Tweet
Granderson hit 2 more homers today.
-
-
I think this year's AL MVP debate is going to make me irrationally angry...poopComment
-
Who do you think should be MVP?
--------------------
I think it should be Bautista or Granderson.Comment
-
Bautista. It shouldn't be a discussion. He's in the Albert Pujols/Barry Bonds realm right now.poopComment
-
It's really not close. Joey Bats.Comment
-
The debate is basically RBI/BA or everything else.
And, like, "the Blue Jays pitching isn't good."poopComment
-
I think what you meant to say is, "The debate is basically should the award go to the overall best player, or the most intangibly 'valuable' player?"
Because that is what the BBWAA and SportsCenter will make it into.*Is a huge fucking asshole*Comment
-
That's what I said, but in a much more condescending way because I'm a close minded jerk and think anyone who thinks Batista isn't the MVP is basically the dumbest.poopComment
-
I just looked at their OPS+ and OPS. Bautista should win, I apologize for being a homer there.Comment
-
Buster Olney:Originally posted by Bobbob1313 View Post
We may never have seen an MVP race quite like what we're seeing in the American League this year, because of the diversity in the field of possible winners. There is a candidate for many different constituencies, from the SABR crowd, to the rival camps of Red Sox and Yankees fans, to fans who believe that a great starting pitcher is the most valuable commodity in the game.
The debate won't only be about the best MVP candidate, but also what exactly defines the Most Valuable Player. In recent years, there has been an evolution in the Cy Young voting, away from the win column and toward other metrics. Because there is such a broad cast of MVP candidates in the AL, some clarity will probably be found this year in exactly how voters, in 2011, weigh the varying strengths of players as they cast their ballots.
If the voters want to pick the guy with the best numbers, there is a clear front-runner. If they want to pick the best player with the best team, there is a nice array of possibilities. If they want to consider how much one player's success impacts whether his team makes the postseason, there is an excellent candidate.
During Sunday Night Baseball, I sent out a tweet asking followers to present their MVP front-runners, and the results looked like something out of an early Iowa caucus, with the votes cast all over the place, like corn stalks.
With 4½ weeks remaining in the season, the platforms for the candidates are being constructed. Here's a look at each:
Why you would pick Jose Bautista: Because he is the best overall player in the league, and there really isn't any debate on that. He's got the highest OPS by a margin of more than 100 points, and his on-base percentage is 46 points higher than that of Adrian Gonzalez, 54 points higher than that of Dustin Pedroia, 76 points higher than that of Curtis Granderson and 83 points higher than that of Jacoby Ellsbury. Jose Bautista is getting the full backing of the baseball constituency that is glued to the numbers: Bautista ranks No. 1 in WAR, at 7.8. Ellsbury, Pedroia and Granderson rank 2, 3 and 4, respectively, in WAR, while Gonzalez ranks sixth in the AL.
Why you wouldn't choose Bautista: Because the Blue Jays basically have been out of contention since the outset of the season, and in the past, the Most Valuable Player Award has almost always been viewed through the prism of team success. Many voters have assigned value in the MVP race according to how important they believe a player has been to his team's ability to contend. This is why Kirk Gibson won the MVP in 1988, and why Willie Stargell was a co-MVP in 1979. The argument against players in Bautista's situation has always been: He might not have been as valuable as a guy on a first-place team because, after all, his team didn't win.
There have been occasional examples of players on non-contending teams who have won the MVP, from Andre Dawson in 1987 to Cal Ripken in 1991.
Why you would choose Adrian Gonzalez: It's very possible that he's going to win the AL batting title, for the team with the best record in the AL, and he is likely to finish No. 1 or No. 2 in RBIs. In addition, his impact on the Boston defense has been extraordinary, in the eyes of folks who work for the Red Sox.
Why you wouldn't choose Gonzalez: Perhaps three of the top six candidates for MVP are members of the Boston Red Sox, which creates an interesting question for voters as they establish the standards for their own ballot: Can a player be an MVP if he's surrounded by such a powerful supporting cast? In other words, could Boston still have been a great team -- a contender -- without Gonzalez? (Or Pedroia, or Ellsbury, for that matter?)
Why you would choose Curtis Granderson: At this moment, the Yankees' center fielder leads the AL in home runs (38), runs (121), extra-base hits (68) and RBIs (107). He's also stolen 24 bases, while manning a prime defensive position.
Why you wouldn't choose Granderson: His batting average of .278 would rank among the lowest in history for award winners, and just as with the Red Sox MVP candidates, his status is impacted by all the firepower around him in the Yankees' lineup. Could the Yankees -- with Mark Teixeira, Robinson Cano, Brett Gardner, Nick Swisher, etc. -- still have been a serious playoff contender without Granderson? You could argue: Yes.
Why you would choose Jacoby Ellsbury: He has had an incredible season, after making up his mind that he'd look to do damage in hitters' counts. Ellsbury has 61 extra-base hits, a .312 average, 36 stolen bases, 95 runs scored. His UZR/150 rating is the best among center fielders, according to FanGraphs. While Ellsbury rates at 19.4 among center fielders, Granderson actually has posted some of the worst UZR/150 numbers among players at his position.
Why you wouldn't choose Ellsbury: On-base percentage is probably the backbone offensive stat, and Ellsbury ranks 16th in that category. And his candidacy will be hurt by the power of the lineup around him.
Why you would choose Dustin Pedroia: He has the second-highest WAR among any player on a contending team, behind Ellsbury, and at least one of his defensive metrics is the best among any middle infielder in the major leagues. When the Red Sox struggled very early, it was Pedroia who held them together, and Boston's midseason takeoff seemed to coincide with that of Pedroia, who started crushing the ball after a doctor checked his knee and gave him some injections.
Why you wouldn't choose Pedroia: See Gonzalez and Ellsbury.
Why you would choose Justin Verlander: He has been the best starting pitcher in the majors this year, and quite simply, the Tigers would be a different team without him, and arguably in a very different place. In the games he has started, Detroit is 21-8; in the games all other pitchers have started, the Tigers are 52-52. He has had an immeasurable impact on the Detroit bullpen because of his consistency, and his innings -- he's thrown 215⅔ innings, and he has never failed to give the Tigers at least six innings in each of his 29 starts; he has one more quality start than Jered Weaver.
Comparing the impact of pitchers and hitters can be an apples-to-oranges discussion; as many voters (and position players) will point out, a starting pitcher works only once every five days. But here's a number worth thinking about when considering how integral a great starter can be to success: Verlander has been involved in 830 plate appearances this year; the AL leaders, among position players, are at about 600.
You could probably make this statement with greater certainty about Verlander than any other player in the AL: Without him, his team wouldn't be in first place.
Why you wouldn't choose Verlander: Because he's a pitcher, and history tells us that starting pitchers almost never win the MVP Award. The last was Roger Clemens, 25 years ago, and part of the reason is that usually some voters will not seriously consider pitchers for this award. Pedro Martinez had an excellent chance to win in 1999, but two voters left him off their ballots entirely -- all 10 spots. And it could be that some voters, in determining the standards for themselves, may decide to place Verlander behind the top position players, in the lower half of their ballot, or they may not consider him at all. As we know from 1999, all it takes to sink a candidacy is a couple of voters.
If I had a vote today, I'd pick Verlander, but couldn't possibly quibble with the other choices. No matter who wins, the debate will be fascinating.
• Thoughts and prayers go out to all those impacted by Irene. Among those, the two communities in which I was raised in Vermont -- the greater Woodstock and Randolph areas -- have been absolutely devastated by floodwaters. The folks in those places will always have the strength to rebuild, because that is who they are.
And today will be better than yesterday.Comment
-
Love Busta bringing WAR into the partyComment
-
I hate the argument that the pitcher can't win the MVP because he's only playing every 5th day, because even players that play every day only impact 1/9th of their teams plate appearances and generally less of their defensive plays. It seems silly to me to take away from pitchers because they wield an enormous influence, but only every 5 games.
If there's an argument for not including pitchers, it's based around the fact that there is already an award for best pitcher. But as long as they're allowed to be voted for, I think it's silly to penalize them.poopComment
-
obv bautista is having the best year....but comparing someone who's had 6 mediocre years followed by two great years to bonds/pujols is ridicComment
-
What does his past have to do with the fact he's is currently now putting up historic numbers that compare to the likes of Bonds/Pujols?Comment
-
Brady Anderson once had a monster year.....should he be spoken in the same breath?Originally posted by MiamiHomer View PostComment
Comment