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

Friday, November 18, 2011

Shaikin: So who didn’t vote for Dodgers’ Clayton Kershaw?

The Dodgers’ Clayton Kershaw won the National League Cy Young Award on Thursday, getting 27 of 32 first-place votes.

Roy Halladay of the Philadelphia Phillies got four first-place votes. Ian Kennedy of the Arizona Diamondbacks got the remaining first-place vote. You can see the complete voting here.

The Baseball Writers Assn. of America selects two voters to represent each National League market. The logical suspicion among Dodgers fans: Did the Philadelphia voters go with their hometown guy, Halladay? Did an Arizona voter go with his hometown guy, Kennedy?

In both cases, the answer is no.

The first-place votes for Halladay were cast by Ken Davidoff of Newsday (N.Y.), Zachary Levine of the Houston Chronicle, Keith Law of ESPN and Scott Miller of CBS Sports. The first-place vote for Kennedy was cast by John Maffei of the North County Times, representing the San Diego chapter of the BBWAA.

Thanks to Evan.

Repoz Posted: November 18, 2011 at 04:20 PM | 22 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: awards, dodgers, sabermetrics

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. salvomania Posted: November 18, 2011 at 04:46 PM (#3996553)
When I saw the hed I thought the implication was that there was one voter who did not cast a vote for Kershaw---but that's not the case.

All 32 writers voted for Kershaw, but not everyone had him first on their ballot.
   2. GregD Posted: November 18, 2011 at 05:12 PM (#3996598)
The article seems to imply that it is shocking that anyone could have voted Halliday #1 and Kershaw #2 or #3.
   3. Endless Trash Posted: November 18, 2011 at 05:21 PM (#3996611)
Voting for Halladay is reasonable. Voting for Kennedy is not.
   4. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: November 18, 2011 at 05:38 PM (#3996630)
Voting for Halladay is reasonable. Voting for Kennedy is not.


I would agree with this.
   5. ellsbury my heart at wounded knee Posted: November 18, 2011 at 06:03 PM (#3996648)
I kind of love these post-award witch hunt/public shamings. Writers probably don't care much about BTF, but there hasn't been a real WTF Cy Young or MVP since like 2006. Seems like it used to happen more frequently.
   6. Bob Evans Posted: November 18, 2011 at 06:31 PM (#3996671)
I kind of love these post-award witch hunt/public shamings. Writers probably don't care much about BTF, but there hasn't been a real WTF Cy Young or MVP since like 2006. Seems like it used to happen more frequently.

I can't see someone being ashamed of their vote, no matter what it is.
   7. McCoy Posted: November 18, 2011 at 06:43 PM (#3996681)
I kind of love these post-award witch hunt/public shamings. Writers probably don't care much about BTF, but there hasn't been a real WTF Cy Young or MVP since like 2006. Seems like it used to happen more frequently.

All that is happening is the same thing that always happens which is conformity. It just so happens that you and perhaps a big chunk of BTF'ers happen to agree with what people are conforming to. This is why we have the "book".
   8. ellsbury my heart at wounded knee Posted: November 18, 2011 at 06:56 PM (#3996690)
All that is happening is the same thing that always happens which is conformity. It just so happens that you and perhaps a big chunk of BTF'ers happen to agree with what people are conforming to.


I agree that there seems to be a little more conformity, but do you think its led to worse decisions? I think the question is whether the decision is good or not, not whether is contrariness for the sake of contrariness. Having more people using wacky criteria in and of itself doesn't seem like a necessarily better thing, although I can see an argument that awards are supposed to be fun, and "top WAR guy is #1 anyone else is stoopid" thing isn't that fun.
   9. salvomania Posted: November 18, 2011 at 07:03 PM (#3996696)
All that is happening is the same thing that always happens which is conformity.


I see it more like, as analysis evolves and general knowledge grows, it becomes easier to agree on what it is we're all seeing.

A few thousand years ago there were many ideas about the nature of the sun and moon: were they gods? Symbols of creation? Watchful presences that would periodically disappear and scare the crap out of everyone?

Now we know that the sun is the star at the center of our solar system (one of many trillions upon trillions of stars and solar systems in the universe) consisting of hot plasma, and was formed about 4.5 billion years ago (unless you're a evangelical Republican, in which case it was formed about 5000 years ago).
   10. HOLLA(R) Posted: November 18, 2011 at 07:07 PM (#3996699)
And what do we burn, apart from witches?
   11. McCoy Posted: November 18, 2011 at 07:12 PM (#3996704)
I think the question is whether the decision is good or not, not whether is contrariness for the sake of contrariness.

My point is that almost everything at the beginning is done because it is viewed as good or right but that over time when things have evolved or moved on we're still stuck with that view that we thought was right 20 years ago. By not allowing independant voices we're cutting off future developments.

You could say that we are following trailblazers and then forcing everyone to get on that path and by doing so we are preventing new trailblazers or at least slowing down their progress.
   12. Endless Trash Posted: November 18, 2011 at 07:37 PM (#3996733)
Personally I am more interested in reason and logic than conformity. If the voter has a logical reason for voting Kennedy I will withdraw my statement, even if I don't completely agree. I visited his blog/column-space and didn't see any.
   13. there isn't anything to do in buffalo but 57i66135 Posted: November 18, 2011 at 07:51 PM (#3996742)
And what do we burn, apart from witches?
gingers.
   14. NJ in NY (Now with Toddler!) Posted: November 18, 2011 at 08:14 PM (#3996757)
Personally I am more interested in reason and logic than conformity. If the voter has a logical reason for voting Kennedy I will withdraw my statement, even if I don't completely agree. I visited his blog/column-space and didn't see any.

I made an effort to catch Kennedy's starts down the stretch and (my memory may be completely off here) I think one of them was against the Padres and I remember seeing Kennedy's splits against the Padres and I remember they were pretty awesome (granted...they are the Padres). I think that, coupled with his W-L record would be enough to turn an "old school" guy.
   15. TomH Posted: November 18, 2011 at 08:24 PM (#3996762)
more witches?
   16. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: November 18, 2011 at 08:44 PM (#3996775)
Now we know that the sun is the star at the center of our solar system (one of many trillions upon trillions of stars and solar systems in the universe) consisting of hot plasma, and was formed about 4.5 billion years ago (unless you're a evangelical Republican, in which case it was formed about 5000 years ago).


Until the discovery of the principles of nuclear fusion, the idea that the sun was a mere few thousand years old was not only plausible, but really the only logical explanation. IIRC, it was the major scientific roadblock to Darwin's theories. His natural selection could not possibly be correct, as it would take millions of years, and the earth and sun couldn't possibly be that old.
   17. ellsbury my heart at wounded knee Posted: November 18, 2011 at 09:17 PM (#3996804)
You could say that we are following trailblazers and then forcing everyone to get on that path and by doing so we are preventing new trailblazers or at least slowing down their progress.


I don't know, I'd like to think that if someone had a new, well-reasoned view on the subject that he (or she) would get a somewhat fair hearing on it. People get a little overly attached to WAR sometimes, but it's not like WAR has overrun the pressboxes, and I think plenty of people at BTF take other stuff into account. Is there some specific new or novel viewpoint that you think is being unfairly excluded?
   18. BrianBrianson Posted: November 18, 2011 at 09:17 PM (#3996806)
No, if the Sun was burning coal it could only last for a few thousand years. But it's Kelvin-Helmholtz time is ~30 million years, so without nuclear energy an age of 10 or 20 million years is plausible.

Geology knew the Earth had to be way older than that, though.
   19. Tim McCarver's Orange Marmalade Posted: November 18, 2011 at 10:57 PM (#3996873)
"IIRC, it was the major scientific roadblock to Darwin's theories. His natural selection could not possibly be correct, as it would take millions of years, and the earth and sun couldn't possibly be that old."

Nope. It had already been accepted geology for decades by 1859 that the Earth was at least millions of years old. A 6,000 year old Earth had been abandoned by the vast majority of geologists (all creationists) when Darwin published. It wasn't until the 1920's and "Flood Geology" that a 6,000 year old Earth was insisted on again by creationists.

What had been considered a problem for Darwin was the pronouncement by Lord Kelvin that the Earth was from 20 to 400 million years old, and no older, especially the lower estimate. The Earth was getting colder Kelvin thought and he couldn't see where any source of energy could come from to keep it warm if it were older. He didn't know about radioactivity.
   20. Swoboda is freedom Posted: November 19, 2011 at 12:07 AM (#3996910)
What had been considered a problem for Darwin was the pronouncement by Lord Kelvin that the Earth was from 20 to 400 million years old, and no older, especially the lower estimate. The Earth was getting colder Kelvin thought and he couldn't see where any source of energy could come from to keep it warm if it were older. He didn't know about radioactivity.

He should have his temperature scale taken away from him.
   21. Eugene Freedman Posted: November 19, 2011 at 01:14 AM (#3996942)
I have trouble distinguishing between Halladay, Kershaw, and Lee. RAA, ERA+, IP they are identical. Kershaw has better Ks. Halladay better walks and HR against. Lee better shutouts. I'm not convinced that components should make the final call like some have argued. I think I'd go with Lee and the shutouts. I am probably the only one. Lee, Kershaw, Halladay would have been my ballot, but realistically, you could have put them in a hat and picked any of the three.
   22. LionoftheSenate Posted: November 19, 2011 at 02:52 AM (#3996973)
Is there any research on the curve ball? Does this pitch age well? Meaning, do guys that live off it and dominate with it, do they carry that long into their careers?

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

News

All News | Prime News

Old-School Newsstand


BBTF Partner

Dynasty League Baseball

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Forsch 10 From Navarone (Dayn)
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogSale of Baseball Prospectus
(100 - 12:39pm, Nov 15)
Last: .

NewsblogOT - Catch-All Pop Culture Extravaganza (November 2018)
(319 - 12:39pm, Nov 15)
Last: PreservedFish

NewsblogOT - NBA Thread (2018-19 season kickoff edition)
(2269 - 12:37pm, Nov 15)
Last: maccoach57

NewsblogAL Central Offseason Preview
(1 - 12:34pm, Nov 15)
Last: snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster)

Newsblog2018 Cy Young Award winners | MLB.com
(21 - 12:31pm, Nov 15)
Last: snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster)

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 11-15-2018
(11 - 12:27pm, Nov 15)
Last: snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster)

NewsblogPirates acquire three players in trade with Tribe
(15 - 12:26pm, Nov 15)
Last: snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster)

Hall of MeritMock 2018 Today’s Game Hall of Fame Ballot
(44 - 12:23pm, Nov 15)
Last: ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick

NewsblogOT: Wrestling Thread November 2014
(2313 - 12:22pm, Nov 15)
Last: aberg

NewsblogManny Machado: Yankees owner Hal Steinbrenner wants 'essential' chat
(5 - 12:12pm, Nov 15)
Last: Avoid running at all times.-S. Paige

NewsblogAtlanta/Southeast BBTF meet up
(70 - 11:37am, Nov 15)
Last: McCoy

NewsblogZack Greinke trade makes sense for these teams
(28 - 11:37am, Nov 15)
Last: snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster)

NewsblogOT: Soccer Thread (2018-19 season begins!)
(1204 - 11:23am, Nov 15)
Last: jmurph

NewsblogAn Update to Prospect Valuation | FanGraphs Baseball
(2 - 11:03am, Nov 15)
Last: snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster)

NewsblogMike Elias Orioles general manager | MLB.com
(17 - 8:21am, Nov 15)
Last: The Duke

Page rendered in 0.2908 seconds
48 querie(s) executed