MLB Awards Week Thread

[Vyle203]

Why is it Trout's fault that other 24 guys on his team sucked (on the whole)?

It's not his fault. I just think it all depends on how you assess "value". To me, if your team is garbage, what was the value in your production?

A lot of voters feel the same way. It's not the player of the year award, or best statistical season award. I think Mookie has a shot to win it because his team won their division.

For the record, it's why I hate MVP awards in general. Player of the year would probably be Trout, though Betts and maybe even Altuve definitely deserve consideration.

 

[mr.hockey4242]

Yea, I don't think an MVP should come from a team that was 14 games under .500 and didn't make the playoffs.

It's most valuable player. Not best team.

Take Betts off the Sox and that offense is still great

Take Trout off the Angels and it's a AAA team.

It's really simple. Trout provides the most value....to any team.

 

[StanMarsh51]

It's not his fault. I just think it all depends on how you assess "value". To me, if your team is garbage, what was the value in your production?

A lot of voters feel the same way. It's not the player of the year award, or best statistical season award. I think Mookie has a shot to win it because his team won their division.

For the record, it's why I hate MVP awards in general. Player of the year would probably be Trout, though Betts and maybe even Altuve definitely deserve consideration.

Agreed that it does depend how you assess value. Since it's an individual award, some place less emphasis on the standing of the team and interpret in the way that if you put Trout on any team, he'd make that team better moreso than any other player in the league. I'd argue that Trout would've made Boston a better team than Betts did, and using that criteria I'd say he was a more valuable player.

 

[Omar 382]

I would have gone with Kluber, but that's just me. Only a 0.1 difference in WAR between the top 4, and of those, he had the best FIP, xFIP, FIP-, xFIP-, with an ERA- just behind Porcello and Verlander by 2 and 1 points. He also had the best GB% of the four. The only way you could clear-cut say that Verlander was objectively the best is if you put an undue amount of weight to WPA.

 

[Vyle203]

It's most valuable player. Not best team.

Take Betts off the Sox and that offense is still great

Take Trout off the Angels and it's a AAA team.

It's really simple. Trout provides the most value....to any team.

If you're losing, there is no tangible way to assess your value. I.E. if Mookie isn't on the Sox this year, they might not win the division. Take Trout off the Angels and what, they suck more? Right or wrong, a lot of voters put stock in what I just said and vote accordingly.

 

[Omar 382]

If you're losing, there is no tangible way to assess your value. I.E. if Mookie isn't on the Sox this year, they might not win the division. Take Trout off the Angels and what, they suck more? Right or wrong, a lit of voters put stock in what I just said and vote accordingly.

That's objectively false.

American League Leaderboards » 2016 » Batters » Dashboard | FanGraphs Baseball

Trout is the best player in baseball, and should definitely be the MVP.

 

[TrustMeIamRight]

Or why not just look at it over an entire season (instead of dissecting it into games where they did this and games where they did that) and adding some context where needed to that whole season?

Over the course of the season, given where they pitched, a strong case can be made that Porcello's ERA and WHIP were more impressive than Verlander's....it's that simple.

I did give you the season stats. I posted an entire graph with the season stats for each pitcher.

Porcello led in wins and run support

Verlander led in strikeouts, IP, WHIP, BAA, quality starts (led the MLB),WAR-P (led the MLB) and WAR. Verlander was also 2nd in ERA.

 

[Omar 382]

I did give you the season stats. I posted an entire graph with the season stats for each pitcher.

Porcello led in wins and run support

Verlander led in strikeouts, IP, WHIP, BAA, quality starts (led the MLB),WAR-P (led the MLB) and WAR. Verlander was also 2nd in ERA.

Yeah, but you're using very preliminary and sometimes irrelevant statistics. You can't just cherry-pick statistics, and because your pitcher was the best in those, he is the best. That's not right.

 

[TrustMeIamRight]

Yeah, but you're using very preliminary and sometimes irrelevant statistics. You can't just cherry-pick statistics, and because your pitcher was the best in those, he is the best. That's not right.

You mean the stats they've used since the inception of baseball? ERA, WHIP, IP, BAA, Strikeouts, Wins, Run support, quality starts. Which stats did I leave off, since I cherry picked?

 

[Omar 382]

You mean the stats they've used since the inception of baseball? ERA, WHIP, IP, BAA, Strikeouts, Wins, Run support, quality starts. Which stats did I leave off, since I cherry picked?

"The inception of baseball." Why don't we use medical advice the Romans used in the 300's?

 

[StanMarsh51]

I did give you the season stats. I posted an entire graph with the season stats for each pitcher.

Porcello led in wins and run support

Verlander led in strikeouts, IP, WHIP, BAA, quality starts (led the MLB),WAR-P (led the MLB) and WAR. Verlander was also 2nd in ERA.

And as I've pointed out, Verlander's ERA and WHIP (arguably the 2 most important stats for a pitcher) aren't really more impressive than Porcello's when you consider where they pitch....if you can't agree on that, you're never going to see that Porcello wasn't a terrible choice.

 

[Omar 382]

And as I've pointed out, Verlander's ERA and WHIP (arguably the 2 most important stats for a pitcher) aren't really more impressive than Porcello's when you consider where they pitch....if you can't agree on that, you're never going to see that Porcello wasn't a terrible choice.

I strongly disagree, unless you are referring to the tree of statistics that spawns from them

 

[Vyle203]

That's objectively false.

American League Leaderboards » 2016 » Batters » Dashboard | FanGraphs Baseball

Trout is the best player in baseball, and should definitely be the MVP.

Again, you're assessing individual production vs. it's value to the team. You obviously didn't get any of what I said in my previous 2 posts, but it doesn't matter because you don't vote for MVP. Incidentally, it's not just baseball. Team production is always taken into consideration in every sport. It's why on the NBA boards, people talk about how James Harden, regardless of the numbers he puts up, will not win MVP if the Rockets don't win enough games.

I'm not saying Trout can't win this thing, because he can. But the regular season success of the Sox WILL come into play in the voters minds, and it's why I think Betts has a shot.

 

[TrustMeIamRight]

"The inception of baseball." Why don't we use medical advice the Romans used in the 300's?

I'm still waiting on what I cherry picked?

 

[TrustMeIamRight]

And as I've pointed out, Verlander's ERA and WHIP (arguably the 2 most important stats for a pitcher) aren't really more impressive than Porcello's when you consider where they pitch....if you can't agree on that, you're never going to see that Porcello wasn't a terrible choice.

And while you are arguing the ballpark factor -- do you know Verlander had a 3.01 ERA on the road and 3.07 ERA at home this year?

Also do batters hit 20+ points higher because of the ballpark Porcello pitches at too?

 

[StanMarsh51]

And while you are arguing the ballpark factor -- do you know Verlander had a 3.01 ERA on the road and 3.07 ERA at home this year?

Also do batters hit 20+ points higher because of the ballpark Porcello pitches at too?

Comerica is a pretty neutral ballpark, so I'm not sure what bringing up Verlander's home/road splits is accomplishing. There's no denying however that Fenway is one of the top hitters' parks in baseball, and that 4 of the 5 AL East parks are considered hitters park (only Tampa Bay isn't a hitter friendly).

So given those circumstances of where they pitch, Porcello's ERA and WHIP are more impressive than Verlander's.

 

[StanMarsh51]

Also do batters hit 20+ points higher because of the ballpark Porcello pitches at too?

So you've never seen batters get hits off the monster in Fenway that would likely be flyouts in other parks? It's a large reason why Wade Boggs hit .354 at Fenway and .302 everywhere else.


Not to mention, Fenway is among the bottom in foul outs of any MLB ballpark, and given it's dimensions its safe to say the lack of foul territory there is giving hitters more chances since foul balls that might be caught in other parks end up in the stands at Fenway and keep the at-bat alive.
Foul Ball Territory: Increasingly Intimate Ballparks


Porcello's batting average against was 22 points higher at home than on the road. You don't think the ballpark factors listed above had anything to do with that?


Again, you're failing to realize (or completely ignoring) that Fenway is a major hitter friendly park, which is a 'handicap' that Porcello had to deal with and Verlander didn't.

 

[TrustMeIamRight]

So you've never seen batters get hits off the monster in Fenway that would likely be flyouts in other parks? It's a large reason why Wade Boggs hit .354 at Fenway and .302 everywhere else.


Not to mention, Fenway is among the bottom in foul outs of any MLB ballpark, and given it's dimensions its safe to say the lack of foul territory there is giving hitters more chances since foul balls that might be caught in other parks end up in the stands at Fenway and keep the at-bat alive.
Foul Ball Territory: Increasingly Intimate Ballparks


Porcello's batting average against was 22 points higher at home than on the road. You don't think the ballpark factors listed above had anything to do with that?


Again, you're failing to realize (or completely ignoring) that Fenway is a major hitter friendly park, which is a 'handicap' that Porcello had to deal with and Verlander didn't.

And you are failing to realize advance metrics are educated guesses. Take a look at Porcello's ERA was on the road -- 3.31. At Home -- 2.97.

And out of curiousity -- is Porcello a ground ball or fly ball pitcher?

 

[StanMarsh51]

And you are failing to realize advance metrics are educated guesses. Take a look at Porcello's ERA was on the road -- 3.31. At Home -- 2.97.

How do you know that Porcello's home ERA couldn't have been lower than 2.97 at home if Fenway wasn't an extreme hitters' park (since many pitchers pitch significantly better at home).

We don't know that answer, but what we do know is that Porcello's ERA and WHIP were slightly worse despite pitching in a much more difficult pitching environment.

I still can't believe you're disputing the ballpark factors...are you next going to argue that a .850 OPS in Coors Field is more impressive than an .830 OPS in Pecto Park?

 

[TrustMeIamRight]

How do you know that Porcello's home ERA couldn't have been lower than 2.97 at home if Fenway wasn't an extreme hitters' park (since many pitchers pitch significantly better at home).

We don't know that answer, but what we do know is that Porcello's ERA and WHIP were slightly worse despite pitching in a much more difficult pitching environment. I can't believe you're disputing this.

He is a ground ball pitcher. You want to know what a tougher pitching environment for him would be? Playing on Astro turf. Or do they take that into consideration when making their educated guesses too? What about a career BABIP of over .300 and coming in 40 points lower? You can argue ANYTHINg with the ridiculous guesstimates everyone makes now