Rationale for bening the MVP
Skinpinch
Posts: 1,531
in Sports Talk
If the rational for being an MVP is "His team would still be great without him," or "His team needs him more," then the MVP is a worthless and trivial award! The best player is the Most Valuable.
For the Andruw Jones backers..........So in order for Pujols to be considered the MVP, his teammates would have to be slightly worse so that his presence on the team means the difference between second place vs. first place as opposed to seven games up vs. 14 games up?? Stupid rationale plain and simple. Basically, a player would need the stars to align to be considered VALUABLE, and everything would have to fall in place....have a great year, do better than you normally do, have some injuries to your teammates, make sure you are on a team that will only win by two games instead of 14. That would then make the award worthless.
THE MVP IS THE GUY THAT IS GOING TO WIN YOUR TEAM THE MOST GAMES!! COME PLAYOFF TIME WHO DO YOU WANT, THE GUY WHO IS BETTER AND WINS MORE GAMES, OR THE LESSER PLAYER WHO IS 'MOST VALUABLE' BECAUSE HIS TEAM WOULD FINISH IN SECOND WITHOUT HIM BECAUSE HIS TEAMMATES AREN'T AS GOOD??? You take the better player as he is going to win the most games for your team, in both the regular season and the playoffs, and that is what is valuable! Not having worse teammates isn't what is valuable!
Again, if those goofy rationales are used to debate who the MVP is, then it is a stupid award and isn't even worth discussing.
Now, if somebody wants to debate on which player is actually going to lead to more wins for their team, then that is a different story. Also, please do not say Jones has more HR and RBI thus he is having a better year at the plate...I may throw up if I continue to hear that. Pujols is easily superior at the plate this season, so just get that notion out of ANYONE'S head.
What needs to be looked at is the defensive difference. Is Jone's centerfield defense good enough to overcome the offensive gap?? It is possible that it is! I haven't looked at it, nor am I going to.
But if an enterprising chap wants to check the value, then make the case the right way, and stop using that drivel of "His team would still be in first without him." That is a first grade analysis.
For the Andruw Jones backers..........So in order for Pujols to be considered the MVP, his teammates would have to be slightly worse so that his presence on the team means the difference between second place vs. first place as opposed to seven games up vs. 14 games up?? Stupid rationale plain and simple. Basically, a player would need the stars to align to be considered VALUABLE, and everything would have to fall in place....have a great year, do better than you normally do, have some injuries to your teammates, make sure you are on a team that will only win by two games instead of 14. That would then make the award worthless.
THE MVP IS THE GUY THAT IS GOING TO WIN YOUR TEAM THE MOST GAMES!! COME PLAYOFF TIME WHO DO YOU WANT, THE GUY WHO IS BETTER AND WINS MORE GAMES, OR THE LESSER PLAYER WHO IS 'MOST VALUABLE' BECAUSE HIS TEAM WOULD FINISH IN SECOND WITHOUT HIM BECAUSE HIS TEAMMATES AREN'T AS GOOD??? You take the better player as he is going to win the most games for your team, in both the regular season and the playoffs, and that is what is valuable! Not having worse teammates isn't what is valuable!
Again, if those goofy rationales are used to debate who the MVP is, then it is a stupid award and isn't even worth discussing.
Now, if somebody wants to debate on which player is actually going to lead to more wins for their team, then that is a different story. Also, please do not say Jones has more HR and RBI thus he is having a better year at the plate...I may throw up if I continue to hear that. Pujols is easily superior at the plate this season, so just get that notion out of ANYONE'S head.
What needs to be looked at is the defensive difference. Is Jone's centerfield defense good enough to overcome the offensive gap?? It is possible that it is! I haven't looked at it, nor am I going to.
But if an enterprising chap wants to check the value, then make the case the right way, and stop using that drivel of "His team would still be in first without him." That is a first grade analysis.
0
Comments
JS
Note to the best player in the league.....Never play on a team that is outstanding and will dominate the regular season as you will NEVER be the MVP as long as close races are alive in MLB. Maybe Albert should have did a Tonya Harding on Chris Carpenter's pitching arm so that St. Louis would have been in a closer race so that Albert could get his coveted award.
Again, with defense in the picture Jones may actually have a LEGIT claim at the award, instead of the drivel we usually hear.
Hypothetically speaking maybe St. Louis will trade Pujols for the MVP winner this year because that player was the difference between two out and one up, and Albert was the difference between 7 up and 13 up. COme playoff time forget having the best player...take the guy that had the lesser teammates.
I am simply amazed at the though process of the average fan. Again, I just shake my head in disbelief. I'm going to go search for Atlas's hands on the earth, because I believe everthing that is puked up from ESPN and talk shows, and fan drivel, instead of actually thinking things through to find out what is really evident and at work.
I'm Back Baby!
<< <i>
What needs to be looked at is the defensive difference. Is Jone's centerfield defense good enough to overcome the offensive gap?? It is possible that it is! I haven't looked at it, nor am I going to.
But if an enterprising chap wants to check the value, then make the case the right way, and stop using that drivel of "His team would still be in first without him." That is a first grade analysis. >>
So you are going to write off an entire part of what makes a player valuable?
They have awards for the best offensive players, but MVP is VALUE....meaning how much value does he mean to his team. I'm not sure where it's written that the most valuable player is the one with the best stats. It's kind of like when you're buying something...the lowest price isn't always the best value, the best number don't mean the most value either.
The MVP has long been awarded to the player who made the most impact on his team....and how valuable his presence has been to his team...all you need to do to prove this is look at the years Arod spent in Texas, as he was easily the BEST player with the BEST numbers, yet wasn't awarded with the MVP there, just once (and that was a miracle).
There's a reason that the MVP is typically awarded to good teams with postseason aspirations, because those players are the ones whose teams needed them the most to be successful.
So tell me, you are going to say the times that Pujols has been second, he's been the second best player in the league? Or not deemed worthy because his team has been better?
Andruw is going to win for (a) being on a Braves team that would not be in the postseason without him and (b) being the first player since 2002 to hit 50 HRs...it's a lock now.
<< <i>Andruw is going to win for (a) being on a Braves team that would not be in the postseason without him and (b) being the first player since 2002 to hit 50 HRs...it's a lock now. >>
I'm glad you consider it a lock since I'm still hearing analysts in each players camp and reading writers who are supporting both. I know you think the Cards would be a lock to make the playoffs without Pujols, but I watch this team every game and he is the glue that has held this team together despite all the injuries - the same as Andruw has been and I don't think you can say either team would have or wouldn't have made the playoffs without these stars. I think both players deserve serious consideration but it is FAR from a lock just because he hit 50.
BTW nice points Skinpinch.
No one can claim with sound evidence that A Jones had more of an impact on his team than Pujols on his.
A blanket statement is not going to do it. Where is the analysis? I cannot say who deserves the MVP. It is very subjective with an inkling of quantitative support.
In 1986, was it appropriate for Clemens to win the MVP with Mattingly having such an incredible season? A Pitcher impacts a team differently than a hitter, so the analysis gets harder to justify. How about the years when Cecil Fielder finished second behind Ricky Henderson and Cal Ripken for the award. The kinds of politics at play then was Fielder was not on a good team..... If its not one thing its another.
Just because someone hits 50 homers does not mean he deserves the MVP. That's what the homerun crown is for.
Choosing between Pujols or Jones is like splitting hairs. Both have been valuable to their teams. Its hard to pick one player, but I am sure any of the top 10 have been valuable to their team to some capacity. You can't go wrong with Jones or Pujols.
BST: Tennessebanker, Downtown1974, LarkinCollector, nendee
Axtell quote..."The MVP has long been awarded to the player who made the most impact on his team....and how valuable his presence has been to his team...all you need to do to prove this is look at the years Arod spent in Texas, as he was easily the BEST player with the BEST numbers, yet wasn't awarded with the MVP there, just once (and that was a miracle)."
That quote is the exact flawed logic that has been at work among fans, writers, etc, and is exactly what I am saying is wrong and turns the MVP into a trivial award.....
THE MVP IS THE GUY THAT IS GOING TO WIN YOUR TEAM THE MOST GAMES!! COME PLAYOFF(OR REGULAR SEASON) TIME WHO DO YOU WANT, THE GUY WHO IS BETTER AND WINS MORE GAMES, OR THE LESSER PLAYER WHO IS VIEWED as 'MOST VALUABLE' BECAUSE HIS TEAM WOULD FINISH IN SECOND WITHOUT HIM BECAUSE HIS TEAMMATES AREN'T AS GOOD??? You take the better player as he is going to win the most games for your team, in both the regular season and the playoffs, and that is what is valuable! Having worse teammates to make one look more important isn't what is valuable.....This is my quote blasting a hole through the flawed logic usually at work.
For the Andruw Jones backers..........So in order for Pujols to be considered the MVP, his teammates would have to be slightly worse so that his presence on the team means the difference between second place vs. first place as opposed to seven games up vs. 14 games up?? Stupid rationale plain and simple. Basically, a player would need the stars to align to be considered VALUABLE, and everything would have to fall in place....have a great year, do better than you normally do, have some injuries to your teammates, make sure you are on a team that will only win by two games instead of 14. So you are basically awarding the guy who just happens to be in the right situation where his team is good, but not too good. If that is your rationale for the award then use it, I'm not going to stop you. But I will tell you that it then makes it a meaningless or trivial award.
"Having worse teammates to make one look more important isn't what is valuable"....always remember that quote.
Sieve talk to.
I've always respected your posts, but you resorting to name calling here ('first grade poster') was really uncalled for.
That being said, you say:
<< <i>
"Having worse teammates to make one look more important isn't what is valuable"....always remember that quote. >>
How is that not true? If there is a player on a team with less talent than another, then how can that not factor into the discussion? There are many voters who will look at Arod on the Yankees and say 'of course he's going to put up great numbers....look at the protection in his lineup!' I don't think you can overlook the talent around a player when determing the MVP.
The Braves top to bottom simply don't have as much talent as the Cardinals....I don't think anyone will dispute that. So for Andruw to come in, and have the incredible year he's having, strapping that team to his back (very similarly to how Ortiz is doing this season), I am not sure how you overlook that fact in determining MVP.
And then you want to completely remove a player's defensive ability in determining MVP? Huh? So essentially what you're saying is MVP should be SOLELY based on offensive numbers, with no weight added to anything else (fielding, worth to his team, etc.?) Again, I don't think you can remove completely the player's worth to his team and in the field from the equation.
Please, skip, if we are going to have this discussion, let's keep it civil? Or should I just remove myself from the discussion?
As for lineups, unless you are in an abysmal lineup, then every single study has shown that lineup protection has no effect on the MEANINGFUL STATS. The effect it has on a player is basically on RBI's and Runs scored, and a good analysis doesn't really look at those numbers(unless dissected like a surgeon). It doesn't really affect, OPS+, or Batter Runs. Lineup protection for those meaningful stats only exists in a very small form, and only when the absolute best players ala Bonds are behind you, or the absolute worst players(like a pitcher) who is batting behind you.
Looking at the Braves lineup, they actually have an excellent lineup, and they don't remotely fit into the criteria of lineup protection of having meaning. The top three in their lineup is exceptional!! Laroch/Franco below avg, Francoeur...exceptional. The rest are ho-hum below avg but not bad enough to qualify(BY the way, the same can be said about all the bottom of the lineups in the league).
Actually, if Jones was soo good and his lineup soo bad, then he should be getting the Bonds treatment, and with only 61 walks it is quite obvious he is getting his pitches to hit, SO PLEASE THROW THAT LINEUP PROTECTION GARBAGE OUT THE WINDOW!
With a superb top of the lineup Jones should have more RBI then he already has, but being that he is only hitting .222 with Runners in Scoring Position, it isn't like he is bringing in extra value compared to what his OPS is saying.
Again, if your rationale for the MVP is the flawed logic that I pointed out, more power to you. But all it means is that it becomes a trivial award if based on that flawed logic.
Now if a GM goes out and signs an MVP based on the rationale you are using, then he would be making a big mistake if he is passing up a better player who wasn't the MVP. Kind of like signing a guy who wins 20 with a high ERA 'cause he knows how to win', or a guy who got hot during the post season and falsely elevating his perceived ability because 'he is clutch'.
P.S. Furcal, Giles, Franceour, and C. Jones are better BASEBALL PLAYERS this year than anybody on the Cardinals not named Pujols. Excluding pitchers.
Your logic is fantanstic. Great posts. Everybody just assumes that the Cardinals lineup is the same as it was last year. Last year, Rolen, Edmonds, and Pujols were MVP candidates, and they acquired a healthy Larry Walker. THAT IS NOT THE CASE THIS YEAR. Albert Pujols has picked up the Cardinals and carried them offensively all year long. Look at how many rookies and bench players have started for them. John Rodriguez, So Taguchi, Abraham Nunez, John Mabry, Hecter Luna - all of these guys have had SIGNIFICANT playing time. Rolen, Walker, Sanders, and Molina have spent significant time on the DL. Edmonds is batting less than .260. Look at the lineup. Pujols leads the team in every offensive category except triples.
Andruw Jones has had a terrific year as well. But to say that the Braves wouldn't make the playoffs without him is ridiculous. Jones doesn't lead even his team in many offensive categories.
Pujols - leads in nearly every category (which means his teamates have not been up to par).
Jones - only leads his team in a few categories (which means his teamates have played well).
Pujols - his team leads by 14 games (remember, he leads in nearly every category).
Jones - his team leads by only 4.5 games (remember, he only leads his team in a few categories).
Now, which player is more valuable!!!!!!!!!!!
Shane
St. Louis Cardianls OPS is..761
Atlanta Braves OPS is ......766
Being that Pujols has a higher OPS than Jones, then it is evident that Andruw Jone's teammates have been better offesnive players than Pujols's. Somebody else could do the math if they want the exact number.
Andruw Jones's teammates have 79 stolen bases and got caught 25 times
Pujols's teammates had 63 stolen bases and got caught 32 times!
So Jone's teammates also got more value in the stolen base department.
How about Hitting with men on stats to determine the extra value to the team?
With men on...Andruw Jones BA .250, OB% .350, SLG%.507.....OPS .877
With men on...Albert Pujols...BA. .317. OB% .432, SLG% .599....OPS 1.032
Even if one wanted to use the flaw logic of "being more valuable to HIS team" because his team needs him more because they have worse players, you cannot even do that in this case. Andruw Jones actually has better hitters around him, not vice versa as has been said!!
Looking at the men on stats widen the offensive gap a little more, and Pujols actually has an advantage on the stolen bases.
So it is left to how much defensive contributions make up the offensive gap.....just like I said in my initial post!
So Cardinal Fans, if Albert Pujols can hold off the defensive contribution and still be ahead, then he is the best player and the TRUE MVP. If somebody wants to trivialize the award(writers included), and give it to Andruw Jones on the basis of his team not being as good, and Pujols's being superior, then remind them of the truth when you hear it. THat is kind of like the semi-plump girl hanging out with the real fat ones to make her stature look better than it really is.
But the only problem is that Derrek Lee has been the best in the N.L this year. THat is why the MVP, as currently viewed and described, is basically a meaningless award.
I like what you say because it doesn't look that you are a Cardinals fan. You are being objective. I try, but because of my avatar, people probably think of me as a homer.
I love the analogy about the fat girls! Jones is the semi-plump one surrounded by the industrial sized!
Yep, check back next year when Pujols is still putting up the numbers, and Jones and Lee are having average years!!
Shane
<< <i>I may seem harsh on the MVP(it isn't meaningless), and currently Pujols is the best player in the NL, even with Derrek Lee edging him for THIS season. Players shouldn't be judged based on one season as that isn't a true barometer. Check back next year when Pujols is repeating his season, and Lee and Jones are dropping back to normal. >>
MVP is a single season award.
Players SHOULD be judged on the results for THAT season, no?
If that's the case, we should just give Arod the award every year in the AL and Bonds the award every year in the NL, right?
<< <i>Yep, check back next year when Pujols is still putting up the numbers, and Jones and Lee are having average years!! >>
Pujols will continue to dominate but don't expect Lee and Jones to be average. They are both in their prime playing years and I would expect them to continue to be stars.
Arod should have won a few more...the writers got it completely wrong on some of them. Bonds almost did win every year lately. He should have won a couple of more though.
There isn't a major prestigous award for being the best player like the MVP should be. The most valuable player to a team is the guy that is responsible for creating the most runs and ultimately the most wins. That is the guy any team would want. Heck, using the common MVP criteria, then Franceour may be considereed more 'valuable' than Pujols because without him they may not be in first either.
If Giles got hurt and Pete Orr had to play second, then they may not be in first either, so then Giles is more valuable than Pujols.
How about Biggio or Chase Utley? Would either one of their teams be a wild card without them? No. So basically they are more valuable than Pujols because they wouldn't be in the playoffs without them,and the Cards would be without Pujols (Thanks Carpenter for ruining Pujols's MVP chance).
See how goofy it can get with that type of rationale?? None of those guys are more valuable than Pujols. If they were more valuable than Pujols wouldn't you want them instead of Albert? Of course not! Then why would you call them more 'valuable' than Albert if you rather have Albert on your team?? If the award is given with the common rationale, then it trivializes it.
my opinion is.......nevermind, I do not neet a fight here.
SD
TSN player of the year? is that the one where thet players vote?
Steve
Not sure who vote on it.
Cy Young is supposed to be an award given to the best pitcher, yet it gets tangled up in the same faulty criteria many use for the MVP, like having to be on a first place team to get serious consideration. That is another pet peeve. Or how Won/loss record is the biggest determining factor....anyone in the know realizes the major pitfalls with that stat. The day I see the best pitcher in the league win the award with a .500 or below record(because of crummy run support), will be, well never, because I don't people will ever realize these things.