Top 10 poll: #12 player ever

[MilkSpiller22]

in WAR shares..

of the remaining offensive players top 5


1. Mike Schmidt-7.3
2. Honus Wagner- 7.2
3. Alex Rodriguez- 7.1
4. Mel Ott- 6.7
5. Albert Pujols- 6.2

 

[MilkSpiller22]

top 5 availablepitchers in WAR share

1. Cy Young- 10.2
2. Christy Mathewson-7.9
3. Grover Alexander- 7.2
4. Roger Clemens- 7.0
5. Lefty Grove- 6.6

next 5 Post expansion guys

1. Randy Johnson-4.6
2. Tom Seaver-4.1
3. Maddux-3.7
4. Pedro- 3.6
5. Bob Gibson- 3.4( despite starting in 1959, wasnt really SPECIAL until 1968)

 

[calsnowskier]

I think if you took a deep dive into the average age of an MLB player, you'll find that it increased into the later half of the 20th century. Most guys didn't play into their mid 30s back then. Only the really good ones did. Even then, some of them transitioned to managers and became very much part time players.

I don’t fucking care if you “identify” as a manager, you freak!!

 

[calsnowskier]

in WAR shares..

of the remaining offensive players top 5


1. Mike Schmidt-7.3
2. Honus Wagner- 7.2
3. Alex Rodriguez- 7.1
4. Mel Ott- 6.7
5. Albert Pujols- 6.2

Can you explain the calculation?

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Can you explain the calculation?

well, I never looked at the calculations before... as I only ever used it as a quick glance...

but apparently what it does is try to mirror MVP shares...

so the WAR shares if you are first it will be like a standard first place MVP share.. if you are 8th it will represent a standard 8th place MVP share...

honestly, I don't like the calculations.. they made it way to complicated... but it still does show the intended...

since I know you like using the bucket method... but is there a difference in your opinion between

these two players in a particular season

Player A- 9.0 WAR but ranked 3rd

Player A- 9.0. War but ranked first

would you say they had the same season??

what is more important to have a high WAR or OPS+ or to be the best in that season??

 

[calsnowskier]

well, I never looked at the calculations before... as I only ever used it as a quick glance...

but apparently what it does is try to mirror MVP shares...

so the WAR shares if you are first it will be like a standard first place MVP share.. if you are 8th it will represent a standard 8th place MVP share...

honestly, I don't like the calculations.. they made it way to complicated... but it still does show the intended...

since I know you like using the bucket method... but is there a difference in your opinion between

these two players in a particular season

Player A- 9.0 WAR but ranked 3rd

Player A- 9.0. War but ranked first

would you say they had the same season??

what is more important to have a high WAR or OPS+ or to be the best in that season??

I have never really looked at WAR rank within a single season. So I don’t really have an opinion on that metric. WAR is somewhat stand alone on its own, so doing some kind of WAR+ doesn’t do a lot. I am open to argument here, though.

What is an MVP share? I am not familiar with that stat/calculation. I checked BBRef and couldn’t find anything referencing shares.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

I have never really looked at WAR rank within a single season. So I don’t really have an opinion on that metric. WAR is somewhat stand alone on its own, so doing some kind of WAR+ doesn’t do a lot. I am open to argument here, though.

What is an MVP share? I am not familiar with that stat/calculation. I checked BBRef and couldn’t find anything referencing shares.

I thought you would like it because it is basically the buckets that you do. But it doesn’t care about the total. Just the rank.

MVP shares are in all sports. And is based on the voting.

 

[calsnowskier]

I thought you would like it because it is basically the buckets that you do. But it doesn’t care about the total. Just the rank.

MVP shares are in all sports. And is based on the voting.

Can you explain the share concept to me like I am a 3rd grader? I have no idea what it is.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Can you explain the share concept to me like I am a 3rd grader? I have no idea what it is.

Every year voters vote for mvp

The percentage of votes each person gets would be their mvp share

and that would be accumulated for every season you received any mvp shares

Usually first place in the mvp race will be anywhere from 90% to 100%

2nd place is usually around 80%.

And so on

All percentages would be added up as numbers

So 90%=0.9. Simple math.

 

[calsnowskier]

Every year voters vote for mvp

The percentage of votes each person gets would be their mvp share

and that would be accumulated for every season you received any mvp shares

Usually first place in the mvp race will be anywhere from 90% to 100%

2nd place is usually around 80%.

And so on

All percentages would be added up as numbers

So 90%=0.9. Simple math.

But the MVP voting is weighted. It is possible that every voter submitted an identical ballot of A in first, Bin 2nd, C in third, etc. how would the shares be broken up in that scenario? Or does each player ONLY get points for 1st place votes?

 

[MilkSpiller22]

But the MVP voting is weighted. It is possible that every voter submitted an identical ballot of A in first, Bin 2nd, C in third, etc. how would the shares be broken up in that scenario? Or does each player ONLY get points for 1st place votes?

so...
this is how the MVP voting works...

there are 30 voters who send a list out 1 through 10...

every thing is tallied and is counted who has how many of what vote...

for some reason... the system set in place...

gives 14 points for every first place, 9 points for every 2nd... and so on... until 1 point for every 10th place

the maximum total is 420...

so everyones total gets divided by 420...

for example Bobby Witt Jr was ranked 2nd by all 30 voters...

that would be 30*9=270 and then the share would be 270/420= .64



I didn't create this system... and I don't understand why first place is given 14 points... I guess simply because if it was just 10, then there would not be much of a difference between MVP and 2nd place...

but why 14 and 15?? I don't know... someone clearly smokes a lot of pot and wanted it to be 420...


I will agree with you that the calculation of shares is stupid.. but again, the results actually look good...

https://www.mlb.com/news/2024-mlb-mvp-award-voting-results

 

[calsnowskier]

so...
this is how the MVP voting works...

there are 30 voters who send a list out 1 through 10...

every thing is tallied and is counted who has how many of what vote...

for some reason... the system set in place...

gives 14 points for every first place, 9 points for every 2nd... and so on... until 1 point for every 10th place

the maximum total is 420...

so everyones total gets divided by 420...

for example Bobby Witt Jr was ranked 2nd by all 30 voters...

that would be 30*9=270 and then the share would be 270/420= .64



I didn't create this system... and I don't understand why first place is given 14 points... I guess simply because if it was just 10, then there would not be much of a difference between MVP and 2nd place...

but why 14 and 15?? I don't know... someone clearly smokes a lot of pot and wanted it to be 420...


I will agree with you that the calculation of shares is stupid.. but again, the results actually look good...

https://www.mlb.com/news/2024-mlb-mvp-award-voting-results

So a unanimous MVP has a share of .33?

Thats an odd “perfect score”, but ok…

It is a good an accolade as any other. Maybe better. I will need to think on this one for a while.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

So a unanimous MVP has a share of .33?

Thats an odd “perfect score”, but ok…

It is a good an accolade as any other. Maybe better. I will need to think on this one for a while.

No a unanimous gets a full 1 point

420/420=1

 

[LHG]

So a unanimous MVP has a share of .33?

Thats an odd “perfect score”, but ok…

It is a good an accolade as any other. Maybe better. I will need to think on this one for a while.

I am curious about hanging so much weight on MVP and Cy Young awards. They are prestigious and should be worth the conversation but it we are talking about how stats have changed, in terms of importance, over the years, and how different eras produced different results, shouldn't we also talk about the controversies over the years about these awards and how not everyone felt that the right players were sometimes awarded these trophies? I seem to recall that this was a big discussion about 15 years ago. Using the metrics that have become more common now, there was talk about how past winners really weren't the best in that year and even some contemporary awards were given out to what seemed like the 2nd, 3rd or 4th best of that year. Shouldn't that also be worth some consideration in our conversations? Hardware is great but if everything else is flawed and taken with a grain of salt, shouldn't this be as well?

 

[MilkSpiller22]

I am curious about hanging so much weight on MVP and Cy Young awards. They are prestigious and should be worth the conversation but it we are talking about how stats have changed, in terms of importance, over the years, and how different eras produced different results, shouldn't we also talk about the controversies over the years about these awards and how not everyone felt that the right players were sometimes awarded these trophies? I seem to recall that this was a big discussion about 15 years ago. Using the metrics that have become more common now, there was talk about how past winners really weren't the best in that year and even some contemporary awards were given out to what seemed like the 2nd, 3rd or 4th best of that year. Shouldn't that also be worth some consideration in our conversations? Hardware is great but if everything else is flawed and taken with a grain of salt, shouldn't this be as well?

perception is kind of important IMO... perception is usually the eye test... not just a popularity contest(of course sometimes it is entirely a popularity contest)...

but sometimes there is a disconnection between statistics and the eye test... so it is nice to see perception awards... even if they are often only given to players on certain teams...

 

[calsnowskier]

perception is kind of important IMO... perception is usually the eye test... not just a popularity contest(of course sometimes it is entirely a popularity contest)...

but sometimes there is a disconnection between statistics and the eye test... so it is nice to see perception awards... even if they are often only given to players on certain teams...

I agree. MVP, CY, ROY are not perfect awards. But as you said, it is a strong, imperfect representation of the eye test (great point). As with any other stat or metric, it shouldn’t be used ALONE, but using it WITH CONTEXT, can provide a decent WAR# type metric.

maybe combine all 3 of the major rewards in a calc something like…

5(Ms) + 4(Cs) + Rs

 

[MilkSpiller22]

I agree. MVP, CY, ROY are not perfect awards. But as you said, it is a strong, imperfect representation of the eye test (great point). As with any other stat or metric, it shouldn’t be used ALONE, but using it WITH CONTEXT, can provide a decent WAR# type metric.

happens all the time, we watch a game, and we are say Player A is so good... and then we look at their stats and we are like "what??"...

id say Vlad Guerrero sr.. he was better eye test than a stats showed...

 

[calsnowskier]

happens all the time, we watch a game, and we are say Player A is so good... and then we look at their stats and we are like what??

id say Vlad Guerrero sr.. he was better eye test than a stats showed...

And every fanbase has their darlings. I have heard that some think Edgar and Pappi were good players (even though neither actually played).