Mookie and the MVP

[sk7326]

To me, the most valuable player is the player who was the most important to his team, not the player who was the best. I would argue that both Papi and Pedroia were more valuable to the team than Trout or Mookie.

 

That's not to take anything away from Trout or Mookie, who are both awesome. I can certainly understand why people would vote for them.

 

What does that even mean? All the criteria I can think of to define "most valuable" in this context comes down to;

 

* Pretty good teammates (so your team contends)

* A bad backup (so you are indispensible)

 

Essentially Trout is penalized for having bad management. That team would be early 2000s Tigers bad without him - that sounds like a huge difference also. There is no win scenario for the Red Sox this year that did not involve Betts making a significant leap.

[Kimmi]

What does that even mean? All the criteria I can think of to define "most valuable" in this context comes down to;

 

* Pretty good teammates (so your team contends)

* A bad backup (so you are indispensible)

 

Essentially Trout is penalized for having bad management. That team would be early 2000s Tigers bad without him - that sounds like a huge difference also. There is no win scenario for the Red Sox this year that did not involve Betts making a significant leap.

 

I know you disagree with me on this, but I think there is a difference between the most valuable player and the best player. I think that some players bring value to the team that can't be measured by stats or by WAR. And if you know anything about me, you know that I'm a big believer in stats and I'm a big fan of WAR.

 

I am not trying to say that Trout or Mookie were not valuable. They were both very valuable to their teams in terms of wins contributed. I just think Papi was more valuable in terms of what he brought to the team through his leadership, his mentoring of the young players (and Hanley), and the 'rallying' factor to win one more ring before he retired.

 

I think it comes down to the way 'most valuable' is interpreted. It's a very subjective term.

[Kimmi]

I agree with you. Once again though - I wish that the MVP was a team given award and the best player was a league award that was in fact given to the 'best player" each season. Not likely to change any time soon though.

 

As one of the writers suggested, there should be a Player of the Year Award. That would go to Trout without him being penalized for playing on a bad team.

[a700hitter]

There are enough post season awards. We don't need any additional ones. They are all BS popularity contests.

[Spudboy]

There are enough post season awards. We don't need any additional ones. They are all BS popularity contests.

 

I agree. Why entertainers of any ilk need to be given an atta boy is beyond me.

[Dojji]

I agree. Why entertainers of any ilk need to be given an atta boy is beyond me.

 

REplace "entertainers" with "workers" and ask the same question. Congratulations, you're a robber baron.

 

Everyone needs recognition when they do a good job. I don't see why that's difficult to understand in any way.

[Spudboy]

REplace "entertainers" with "workers" and ask the same question. Congratulations, you're a robber baron.

 

Everyone needs recognition when they do a good job. I don't see why that's difficult to understand in any way.

 

Oh blow me.

 

You really like to sensationalize, don't you.

 

I stand by my statement. There is simply no comparison between a factory / direct labor employee.

 

Try a little harder to startle us with your world view.

[Youk Of The Nation]

I have to say, I agree with Dojji on this one. I think the job you do and the amount of money you make should be immaterial to your reward for doing that job well. Recognizing excellence in any field should be a no-brainer for management, whether it is a Major League Baseball team, an accounting firm, or Wendy's. It's a simple way of saying "Hey, everyone does their job, but thanks for pouring your heart out and being the best." I have no problem with awards, as long as it doesn't degenerate into participation trophies.

[southpaw777]

It never hurts to show appreciation for hard work. It encourages more from that person and those watching. Doesnt matter what field of work its in

[Kimmi]

There are enough post season awards. We don't need any additional ones. They are all BS popularity contests.

 

They are getting better, as the voters become more educated. If they want it done right, they need to let the stat geeks vote.

[Kimmi]

I agree with Dojji, YOTN, and Southpaw on this one. There's nothing wrong with recognizing excellence and hard work. A little pat on the back now and then can go a long way in terms of future performance.

[S5Dewey]

They are getting better, as the voters become more educated. If they want it done right, they need to let the stat geeks vote.

 

You know that post is going to be difficult to reconcile with your post about Papi being the MVP, don't you?

 

Quote: "I know you disagree with me on this, but I think there is a difference between the most valuable player and the best player. I think that some players bring value to the team that can't be measured by stats or by WAR. And if you know anything about me, you know that I'm a big believer in stats and I'm a big fan of WAR."

 

And just when I thought you were 'coming around', too.

[Kimmi]

You know that post is going to be difficult to reconcile with your post about Papi being the MVP, don't you?

 

Quote: "I know you disagree with me on this, but I think there is a difference between the most valuable player and the best player. I think that some players bring value to the team that can't be measured by stats or by WAR. And if you know anything about me, you know that I'm a big believer in stats and I'm a big fan of WAR."

 

And just when I thought you were 'coming around', too.

 

No, those two posts are not difficult to reconcile with each other. The problem, IMO, is that people have strong misconceptions about stat geeks. Being a stat geek does not preclude one from understanding the human element of the game.

 

And what do I have to 'come around' to? I am there. It's most other people who have to 'come around'.

[Kimmi]

In terms of the awards, look at the Gold Gloves. They were a joke. A few years back, Rawlings acknowledged this fact, and added a 'saber' component to the voting. Since then, the Gold Gloves have become much more reputable. They are still not as accurate as the Fielding Bible Awards, because too many managers/coaches are still voting based on a player's reputation, but they have become much, much better.

 

Also, if you're looking for the 'best' player, pitcher, or defender, you can get that from stats alone. If you're looking for the 'most valuable' or for MOTY, that's a different story.

[Bellhorn04]

No, those two posts are not difficult to reconcile with each other. The problem, IMO, is that people have strong misconceptions about stat geeks. Being a stat geek does not preclude one from understanding the human element of the game.

 

I agree that stat geeks appreciate the human element. But given that the human element is impossible to measure, I'm not sure how stat geeks could do a better job determining who is 'most valuable', if the human element (Papi) is supposed to be factored in.

[Bellhorn04]

I have to say, I agree with Dojji on this one. I think the job you do and the amount of money you make should be immaterial to your reward for doing that job well. Recognizing excellence in any field should be a no-brainer for management, whether it is a Major League Baseball team, an accounting firm, or Wendy's. It's a simple way of saying "Hey, everyone does their job, but thanks for pouring your heart out and being the best." I have no problem with awards, as long as it doesn't degenerate into participation trophies.

 

I don't have a big problem with awards, but I'm cynical about them. I think the biggest purpose they serve is as a promotional tool for the game.

 

I say that because there is often controversy about whether the award went to the right player. So you have some players feeling rewarded and others feeling ripped off.

[a700hitter]

They are getting better, as the voters become more educated. If they want it done right, they need to let the stat geeks vote.

It has always been a popularity contest. Advanced statistics will not make a difference. Statistics have been disregarded since the forever.

[a700hitter]

Congratulations, you're a robber baron.

I have never met one, but if I did I might ask for an autograph.

[a700hitter]

Oh blow me.

 

You really like to sensationalize, don't you.

 

I stand by my statement. There is simply no comparison between a factory / direct labor employee.

 

Try a little harder to startle us with your world view.

We really need to do that radio show.

[Spudboy]

We really need to do that radio show.

 

No s***.

[Behindenemylines]

Doesn't the teams record have any impact on MVP voting. If a player is so valuable should his team have a better record?

[Bellhorn04]

Doesn't the teams record have any impact on MVP voting. If a player is so valuable should his team have a better record?

 

The best players in baseball can add about 10 wins to their team's record. That still only makes a 65 win team a 75 win team. One guy alone can't work miracles.

[Kimmi]

I agree that stat geeks appreciate the human element. But given that the human element is impossible to measure, I'm not sure how stat geeks could do a better job determining who is 'most valuable', if the human element (Papi) is supposed to be factored in.

 

Fair enough point regarding 'most valuable' and the human element.

[Dojji]

I agree that stat geeks appreciate the human element. But given that the human element is impossible to measure, I'm not sure how stat geeks could do a better job determining who is 'most valuable', if the human element (Papi) is supposed to be factored in.

 

Stat geeks aren't limited to stats alone. No reputable stat geek denies that the human element exists and can be an X factor. They just recognize that that X factor can't be quantified. Meanwhile the traditionalists are the ones that are blocking themselves from whole realms of knowable things as regards the sport they profess to love.

 

No stat geek I ever met has a problem admitting that X factors exist. They just like to know what is knowable. I fail to understand why a desire to know the knowable is such a barrier for some.

[Kimmi]

It has always been a popularity contest. Advanced statistics will not make a difference. Statistics have been disregarded since the forever.

 

That's the point of letting the stat geeks vote. They will not vote on popularity or on reputation.

[Dojji]

Except they will, because there's no way to avoid it. Hopefully they'll use it as a tiebreaker like they should.

[Kimmi]

Stat geeks aren't limited to stats alone. No reputable stat geek denies that the human element exists and can be an X factor. They just recognize that that X factor can't be quantified. Meanwhile the traditionalists are the ones that are blocking themselves from whole realms of knowable things as regards the sport they profess to love.

 

No stat geek I ever met has a problem admitting that X factors exist. They just like to know what is knowable. I fail to understand why a desire to know the knowable is such a barrier for some.

 

I think I love you.

[Kimmi]

Except they will, because there's no way to avoid it. Hopefully they'll use it as a tiebreaker like they should.

 

Nope, I don't think they will. Not when it comes to voting on the best.

 

If there are two candidates who are neck and neck, sure, they might go with their biases. But they certainly won't pick Derek Jeter to win a Gold Glove Award.

[Dojji]

Yeah that's what I meant by a tiebreaker. No reputable stats guy would put Derek Jeter up for a Gold Glove, but if a future SS GG is about Lindor or another big-name SS, vs an unknown and/or a guy having a year where he plays over his head, and the defensive stat values are a wash, shrugging and giving the first place vote to Lindor isn't particularly inappropriate.

[Bellhorn04]

Yeah that's what I meant by a tiebreaker. No reputable stats guy would put Derek Jeter up for a Gold Glove, but if a future SS GG is about Lindor or another big-name SS, vs an unknown and/or a guy having a year where he plays over his head, and the defensive stat values are a wash, shrugging and giving the first place vote to Lindor isn't particularly inappropriate.

 

If it was me, that would be a real last resort. I would rather find some statistical tiebreaker than call it a draw and give it to the better-known guy. It's hard to imagine the stats being a perfect wash.