MVEC?
Okay people, the time to announce the Most Valuable East Coaster is approaching soon. Get pumped! We all know our pride and joy Albert deserves this year's MVP, but who's it really going to go to? David Wright had a nice year...Carlos Delgado put up some big numbers too. But the Mets, like our Cardinals, didn't make the playoffs...hmmm. Braun and Fielder had similarly big years AND made the playoffs (by a hair), but they weren't a shadow of Albert's numbers and it is milwaukee. Well, that leaves Manny in LA who didn't play a full year but has big time split numbers, and our pal Ryan Howard in Philly. Howard trumped Albert in power and production, but Albert has .100+ points and -145ish strikeouts to his name. Chase Utley had a big year too, and unlike Howard and his DP partner Jimmy Rollins, hasn't received the award yet. So I leave it to you, my friends. Which Philly gets the prize this year?
0 recs |
27 comments
Comments
Albert still gets it
Keep the faith people…let’s not bitch about Albert getting screwed if/until it actually happens.
"I believe he’s been reincarnated, that he played before, in the twenties and thirties, and he’s back to prove something." - Former teammate Mark McGwire about Albert Pujols
by cardzfan24 on Oct 2, 2008 1:46 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
just like he
got it in 02 (bonds), 03 (bonds), 04 (bonds), and 06 (howard) right? i’m not bitching, i’m just anticipating, pal.
by gsjefferies93 on Oct 2, 2008 2:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Bonds deserved each one of his
Howard was a joke, but you did skip the year when Albert, you know, WON THE MVP.
"I believe he’s been reincarnated, that he played before, in the twenties and thirties, and he’s back to prove something." - Former teammate Mark McGwire about Albert Pujols
by cardzfan24 on Oct 2, 2008 10:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
pujols did win it in 2005
but he had a better case for it in 06, as he does this year. there was very stiff competition from d. lee in 2005, i’m still not sure he shouldn’t have won the thing. andruuuuuw jones finished second, i think, which was ridiculous.
by mattybobo on Oct 3, 2008 11:03 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Bonds had great seasons,
but he didn’t “deserve” a single one of those seasons.
by Viva Vina on Oct 3, 2008 6:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Bonds had *great* seasons
and at least Howard bat over .300+ in 2006. Howard was a legit MVP in 06, not saying he should’ve won, but Howard 06 does not = Howard 08. I’m not expecting Pujols to lose out this year, so I’m not losing it yet, but all these sports broadcasters and writers are starting to make me nervous.
Piñata - something children beat relentlessly with bats. Piñeiro - .858 OPS against. Some call it irony; I call it destiny.
by thegodfather on Oct 2, 2008 10:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
agreed. it's making me nervous too. i still think albert will win it.
in 2006 it was not instantly obvious, i don’t think, who should have won. since then however, it has become clear to me that if the voters just looked a little bit closer they would have seen albert’s year as the better one. he led the league in OBP and SLG, GPA, runs created, etc. etc. etc. (BA/BIP was under 300 that year… weird). howard only led albert in homers, rbi, and walks from what i can tell. blah.
long story short, i’m still annoyed he lost it in 2006, but i can totally understand why people thought howard was better (though he clearly wasn’t). this year however it’s simply flabbergasting that anybody could vote for someone other than albert.
by mattybobo on Oct 3, 2008 11:10 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree that AP was better in 2006
and he is MUCH better in 2008. Let’s just hope the voters can see past Howard’s statistical excellence…
Piñata - something children beat relentlessly with bats. Piñeiro - .858 OPS against. Some call it irony; I call it destiny.
by thegodfather on Oct 3, 2008 11:41 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
you mean
statistical outstanding-ness?
by mattybobo on Oct 3, 2008 12:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Dang it
I got his Statistical Outstand-ing-ed-ness and his defensive Excellents mixed up. sorry about that.
Piñata - something children beat relentlessly with bats. Piñeiro - .858 OPS against. Some call it irony; I call it destiny.
by thegodfather on Oct 3, 2008 1:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
don't worry about it. the important thing to remember with howard
is his overall out-of-the-ordinarilitude.
by mattybobo on Oct 3, 2008 1:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Still Pujols
None of the other candidates were close to as good as Pujols this season. Howard and Delgado will have get a few first place votes, but Pujols will get the sizable majority of first place nods. I don’t believe in the east coast bias thing.
"The big possum walks late." - Harry Caray
by memphiscub on Oct 2, 2008 2:41 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
The east coast bias is absolutely real,
but I think pujols supremacy might just be that undeniable.
Space.
It's a problem we face.
So we never go anywhere.
We just stay in one place.
by hazel on Oct 2, 2008 4:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Is this a bias? Judge for yourself.
Last 20 NL MVPs, by city:
San Francisco – 7
Atlanta – 2
Pittsburgh – 2
Philadelphia – 2
Los Angeles, San Diego, Denver, Chicago, Cincinnati, St. Louis, Houston – 1 each.
Last 20 AL MVPs by city:
Oakland – 5
Dallas – 4
Seattle – 2
Chicago – 2
New York – 2
Milwaukee, Baltimore, Boston, Anaheim, Twin Cities – 1 each
Last 20 Cy Youngs:
NL
Atlanta – 6
Phoenix – 5
Los Angeles – 2
San Diego – 2
St. Louis, Houston, Montreal, Chicago, Pittsburgh – 1 each
AL
Toronto – 4
Oakland -3
Twin Cities – 3
Boston -2
Kansas City -2
Chicago, Seattle, New York, Cleveland, Anaheim – 1 each
by Hal Lanier's Pants on Oct 2, 2008 7:00 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
interesting
Kinda flies in the face of conventional wisdom. I still think Pujols may not get this one, but that is because sportswriters put a big premium on making the playoffs.
by Merry CRasmus on Oct 2, 2008 7:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
well, right.
I agree. The bias really only goes as far as coverage. The voters themselves aren’t stupid.
On with the (good) youth movement!
by aet15 on Oct 2, 2008 8:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
yeah... i don't think the real bias here is a geographical thing
there is definitely a bias when it comes to amount of coverage of big market teams versus smaller ones… and i care about that less and less because it just makes sense economically. bigger fan bases and whatnot.
when it comes to mvp voting there is almost always some kind of bias. whether it’s a bias toward certain months, or towards arbitrary cherry-picked numbers, or milestones, or great stories, or whatever fluctuates year to year—that’s the most annoying thing to me. the voters as a group seem to just randomly shift to a new dumb criterion each year for making their choices.
by mattybobo on Oct 3, 2008 12:48 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Voting
I think you could apply that little rant about MVP voting to elections for just about anything.
It’s a vote, not some sort of computerized analysis. Of course people are going to be swayed by all kinds of things.
by Hal Lanier's Pants on Oct 3, 2008 7:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Very true
But aet15’s point is also right. I think it’s a huge bias of coverage which I think everyone would agree on. Some may call the many 1st place votes Howard will likely receive a difference in “voting standards/voter preferences,” but I would call it a bias, at least to some degree. If the Phillies’ first baseman’s name was Pujols, then he would likely be a near unanimous MVP selection. Just sayin’…
Piñata - something children beat relentlessly with bats. Piñeiro - .858 OPS against. Some call it irony; I call it destiny.
by thegodfather on Oct 2, 2008 10:05 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Crap.
that was supposed to be a reply to Hal Lanier’s Pants. Friggin’ A…
Piñata - something children beat relentlessly with bats. Piñeiro - .858 OPS against. Some call it irony; I call it destiny.
by thegodfather on Oct 2, 2008 10:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The east coast bias is nonsense but
the indignation for Albert is right on. There is not the slightest question that Albert is a better hitter and all around player than Ryan Howard. We know that stats such as ops and the more complicated win shares formulas show that. The come back for those who vote for stats such as rbi’s or combinations of runs and rbi’s is that they show actual runs produced in the course of a season rather than extrapolated runs produced based on oba and slugging.
For these arguements I like to haul out an old mostly discredited stat called runs created It consists of adding runs and rbi’s and subtracting homers (because they count as 2 runs while actually producing only 1). I then like to add the oba factor in by dividing the number of outs that a player made by the runs they created. You could do it by at bats but I think that it’s more instructive to use the one negative outcome that a hitter can produce. Using this stat shows that Albert was a more valuable player than Howard in both ‘06 and ’08.
In ’06 Albert actually produced 8 more runs than Howard while making 41 fewer outs. It took Howard 2.05 outs to produce a run and it took Albert only 1.72 outs to produce one.
This year Howard did produce more runs than Albert but he required a whopping 127 more outs to do it! I mean, geez, give Cesar Izturis a few thousand outs to work with and he’ll produce the same runs as Albert too! This year it took Howard 2.28 outs to produce a run. Albert “slumped” to needing 1.88 outs to produce a run.
Conclusion, not only is Albert year in and year out a better ball player than Ryan Howard but he was a more valuable player in ’06 and was even more valuable than him this year.
by easy on Oct 5, 2008 11:52 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
very
interesting research! great post, i knew i had a good case for 06 even though howard had a great avg. in addition to production numbers.
by gsjefferies93 on Oct 6, 2008 1:30 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Talking heads v Actual Votes
Most of what we hear is from columists or “sportscasters” who don’t have a vote and get paid to voice an opinion which will keep interest going. We don’t hear enough from the actual voters. A good example is to look at two articles at SI.Com. Heyman (who doesn’t vote) has the typical columnist approach aimed at generating discussions while Verducci (who does vote) lays out his ballot in a straight forward manner.
Another example of the talking head nonsense was from Cal Ripken himself. On a recent pre game show, Cal said the MVP should come from a playoff team, conveniently forgetting that when he won his second trophy (1991) he played for a sixth place team that was out of the race before July 1st.
IMO, the 32 voters will get it right for 2008 by not listening to the talking heads.
by ubeddie on Oct 5, 2008 11:01 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Just a question…..you know how last year his elbow really really bothered him? And this year, its not hurting as bad, but it still is painful….and do you remember last year how he had that great warning track power where he tried to hit 50 home runs? I have seen that very little this year. Perhaps this year he quit trying to be like he was in 06 and is just hitting .357 because he is compensating and doing more of a Gwynn impression? I mean, you know how good hitters choose how they want to hit, like Ichiro, who has great power, but chooses to slap everything instead, maybe thats what Albert is doing out of necessity.
by miniboscorino on Oct 6, 2008 2:31 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
i wish
i could do more than speculate here, but i think there’s something to this. i do remember the track power and frequency of fly balls in 06, and this year it seems like a much more line-drive oriented pujols. it could be the shoulder adjusting his approach, but we’ve always heard that home runs are line-drives that just get up more, so it’s no surprise that he’s only down ~10 homers from 06.
he’s never been the type to hit mcgwire-like shots, and i believe it’s because he understands that line drives are more likely to be hits of any type than high fly balls. i’ll take .357 and 37 homers any year, especially if it means almost winning the batting title. i would claim this year to be more like 03 when albert hit .359, but that year he hit 42 homers as well…geez what a year. (this was another year he lost the mvp to bonds and had nearly 200 more ab’s although production numbers are close…god bless steroids.) i guess we just need to be thankful for what we have, yeah mini/matty, i suspect this too.
PS To those who defended Bonds’ MVPs in strong Pujols years, there is no denying who the real pure talent is between the two. As Cardinal fans I would expect there to be more of a movement that those MVPs be given to their rightful owner, which is Albert in 2002 and 2003, in light of the Bonds steroids proceedings. Does anyone see this as a possibility should more hearings continue? On a similar note, how about Clemens’ Cy Youngs?
by gsjefferies93 on Oct 7, 2008 12:52 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

by 
















