User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
|
Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats
|
AllianceTickets.com has cheap MLB Tickets. Get all your Colorado Rockies Tickets, Seattle Mariners Tickets, San Francisco Giants Tickets and all your favorite baseball tickets here. We also carry cheap Denver Broncos Tickets, Seattle Seahawks Tickets and Denver Nuggets Tickets. |
For wholesale prices on baseball gifts and equipment, check these stores out! |
Page rendered in 0.3618 seconds
50 querie(s) executed
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. Harveys WallbangersIf not then I believe Braun at least has an earned even from the most ardent pro-WAR crowd a look based on the following:
--obviously the best the player on a division winning team
--his own collection of numbers which place him among the top players in the NL
--when the Brewers went on their crazy streak Braun was the foundation of the offense while the pitching was insanely effective
--Braun has been hot the entire second half
--when the Brewers began to sputter in September it has been Braun who has helped keep the team playing around .500
Sept 11. Team has lost five in a row. Braun drives in go ahead run in the bottom of the 7th
Sept 13. Greinke sputters but between him and a slew of relievers hold the Rockies to 1 run over 11 innings. Braun wins it in the bottom of the 11th with a home run
Sept 16-18: After the offense had stumbled around for what seemed like forever Braun goes 8-13 over the weekend with 3 homers against the Reds as Crew sweeps keeping pace against red hot Cards
Sept 23: Well documented as Braun makes a great defensive play then hits the homer the breaks the tie in the bottom of the 8th
Yes Prince has hit in September as well but Braun has been better. The pitching, especially the bulllpen, has done its job but the offense abandoned its post thanks to horrible slumps by McGehee, Betancourt and Lucroy.
Ryan has not been Yaz in '67 or Stargell in '79 or Brett in '85 but he has been d*mn good when the team needed someone to swing the bat worth a d*mn.
I get what you are saying Harv, but it's kind of like saying "I'd vote for this guy for the HOF only if he cracks 3,000 hits." The difference between Matt Kemp and the triple crown right now is 4 singles.
Ryan is a very deserving runner-up, and perfectly capable of stepping in if Kemp is unable to fulfill his MVP duties. I'm willing to give a pennant contender boost if the competition for the honor is really close. I think the gap between Kemp and the rest of the league is too large though.
Irrelevant according to the MVP voting guidelines. Also, unless you only mean his own team, Lee and Halladay are not obviously worse.
--his own collection of numbers which place him among the top players in the NL
Significantly behind Kemp.
--Braun has been hot the entire second half
The first half counts just as much as the second. Actually, more, since the first "half" is longer than the second.
--when the Brewers went on their crazy streak Braun was the foundation of the offense while the pitching was insanely effective
--Braun has been hot the entire second half
--when the Brewers began to sputter in September it has been Braun who has helped keep the team playing around .500
Sept 11. Team has lost five in a row. Braun drives in go ahead run in the bottom of the 7th
Sept 13. Greinke sputters but between him and a slew of relievers hold the Rockies to 1 run over 11 innings. Braun wins it in the bottom of the 11th with a home run
Sept 16-18: After the offense had stumbled around for what seemed like forever Braun goes 8-13 over the weekend with 3 homers against the Reds as Crew sweeps keeping pace against red hot Cards
Sept 23: Well documented as Braun makes a great defensive play then hits the homer the breaks the tie in the bottom of the 8th
Has SBB stolen your login information?
Also, on the clutch front: WPA:
Kemp 5.64
Braun 5.39
Which AFAIK doesn't give credit for Kemp's advantage on the defensive spectrum.
I despise the cut and paste approach since it lends itself to endless dissection but to clarify a few items.
I am speaking specifically of Braun being the best player on the Brewers.
The Brewers won the division based on the team's performance in the second half. Braun was central to that effort
And it's obvious that Kemp plays centerfield and Braun plays left field. So clearly there is a gap in defensive value. I didn't think every blessed item had to be recounted among a learned audience.
And for everyone I wrote Braun earned a hard look. At no time did I write that Braun had to be named NL MVP
Actually you wrote this:
"If not then I believe Braun at least has an earned even from the most ardent pro-WAR crowd a look based on the following:"
I guess you left out the words "a hard look" after earned which led to confusion. I read "an earned even" as an awkwardly phrased "he is even with Kemp"
Hate cut and paste (did I write that already?)
But I wrote "earned even from the most ardent pro-WAR crowd a look"
On a separate point it has been pretty obvious if you follow the Brewers that half the field regulars were playing with extra tight sphincters as the lead was reduced. Even Prince at times was swinging at stuff way out of the zone, mostly high stuff, and Braun himself had some terrible at bats.
But overall Ryan was by far the most consistent. Hart has had hits, Weeks drew some walks but it was Ryan who kept the offense from completely disappearing.
If folks here don't think pennant race game conditions are different then you really need to pay closer attention. Because at least with the Brewers it was VERY obvious. And disappointing because the playoffs will only be more challenging.
Sigh
And freely admit I could have worded that better.
OK, this is getting silly, but...
As awkward as that split infinitive is, it's made even worse by the addition of the word an in front of even. Again, what is "an earned even"? I don't think it's unfair for someone to read that as Braun is even with Kemp. Remember old adage that it's the fault of the writer if his meaning is confusing to the reader.
edit: I see you addressed that prior to my posting.
And of course the idea that it's more difficult to perform on a contending team is utterly absurd, as noted by Jon Weisman in another thread that's on the hot topics bar right now. Usually I wouldn't expect such an ignorant argument from someone like Harvey's but hey, fanboyism can get the best of us all sometimes, I guess.
I was speaking directly to the Brewers
Feel free to ask mrams and other Brewer posters. The team was really fumbling all over itself at the plate save for a precious few.
I am speaking specifically of Braun being the best player on the Brewers.
And 15 other guys are the best player on their respective teams. You can hand Braun the Most Valuable Brewer award today, as far as I care.
The Brewers won the division based on the team's performance in the second half. Braun was central to that effort
And if he had been better in the first half, they wouldn't have needed such an effort in the second. It's catch-22. All games count the same in the standings.
And it's obvious that Kemp plays centerfield and Braun plays left field. So clearly there is a gap in defensive value. I didn't think every blessed item had to be recounted among a learned audience.
I was just pointing that out in the context of the WPA numbers I cited (which was more a point about the original article). Kemp has been more 'clutch' than Braun, without defensive credit.
And for everyone I wrote Braun earned a hard look. At no time did I write that Braun had to be named NL MVP
I don't want to come of all anti-Braun here. He's had a great season, and I'd put him somewhere 2-4 on my ballot, if I had one. But Kemp should run away with it [insert BBWAA stupidity disclaimer here].
You should try watching the Astros sometime.
(Of course, calling Attanasio the dumbest owner in baseball is still utterly ridiculous.)
Well, I doubted you that the Cy voters would go for Felix last year, and you were right there, so I'll give your opinion some weight. That said, I still suspect that Kemp has to win the Triple Crown to win it. I don't think the writers will feel like thinking outside the box when Braun is right there to vote for. For that same basic reason, though, I will only be momentarily disappointed if and when Braun wins. He has been the second-best position player, and he really is great. (Also, he was my pre-season pick ;-) Poz's too, and most likely many others as well.)
This should be interesting
I think we vastly overstate the plays for a playoff team factor (probably the result of taking the opinion of too many non-voters as representative of the electorate). Albert won the award in 2008 on a fourth-place team. And Hanley finished second two years ago for a non-entity. I think most voters prefer a playoff contender and treat that as kind of a tiebreaker, but it's not a dealbreaker (on the other hand, being a pitcher is a dealbreaker for some, I believe*).
Kemp's late surge to potential triple crown winner with six games left will definitely attract attention, even if he doesn't finish the deal. He will place high on every ballot. The biggest thing working against him is that Braun may have become the obvious contender among the playoff-bound teams (he'd be better served if there were a handful of legit conteders among the postseason teams). But I do believe they will finish 1-2, and I suspect it will be close. I wouldn't hazard a guess which way it goes (unless Kemp does win the TC, in which case it will be him).
* Or has been. Verlander's numbers will be telling where this stands.
And though a hate to say it, God is right.
Kemp delivered the knockout blow to the Giants... (Though Arizona has admittedly put the nail in the coffin, the coffin in the ground, and the dirt on top of it).
I don't agree with this as a predictive matter at all. Yes, Pujols won in 2008, and that is certainly the best recent precedent for Kemp. Like Kemp, Pujols had to be (and was) head and shoulders above the rest of the league to overcome being on a non-contender. What is different this year is that the closest (albeit distant) contender to Pujols in quality in 2008 (Hanley Ramirez) was also on a non-contender, whereas this time around, it's Ryan Braun, who is on a division winner. That is a huge difference.
And once you get past Prince Albert, you really can't find an MVP winner on a non-contender. Hanley finished second in 2008, true, but with zero first place votes. In a year where there is a unanimous MVP like that one (Pujols, naturally), and everyone knows who it's going to be, the voting for the other spots often becomes an exercise in just ranking players' performance.
I think you'd be really hard-pressed to argue that the voters don't take contending status of the team into serious consideration when they make their top-of-the-ballot choices. The guys with ballots certainly say they do just that, almost as consistently as they say they won't vote for (or seriously discount) starting pitchers. It takes almost a perfect storm, like 2008, for a great player head-and-shoulders above anybody on a contending team to win. Kemp may -- may -- be far enough ahead of Braun to have that happen this year. I think it should, of course. It's gonna be very, very close.
He also fell further behind Jose Reyes (2 for 4).
Braun: .333
Reyes: .331
Kemp: .325 (so far, 1 for 4)
It shouldn't come down to whether he happens to win the Triple Crown, but you have to think the odds aren't with him, with two guys to catch in the batting race.
I didn't say either should be seen as predictive of what will happen this year (in fact, I predicted the exact same thing you did, only earlier), just that we overstate the reluctance to vote for non-contenders. The fact that fourth-place Pujols easily outpolled perenially MVP-vote favorite and playoff-bound Ryan Howard in 2008 does tell us that simply playing for a non-contender is not a dealbreaker, which is what I said.
In the other league, last year Miguel Cabrera finished second in the MVP voting, earning five first-place votes, despite playing for a non-contender AND not being meaningfully (if at all) better than two playoff-bound players (the winner Hamilton and also-ran Longoria).
Well, forget whether we "overstate" it or not -- resolving that requires us to decide the pretty amorphous question of how strongly "we" state it, whomever "we" are. Let me try just to state how strongly I think the reluctance is, and you can tell me whether you think I'm overstating it or if I have it about right.
I think that a player on a non-contender can win the MVP in this era if, and only if, the voters don't think there is a player on a contender whose performance has been even close to him. The gap in perceived performance quality has to be extremely wide, such that it is fair to say there is a substantial pro-contender bias. It's not impossible for a player on a non-contender to win, but it's very difficult.
The 2008 award to Pujols is consistent with that: the voters didn't perceive anyone on a contender as being anywhere close to Pujols. The interesting question would have been whether Hanley Ramirez would have been perceived to be close enough in performance if the Marlins had been a contender. That would have been an excellent indicator of the Braun/Kemp race this year. Not perfect, but pretty close.
The other problem Kemp has is that the perception of his performance by a lot of the writers may not match its actual quality, because of the decline in offense. Leading the league in home runs with (say) 39 isn't the same as leading the league with 47 (or something like that). Leading the league hitting .330 isn't the same as leading it hitting .357, as Pujols did in 2008. Even if it's just as valuable a season in context, it doesn't carry the same "oomph" to some of the writers -- which is part of the reason why the label "Triple Crown" may be important.
(TAKES HARD LOOK)
Kemp is better.
Personally I think Kemp is ok
I should mention... you know who did have Kemp, who seemed like a pretty crazy pick pre-season?
That's right, the architect of Moneyball... Joe Sheehan.
I think Matt Kemp can win the MVP without winning the Triple Crown this year. Since, from what I've seen, that seems to be a minority opinion in these parts, it follows that I think folks overstate the importance of contenderhood.
As for you, I think you've drawn the conditions too narrowly.* If there were two other playoff-bound contenders perceived as being equal to Braun, (say, as was the case in the AL about a month ago), then I think Kemp would have emerged as the winner with this late triple crown push, regardless how far the perceived gap was between him and Braun. If Braun is seen as his only real competition among the playoff-bound, that will make it much harder for Kemp to win. In that case, the gap is secondary to the complexion of the field.
Ultimately, if we both think this particular MVP race will be "very, very close," then we can't be that far off.
The AL race is actually more interesting, as it brings both biases (anti-contender, anti-pitcher) to the fore against, by default, Granderson.
* Additionally, you've kind of set up a situation where you can't really be proved wrong. If Kemp does win this year, you can just say the perceived gap was large enough to overcome the substantial pro-contender bias, and therefore Ol' Sammy was right agin. Tricky shysters.
Not intentionally. I will say that Kemp winning -- especially if he does it without the Triple Crown as a marker for voters to justify making an "exception" -- would be an important milestone in breaking down the strong bias in favor of contenders. Kemp faces one big disadvantage, in that he has to battle just one obvious opponent in the race (Braun) instead of having the vote of those who most strongly favor players from contending teams split. If he falls short of the Triple Crown after having made a run (and that's how the narrative will play out), that'll be another problem for him in the voting. If he wins, despite those two issues, it'll certainly be a step in breaking down the barrier against players like Kemp. Any time you have a precedent you can cite in future votes, that helps make the case, and moves the needle.
Like you, I think Kemp can win without the Triple Crown, but I think it becomes a lot harder, and I don't think there's any recent strong precedent for it. It is a tribute to how much better he has been than the league that he has a chance -- a chance -- to break the barrier.
I think the one thing we also tend to forget is an evolving electorate*, in large part because we get so many asinine viewpoints on all things baseball Repoz'd at us throughout the year from guys without a vote. The beat writers who vote on these things, as the most recent elections have demonstrated, have been getting consistently more comfortable with advanced metrics and what those metrics demonstrate.
* This just goes for season-ending awareds. That evolution is several years away from making a significant dent in Hall of Fame voting.
Don't they rotate the vote?
I suspect anyone who would use that rationale would already be in the anti-noncontender camp.
Yes, but the number of potential voters has shrunk, and the trend has been going on for several years in most of the BBWAA elections (helped along by new electors such as Law).
No he didn't - Chipper hit .364 that year.
Not that it invalidates the rest of your point, which is fine; Ted Williams' Triple Crown seasons weren't really his best ones, which is part of the reason (certainly not the entire reason) he didn't win the MVP in either of them.
Chipper Jones is just destined to bedevil me in every way, for the rest of eternity, isn't he?
Sigh.
Ted didn't win in 1942 in part because the voters knew he would have better seasons later on? This of course also applies to his 1947 season as well. 42 and 47 were Ted's 4th and 6th season in the league. Ted ended up winning in 1949 when he just missed another triple crown but didn't have as good of a season with the bat as he did in 1942 or 1947.
Who did this?
Jimmie Foxx 1933, MVP
Lou didn't win in 1934 because they gave it to Mickey Cochrane the wonder manager/catcher. Lou finished in 5th and even Gomez had the pitcher's Triple Crown finished 3rd. That year the voters were just really gaga over the Tigers and probably a little burnt out on the Yankees.
Chuck didn't win in 1933 because they gave it to a pitcher.
He had a bad year with the bat too and nobody has any trouble accepting it.
This is true; I think I did a poor job of agreeing with the point I was trying to agree with, which was that the impressiveness of the actual numbers may matter more to the voters than whether they were close to the league lead.
Ted didn't win in 1942 in part because the voters knew he would have better seasons later on?
No, but he had just had a better season the year before.
Also, the voters were dumb.
Joe Medwick 1937, MVP
Medwick won the 1937 MVP by 2 points, and got 2 first place votes out of 8. The second-place finisher (Gabby Hartnett) did not qualify for the batting title, and his team did not win the pennant. That hardly suggests the voters saw the Triple Crown as ruling out any other candidate.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main