Post Your Top 3 AL/NL MVP/CYA - End of August

[rmilia1]

Considering you think relievers are more valuable than starting pitchers, it's safe to say you have no fucking clue how to determine a player's value.

Didnt say relievers, I said dominant closer. Dominant as in just that. A guy like that ahs far more effect on a teams season than a starting pitcher ever can if only because they dont play in enough games. We already had this talk though, you disagree. It is cool.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

OK as I have said tens of times. Thats fine if thats how YOU want to judge a MVP talk. Its not how I want to judge a MVP... stats are an indicator of how good a guy is, they arent always an indicator of how valuable he is. Anyway this has been a fun debate I think. I knew going into it that most people would disagree with my opinion but thats OK by me. In baseball the stats are the king and always will be. I fully expect Harper to win the award going away, I still wont agree with it but its no biggie

But again, anyone can cherry pick stats to prove they are right... I can prove to you that Brendan Ryan is the MVP!!! But the problem seems to be not that you are cherry picking, but you are disregarding all statistics that say otherwise... Even the ones that show your reasoning to be invalid... For example, you say Rizzo has been more clutch than Harper... But you disregarded the fact that Harper has been significantly better than Rizzo when the score is tied...

 

[SlinkyRedfoot]

Didnt say relievers, I said dominant closer. Dominant as in just that. A guy like that ahs far more effect on a teams season than a starting pitcher ever can if only because they dont play in enough games.

Seriously, who turns your computer on for you?

 

[SlinkyRedfoot]

A guy like that ahs far more effect on a teams season than a starting pitcher ever can

I can guarantee you that if you gave any GM in baseball the choice between having an Ace starting pitcher or a dominant closer, not one would take the closer. Guaranteed.

In fact, I would be surprised if a GM would take that closer over a solid #3 SP.

You literally have no idea what you're talking about, yet you do it with such confidence. It's seriously amazing. You truly are a bullshit artist. I suggest a career as a sleazy salesman - maybe cars.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

I can guarantee you that if you gave any GM in baseball the choice between having an Ace starting pitcher or a dominant closer, not one would take the closer. Guaranteed.

In fact, I would be surprised if a GM would take that closer over a solid #3 SP.

You literally have no idea what you're talking about, yet you do it with such confidence. It's seriously amazing. You truly are a bullshit artist. I suggest a career as a sleazy salesman - maybe cars.

Don't go that far... there are relievers that any GM would want more than even some #1 pitchers... Rmilla was correct with one statement that there is a difference between who is better and who is more valuable... A dominant closer is more valuable than most SP... Just not a dominant SP...

 

[SlinkyRedfoot]

Don't go that far... there are relievers that any GM would want more than even some #1 pitchers... Rmilla was correct with one statement that there is a difference between who is better and who is more valuable... A dominant closer is more valuable than most SP... Just not a dominant SP...

Bullshit.

A dominant closer gets paid about as much as an average starting pitcher.

 

[SlinkyRedfoot]

Bullshit.

A dominant closer gets paid about as much as an average starting pitcher.

Actually, probably less.

 

[rmilia1]

But again, anyone can cherry pick stats to prove they are right... I can prove to you that Brendan Ryan is the MVP!!! But the problem seems to be not that you are cherry picking, but you are disregarding all statistics that say otherwise... Even the ones that show your reasoning to be invalid... For example, you say Rizzo has been more clutch than Harper... But you disregarded the fact that Harper has been significantly better than Rizzo when the score is tied...

Im not disregarding anything. Ive said Harper is having the statistically better year. Just doesnt make him more valuable. I dont know why that is tough to understand. Its the same reason guys on 3-9 teams dont win the Heisman, the same reason guys on 40-42 teams dont win NBA MVP, same reason guys on 6-10 teams dont win the NFL MVP... all your stats are valid and correct, that doesnt mean I think he is the most valuable player. Just a different definition of what valuable means I guess

 

[SlinkyRedfoot]

His 2013 contract would make 36-year-old Ryan Dempster the third highest paid closer of all time.

Ryan Fucking Dempster.

 

[rmilia1]

Im not sure why you guys are confusing being better with being more valuable. Or why you seem to think the money you are paid equates to your value to your team... thats just stupid.

 

[SlinkyRedfoot]

Im not sure why you guys are confusing being better with being more valuable. Or why you seem to think the money you are paid equates to your value to your team... thats just stupid.

Ask me about my level of interest in explaining how salaries relate to this discussion to you.

 

[SlinkyRedfoot]

Ask me about my level of interest in explaining how salaries relate to this discussion to you.

No, wait. Don't. I'll let Dean Wormer tell you:

Spoiler

 

[rmilia1]

Ask me about my level of interest in explaining how salaries relate to this discussion to you.

They dont have anything to do with each other. Salaries are based on previous performance and expected performance. They have no correlation to an individual years value. Unless you think John Lester is more valuable than Jake Arrieta?? Or that Albert Pujols is 4 times as valuable to the Angels this year as Mike Trout is?? There are about a billion other examples to use but I think you get the drift.

 

[SlinkyRedfoot]

They dont have anything to do with each other. Salaries are based on previous performance and expected performance. They have no correlation to an individual years value. Unless you think John Lester is more valuable than Jake Arrieta?? Or that Albert Pujols is 4 times as valuable to the Angels this year as Mike Trout is?? There are about a billion other examples to use but I think you get the drift.

Ask me about my level of interest in explaining how salaries relate to this discussion to you.

 

[rmilia1]

So Im right.. already knew that. Thanks for confirmation though.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Im not disregarding anything. Ive said Harper is having the statistically better year. Just doesnt make him more valuable. I dont know why that is tough to understand. Its the same reason guys on 3-9 teams dont win the Heisman, the same reason guys on 40-42 teams dont win NBA MVP, same reason guys on 6-10 teams dont win the NFL MVP... all your stats are valid and correct, that doesnt mean I think he is the most valuable player. Just a different definition of what valuable means I guess

But that's the thing... It would be one thing if you just stood still on the playoffs thing... You had to show stats about Rizzo being CLUTCH... You brought it up many times how CLUTCH Rizzo is... You cant have it both ways... Once you bring in the clutch stat, and someone shows you how Harper has been just as clutch, then you lose all credibility... you cant stand still about playoffs and then say a SP doesn't deserve it because they influenced less games... you are arguing contradicting things...

If you want to say the MVP HAS to come from a playoff team, then fine!!! just don't bring stats into your argument in proving you correct!!!

 

[rmilia1]

But that's the thing... It would be one thing if you just stood still on the playoffs thing... You had to show stats about Rizzo being CLUTCH... You brought it up many times how CLUTCH Rizzo is... You cant have it both ways... Once you bring in the clutch stat, and someone shows you how Harper has been just as clutch, then you lose all credibility... you cant stand still about playoffs and then say a SP doesn't deserve it because they influenced less games... you are arguing contradicting things...

If you want to say the MVP HAS to come from a playoff team, then fine!!! just don't bring stats into your argument in proving you correct!!!

Of course I can have it both ways. Why wouldnt I be able to?? The playoffs are a huge deal to me but that cant be the only reasoning or else youd just give MVP to the best player on the team with the best record. Rizzo IS clutch. Thats why he is the best player amongst NL playoff teams. Thats why I would give him the award if it were me

 

[SlinkyRedfoot]

So Im right.. already knew that. Thanks for confirmation though.

I have no confidence that even if I took the time to explain it that you would understand it, so I'm not going to waste my time.

If you want to believe that makes you right, I don't care. It's just another thing you're wrong about.

 

[Villain]

Didnt say relievers, I said dominant closer. Dominant as in just that. A guy like that ahs far more effect on a teams season than a starting pitcher ever can if only because they dont play in enough games.

That is not an opinion, that is an objective statement. Cause and effect can be measured. There's over a hundred years of baseball statistics and records that can be used to back up your statement.

I'd love to see you try.

 

[SlinkyRedfoot]

So Im right.. already knew that. Thanks for confirmation though.