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

[MilkSpiller22]

...or Votto.

or even Kris Bryant... OK maybe I went too far...

 

[navamind]

or even Kris Bryant... OK maybe I went too far...

That's debateable.

Chicago Cubs Leaderboards » 2015 » Batters » Dashboard | FanGraphs Baseball

Obviously Rizzo's been the better hitter. But 3B is a lot more demanding than 1B, and Bryant's been pretty solid defensively.

 

[SlinkyRedfoot]

That's debateable.

Chicago Cubs Leaderboards » 2015 » Batters » Dashboard | FanGraphs Baseball

Obviously Rizzo's been the better hitter. But 3B is a lot more demanding than 1B, and Bryant's been pretty solid defensively.

Dude. Before that can even be considered, you have to check to see what Bryant's stats are in afternoon games against NL West opponents with records over .500.

 

[navamind]

Dude. Before that can even be considered, you have to check to see what Bryant's stats are in afternoon games against NL West opponents with records over .500.

 

[navamind]

 

[rmilia1]

I have no problems with you wanting to give it to a playoff player... Problem is that you have cherry picked stats to help your case and whenever someone gives you other stats to prove against your point you have discounted it... Giving a reward to a playoff player is great, as long as it is close... I just don't see any way you can HONESTLY defend that Rizzo is close to Harper or Goldshmidt...

Of course I have cherry picked stats, thats what people do when theya re making an argument. If I have already conceded that Haprer is having the better overall year stats wise then what other way do I use to prove that Rizzo should still be MVP?? Its not enough to solely say " Hey his team is making the playoffs", if it were then a Cardinals player should win MVP.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Of course I have cherry picked stats, thats what people do when theya re making an argument. If I have already conceded that Haprer is having the better overall year stats wise then what other way do I use to prove that Rizzo should still be MVP?? Its not enough to solely say " Hey his team is making the playoffs", if it were then a Cardinals player should win MVP.

yes, but the problem is when you argue it when you don't believe it and then add its my opinion so I cant be wrong...

 

[rmilia1]

TL/DR.

I quit after "that bothers you so." Nothing. Nothing you post bothers me.

When you post things like 'closers are more valuable than starting pitchers,' it's a robust endorsement that I should not take a single thing you say about baseball seriously.

A dominant closer is more valuable at least as it pertains to MVP discussion. If you effect more games then you are inherently at an advantage. Now if you are talking Cy Young then thats different because Cy Young goes to BEST pitcher.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

yes, but the problem is when you argue it when you don't believe it and then add its my opinion so I cant be wrong...

But with that said, nice job trolling this thread to 9 pages... Although I think it was a popular topic enough to do well without your trolling...

 

[SlinkyRedfoot]

Of course I have cherry picked stats, thats what talking meatballs do when theya re making an argument.

Fixed.

 

[rmilia1]

yes, but the problem is when you argue it when you don't believe it and then add its my opinion so I cant be wrong...

You can think Im wrong, doesnt mean I have to agree with you. This isnt a fact based award. Its an opinion based award. People vote on it and people use their opinion to do so

 

[SlinkyRedfoot]

A dominant closer is more valuable at least as it pertains to MVP discussion. If you effect more games then you are inherently at an advantage. Now if you are talking Cy Young then thats different because Cy Young goes to BEST pitcher.

Not even close.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

You can think Im wrong, doesnt mean I have to agree with you. This isnt a fact based award. Its an opinion based award. People vote on it and people use their opinion to do so

But that is where you are wrong... when stats prove you to be wrong, then you have to admit you are wrong and the only reason you are voting for a certain player is because you are a homer or you are a hater... One or the other...

Look at the HOF vote ins... Nobody has ever got 100%, but can you really believe that Babe ruth SHOULD not be in the HOF??

 

[rmilia1]

But with that said, nice job trolling this thread to 9 pages... Although I think it was a popular topic enough to do well without your trolling...

Not trolling, I just dont consider a guy on a .500 team to be most valuable anything and neither would any other league. Only in baseball does a guy on a shit teram even get consideration for being most valuable. LOL. "

 

[rmilia1]

But that is where you are wrong... when stats prove you to be wrong, then you have to admit you are wrong and the only reason you are voting for a certain player is because you are a homer or you are a hater... One or the other...

Look at the HOF vote ins... Nobody has ever got 100%, but can you really believe that Babe ruth SHOULD not be in the HOF??

Not all the stats. Stats ( just like anything else ) are evaluated by a what a person considers to be important. I dont consider batting .350 against sub .500 teams to be all that relevant. You are talking like Rizzo is having a shit year. He is 4th in WAR in the NL ( amongst non pitchers )... sure he is behind Harper but as I said if you are solely going to use stats then change the name of the award

 

[navamind]

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.

 

[navamind]

Not all the stats. Stats ( just like anything else ) are evaluated by a what a person considers to be important. I dont consider batting .350 against sub .500 teams to be all that relevant. You are talking like Rizzo is having a shit year. He is 4th in WAR in the NL ( amongst non pitchers )... sure he is behind Harper but as I said if you are solely going to use stats then change the name of the award

But no one ever said Rizzo had a shit year. Rizzo's a star 1B and I think he'll probably be a serious MVP candidate over the next few years. But Rizzo's stats, along with just about any other player in baseball, really, pale in comparison to Harper this year. Harper's having a historically good year.

 

[rmilia1]

But no one ever said Rizzo had a shit year. Rizzo's a star 1B and I think he'll probably be a serious MVP candidate over the next few years. But Rizzo's stats, along with just about any other player in baseball, really, pale in comparison to Harper this year. Harper's having a historically good year.

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

 

[SlinkyRedfoot]

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.

This.

 

[navamind]

Deserved Run Average: A better way to determine the Cy Young winners