Is the AL MVP race pretty much over?

[moonslav59]

There are six candidates who would not be scandalous. But Trout and Betts clearly stand above the crowd.

 

I'd say 4.

[sk7326]

I'd say 4.

 

Trout, Betts, Ramirez, Bregman, Lindor, Chapman all seem reasonable. Martinez too. But Trout and Betts are a cut above and neither of them are bad choices.

[moonslav59]

Trout, Betts, Ramirez, Bregman, Lindor, Chapman all seem reasonable. Martinez too. But Trout and Betts are a cut above and neither of them are bad choices.

 

I agree that Betts and Trout are above the others, but I don't see Bregman, Lindor or Chapman as legit.

 

I'm counting JD, because of how he affected our team and how he came pretty close to the triple crown.

 

Ramirez is legit.

[Maxbialystock]

I agree that Betts and Trout are above the others, but I don't see Bregman, Lindor or Chapman as legit.

 

I'm counting JD, because of how he affected our team and how he came pretty close to the triple crown.

 

Ramirez is legit.

 

Yeah, well I like Lindor so there.

[dannycater]

Yes, it's over...Bet on Betts

[moonslav59]

Yeah, well I like Lindor so there.

 

More than Ramirez?

 

Is it his defense that makes you like him more?

 

He is an excellent defender and plays a key position. I guess that could be more valuable than the 75 point OPS lead Ramirez has.

 

You've convinced me he belongs on the short list.

[sk7326]

More than Ramirez?

 

Is it his defense that makes you like him more?

 

He is an excellent defender and plays a key position. I guess that could be more valuable than the 75 point OPS lead Ramirez has.

 

You've convinced me he belongs on the short list.

 

Just going off the WAR leaderboard ... Chapman is the best defensive player in the league (this year at least). Bregman has been terrific - even if it has been mostly offense.

[Carpin]

I agree that Betts and Trout are above the others, but I don't see Bregman, Lindor or Chapman as legit.

 

I'm counting JD, because of how he affected our team and how he came pretty close to the triple crown.

 

Ramirez is legit.

 

You raised a good point, for me JD is the MVP, he's the only important difference in their lineup (compared with 2017) and is being an amazing figure to push the rest of the guys to raise their game, I know Betts have better numbers, but in my opinion JD is more valuable for the SOX, still it depends on what you like

[Kimmi]

And of course that was the point of my somewhat tongue-in-cheek proposal to give the MVP award to the player with the highest WAR. All of these sabermetrics have done nothing more than cloud the issue of value even more. Entrusting the MVP award to the same people who refuse to vote for certain players into the HOF on the first ballot is wrong. These people are not only subjective, they're closed-minded and mean spirited.

That brings up the question of, if the BBWAA isn't going to be voting for the MVP and the HOF, who is? WAR certainly isn't perfect but it may be better than having the writers and their subjectivity do it. At least we'd have criteria for the vote. That criteria may be 'fuzzy math' but at least it's something we could hang our hats on.

 

Hmmm... maybe that idea isn't so tongue-in-cheek after all.

 

I have said many times, if you want to get these awards right, let the stat geeks do the voting. I say that in all sincerity.

[Kimmi]

WAR Is the best indicator, as flawed as it may be. Most fans look at the triple slash, whereas defense and base running are just as important, if not more. WAR tries to take that into account. There’s no reason Mookie shouldn’t win. There’s also no reason Trout shouldn’t finish second

 

+100

[Kimmi]

the writers have progressively gotten better. old people die eventually.

 

Ouch.

[Carpin]

I have said many times, if you want to get these awards right, let the stat geeks do the voting. I say that in all sincerity.

 

Which WAR should we use? baseball reference or fangraphs? we all know they both have different calculations as of today Betts is leading in both sites:

 

Baseball Reference

Betts 10.8

Trout 10.1

 

Fangraphs

Betts 10.1

Trout 9.7

 

If Trout has some very good games over the weekend he might pass Betts in fangraphs (BR is a big diference to overcome in 3-4 games)

 

I'm curious, would you still be in favor of using WAR to decide the MVP?

[sk7326]

Which WAR should we use? baseball reference or fangraphs? we all know they both have different calculations as of today Betts is leading in both sites:

 

Baseball Reference

Betts 10.8

Trout 10.1

 

Fangraphs

Betts 10.1

Trout 9.7

 

If Trout has some very good games over the weekend he might pass Betts in fangraphs (BR is a big diference to overcome in 3-4 games)

 

I'm curious, would you still be in favor of using WAR to decide the MVP?

 

A general rule for me is that bWAR is better for awards and fWAR is better to predict future performance.

 

WAR is not precise enough to be used like that (a 0.1 win difference mattering). WAR is more good for establishing tiers.

[notin]

A general rule for me is that bWAR is better for awards and fWAR is better to predict future performance.

 

WAR is not precise enough to be used like that (a 0.1 win difference mattering). WAR is more good for establishing tiers.

 

I wouldn't give the leader the MVP award outright, just like in the pre-sabermetric days, I wouldn't give the award outright to the home run leader or the RBI leader. But using WAR, you can get a list of the best 3 or 4 or 5 candidates and work from there...

[moonslav59]

The WAR is pretty even, but then you look at how the teams did, how Betts reached 30-30. He's even got more RBIs while batting first.

 

It should be a lock.

[Yaz Fan Since 67]

JD has been tremendous, obviously, but I don't get the comments I hear where Mookie may be the league MVP but JD is the Red Sox MVP. As posted Mookie does everything well. His base running and defense really changes games. I don't see any way he does not win the MVP.

[redsoxrules]

JD has been tremendous' date=' obviously, but I don't get the comments I hear where Mookie may be the league MVP but JD is the Red Sox MVP. As posted Mookie does everything well. His base running and defense really changes games. I don't see any way he does not win the MVP.[/quote']

 

It's because JD in the lineup changes the WHOLE lineup. Red Sox would have been lucky to win 95 games this year without JD on the team. He just makes everyone better.

[SoxnCycles]

That was a bias against pitchers. Pedro was left off someone's ballot all together, as I recall.

 

That would famed NY doosh, George King, and another dope from Minnesota.

With King, it wasn't pitcher bias, it was Boston bias.

[notin]

That would famed NY doosh, George King, and another dope from Minnesota.

With King, it wasn't pitcher bias, it was Boston bias.

 

King claimed he did not think a pitcher should be eligible for the award despite the rules for MVP voting explicitly stating pitchers are eligible. That interpretation of the rules came about rather suddenly, as he had voted for David Wells (then with the Yankees) the previous season.

 

Total Boston bias...

[kenmeister]

Yeah, well I like Lindor so there.

 

If I were asked to start a brand new baseball team, and I could draw players from existing teams with my very first pick unprotected, I may very well start with Lindor. That kind of production from the shortstop position is hard to find and he's only 24.

[notin]

If I were asked to start a brand new baseball team, and I could draw players from existing teams with my very first pick unprotected, I may very well start with Lindor. That kind of production from the shortstop position is hard to find and he's only 24.

 

Is it really hard to find?

 

Lindor is outstanding, but how much better is he over Correa, Seager, Machado (still only 26!!), Baez, Story, Turner , Bogaerts, Grigorius or Simmons?

 

Even if he is the best, the drop off among the top 10 shortstops might not be so significant...

[Bellhorn04]

If I were asked to start a brand new baseball team, and I could draw players from existing teams with my very first pick unprotected, I may very well start with Lindor. That kind of production from the shortstop position is hard to find and he's only 24.

 

Lindor is great. I'd have to take Mookie though.

[notin]

Lindor is great. I'd have to take Mookie though.

 

Or Trout...

[SoxnCycles]

King claimed he did not think a pitcher should be eligible for the award despite the rules for MVP voting explicitly stating pitchers are eligible. That interpretation of the rules came about rather suddenly, as he had voted for David Wells (then with the Yankees) the previous season.

 

Total Boston bias...

 

An amazing amount of arrogance to think that excuse would fly.

[Bellhorn04]

Or Trout...

 

Yes. Liking Mookie over Trout probably reflects some homer bias on my part.

[notin]

Yes. Liking Mookie over Trout probably reflects some homer bias on my part.

 

If it's a choice between the two, it's a question with no wrong answer...

[notin]

An amazing amount of arrogance to think that excuse would fly.

 

They should have removed his right to vote for violating the established voting regulations...

[sk7326]

The WAR is pretty even, but then you look at how the teams did, how Betts reached 30-30. He's even got more RBIs while batting first.

 

It should be a lock.

 

Keith Law made an interesting argument for Trout (though he absolutely thinks Betts is a worthy choice). Trout has same slugging, much higher OBP playing in a much tougher ballpark for hitters. Betts WAR lead comes down to defense and the defensive adjustment for RF vs CF. If you flip flopped their positions, is there really much evidence that either would play each other's position that much better or worse. So if you call them equal on defense, and the metrics are equal on the bases - then Trout's offensive season Trump's Betts by a little. Trout is having one of the best offensive seasons in history. 199 OPS+ (Top 50 seasons since 1901), 193 wRC+ (best season outside of 2015 Bryce Harper since Barry Bonds hung em up)

[sk7326]

Yes. Liking Mookie over Trout probably reflects some homer bias on my part.

 

Absolutely. That said, I have that bias too. Really there is not a "wrong" choice between Betts and Trout. Calling anybody else MVP over those two requires some 'splainin. Now, I think Ramirez, Bregman, Lindor and Chapman are all fine choices, and would be MVP-worthy in most seasons, this year it just doesn't fit. They got run over by two flat remarkable seasons.

[notin]

Absolutely. That said, I have that bias too. Really there is not a "wrong" choice between Betts and Trout. Calling anybody else MVP over those two requires some 'splainin. Now, I think Ramirez, Bregman, Lindor and Chapman are all fine choices, and would be MVP-worthy in most seasons, this year it just doesn't fit. They got run over by two flat remarkable seasons.

 

And any of them would be an easily defensible candidate for MVP if they were in the National League...