Hypothetically Speaking...

[jwolt92]

IF the Mets implode and lose this 6 game lead over the Nats with something like 13 games to go, does Harper win the NL MVP with 100% of the first place votes? He should win it regardless, even if his team doesn't make the playoffs because he's had a monster year. So what do you think? IMO it's not very likely that he gets 100% of the first place votes because some asshole won't want him to win it, but he really should if they somehow overcome this 6 game deficit.

 

[tducey]

More than likely yes, as it is Harper has to be considered one of the MVP favorites.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

nobody wins with 100%, so I don't think so... But it is clear that he would win with an overwhelming majority...

 

[Villain]

Anyone who factors the performance of the rest of the division into an individual award should get their voting rights revoked.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Anyone who factors the performance of the rest of the division into an individual award should get their voting rights revoked.

I do disagree... I do give a little advantage to playoff players... For example, look at Trout vs Donaldson... Trout has better advanced stats, has better OBP, OPS, and others... But one is making the playoffs and one is not... And Donaldson has more RBIs, and HRs... To me, that race is close enough to give the advantage to the playoff player...

 

[obxyankeefan]

I do disagree... I do give a little advantage to playoff players... For example, look at Trout vs Donaldson... Trout has better advanced stats, has better OBP, OPS, and others... But one is making the playoffs and one is not... And Donaldson has more RBIs, and HRs... To me, that race is close enough to give the advantage to the playoff player...

When looking at counting stats (and I like to for the MVP or CY) the way I figure is the player on the better team is going to have more AB, Runs, RBI. So there is his advantage to making the playoffs.

 

[Villain]

I do disagree... I do give a little advantage to playoff players... For example, look at Trout vs Donaldson... Trout has better advanced stats, has better OBP, OPS, and others... But one is making the playoffs and one is not... And Donaldson has more RBIs, and HRs... To me, that race is close enough to give the advantage to the playoff player...

Why should anything the Mets do have anything to do with how valuable Harper is?

"The Mets shit the bed, so Harper is more valuable." Pfft.

It's not a team award. It's not the "best player on a playoff team" award. They give out MVP awards in the playoffs if you need that.

Donaldson is actually tied with Trout in home runs. They both have 39. Trout has better power numbers overall. In fact, Trout beats Donaldson in pretty much every hitting metric that actually measures how good of a hitter you are (RBIs don't measure skill).

In my opinion, you can't go wrong with Trout or Donaldson. It's very close. Trout has the edge in offense. Donaldson has been slightly better in terms defensive metrics. Coin-flip, honestly.

There shouldn't be any debate in the NL. It's Harper and only Harper.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Why should anything the Mets do have anything to do with how valuable Harper is?

"The Mets shit the bed, so Harper is more valuable." Pfft.

It's not a team award. It's not the "best player on a playoff team" award. They give out MVP awards in the playoffs if you need that.

Donaldson is actually tied with Trout in home runs. They both have 39. Trout has better power numbers overall. In fact, Trout beats Donaldson in pretty much every hitting metric that actually measures how good of a hitter you are (RBIs don't measure skill).

In my opinion, you can't go wrong with Trout or Donaldson. It's very close. Trout has the edge in offense. Donaldson has been slightly better in terms defensive metrics. Coin-flip, honestly.

There shouldn't be any debate in the NL. It's Harper and only Harper.

That's really my point, if it is close I will always go with the playoff player... But if it is not close, I will always go with the better player... Its just the Close line, that I have yet to define...

But it is sure that Harper vs anyone is NOT close...

 

[StanMarsh51]

nobody wins with 100%, so I don't think so... But it is clear that he would win with an overwhelming majority...

It doesn't happen very often for MVP, but it does happen...Trout won unanimously last year, and before him the last two guys to win unanimously were Pujols and Bonds.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

But I do think making the playoffs is a statistic, so I take it into account... I am also one who doesn't dismiss stats like Wins(for pitchers), RBIs and Runs(for hitters)... I think all stats measure something specific, and they should all be taken into account somehow...

 

[Villain]

That's really my point, if it is close I will always go with the playoff player... But if it is not close, I will always go with the better player... Its just the Close line, that I have yet to define...

That's fine, especially considering just how close it is Trout and Donaldson. You have a split hairs in order to pick the right guy between those two.

What kills me is when voters are making the argument that Harper, the best player in MLB this year, shouldn't win because the Nationals have been as good as a wet sandwich.

But it is sure that Harper vs anyone is NOT close...

But I do think making the playoffs is a statistic, so I take it into account... I am also one who doesn't dismiss stats like Wins(for pitchers), RBIs and Runs(for hitters)... I think all stats measure something specific, and they should all be taken into account somehow...

Take them into account by throwing them into the trash can. Is Brett Anderson deserving of credit if he's on first after a crappy bunt (fielder's choice) and Adrian Gonzalez hits a home run? That's a run. He scored a run so he's good right?

(No, he sucks at the plate and has zero offensive value)

 

[williewilliejuan]

Harper is having a season for the ages. There's no one that has even a remotely legitimate argument for the award over him. Frankly, if he was on a better team his numbers would likely only look better. The fact that he's put up the numbers he has while the rest of his team collectively shit the bed is nothing short of astonishing.

 

[obxyankeefan]

Take them into account by throwing them into the trash can. Is Brett Anderson deserving of credit if he's on first after a crappy bunt (fielder's choice) and Adrian Gonzalez hits a home run? That's a run. He scored a run so he's good right?

(No, he sucks at the plate and has zero offensive value)

In my case why would you be looking at Brett Anderson for MVP? I am with Milkk in that every stat has some value, it is just in finding the value for each stat. And that value differs between each one of us.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

That's fine, especially considering just how close it is Trout and Donaldson. You have a split hairs in order to pick the right guy between those two.

What kills me is when voters are making the argument that Harper, the best player in MLB this year, shouldn't win because the Nationals have been as good as a wet sandwich.







Take them into account by throwing them into the trash can. Is Brett Anderson deserving of credit if he's on first after a crappy bunt (fielder's choice) and Adrian Gonzalez hits a home run? That's a run. He scored a run so he's good right?

(No, he sucks at the plate and has zero offensive value)

I do wonder if you are the type that creates his own statistics or just takes the advanced stats that are given... Problem with many advanced stats is that they are weighted in a way you might disagree with... I tend to hate adjusted stats, because I dont like the way they are adjusted...

But every stat has its flaws, and I could make a case for any stat to stink...

But counting stats like hits, Runs, RBIs, Wins, etc. are not important on how you record one, it matters how many you record... Then if you want you can figure out how many they recorded per PA, or if you really want to be clever you can record how many recorded compared to the rest of that players team...

 

[Villain]

In my case why would you be looking at Brett Anderson for MVP? I am with Milkk in that every stat has some value, it is just in finding the value for each stat. And that value differs between each one of us.

Well, he got Votto to strikeout looking twice. So yes. He's the most valuable pitcher in baseball. (joking)

Replace Brett Anderson with any other name. It doesn't matter. Scoring runs isn't a skill. It's a thing that happens because of the situation. Counting how many times a guy has crossed the plate doesn't do much. If you want to talk about how much value he's added via baserunning with stolen bases, going first-to-third or first-to-home or whatever, that's another story. Some players can do that, some can't. That's value that can be measured. That's skill.

RBIs, Runs, Pitcher Wins, etc... That's not something an individual player can control by himself. The MVP is not a team award.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Well, he got Votto to strikeout looking twice. So yes. He's the most valuable pitcher in baseball. (joking)

Replace Brett Anderson with any other name. It doesn't matter. Scoring runs isn't a skill. It's a thing that happens because of the situation. Counting how many times a guy has crossed the plate doesn't do much. If you want to talk about how much value he's added via baserunning with stolen bases, going first-to-third or first-to-home or whatever, that's another story. Some players can do that, some can't. That's value that can be measured. That's skill.

RBIs, Runs, Pitcher Wins, etc... That's not something an individual player can control by himself. The MVP is not a team award.

But aren't these team stats the best measures of REAL production... there is a difference between Theoretical production and Real production... It seems like you only like the theoretical...

 

[Villain]

I do wonder if you are the type that creates his own statistics or just takes the advanced stats that are given... Problem with many advanced stats is that they are weighted in a way you might disagree with... I tend to hate adjusted stats, because I dont like the way they are adjusted...

Not all advanced stats are weighted.

But every stat has its flaws, and I could make a case for any stat to stink...

That's why you'll never see me make a case for someone with only one stat. Analysis is most successful when several metrics are used together to paint a more complete and accurate picture. Context and perspective is everything

But counting stats like hits, Runs, RBIs, Wins, etc. are not important on how you record one, it matters how many you record... Then if you want you can figure out how many they recorded per PA, or if you really want to be clever you can record how many recorded compared to the rest of that players team...

Being "clever" and comparing one person's numbers against the rest of their team (or, more accurately, the league) is literally exactly what weighted statistics do (or attempt to do).

 

[Villain]

But aren't these team stats the best measures of REAL production... there is a difference between Theoretical production and Real production... It seems like you only like the theoretical...

No, that's not accurate. In fact, I haven't mentioned a single theoretical stat in this thread.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

No, that's not accurate. In fact, I haven't mentioned a single theoretical stat in this thread.

Havent mentioned them, but I do think when one discounts team stats they are missing out on the REAL production numbers... I know Rmilla went overboard, but there is a difference between batting with men on base than bases empty, the more RBIs a player has, wouldn't you agree that they likely do most of their damage with men on base?? I am not claiming these team stats to be perfect, but they definitely have their place...

How often do you see a pitcher do JUST enough to win, or JUST enough to lose?? sometimes these stats just show the intangibles...

 

[obxyankeefan]

That's why you'll never see me make a case for someone with only one stat. Analysis is most successful when several metrics are used together to paint a more complete and accurate picture. Context and perspective is everything.

Best thing said in this thread yet. I said I like counting stats for single season awards, but their value diminishes when discussing different or multi seasons IMO. All stats have value and also have problems, so anytime you compare two players you need multiple stats.