Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Saturday, July 07, 2012

Barra: Pablo Sandoval Over David Wright In All-Star Game? It’s All Your Fault, New York

Merely a fece in the crowd…

Really, what can you say when a San Francisco 3rd baseman is getting outhit by a New York first baseman by 60 points and out polls him in the All-Star balloting by 1.6 million? The area from which the Mets pull their support is about 8 times more populous than the one the Giants draw on. Does this indicate a laziness on the part of New York fans? Apathy? I don’t know what else you can call it.

But we can’t put this off just to New York fans. David Wright has been in the league 9 years to Sandoval’s 5, and he has been one of the NL’s best players for nearly that entire stretch. How could fans in other NL cities not know that Wright is a great player and, by a mile, the best 3rd baseman in the league?

All this just goes to prove that the old prejudice about New York players, that they always get favorable treatment in the All-Star game and MVP voting, is nonsense. And it also proves that the old saying about New York as the country’s best baseball city is also nonsense. Josh Hamilton set an All-Star record of more than 11 million votes. What kind of country do we live in where New York fans couldn’t give David Wright at least half of that? A big wrong doesn’t make Wright.

Repoz Posted: July 07, 2012 at 09:24 AM | 132 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: all-star game, giants, mets

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 2 of 2 pages  < 1 2
   101. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: July 08, 2012 at 10:27 PM (#4176576)
That makes intuitive sense, but what player with a career that's truly comparable to Mattingly's** has been unable to stay on the ballot as long as he has?

**in traditional Old School metrics, which are what most writers still use in the absence of a Blyleven-level lobbying campaign


There's Will Clark, whom I mentioned in my earlier post. There's also Jack Clark, who had a much better career than Mattingly's, and who got 1.5% in his one year on the ballot.

Whatever East Coast bias there might be would be as much explained by the time zone factor as anything else.


Nobody pays attention to the Pirates, and they're in the Eastern time zone. Nobody paid all that much attention to them back in the early '90s when they were good, either, and at that point they were even still in the NL East.
   102. McCoy Posted: July 08, 2012 at 10:32 PM (#4176584)
I notice, BTW, that neither of you elected to try and defend Munson's MVP or Jeter's Gold Gloves...

I can do it. The MVP voting process involves two writers from each city with an AL team. NY writers only have two votes.

Gold Gloves are voted on by managers and coaches. You are not allowed to vote for your own players.
   103. bobm Posted: July 08, 2012 at 10:33 PM (#4176586)
[99]
Hodges made those all-star games in part because he had the best career of NL 1B in the 1950s and there were no HOF caliber guys then, sort of like Jack Morris.

Ted Kluszewski was pretty decent, and he didn't make the team in 1950 (124 OPS+) or 1952 (146 OPS+), even though he was right there with Hodges in both years. (And even though, in 1952, New York Giants 1B Whitey Lockman also made the team - with a 109 OPS+). Earl Torgeson led the league in runs scored in 1950, putting up a 138 OPS+ in the process, but he sat at home while Hodges went to the game with a 125. Dale Long had a 132 in 1955 (while leading the league in triples) and a 134 in 1957, better than Hodges both years (127 and 125 respectively), yet he didn't go to the game either time.

It's interesting, isn't it, how amid this big gaggle of mediocre 1Bs, the same guy kept getting the benefit of the doubt every time? And how it was the guy who happened to play in New York? It's almost as if there were some secondary effect at work...


For the 1950s Hodges had 6163 PAs of 128 OPS+, and was only 2 points of OPS+ behind the NL 1B leader (Kluszewski) but with 1,200 more PAs. IMO it's hard to lump him in as part of "a gaggle of mediocre 1Bs".

Spanning Multiple Seasons or entire Careers, Playing in the NL, From 1950 to 1959, Played 50% of games at 1B, (requiring At least 3000 plate appearances), sorted by greatest Adjusted OPS+

                                                                                                                                      
Rk           Player OPS+   PA From   To   Age    G   AB   R    H  2B 3B  HR  RBI  BB  SO   BA  OBP  SLG  OPS       Pos              Tm
1    Ted Kluszewski  130 4903 1950 1959 25-34 1241 4464 672 1350 218 22 237  813 399 264 .302 .361 .520 .882        *3         CIN-PIT
2        Gil Hodges  128 6163 1950 1959 26-35 1477 5313 890 1491 238 37 310 1001 751 882 .281 .369 .514 .884 *3/795284         BRO-LAD
3        Joe Adcock  119 4273 1950 1959 22-31 1128 3910 513 1106 198 26 181  637 293 552 .283 .333 .486 .819     *37/9         CIN-MLN
4     Earl Torgeson  114 3072 1950 1955 26-31  726 2558 418  685 120 24  69  348 462 306 .268 .380 .414 .795     *3/97         BSN-PHI
5         Dee Fondy   95 3758 1951 1958 26-33  967 3502 437 1000 144 47  69  373 203 526 .286 .324 .413 .737     *3/97     CHC-TOT-CIN
6    Whitey Lockman   88 5006 1950 1959 23-32 1276 4529 593 1243 156 31  81  417 399 272 .274 .334 .376 .710   *37/849 NYG-TOT-SFG-CIN
   104. Howie Menckel Posted: July 08, 2012 at 10:38 PM (#4176593)

I never knew that in the 1950s they didn't choose the All-Star team until after the season ended, but if we're basing selections on end-of-year stats, it must be true. I take it there was some sort of time travel that allowed the games to have a "July" dateline.............



   105. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: July 08, 2012 at 10:41 PM (#4176595)
I can do it. The MVP voting process involves two writers from each city with an AL team. NY writers only have two votes.

Gold Gloves are voted on by managers and coaches. You are not allowed to vote for your own players.


We were discussing whether or not NY players get a boost in awards and recognition from playing in New York relative to what they deserve on merit, not whether that boost was the result of one particular cabal or another pushing those players forward (deliberately or otherwise).
   106. McCoy Posted: July 08, 2012 at 10:43 PM (#4176596)
I've never liked looking at just one stretch of time since invariably favors the one hitter you're looking at.

Instead I usually take stretches of time starting 5 years before and ending 5 years after.

So from 1946 to 1964 here are the 109 10 year stretches for first basemen.

Rk Player OPSPA From To
1 Norm Cash 146 3020 1958 1964
2 Johnny Mize 142 3182 1946 1953
3 Orlando Cepeda 141 4437 1958 1964
4 Orlando Cepeda 140 3849 1958 1963
5 Orlando Cepeda 136 3220 1958 1962
6 Ted Kluszewski 134 4295 1952 1961
7 Roy Sievers 133 5526 1953 1962
8 Ted Kluszewski 133 3746 1953 1961
9 Roy Sievers 133 5713 1954 1963
10 Joe Adcock 133 4226 1955 1964
11 Joe Adcock 132 4373 1954 1963
12 Roy Sievers 132 5307 1955 1964
13 Bill Skowron 131 3578 1954 1961
14 Joe Adcock 131 4696 1953 1962
15 Ted Kluszewski 131 3117 1954 1961
16 Ted Kluszewski 130 5015 1950 1959
17 Ted Kluszewski 130 4649 1951 1960
18 Joe Adcock 130 4652 1952 1961
19 Bill Skowron 129 4102 1954 1962
20 Mickey Vernon 129 3281 1953 1960
21 Ted Kluszewski 128 4696 1947 1955
22 Ted Kluszewski 128 5270 1947 1956
23 Ted Kluszewski 128 5392 1948 1957
24 Ted Kluszewski 128 5326 1949 1958
25 Gil Hodges 128 6163 1950 1959
26 Gil Hodges 127 6358 1949 1958
27 Gil Hodges 127 5748 1951 1960
28 Gil Hodges 126 6353 1948 1957
29 Mickey Vernon 126 3945 1952 1960
30 Gil Hodges 125 5157 1947 1955
31 Gil Hodges 125 5790 1947 1956
32 Vic Wertz 125 4307 1951 1960
33 Bill Skowron 125 4358 1954 1963
34 Joe Adcock 124 4445 1951 1960
35 Mickey Vernon 124 4549 1951 1960
36 Mickey Vernon 123 5029 1950 1959
37 Ferris Fain 123 3021 1950 1955
38 Gil Hodges 123 5312 1952 1961
39 Mickey Vernon 122 5589 1949 1958
40 Norm Siebern 122 3762 1956 1963
41 Dick Stuart 122 3523 1958 1964
42 Norm Siebern 121 4358 1956 1964
43 Bill Skowron 121 4696 1955 1964
44 Ferris Fain 120 4904 1947 1955
45 Ferris Fain 120 4904 1947 1955
46 Ferris Fain 120 3693 1949 1955
47 Vic Wertz 120 4094 1952 1961
48 Gil Hodges 120 4835 1953 1962
49 Mickey Vernon 119 6304 1946 1955
50 Ferris Fain 119 4337 1948 1955
51 Joe Adcock 119 4273 1950 1959
52 Earl Torgeson 118 4559 1949 1958
53 Eddie Robinson 117 4573 1946 1955
54 Earl Torgeson 117 4574 1947 1955
55 Earl Torgeson 117 4974 1947 1956
56 Joe Adcock 117 3480 1950 1957
57 Mickey Vernon 117 5804 1948 1957
58 Joe Adcock 117 3829 1950 1958
59 Earl Torgeson 117 4790 1950 1959
60 Dale Long 117 3286 1955 1962
61 Vic Wertz 117 3720 1953 1962
62 Gil Hodges 117 4262 1954 1963
63 Dale Long 117 3302 1955 1963
64 Bill White 117 4533 1956 1964
65 Dale Long 117 3302 1955 1963
66 Mickey Vernon 116 6138 1947 1956
67 Earl Torgeson 116 4856 1948 1957
68 Eddie Robinson 116 3953 1949 1957
69 Bill White 116 3840 1956 1963
70 Joe Adcock 115 3249 1950 1956
71 Eddie Robinson 115 3350 1950 1957
72 Vic Wertz 115 3256 1954 1963
73 Eddie Robinson 113 4803 1947 1956
74 Eddie Robinson 113 4493 1948 1957
75 Earl Torgeson 113 4161 1951 1960
76 Earl Torgeson 113 3045 1953 1961
77 Gil Hodges 113 3584 1955 1963
78 Bill White 112 3114 1956 1962
79 Earl Torgeson 110 3516 1952 1961
80 Vic Power 107 3442 1954 1959
81 Vic Power 104 4066 1954 1960
82 Walt Dropo 103 3186 1949 1955
83 Walt Dropo 102 4246 1950 1959
84 Vic Power 102 4688 1954 1961
85 Walt Dropo 101 3598 1949 1956
86 Walt Dropo 101 3842 1949 1957
87 Walt Dropo 101 4080 1949 1958
88 Vic Power 101 5338 1954 1962
89 Vic Power 100 5916 1954 1963
90 Whitey Lockman 99 5218 1947 1955
91 Vic Power 99 5765 1955 1964
92 Walt Dropo 98 3471 1952 1961
93 Eddie Waitkus 97 4652 1946 1955
94 Dee Fondy 97 3627 1951 1957
95 Dee Fondy 96 3219 1951 1956
96 Walt Dropo 96 3838 1951 1960
97 Eddie Waitkus 95 4180 1947 1955
98 Whitey Lockman 95 6120 1948 1957
99 Eddie Waitkus 95 3626 1948 1955
100 Dee Fondy 95 3758 1951 1958
101 Dee Fondy 95 3758 1951 1958
102 Dee Fondy 95 3758 1951 1958
103 Dee Fondy 95 3574 1952 1958
104 Whitey Lockman 92 5602 1949 1958
105 Eddie Waitkus 92 3012 1949 1955
106 Whitey Lockman 88 5084 1950 1959
107 Whitey Lockman 87 4515 1951 1960
108 Whitey Lockman 85 3842 1952 1960
109 Whitey Lockman 80 3155 1953 1960 
   107. McCoy Posted: July 08, 2012 at 10:46 PM (#4176599)
We were discussing whether or not NY players get a boost in awards and recognition from playing in New York relative to what they deserve on merit, not whether that boost was the result of one particular cabal or another pushing those players forward (deliberately or otherwise).

I'm not sure why you think what I just said doesn't dispute the notion that Munson and Jeter got their awards because of NY. Munson won his MVP because non-NYers thought he was the best in the league or darn close to it. Are you saying that the KC sportswriter voted for Munson because Munson played in NY? Are you saying that if Jeter played for the Cardinals he wouldn't have won his GG because the coaches and managers wouldn't have voted for him?
   108. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: July 08, 2012 at 10:49 PM (#4176602)
For the 1950s Hodges had 6163 PAs of 128 OPS+, and was only 2 points of OPS+ behind the NL 1B leader (Kluszewski) but with 1,200 more PAs. IMO it's hard to lump him in as part of "a gaggle of mediocre 1Bs".

Spanning Multiple Seasons or entire Careers, Playing in the NL, From 1950 to 1959, Played 50% of games at 1B, (requiring At least 3000 plate appearances), sorted by greatest Adjusted OPS+


This is an All-Star appearance, not a lifetime achievement award. The relevant consideration should be whether for any given year Hodges was the Nth or better 1B in the NL, where N = the number of 1Bs on that year's All-Star team. Crossing out everyone who retired partway through the sample, or debuted partway through the sample, or got traded to or from an AL club is actively counterproductive.

The thing that I find so interesting is that there's only one season, 1956, where Hodges delivered a plausibly All-Star-looking performance and didn't get the nod. Every other year, no matter what anyone else did, Good Ol' Gil was one of the two or three guys picked. [You could maybe sort-of try to make a case for 1959, but he obviously wasn't in the same class as Musial, F-Robby, or Cepeda.]
   109. Kiko Sakata Posted: July 08, 2012 at 10:50 PM (#4176604)
I never knew that in the 1950s they didn't choose the All-Star team until after the season ended, but if we're basing selections on end-of-year stats, it must be true. I take it there was some sort of time travel that allowed the games to have a "July" dateline.............


It's not a big difference, and I have no idea how it compares to Kluzkewski or Torgeson or anybody else, but for his career, Hodges was a better first-half hitter than second-half: .276/.361/.501 vs. .270/.357/.472.
   110. McCoy Posted: July 08, 2012 at 10:51 PM (#4176606)
If you take out all the 10 year stretches where the player didn't play in 10 seasons you get 55 such 10 year stretches and the list looks like this:

Rk Player OPSPA From To
1 Ted Kluszewski 134 4295 1952 1961
2 Roy Sievers 133 5526 1953 1962
3 Roy Sievers 133 5713 1954 1963
4 Joe Adcock 133 4226 1955 1964
5 Joe Adcock 132 4373 1954 1963
6 Roy Sievers 132 5307 1955 1964
7 Joe Adcock 131 4696 1953 1962
8 Ted Kluszewski 130 5015 1950 1959
9 Ted Kluszewski 130 4649 1951 1960
10 Joe Adcock 130 4652 1952 1961
11 Ted Kluszewski 128 5270 1947 1956
12 Ted Kluszewski 128 5392 1948 1957
13 Ted Kluszewski 128 5326 1949 1958
14 Gil Hodges 128 6163 1950 1959
15 Gil Hodges 127 6358 1949 1958
16 Gil Hodges 127 5748 1951 1960
17 Gil Hodges 126 6353 1948 1957
18 Gil Hodges 125 5790 1947 1956
19 Vic Wertz 125 4307 1951 1960
20 Bill Skowron 125 4358 1954 1963
21 Joe Adcock 124 4445 1951 1960
22 Mickey Vernon 124 4549 1951 1960
23 Mickey Vernon 123 5029 1950 1959
24 Gil Hodges 123 5312 1952 1961
25 Mickey Vernon 122 5589 1949 1958
26 Bill Skowron 121 4696 1955 1964
27 Vic Wertz 120 4094 1952 1961
28 Gil Hodges 120 4835 1953 1962
29 Mickey Vernon 119 6304 1946 1955
30 Joe Adcock 119 4273 1950 1959
31 Earl Torgeson 118 4559 1949 1958
32 Eddie Robinson 117 4573 1946 1955
33 Earl Torgeson 117 4974 1947 1956
34 Mickey Vernon 117 5804 1948 1957
35 Earl Torgeson 117 4790 1950 1959
36 Vic Wertz 117 3720 1953 1962
37 Gil Hodges 117 4262 1954 1963
38 Mickey Vernon 116 6138 1947 1956
39 Earl Torgeson 116 4856 1948 1957
40 Vic Wertz 115 3256 1954 1963
41 Eddie Robinson 113 4803 1947 1956
42 Eddie Robinson 113 4493 1948 1957
43 Earl Torgeson 113 4161 1951 1960
44 Earl Torgeson 110 3516 1952 1961
45 Walt Dropo 102 4246 1950 1959
46 Walt Dropo 101 4080 1949 1958
47 Vic Power 100 5916 1954 1963
48 Vic Power 99 5765 1955 1964
49 Walt Dropo 98 3471 1952 1961
50 Eddie Waitkus 97 4652 1946 1955
51 Walt Dropo 96 3838 1951 1960
52 Whitey Lockman 95 6120 1948 1957
53 Whitey Lockman 92 5602 1949 1958
54 Whitey Lockman 88 5084 1950 1959
55 Whitey Lockman 87 4515 1951 1960 
   111. bobm Posted: July 08, 2012 at 10:52 PM (#4176607)
[99]
All those NY players inducted by the VC were Giants and can be blamed on the presence of Frank Frisch who also inducted undeserving Cardinals like Jesse Haines and Jim Bottomley.

So it doesn't count as a pattern of questionable HoF votes because the NY team wasn't the only one that benefited from it? ########.

Not to mention that Frisch wouldn't have gotten away with it if not for the compliance of the other members of the committee - including New York sportswriters like Fred Lieb and Dan Daniel.


From Bill James' Whatever Happened to the Hall of Fame (a/k/a The Politics of Glory):

Frisch was not alone; the Veterans Committee also contained Fred Lieb (1966-80), Dan Daniel (1961-76) and, most importantly, Roy Stockton (1961-71). Lieb and Daniel had covered Frisch's teams in New York oh so many years before and were highly susceptible to Frisch's arguments about the greatness of that team. Stockton had covered Frisch's teams in St. Louis for many years, and had written a book, The Gas House Gang (Barnes, 1945), about Frisch's most famous team. Fred Lieb had also written the St. Louis Cardinals book in the Putnam series, 1944. ...

The venerable Roy Stockton left the committee in 1971. His resignation, however, had no impact on the cabal which was electing these old Cardinals and Giants, as his spot was taken by Bob Broeg, who had been hired by Stockton, had worked beside him for many years on the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, and had succeeded him as sports editor there.


Bottomley was selected in 1974. Frisch had died in 1973.
   112. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: July 08, 2012 at 10:53 PM (#4176609)
Are you saying that the KC sportswriter voted for Munson because Munson played in NY?


In part, yes, whether he was conscious of that as a reason or not. It probably wasn't the only factor, but it almost certainly was A factor.

Are you saying that if Jeter played for the Cardinals he wouldn't have won his GG because the coaches and managers wouldn't have voted for him?


He would have gotten less support for the GG if he'd played for the Cardinals, simply because he wasn't playing for the Yankees, and wouldn't have had the benefit of their in-your-face visibility and constant media fluffing. [That's independent of the fact that the NL's top defensive SS at that time was also generally better than the AL's, which would've cut into his awards even a bit more.] Would the decrease in support have been substantial enough that he wouldn't have won? I can't say that for sure... the effect is pretty obviously real, but its exact magnitude is certainly open for debate.
   113. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: July 08, 2012 at 10:55 PM (#4176611)
Bottomley was selected in 1974. Frisch had died in 1973.


So what? The surviving members of the committee had heard Frisch pumping up Bottomley (and the other Giants) for years at that point. Their memory of that advocacy didn't die with Frisch.
   114. Jolly Old St. Nick Still Gags in October Posted: July 08, 2012 at 10:56 PM (#4176613)
Whatever East Coast bias there might be would be as much explained by the time zone factor as anything else.

Agreed that it is a factor. At the same time, look at the number of Red Sox/Yankee games that get prime coverage. You don't see as many Mets/Braves games or Braves/Phillies games. (Yes I realize that the Mess are a New York team, but they are clearly the step child) There is clearly a media bias to promote the Yankee/Red Sox rivalry.


But you can just as easily say that it's a bias to promote a rivalry where both teams have been in contention on an almost permanent basis for the past 18 years. The Braves were the NL equivalent of the Yankees for much of that period, but they never had any consistent rival that would correspond to the Red Sox.

The only NL equivalents to the Yanks-Red Sox in terms of longstanding divisional rivalries are the Cardinals-Cubs and the Dodgers-Giants. Problem is, the Cubs are usually mired in mediocrity, and the majority of Dodgers-Giants games begin at 9:00 or 10:00 at night in 3/4 of the country. Put all this together, and it would take some sort of anti-logical affirmative action NOT to feature the Yankees and the Red Sox more than any other rivalry on a regular basis.

-----------------------------------------

Vlad, all you're doing is applying sabermetrics arguments in an era when nobody paid attention to them. Hodges was universally viewed as the best fielding first baseman in the game during most of his career, and he had solid offensive numbers to go along with it. You're seeing conspiracies in random occurrences and not bothering to examine any counterexamples that might not back your thesis. As if Joe McCarthy's one-time pick of Frankie Crosetti (who didn't even play in the game) doesn't have corresponding picks made by other (non-Yankee) managers for their own players.

Ted Kluszewski had six standout years for the Reds, and he made the All-Star team in four of them. In 1950 he was just beginning to become known, and in 1952 he had 7 home runs and 40 RBI in the first half of the season, coming off a mediocre 1951. Not exactly evidence of a conspiracy.

And if you think that Catfish Hunter made the Hall of Fame for anything other than his years in Oakland plus his ONE first rate Yankee year, all I can say is: You're crazy. His HoF narrative consisted of 5 straight 20-game seasons and 5 rings, and the Yankee uniform was but a minor part of it.
   115. McCoy Posted: July 08, 2012 at 10:57 PM (#4176614)
Rafael Palmeiro won the GG for first base despite only playing 28 games at first. I think you are overestimating how much these guys are watching ESPN. Secondly Jeter started winning GG well after the idea that he was a bad fielder became mainstream in the media.

As for "A factor" well, okay, I can't dispute that. Nor can I dispute a theory that the amount of ants on a lollipop is A factor to MVP voting either. Voters vote for players on winning teams traditionally. If Thurman Munson was on the Red Sox and they won that year instead of the Yankees he would have won the MVP. If Munson was on the Cubs and they won that year he would have won the MVP. If he was on the Royals that year he would have won the MVP.
   116. bobm Posted: July 08, 2012 at 10:59 PM (#4176616)
Ted Kluszewski > Career Batting Splits

                                 
       Split   BA  OBP  SLG BAbip
    1st Half .288 .344 .498  .268
    2nd Half .308 .362 .498  .293
   117. cardsfanboy Posted: July 08, 2012 at 11:00 PM (#4176617)
As the gold glove goes, since we have no idea of what the vote totals were, it's very possible that a guy like Jeter is getting what amounts to 3 votes for the gold glove in the years he is winning, when you are dealing with the small number of votes, and the liklihood that the voters just don't give a rats ass about the vote, it's possible that name recognition is the deciding factor. Of course add in the hop/throw and Jeter looks like a good fielder every once in a while(provided you don't bother to realize that he is making the hop throw on a ball hit two steps to his right.
   118. PreservedFish Posted: July 08, 2012 at 11:01 PM (#4176618)
I think the Jeter Gold Gloves can mostly be explained by the usual weird voting patterns. Between 1990 and Jeter's first, every award had been won by Cal Ripken, Omar Vizquel or Alex Rodriguez. When Jeter won his first, the only competition was a 37 year old Omar Vizquel. There wasn't a single other shortstop in the league that was actually famous, and most of the others weren't that good anyway (they were Lugo, Berroa, Guzman, and Crosby. That's it among qualified starters). Vizquel was out of the league the next year, and we know how it's an easy award to lock down for years at a time.

He got it back in 2009, a development that some people on this site predicted because of the caliber of his competition. There were lots of good young guys that were probably better fielders (Aybar, Andrus, Ramirez, Bartlett, A Cabrera) but none was even remotely well known yet, and it would be insane to expect any consensus among the lazy voting managers and coaches about which of these youngsters was best. Once again, he was the only famous shortstop, and he won.
   119. Kiko Sakata Posted: July 08, 2012 at 11:03 PM (#4176620)
In part, yes, whether he was conscious of that as a reason or not. It probably wasn't the only factor, but it almost certainly was A factor.


When you talk about a New York bias, how much of that is a winning-team bias that shows up in New York because New York teams tend to win a lot? The year that Thurman Munson won the MVP award, the Yankees won 14 games more than they had the year before and made the playoffs for the first time in 12 years. That's a similar dynamic to the one that won Terry Pendleton an MVP award in Atlanta in 1991, for example (or Willie McGee had in 1985, in the most blatantly anti-NY MVP vote in history). Similarly, one thing that Gil Hodges had going for him in the 1950s was that his team was regularly winning pennants or coming close through most of the decade.
   120. cardsfanboy Posted: July 08, 2012 at 11:09 PM (#4176625)
Put all this together, and it would take some sort of anti-logical affirmative action NOT to feature the Yankees and the Red Sox more than any other rivalry on a regular basis.


And that is just plain stupid and short sightedness. Why pump up a rivalry, when you can pump up quality. It's not like the Red Sox are a historically great team. Heck pumping up a rivalry is ultimately hurting your overall penetration. As a general rule, it makes the most sense to pump up matches that feature two distinct, largely populated cities that are not regionally close to each other. If Chicago is good and Philly is good, that makes a lot of sense. On top of creating matchups of two distinct teams, you increase the number of fans of teams that dislike/have rivalry with the teams playing. If you have a matchup between the Cardinals/Braves....you also bring in fans of the Cubs, Phillies, Mets, etc. Focusing all the resources on the greatest baseball team in history, and their little wannabee brother, doesn't make much sense. The only people that care about that matchup, are the two in that city(which is a large group) baseball fans in general, and fans of the al east teams.

   121. cardsfanboy Posted: July 08, 2012 at 11:17 PM (#4176636)
(or Willie McGee had in 1985, in the most blatantly anti-NY MVP vote in history).


What? It wasn't anti-NY voting, it was a pitcher doesn't deserve the mvp vote. Tudor posted a 21-8, 10 shutouts and finished 8th in the vote behind NYM catcher Gary Carter and tied with NYM Mets Keith Hernandez. It wasn't anti-NY vote in the slightest.
   122. Jolly Old St. Nick Still Gags in October Posted: July 08, 2012 at 11:19 PM (#4176638)
When you talk about a New York bias, how much of that is a winning-team bias that shows up in New York because New York teams tend to win a lot? The year that Thurman Munson won the MVP award, the Yankees won 14 games more than they had the year before and made the playoffs for the first time in 12 years. That's a similar dynamic to the one that won Terry Pendleton an MVP award in Atlanta in 1991, for example (or Willie McGee had in 1985, in the most blatantly anti-NY MVP vote in history). Similarly, one thing that Gil Hodges had going for him in the 1950s was that his team was regularly winning pennants or coming close through most of the decade.

No shit, Sherlock. Vlad's acting as if writers and players don't pay any attention to the standings, and spend their time following stats on Baseball-Reference.

In the 16 years since the Yankees began dominating the American League, one Yankee (A-Rod) has won two MVPs. And that's it. Clemens won the Yanks' lone CYA in a year he didn't deserve it, but that was almost certainly due to his 20-3 W-L record and not because of any grand conspiracy.
   123. Jolly Old St. Nick Still Gags in October Posted: July 08, 2012 at 11:24 PM (#4176641)
Put all this together, and it would take some sort of anti-logical affirmative action NOT to feature the Yankees and the Red Sox more than any other rivalry on a regular basis.

And that is just plain stupid and short sightedness. Why pump up a rivalry, when you can pump up quality. It's not like the Red Sox are a historically great team. Heck pumping up a rivalry is ultimately hurting your overall penetration. As a general rule, it makes the most sense to pump up matches that feature two distinct, largely populated cities that are not regionally close to each other. If Chicago is good and Philly is good, that makes a lot of sense. On top of creating matchups of two distinct teams, you increase the number of fans of teams that dislike/have rivalry with the teams playing. If you have a matchup between the Cardinals/Braves....you also bring in fans of the Cubs, Phillies, Mets, etc. Focusing all the resources on the greatest baseball team in history, and their little wannabee brother, doesn't make much sense. The only people that care about that matchup, are the two in that city(which is a large group) baseball fans in general, and fans of the al east teams.


There's some sense to that, but traditionally the national telecasts will usually feature teams that are both in contention. And no matter how you look at it, the Yankees and the Red Sox are the only pairing of teams that consistently fit that description on a year-to-year basis.

(or Willie McGee had in 1985, in the most blatantly anti-NY MVP vote in history).


What? It wasn't anti-NY voting, it was a pitcher doesn't deserve the mvp vote. Tudor posted a 21-8, 10 shutouts and finished 8th in the vote behind NYM catcher Gary Carter and tied with NYM Mets Keith Hernandez. It wasn't anti-NY vote in the slightest.

You're right about that, and anyway, the most insane MVP vote ever was Hank Sauer over Robin Roberts in 1952.
   124. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: July 08, 2012 at 11:25 PM (#4176642)
Hodges was universally viewed as the best fielding first baseman in the game during most of his career...


In part because he played in New York. New York players often end up with outsized defensive reputations. Just look at Jeter.

You're seeing conspiracies in random occurrences and not bothering to examine any counterexamples that might not back your thesis.


100+ years' worth of random occurrences isn't "random occurrences". That's a pattern.

Not every New York player gets the same kind of boost, but there's a substantial house effect at work. Only someone who's willfully blind (like a Yankees fan) could miss it.

In 1950 [Kluszewski] was just beginning to become known...


Just like Hodges in 1949. Only Hodges made the team in his first decent-ish year, and Kluszewski didn't, even though Kluszewski's first decent-ish year was better than Hodges's. I wonder how that happened?

And if you think that Catfish Hunter made the Hall of Fame for anything other than his years in Oakland plus his ONE first rate Yankee year, all I can say is: You're crazy. His HoF narrative consisted of 5 straight 20-game seasons and 5 rings, and the Yankee uniform was but a minor part of it.


Hunter getting into the Hall doesn't have anything to do with numbers. On the numbers, his case is weaker than that of a lot of guys who are never going through the big door unless they buy a ticket. He got into the Hall because he was Catfish - and it was his time in the NY fishbowl that put that persona out in front of the world.

Look at Luis Tiant, one of Hunter's exact contemporaries. He won 20+ four times, and ended up with career numbers that are extremely similar to Hunter's. But he only spent two years in New York, toward the end of his career when he was just hanging on, and so he's on the outside looking in, and never got particularly close.
   125. Kiko Sakata Posted: July 08, 2012 at 11:25 PM (#4176643)
It wasn't anti-NY voting, it was a pitcher doesn't deserve the mvp vote


My tongue was at least partly in my cheek there. Sorry.
   126. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: July 08, 2012 at 11:30 PM (#4176650)
No ####, Sherlock. Vlad's acting as if writers and players don't pay any attention to the standings, and spend their time following stats on Baseball-Reference.

In the 16 years since the Yankees began dominating the American League, one Yankee (A-Rod) has won two MVPs. And that's it. Clemens won the Yanks' lone CYA in a year he didn't deserve it, but that was almost certainly due to his 20-3 W-L record and not because of any grand conspiracy.


Nobody's alleging a "grand conspiracy" with Fremasons and the Trilateral Commission. We're saying that New York players win substantially larger numbers of awards than they deserve on the merits. Which, duh.

If it's in part a function of an illogical bias toward winning teams, that doesn't do ####-all for the more deserving players who got screwed out of awards and recognition, does it?
   127. Crispix reaches boiling point with lackluster play Posted: July 08, 2012 at 11:52 PM (#4176672)
Nobody's alleging a "grand conspiracy" with Fremasons and the Trilateral Commission.

Hey, I think it's eminently plausible that Alex Rodriguez is a member of the Trilateral Commission. From hobnobbing with the best and the brightest at Art Basel Miami it's just a short leap to engaging in global regulatory governance at the actual Basel, and worse yet, Davos.
   128. bobm Posted: July 09, 2012 at 12:00 AM (#4176676)
With the caveat that all-star voters in the 1950s did not look at OPS...

1950: Hodges had 1st half more playing time than Klu and a higher OPS than Torgeson.
1952: Klu had the lowest 1st half OPS in the least playing time
1955: Long and Hodges were similar (even in 1st half triples: 7 vs. 4), and Long had been in the minors in 1952-1954
1957: Hodges had a better 1st half OPS than Long (EDITED TO ADD: and in more PA)

That's not much evidence of NY bias.

--------------------------------------

Selected 1st Half Splits, sorted by year, then by OPS
(All Star in Bold)

Year     Player  Split     G GS PA  AB HR RBI   BA    OBP   SLG   OPS
1950 Kluszewski  1st Half 57 54 234 221 13 53 0.303 0.342 0.557 0.898
1950     Hodges  1st Half 72 72 308 265 11 49 0.291 0.380 0.487 0.866
1950   Torgeson  1st Half 75 74 335 276 11 46 0.275 0.399 0.442 0.841

1952     Hodges  1st Half 72 72 293 245 17 57 0.237 0.360 0.494 0.853
1952    Lockman  1st Half 73 73 330 287  6 30 0.307 0.390 0.425 0.815
1952 Kluszewski  1st Half 64 60 253 239  7 40 0.297 0.336 0.456 0.792

1955 Kluszewski  1st Half 79 79 351 309 29 65 0.317 0.390 0.641 1.031
1955       Long  1st Half 76 67 275 240  9 44 0.300 0.369 0.525 0.894
1955     Hodges  1st Half 84 84 369 313 14 59 0.281 0.371 0.492 0.863

1957     Hodges  1st Half 73 73 317 282 10 38 0.309 0.382 0.482 0.864
1957    Bouchee  1st Half 77 77 336 287 11 46 0.272 0.375 0.484 0.859
1957       Long  1st Half 58 51 225 191 10 29 0.262 0.356 0.461 0.816
1957 Kluszewski  1st Half 24  7  48  48  1  5 0.229 0.229 0.354 0.583

   129. cardsfanboy Posted: July 09, 2012 at 12:13 AM (#4176688)
My tongue was at least partly in my cheek there. Sorry.


Sorry for taking it the wrong way, just have heard a lot over the years about how Doc was robbed, and when war started getting popular it became more pronounced. Doc had a great year, Tudor had a great year, but it seems that only closers can be MVP(Verlander broke that spell)

I mean Doc had a great year, but superficially there isn't that much of a difference between his year and Tudor's especially when you consider that Tudor started the year at 1-7 with a 3.74 era, and their head-to-head matchups. Mind you, when you include dominance(strikeout total) park effects(era+) then the gap becomes more pronounced in Gooden's favor, but people crying about Gooden not getting the award should also be complaining about Tudor not finishing second or such. The voting for the Cy Young was correct, so it's not like there was an anti-NY anything going on.


Looking at Bob's list and assuming I'm voting on no knowledge of park effects and only for 1st half stats..
I go with whoever has the better defensive rep between Hodges and Klu in '50.
Lockman in '52 (if Hodges average was north of .250, I think I would vote for him---but him making the team is a triumph of obp over average--although in reality it was probably a triumph of RBI)
'55 has to be Klu then Hodges over Long.
'57 I go Hodges here, but look for a reason to vote for Bouchee. (More RBI's = better clutch)

   130. McCoy Posted: July 09, 2012 at 06:23 AM (#4176743)
If it's in part a function of an illogical bias toward winning teams, that doesn't do ####-all for the more deserving players who got screwed out of awards and recognition, does it?

No it doesn't but it also means there isn't really a "NY-bias".
   131. Ivan Grushenko of Hong Kong Posted: July 09, 2012 at 07:54 AM (#4176764)
Hodges was universally viewed as the best fielding first baseman in the game during most of his career...


In part because he played in New York. New York players often end up with outsized defensive reputations. Just look at Jeter.


The difference is that Jeter does not have that reputation amongst everybody, and Hodges does.
   132. dr. scott Posted: July 09, 2012 at 06:52 PM (#4177497)
The giants marketing push worked for me. before hand I submitted one ballot. Only giants I voted for were Posey and Melky (voted for wright). After "The Push" I voted the other 23 times, and included Pablo. I figured he had no chance. I was shocked that he won. A lot of the momentum for the the push was happening in the stands before the Giants made it official, and it was all for Melky. The Melk Men had huge signs and they were cut to 10-15 times a game. The fact that Melky was trailing Braun... well we in SF will only allow "our" PED taking superstars to be voted to the All Star game.

I looked for the vote all Giants app, but in the end it was just so easy to vote 25 times on the MLB ap, and I surly did not want sanchez or crawford to get my votes.

Eventually the announcers even got into it, but said there was little chance Pablo would overcome Wright. The whole push was really for Melky after his amazing May given he was trailing.

It would be fascinating to get the raw numbers and see when the votes started coming in and on what platforms.
Page 2 of 2 pages  < 1 2

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
A triple short of the cycle
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogOMNICHATTER 7-28
(6 - 2:31pm, Jul 28)
Last: salvomania

NewsblogO'Connor: Tulo looks more A-Rod than Jeter
(20 - 2:31pm, Jul 28)
Last: Howie Menckel

NewsblogHall of Fame Announces Changes to Voting Process for Recently Retired Players, Effective Immediately
(86 - 2:31pm, Jul 28)
Last: Sunday silence

NewsblogDeadspin: David Ortiz Pissed Off the Rays Again
(38 - 2:26pm, Jul 28)
Last: Jittery McFrog

NewsblogDmitri Young explains his amazing weight loss
(1 - 2:26pm, Jul 28)
Last: Jose Can Still Seabiscuit

NewsblogOTP - July 2014: Republicans Lose To Democrats For Sixth Straight Year In Congressional Baseball Game
(3355 - 2:25pm, Jul 28)
Last: A big pile of nonsense (gef the talking mongoose)

NewsblogOT: Monthly NBA Thread- July 2014
(974 - 2:18pm, Jul 28)
Last: clowns to the left of me; STEAGLES to the right

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 7-28-2014
(34 - 2:17pm, Jul 28)
Last: PreservedFish

NewsblogFull Count » Mike Carp explains why he requested a trade from Red Sox
(24 - 2:16pm, Jul 28)
Last: villageidiom

NewsblogSickels: George McClellan, Dayton Moore, and the Kansas City Royals
(623 - 2:14pm, Jul 28)
Last: McCoy

NewsblogIs It True That Some Players Can’t Hack It in New York?
(2 - 2:03pm, Jul 28)
Last: BDC

Hall of MeritMost Meritorious Player: 1957 Discussion
(2 - 1:52pm, Jul 28)
Last: DL from MN

NewsblogOT: The Soccer Thread July, 2014
(447 - 1:09pm, Jul 28)
Last: Commissioner Bud Black Beltre Hillman

Newsblog2014 Prospect Watch | MLB.com: UPDATED
(4 - 1:00pm, Jul 28)
Last: Johnny Sycophant-Laden Fora

NewsblogDodgers and Diamondbacks Triple-A teams involved in wild brawl
(23 - 12:23pm, Jul 28)
Last: Ron J2

Page rendered in 0.3322 seconds
52 querie(s) executed