Jump to content
  • Welcome to AngelsWin.com

    AngelsWin.com - THE Internet Home for Angels fans! Unraveling Angels Baseball ... One Thread at a Time.

    Register today to join the most interactive online Angels community on the net!

    Once you're a member you'll see less advertisements. Become a Premium member and you won't see any ads! 

     

IGNORED

AL MVP


tdawg87

Recommended Posts

I have an MVP vote. 

The way I usually do it is take all the key candidates and see where they rank in a couple all ecompassing offensive stats (OPS+ or maybe wRC+), use some defensive metric (maybe dWAR) and then add in WPA (which is basically how clutch you were as far as producing when it counted). 

I haven’t done it yet, so I have no idea what that will get me, but it’s how I start. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Jeff Fletcher said:

I have an MVP vote. 

The way I usually do it is take all the key candidates and see where they rank in a couple all ecompassing offensive stats (OPS+ or maybe wRC+), use some defensive metric (maybe dWAR) and then add in WPA (which is basically how clutch you were as far as producing when it counted). 

I haven’t done it yet, so I have no idea what that will get me, but it’s how I start. 

If a pitcher is having a really good year (like in the NL), how do you incorporate them into the mix?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, m0nkey said:

If a pitcher is having a really good year (like in the NL), how do you incorporate them into the mix?

That gets tricky. I'll normally end up with a list of my top 10-12 position players, and then I look at the top pitchers and just sort of eyeball where they should go in. I don't think I've ever put a pitcher in the top 5 or 6.

I don't know a really good way to compare apples and oranges. I think WAR for pitchers is questionable, especially the one that's based on FIP (I forget which that is).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Jeff Fletcher said:

I have an MVP vote. 

The way I usually do it is take all the key candidates and see where they rank in a couple all ecompassing offensive stats (OPS+ or maybe wRC+), use some defensive metric (maybe dWAR) and then add in WPA (which is basically how clutch you were as far as producing when it counted). 

I haven’t done it yet, so I have no idea what that will get me, but it’s how I start. 

@Jeff Fletcher I am sure you already know this, but WPA is very much dependent on the rest of your team to give you those opportunities.  I would like to point out that Mike Trout has the highest negative WPA in baseball.  meaning he's had the lowest negative impact on his team.  What does that tell us?  Can the true value of a player be diminished by true opportunity?  

Trout has been intentionally walked 23 times.  The next closest in the AL is Jose Ramirez at 15.  Then JD Martinez at 10.  

Overall he's walked 115 times.  Jose Ramirez is next at 96 and then Bregman at 89 times.  both have played 15 more games.  How many of those walks were intentional unintentional?

When determining 'most valuable', I would encourage you and your brethren to not only consider what certain players produced, but what was available for them to produce.  

I would contend that Trout produced more in his true opportunities than any other player.   

Most. Valuable.  Player.  

If you put Jose Ramirez, Mookie Betts, Alex Bregman, JD Martinez and Mike Trout on the same team, who would be the 'most valuable'?  That's the question the voters should be asking themselves.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Dochalo said:

@Jeff Fletcher I am sure you already know this, but WPA is very much dependent on the rest of your team to give you those opportunities.  I would like to point out that Mike Trout has the highest negative WPA in baseball.  meaning he's had the lowest negative impact on his team.  What does that tell us?  Can the true value of a player be diminished by true opportunity?  

Trout has been intentionally walked 23 times.  The next closest in the AL is Jose Ramirez at 15.  Then JD Martinez at 10.  

Overall he's walked 115 times.  Jose Ramirez is next at 96 and then Bregman at 89 times.  both have played 15 more games.  How many of those walks were intentional unintentional?

When determining 'most valuable', I would encourage you and your brethren to not only consider what certain players produced, but what was available for them to produce.  

I would contend that Trout produced more in his true opportunities than any other player.   

Most. Valuable.  Player.  

If you put Jose Ramirez, Mookie Betts, Alex Bregman, JD Martinez and Mike Trout on the same team, who would be the 'most valuable'?  That's the question the voters should be asking themselves.  

I don’t weigh it as much as the non-contextual stats but still throw it in there. 

And it’s still a more fair number than RBI, Mike Trout is still very low in RBI but he’s about 5th in WPA. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Dochalo said:

@Jeff Fletcher I am sure you already know this, but WPA is very much dependent on the rest of your team to give you those opportunities.  I would like to point out that Mike Trout has the highest negative WPA in baseball.  meaning he's had the lowest negative impact on his team.  What does that tell us?  Can the true value of a player be diminished by true opportunity?  

Trout has been intentionally walked 23 times.  The next closest in the AL is Jose Ramirez at 15.  Then JD Martinez at 10.  

Overall he's walked 115 times.  Jose Ramirez is next at 96 and then Bregman at 89 times.  both have played 15 more games.  How many of those walks were intentional unintentional?

When determining 'most valuable', I would encourage you and your brethren to not only consider what certain players produced, but what was available for them to produce.  

I would contend that Trout produced more in his true opportunities than any other player.   

Most. Valuable.  Player.  

If you put Jose Ramirez, Mookie Betts, Alex Bregman, JD Martinez and Mike Trout on the same team, who would be the 'most valuable'?  That's the question the voters should be asking themselves.  

Trout is on a team that is finishing 20 plus games out of 1st. The term valuable doesn't apply. So if he was off the team we'd be in last place, with him on the team we are in 4th. Meh... Trout doesn't deserve it this year and that's fine. Maybe if the Angels put together a better team this next year than this year he will deserve it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Voter:

There is no clear-cut definition of what Most Valuable means. It is up to the individual voter to decide who was the Most Valuable Player in each league to his team. The MVP need not come from a division winner or other playoff qualifier.

The rules of the voting remain the same as they were written on the first ballot in 1931:

1.  Actual value of a player to his team, that is, strength of offense and defense.

2.  Number of games played.

3.  General character, disposition, loyalty and effort.

4.  Former winners are eligible.

5.  Members of the committee may vote for more than one member of a team.

You are also urged to give serious consideration to all your selections, from 1 to 10. A 10th-place vote can influence the outcome of an election. You must fill in all 10 places on your ballot. Only regular-season performances are to be taken into consideration.

Keep in mind that all players are eligible for MVP, including pitchers and designated hitters.

Edited by arch stanton
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, arch stanton said:

Dear Voter:

There is no clear-cut definition of what Most Valuable means. It is up to the individual voter to decide who was the Most Valuable Player in each league to his team. The MVP need not come from a division winner or other playoff qualifier.

The rules of the voting remain the same as they were written on the first ballot in 1931:

1.  Actual value of a player to his team, that is, strength of offense and defense.

2.  Number of games played.

3.  General character, disposition, loyalty and effort.

4.  Former winners are eligible.

5.  Members of the committee may vote for more than one member of a team.

You are also urged to give serious consideration to all your selections, from 1 to 10. A 10th-place vote can influence the outcome of an election. You must fill in all 10 places on your ballot. Only regular-season performances are to be taken into consideration.

Keep in mind that all players are eligible for MVP, including pitchers and designated hitters.

How valuable is Trout if when he is on the team we are a 4th place team 20 plus games out and if he wasn't on the team we'd be 5th and 20 plus games out. This year he isn't the MVP. He is the best player on the planet. But this year it isn't by a lot. Betts Martinez and Bregman all deserve a nod over Trout. Sorry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, arch stanton said:

Dear Voter:

There is no clear-cut definition of what Most Valuable means. It is up to the individual voter to decide who was the Most Valuable Player in each league to his team. The MVP need not come from a division winner or other playoff qualifier.

The rules of the voting remain the same as they were written on the first ballot in 1931:

1.  Actual value of a player to his team, that is, strength of offense and defense.

2.  Number of games played.

3.  General character, disposition, loyalty and effort.

4.  Former winners are eligible.

5.  Members of the committee may vote for more than one member of a team.

You are also urged to give serious consideration to all your selections, from 1 to 10. A 10th-place vote can influence the outcome of an election. You must fill in all 10 places on your ballot. Only regular-season performances are to be taken into consideration.

Keep in mind that all players are eligible for MVP, including pitchers and designated hitters.

Trout is definitely in the mix...with a 9.4 WAR, you can't really ignore that performance.  I think Betts ultimately wins in because the two will end up close in WAR and Trout beat Betts for MVP in 2016 - not how I'd vote but that's the typical MVP voter logic I've seen in the past.  I think for Martinez to even get into the conversation he needs to get Triple Crown Numbers but Betts and Davis are going to make it tough for him.  I think Trout's only shot at winning is if Martinez does get the Triple Crown but Betts ends up beating him by 4 WAR and "numbers" voters and "SABR" voters are split between Betts, Martinez, Trout not mention you might have 4 other players (Chapman, Bregman, Ramirez, and Lindor) who are or will likely finish 8+ WAR meaning the writers that cover them may not default to Betts or Trout as their pick.

It's going to be a very interesting vote. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Jeff Fletcher said:

I have an MVP vote. 

The way I usually do it is take all the key candidates and see where they rank in a couple all ecompassing offensive stats (OPS+ or maybe wRC+), use some defensive metric (maybe dWAR) and then add in WPA (which is basically how clutch you were as far as producing when it counted). 

I haven’t done it yet, so I have no idea what that will get me, but it’s how I start. 

If you don't give Trout your 1st place vote, Chuck will ban you for one month.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Barrett said:

How valuable is Trout if when he is on the team we are a 4th place team 20 plus games out and if he wasn't on the team we'd be 5th and 20 plus games out. This year he isn't the MVP. He is the best player on the planet. But this year it isn't by a lot. Betts Martinez and Bregman all deserve a nod over Trout. Sorry.

I'm not making a case for Trout or anyone else. I'm just posting the actual criteria used which clearly makes him a viable candidate

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, arch stanton said:

I'm not making a case for Trout or anyone else. I'm just posting the actual criteria used which clearly makes him a viable candidate

He is a viable candidate. I never said he wasn't. But in my opinion he won't finish top 3 and I don't think he deserves it this year. Being valuable to your team is key, Trout is the best player in baseball. But he isn't the most valuable this year. To me winning matters and other players are putting up similar numbers to Trout this year on ball clubs that are winning a ton of games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Barrett said:

He is a viable candidate. I never said he wasn't. But in my opinion he won't finish top 3 and I don't think he deserves it this year. Being valuable to your team is key, Trout is the best player in baseball. But he isn't the most valuable this year. To me winning matters and other players are putting up similar numbers to Trout this year on ball clubs that are winning a ton of games.

I don't think the record matters as much to the voters though, at least not as much as it used to, otherwise Trout wouldn't have won in 2016.

Trout 10.5 WAR on a 74-88 team vs Betts 9.7 WAR on a 93-69 team, and there was no one else close to them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, mulwin444 said:

I don't think the record matters as much to the voters though, at least not as much as it used to, otherwise Trout wouldn't have won in 2016.

Trout 10.5 WAR on a 74-88 team vs Betts 9.7 WAR on a 93-69 team, and there was no one else close to them.

I think it is different this year being as Betts and Trout are closer in WAR and Boston is going to have 110 plus wins and the Angels might get to 80? I wouldn't have voted for Trout in 2016 either if it is any consolation. 

Edit: Fangraphs has Trout and Betts at 9.1 each

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In my opinion the most “valuable” player is the best player. 

If you have a $20 bill sitting with a pile of $1s and a $10 bill sitting with a pile of $5s, which is the most valuable bill?

If you have a Porsche sitting in front of a trailer, and a Civic sitting  front of a mansion, which car is more valuable?

The value of something doesn’t change based on its surroundings. 

My opinion. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Jeff Fletcher said:

In my opinion the most “valuable” player is the best player. 

If you have a $20 bill sitting with a pile of $1s and a $10 bill sitting with a pile of $5s, which is the most valuable bill?

If you have a Porsche sitting in front of a trailer, and a Civic sitting  front of a mansion, which car is more valuable?

The value of something doesn’t change based on its surroundings. 

My opinion. 

I understand that concept. I disagree but understand it. If ESPN and baseball references have Betts ahead of Trout in WAR and Fangraphs have them tied. Wouldn't Betts be the better player on the better team this year? Do you not take into consideration how the team did in terms of winning at all? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Barrett said:

I think it is different this year being as Betts and Trout are closer in WAR and Boston is going to have 110 plus wins and the Angels might get to 80? I wouldn't have voted for Trout in 2016 either if it is any consolation. 

Edit: Fangraphs has Trout and Betts at 9.1 each

Reading "Baseball Reference":

image.png.a8d12438cd82e2965711b8608478414a.png

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Barrett said:

I think it is different this year being as Betts and Trout are closer in WAR and Boston is going to have 110 plus wins and the Angels might get to 80? I wouldn't have voted for Trout in 2016 either if it is any consolation. 

Edit: Fangraphs has Trout and Betts at 9.1 each

Trout was clearly the better player in 2012 and 2013 but finished 2nd both times...I don't think record should matter that much in terms of MVP, in my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...