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! 

     

Today is the day: MVP voting


Angel Oracle

Recommended Posts

`

Trout will finish 3rd. Miggy wins in a landslide again

 

Not sure if Trout will finish 2nd or 3rd, but, yeah, I agree that it won't even be close.

 

And, honestly, I'm fine with that.  I really don't understand why people get in such a tizzy about it.  If the MVP was based on WAR (which seems to be the primary (or sole, in some cases) reason people think Trout should win), then they wouldn't even bother voting for it.  Do I think Trout is the better all-around player?  Sure.  But since there aren't any clear-cut rules regarding the voting--or even the definition of "Most Valuable Player," I'm fine with people injecting whatever criteria they want to in their decision-making process--and I can see the logic in voting for Cabrera over Trout, even if I disagree with the decision (but the dude who didn't list Wil Myers in his top 3 for AL Rookie of the Year?  Yeah, that dude's a moron. :) ).

 

"There seems to always be a debate about the definition of the MVP. What does the ballot say?

 

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."

 

http://bbwaa.com/voting-faq/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Davis slumped after the ASB and his OPS barely finished above Trout's. 

That plus Trout >>>>>>>>>> Davis at everything else and the O's also failing to make the post-season = Trout as runnerup.

 

In fact, post-ASB Davis vs. Hamilton, Davis was only truly better at HRs (16 vs. 7) and that's only why his OPS was .854 vs. Hamilton's .801.

Edited by Angel Oracle
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure if Trout will finish 2nd or 3rd, but, yeah, I agree that it won't even be close.

 

And, honestly, I'm fine with that.  I really don't understand why people get in such a tizzy about it.  If the MVP was based on WAR (which seems to be the primary (or sole, in some cases) reason people think Trout should win), then they wouldn't even bother voting for it.  Do I think Trout is the better all-around player?  Sure.  But since there aren't any clear-cut rules regarding the voting--or even the definition of "Most Valuable Player," I'm fine with people injecting whatever criteria they want to in their decision-making process--and I can see the logic in voting for Cabrera over Trout, even if I disagree with the decision (but the dude who didn't list Wil Myers in his top 3 for AL Rookie of the Year?  Yeah, that dude's a moron. :) ).

 

"There seems to always be a debate about the definition of the MVP. What does the ballot say?

 

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."

 

http://bbwaa.com/voting-faq/

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-diminishing-value-of-valuable/

 

Fangraph's Dave Cameron on why value should mean "best" player or else there is no real point in having the MVP award.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ESPN's panel had Cabrera #1 and Trout #2, and Davis received zero first place votes.

http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/9965623/mlb-2013-al-mvp

 

To me this is the stupidest way the vote could go. Either team success (making the playoffs)  means value or it doesn't. If it means team success then Trout and Davis shouldn't be on a voters ballot. If it doesn't then Trout should be first.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-diminishing-value-of-valuable/

 

Fangraph's Dave Cameron on why value should mean "best" player or else there is no real point in having the MVP award.

 

But, again, if "Best Player" just means "Who has the highest WAR" or whatever, then there's no point in voting.  He doesn't really say what his criteria would be, admittedly...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-triangle/post/_/id/82462/forget-cabrera-vs-trout-put-this-bit-of-crazy-in-your-bottomless-mvp-debate-pipe-and-smoke-it

 

His actual MVP argument for Phillips is actually a convincing argument (although not a good one). His A-Rod piece is a little lacking.

 

Um, I don't know how to tell you this, but that was sarcasm. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-diminishing-value-of-valuable/

 

Fangraph's Dave Cameron on why value should mean "best" player or else there is no real point in having the MVP award.

 

I just read all the comments and my faith in humanity has been temporarily restored to a reasonable level. Only a tiny amount of stupid. Though I guess it has to do with the site it was posted on. If that gets linked on Yahoo or ESPN the idiots will run rampant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me this is the stupidest way the vote could go. Either team success (making the playoffs)  means value or it doesn't. If it means team success then Trout and Davis shouldn't be on a voters ballot. If it doesn't then Trout should be first.

The problem is that there is only one award.   If there were awards for both MVP and best player, then each of those votes would be clearer than the MVP voting can tend to be.

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...