 1987 only hit .293, but his OBP and SLG were better. And he hit 37 HR and stole 50 bases. A-Rod hit .310 in his 40-40 season. Bonds in 1990. Or 1996. Or 1997.
That Bonds guy was pretty good, huh?
And it's pretty amazing company for Trout, which basically confirms the author's point - that this is easily a "Wow, that guy is the MVP!" type of season.
Correct. Bagwell and Vlad were both good guesses and would have been co-winners prior to 2006. In that same season, Berkman beat Bagwells RBI record by 1 and Soriano beat Vlad's HR record by 2.
The triple crown is not an official baseball award. I believe it is a concept created by writers and fans. While Yaz (and Ducky Joe for that matter) are recognized as triple crown winners, it just has never made sense according to every definition of the triple crown that has ever been recorded. (I do not believe that there is an MLB baseball rule defining it; does anyone know of one?) Wherever you look it clearly states that the player must lead the league in all three categories; nowhere is that qualified by the statement "lead or tied for the lead", or at least in my many years I've never seen it. Words have meanings that must be adhered to, and leading the league means being ahead of all other players. It might sound ludicrous, but if everyone hit 20 home runs some year, would everyone be considered the league leader in homers? Sorry Yaz, but you never did lead the league in homers in 1967, and really did not win the triple crown. Simple mathematical logic leads to the following statement being incontrovertibly true: If Carl Yastrzemski won the triple crown in 1967, then I led the major leagues in unassisted triple plays in 2011. He didn't, and neither did I.
This is incorrect.
Yes. (1981 in the AL?)
It's only in your imagination that no one leads the league some years.
So they should not acknowledge anyone as winning the HR title (or whatever category you prefer) if there's a tie? Nah.
Exactly, which is why there's no "official" definition about whether ties count or not. People decided that Yaz's tie counted, and therefore it did, since there was no official rule that said otherwise.
True, often several, including many "unofficial" ones.
that must be adhered to
Only if they're in a law and you don't have a good lawyer.
You state that (to your knowledge ... and mine) that there is no official rule.
Anyway, I was surprised to discover in the Melky controversy that the rule about 502 PAs and the zero-ing out of PAs under 502 is in the official rule book. So at this point I wouldn't be surprised to find there's an official rule about "leading" the league in other categories.
You must be fun to talk to everytime Alanis Morissette comes on the radio.
If you look at the listing on the leaderboards, they list everyone who is tied for the top spot as 1. in ranking. That is leading the league.
Mike Nickeas did, though.
Or you do what most people seem to do and consider both players that tied to be league leaders and don't worry about how it perverts the english language.
I can say without hesitation that I would much rather tie for a Major League HR title than kiss my sister.
That was a weird example, man.
My understanding is that the dealer needs to have a pair of jacks or better for anyone to be considered the league leader in homers.
Ummm....
Mrs. Erdelatz had no comment.
Page 1 of 2 pages
1 2 >You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.