The W
Views: 97697904
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Calendar | Color chart | Log in for more!
26.7.14 0411
The W - Baseball - MVP discussion time.... (Page 3)
This thread has 20 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Thread rated: 4.98
Pages: Prev 1 2 3 4 Next
(931 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (65 total)
jfkfc
Liverwurst








Since: 9.2.02

Since last post: 9 days
Last activity: 3 days
#41 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.87
And Gary Sheffield hits another one out in the 9th, picking up the Yanks after Gordon gives up a run to tie the game in the 8th. They needed a win and got it off the bat of Shef coupled with the close by Mariano. He is clearly the guy who comes through in the clutch for the AL team with the best record, and should be on pace for the ALMVP. I just think that his performace, clutch hitting, and grit for playing with what is reportedly a very painful injury, in conjunction with his team's place in the standings, should warrant it.



"Richard Grieco, you see right through me."
BigSteve
Pepperoni








Since: 23.7.04
From: Baltimore, MD

Since last post: 2752 days
Last activity: 2480 days
#42 Posted on | Instant Rating: 2.00
    Originally posted by skorpio17
      Originally posted by Guru Zim
      Imagine a team with 5 amazing pitchers, 8 amazing defensive players, and one guy (Larry) who hits .100 but it's always a home run.

      The pitchers all throw complete games every night, and never give up a run. Not one all season. The defensive guys really suck at hitting. None of them ever get a hit. Not one all season. Every game continues until Larry finally hits a home run.

      Larry ends up with 162 GWRBI.

      This is a very stupid extreme scenario, but it sorta makes a point. GWRBI taken without any reference to pitching is a bogus stat. First of all, it discredits pitching, because most of your pitchers won't have many GWRBI. If someone won 30 games in a season, but had no GWRBI, I'd hope they were eligible for the MVP. Secondly, someone always has to get a GWRBI for each game. This overly rewards teams with winning records.

      (OK, granted, in this example, Larry ends the season with 162 HR at a minimum, and should be the MVP, but you get where I'm going with this I hope).

      I have the same problem with "clutch" GWRBI. In the example above, the hitter always has a 1 / 10 shot of hitting the home run. Why is it clutch if it happens in innings 9-100 but just average if it is in innings 1-8?

      GWRBI and I don't get along.

      (edited by Guru Zim on 23.8.04 1431)


    You can't really compare pitching stats with hitting stats either. I'd only give the MVP to a hitter because pitchers already have their own award in the Cy Young. It doesn't seem right to me for a pitcher to get both awards.

    That same pitcher with 30 wins could have an ERA of 7.50 and a team that scores 20 runs a game behind him. I'd hope he wouldn't get the MVP. Also in that 24-0 game that he doesn't want the leadoff hitter getting the GWRBI, he has no problem giving a save to the reliver for pitcher 3 innings on the winning side.

    There can be games without a GWRBI if the winning runs scores on an error. And for clutch hitting they use the 7th inning or later.

    In an example of a good GWRBI situation, check out the 4/30/3 Giants vs. Marlins game. In the fifth inning of a tie game Bonds was up with the bases loaded. Florida intentionally walked him to give up the winning Run. Bonds finished 0-2 with a GWRBI... Or just look what Sheffield did again last night for the Yankees.

    To continue with the hypotheticals, if Bonds was walked every single atbat in a season his year end stats would be something like 0 AB, 0 HR, 170 Runs, 10 RBIs. Would it still be possible for him to win an MVP?


How is that a good GWRBI situation? It was in the 5th inning and Bonds didn't do anything to earn the RBI other than to stand at the plate. And yeah, if he walked 600 times or in every at bat, he should be MVP because his team would score vastly more runs as he would make no outs the entire season.
StaggerLee
Scrapple








Since: 3.10.02
From: Right side of the tracks

Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 12 hours
AIM:  
Y!:
#43 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.23
    Originally posted by Joseph Ryder

    It's in response to Eddie Famous' remark that the Cards are an offensive juggernaut (thanks to the addition of Scottie Rolen). I think you even mentioned something about the Cards being a historic offensive team. I disagree, citing that any team that's struggling to score more runs than the SF Giants should in no way be considered a juggernaut. Seeing as how the primary objective of a team's offense is to score runs, the Cards are only barely better than the Giants. Are the Giants then also a juggernaut? If so...

    ...then it ties into my hypothetical (not rhetorical, people) questions at the end. If you take Rolen away from the Cards, and Bonds away from the Giants, which team suffers more relative to its original state? Most people with a pulse would say the Giants. Why? Because after Bonds, it's mediocre city. Then why is the team scoring as many runs as the juggernaut Cards? Look at the offensive leaders for each team, sorted by OPS, greater than 200 ABs, and please note the bold text:



    AB R HR RBI BB OB SLG BA OPS
    Edmonds 395 82 31 85 80 .421 .630 .304 1.052
    Pujols 464 105 38 106 66 .405 .642 .321 1.047
    Rolen 432 93 31 110 57 .415 .623 .329 1.038




    AB R HR RBI BB OB SLG BA OPS
    Bonds 286 100 35 79 174 .612 .822 .371 1.434
    Snow 262 46 9 39 45 .427 .527 .321 .953
    Tucker 375 68 12 52 57 .370 .453 .275 .823

    I know he's black, he's a real meanie, and it's fun to imagine having a different MVP once in awhile ('specially a nice boy like Rolen), but these are special times, and I think we're just going to have to wait until Bonds retires to fulfill that fantasy. Some of us more patiently than others it seems.

    (edited by Joseph Ryder on 23.8.04 1659)


I still dont know how you can say "take barry away, and they have nothing" and then say "they are a great team"

http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/sports/columnists.nsf/Bernie+Miklasz/E1E99F437F69E93386256EF2002482DD?opendocument&Headline=Stats+men+believe+Cards+now+have+one+of+best+lineups+ever
(sorry, I dont know how to make clever links)


    After Walker joined the fun, the respected mathematicians at The Baseball Prospectus think tank studied the heart of the Cardinals order and compared it with other great nucleuses in baseball history.

    BP used a statistic known as MLVr to analyze the Cardinals. What it means: The stat measures the number of runs a game a player will contribute to a lineup that otherwise consists of average offensive performers.

    Baseball Prospectus broke it down two ways: with Edgar Renteria, and without Renteria. With Renteria batting sixth behind (in order) Walker, Albert Pujols, Scott Rolen and Jim Edmonds, the Cardinals MLVr score was the 16th highest in major-league history, but the third-best since 1940.

    However, if you reduce the criteria to four players - Walker, Pujols, Rolen and Edmonds - the results are stunning. Authors Chaim Bloom and Keith Woolner concluded: "When we look at the top four batters instead of the top five, we see that this year's Cardinals . . . are second all-time behind only the 1894 Phillies. By that measure, the heart of this Cardinals lineup is the best in modern baseball . . . and if a list of average MLVr gets you going instead, the Cardinals still rank seventh, and the best since 1937."


If you wanna rely on just STATS and STATS ALONE to argue about teams abilities, and players production, that should settle the fact that the Cards are great, and that at least one or two of them SHOULD be considered for the MVP. Bonds may be the greatest talent in baseball, since he has 'nobody' around him, but the fact that Rolen and Pujols have great teammates around them, shouldnt disqualify them for anything either.






Thank you for your irrelevant opinion.

Doe, Ray, Me, Fa, So, La, TITO SANTANA!
Eddie Famous
Andouille








Since: 11.12.01
From: Catlin IL

Since last post: 245 days
Last activity: 238 days
#44 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.79

    Originally posted by Joseph Ryder
    It's in response to Eddie Famous' remark that the Cards are an offensive juggernaut (thanks to the addition of Scottie Rolen). I think you even mentioned something about the Cards being a historic offensive team. I disagree, citing that any team that's struggling to score more runs than the SF Giants should in no way be considered a juggernaut. Seeing as how the primary objective of a team's offense is to score runs, the Cards are only barely better than the Giants. Are the Giants then also a juggernaut? If so...

    ...then it ties into my hypothetical (not rhetorical, people) questions at the end. If you take Rolen away from the Cards, and Bonds away from the Giants, which team suffers more relative to its original state? Most people with a pulse would say the Giants. Why?


Because they are unable to look past raw numbers. Scott Rolen is the missing piece to the puzzle that takes the Cards from a possible contending wildcard team to a dominant division leading team. Oh, and when I interviewed Bing Devine a couple weeks ago, he agreed with me. I'm in pretty good company.



(edited by Eddie Famous on 25.8.04 1659)


"In the sky. Lord, in the sky..."
redsoxnation
Scrapple








Since: 24.7.02

Since last post: 390 days
Last activity: 390 days
#45 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.37
    Originally posted by jfkfc
    And Gary Sheffield hits another one out in the 9th, picking up the Yanks after Gordon gives up a run to tie the game in the 8th. They needed a win and got it off the bat of Shef coupled with the close by Mariano. He is clearly the guy who comes through in the clutch for the AL team with the best record, and should be on pace for the ALMVP. I just think that his performace, clutch hitting, and grit for playing with what is reportedly a very painful injury, in conjunction with his team's place in the standings, should warrant it.






I've moved away from Matsui as the Yankees MVP candidate. However, I refuse to consider Sheffield because I will always believe he should have been banned for life for the tank job he did in Milwaukee early in his career. However, you do mention the true A.L. MVP for this season, and probably many of the last 8. Without Rivera, the Yankees are mortal. They can score runs all night, but if they had Quantrill in the 8th/Gordon in the 9th, they wouldn't be 30 over .500. Rivera is the intimidator that causes teams to realize they can't come back late, because he won't let them off the hook.



The Public Demands: Replace the Star Spangled Banner with Brass Bonanza.
jfkfc
Liverwurst








Since: 9.2.02

Since last post: 9 days
Last activity: 3 days
#46 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.87
    Originally posted by redsoxnation
    I've moved away from Matsui as the Yankees MVP candidate. However, I refuse to consider Sheffield because I will always believe he should have been banned for life for the tank job he did in Milwaukee early in his career.
I was just talking to my son about this very thing last night. He asked me why Joe Torre likes him so much, knowing Sheffield did that. The only thing I could think of is that Joe knows him better than I do, and perhaps feels that as wrong as that was, he is past it. Not that it makes it right, or that he shouldn't have been severely punished for it...

    Originally posted by redsoxnation
    However, you do mention the true A.L. MVP for this season, and probably many of the last 8. Without Rivera, the Yankees are mortal. They can score runs all night, but if they had Quantrill in the 8th/Gordon in the 9th, they wouldn't be 30 over .500. Rivera is the intimidator that causes teams to realize they can't come back late, because he won't let them off the hook.
And I couldn't agree with you more. The only reason I never broach his name in the MVP talk, is because if he was ever going to win ALMVP, it would have happened in 1996, and at least 2 more times since then. There has been no more indispensable player on the Yanks than Rivera in the last 10 years. People tell me all the time that he cost the Yanks two championships (1997 and 2001), and these ass-clowns forget that without him, they would have zero rings, instead of 4 with 6 pennants in 8 years.



"Richard Grieco, you see right through me."
AWArulz
Knackwurst








Since: 28.1.02
From: Louisville, KY

Since last post: 4 days
Last activity: 5 hours
AIM:  
Y!:
#47 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.40
My choices (in the NL - I don't do the AL)

MVP - Rolen or Bonds. I'm sorry, I just gotta go with Bonds. Guy's hitting 360+, has 35 dingers, 80 RBS and 130 more walks than Rolen! He's a freaking Hoss, by Gawd!

Cy Young - Schmidt's got the inside track, but in the spirit of rooting for the home town guy, I propose Carlos Zambrano as a posibility. He's under 3 in the ERA, got some Ks and knows how to plunk Edmonds. That's a few extra votes in my book.

Rookie - I'm going with Khalil Greene of the Padres. Guy flashes some serious leather and can hit a little!




Now, is it ok for me yell THEATRE! in a crowded fire?
eviljonhunt81
Pepperoni








Since: 6.1.02
From: not Japan

Since last post: 2898 days
Last activity: 2895 days
#48 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.96
    Originally posted by AWArulz
    My choices (in the NL - I don't do the AL)

    MVP - Rolen or Bonds. I'm sorry, I just gotta go with Bonds. Guy's hitting 360+, has 35 dingers, 80 RBS and 130 more walks than Rolen!


So he's got more walks? Rolen's defense alone adds more to the Cardinals that Bonds's offense does for the Giants.



Weekly Visitor - Constantly inane for over 2 years!

Jersey is Dead - relaunch coming soon

Ebay Sale - mainly zombie movie DVDs
jfkfc
Liverwurst








Since: 9.2.02

Since last post: 9 days
Last activity: 3 days
#49 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.87
    Originally posted by eviljonhunt81
    Rolen's defense alone adds more to the Cardinals that Bonds's offense does for the Giants.
Now how is THAT calculated? Are there numbers being manipulated to say Rolen's defense > Bonds' offense?

Bonds:
• Ranks 1st in NL in BA (.367)
• Ranks 5th in NL in HR (35)
• Ranks 2nd in NL in R (101)
• Ranks 1st in NL in BB (181)
• Ranks 1st in NL in OBP (.612)
• Ranks 1st in NL in SLG (.813)
• Ranks 1st in NL in OPS (1.425)
• 94 of 181 walks were intentional
• Has more intentional walks than all but THREE players in all of baseball have TOTAL walks
• The second highest ML OBP is over 15% lower than Bonds'

This guy is automatically on first 94 times, and is on SOME base over 61% of the time. There is NO possible way for Rolen's defense to match those numbers, unless they move Renteria to "short field" and have Rolen playing in the middle of 3B and 2B, managing to get to every ball, and making only a minute number of errors. Then....maybe.




Accept Christ and Get a Free Playstation2
Joseph Ryder
Head cheese








Since: 19.3.02
From: Seattle, WA

Since last post: 1109 days
Last activity: 642 days
#50 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.57

I never said they were a great team. They're a "below average" team made "playoff caliber" by Barry alone. Schmidt's a stud, but if Barry wasn't there, he'd be their only decent player. My point is more that the Cards are "not as great" as people say they are than the Giants are "as great" as the Cards. Believe me, I'm on Barry's nuts, not the Giants'. Your link provides nice stats and whatnot, but the main stat I'm looking at is runs scored...which says the Card's are as productive as the Giants...who would suck without Barry.
    Originally posted by StaggerLee
      Originally posted by Baseball Prospectus
      After Walker joined the fun, the respected mathematicians at The Baseball Prospectus think tank studied the heart of the Cardinals order and compared it with other great nucleuses in baseball history.

      BP used a statistic known as MLVr to analyze the Cardinals. What it means: The stat measures the number of runs a game a player will contribute to a lineup that otherwise consists of average offensive performers.

      Baseball Prospectus broke it down two ways: with Edgar Renteria, and without Renteria. With Renteria batting sixth behind (in order) Walker, Albert Pujols, Scott Rolen and Jim Edmonds, the Cardinals MLVr score was the 16th highest in major-league history, but the third-best since 1940.

      However, if you reduce the criteria to four players - Walker, Pujols, Rolen and Edmonds - the results are stunning. Authors Chaim Bloom and Keith Woolner concluded: "When we look at the top four batters instead of the top five, we see that this year's Cardinals . . . are second all-time behind only the 1894 Phillies. By that measure, the heart of this Cardinals lineup is the best in modern baseball . . . and if a list of average MLVr gets you going instead, the Cardinals still rank seventh, and the best since 1937."
    If you wanna rely on just STATS and STATS ALONE to argue about teams abilities, and players production, that should settle the fact that the Cards are great, and that at least one or two of them SHOULD be considered for the MVP. Bonds may be the greatest talent in baseball, since he has 'nobody' around him, but the fact that Rolen and Pujols have great teammates around them, shouldnt disqualify them for anything either.



First off, I completely ignored Larry Walker's numbers when talking about the Cards' offense because he's only played like 15 games for them. If I were to include him, Rolen suddenly becomes the 4TH-ranked batter on the team instead of 3rd.

And I'm not disqualifying Rolen and Pujols because they have good teammates. I'm disqualifying them because:

1. Their numbers are NOWHERE near Barry's and
2. Individually they are less valuable to their team than Barry is to SF.

To the couple posts regarding Rolen's defense, I agree that Rolen's pretty dope at his position, but I can't take seriously the idea that his defense makes up for the gross discrepancy between his and Bonds' batting stats.

The simple question remains:

If the Cards lost Rolen (or Pujols or Edmonds or Walker) and the Giants lost Bonds, who would suffer more? The answer is the team where you will find the most valuable player.
TheCow
Landjager








Since: 3.1.02
From: Knoxville, TN

Since last post: 2360 days
Last activity: 2360 days
AIM:  
Y!:
#51 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.00
For myself, I put the Bonds / Rolen question simply. If I was a pitcher, and the outcome of the game hinged on this next batter to come up against me, who would I least want to see, Bonds or Rolen?

For myself, I'd say Bonds. No way would I want to face him in a situation like that.
JayJayDean
Scrapple








Since: 2.1.02
From: Seattle, WA

Since last post: 4 days
Last activity: 9 hours
AIM:  
Y!:
#52 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.85
If you're going to have this discussion and include guys other than Bonds, don't you have to include Adrian Beltre? He's got a higher average than both Pujols and Rolen, the most home runs in the NL, and although he has fewer RBI than Rolen and Pujols, he accounts for the same percentage of his team RBI as Rolen, the NL RBI leader. (The Cards lead the NL in runs scored, the Dodgers are 9th.) His team is in first place, too.



“To get ass, you’ve got to bring ass." -- Roy Jones Jr.

"Your input has been noted.
I hope you don't take it personally if I disregard it."
-- Guru Zim

"Speak English or face admin retribution." -- CRZ
pieman
As young as
he feels








Since: 11.12.01
From: China, Maine

Since last post: 2 days
Last activity: 20 hours
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#53 Posted on | Instant Rating: 8.49

Bonds is so much better a player than anyone else swinging a stick right now. It is not even close.




Oh, Scott Christ for President, too.




Gabba Gabba Hey!


Iago
Chourico








Since: 17.2.04
From: Eugene, Oregon

Since last post: 3018 days
Last activity: 2320 days
AIM:  
#54 Posted on | Instant Rating: 1.88
It's not just Bonds' tangible statistics and performance, it is also the fact that he scares the bajeezus out of opposing pitchers and managers. When you go out of your way to not pitch to a guy, like they are doing to Bonds it is a telling mark.

Rolen is good, very good, but this is sort of a career year for him, and for that matter Beltre. I am more inclined to say Beltre over Rolen as well, because his offense is far more important to his team. Now I must wash myself for endorsing a Dodger.





[/witty and brilliant commentary, or at least delusions thereof]
StaggerLee
Scrapple








Since: 3.10.02
From: Right side of the tracks

Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 12 hours
AIM:  
Y!:
#55 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.18
While driving home from work today, I as thinking. Bonds is a great player, probably the best hitter in all of baseball.

Randy Johnson is probably the best pitcher in the National League this season. Randy's team sucks.

Should Randy win the Cy Young, with a losing or .500 record, because he is the best pitcher in baseball, but nobody who surrounds him does much to help him out? I mean, teams fear facing Randy Johnson. He shuts them down. Managers hate to face him, because he is going to get 10-12 Ks a night, and, if the Diamondbacks can get 2 runs or 3 runs, he is most likely going to win.

But, we dont give out the Cy Young award for the pitcher who really pitches the best, we usually give it to the guy with the best record. The one that helps his team win the most.

That being said, if you can agree that Bonds plays great, but they arent tearing up the league like the Cardinals are, then somebody with similar stats to his, should be considered above him in the MVP voting. Take away the walks, and Bonds OBP plummets. The rest of his stats are arguably just as good as Rolen's.





Thank you for your irrelevant opinion.

Doe, Ray, Me, Fa, So, La, TITO SANTANA!
redsoxnation
Scrapple








Since: 24.7.02

Since last post: 390 days
Last activity: 390 days
#56 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.37
    Originally posted by StaggerLee
    While driving home from work today, I as thinking. Bonds is a great player, probably the best hitter in all of baseball.

    Randy Johnson is probably the best pitcher in the National League this season. Randy's team sucks.

    Should Randy win the Cy Young, with a losing or .500 record, because he is the best pitcher in baseball, but nobody who surrounds him does much to help him out? I mean, teams fear facing Randy Johnson. He shuts them down. Managers hate to face him, because he is going to get 10-12 Ks a night, and, if the Diamondbacks can get 2 runs or 3 runs, he is most likely going to win.

    But, we dont give out the Cy Young award for the pitcher who really pitches the best, we usually give it to the guy with the best record. The one that helps his team win the most.

    That being said, if you can agree that Bonds plays great, but they arent tearing up the league like the Cardinals are, then somebody with similar stats to his, should be considered above him in the MVP voting. Take away the walks, and Bonds OBP plummets. The rest of his stats are arguably just as good as Rolen's.









If Randy Johnson was pitching a crap team into the playoffs, he'd win the Cy Young in a walk. If the D-Backs didn't have Johnson, would they still finish last? Yes. If the Giants make the playoffs, would they have done it without Bonds? Pretty safe bet that it's no. And, it's impossible to take away his walks and talk about his OBP plummetting. Give Bonds the 200 at bats he loses due to walks and the pace he hits home runs, he hits at least another 22 home runs and finishes above 60. IF you are going to take away a part of Bonds game, then you have to question whether Rolen would put up big numbers without Pujols, Renteria and Edmonds in the line-up with him. And, I really can't stress this enough, I hate Bonds. And I hate defending him even more.



The Public Demands: Replace the Star Spangled Banner with Brass Bonanza.
Joseph Ryder
Head cheese








Since: 19.3.02
From: Seattle, WA

Since last post: 1109 days
Last activity: 642 days
#57 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.09
    Originally posted by StaggerLee
    While driving home from work today, I as thinking. Bonds is a great player, probably the best hitter in all of baseball.

    Randy Johnson is probably the best pitcher in the National League this season. Randy's team sucks.

    Should Randy win the Cy Young, with a losing or .500 record, because he is the best pitcher in baseball, but nobody who surrounds him does much to help him out? I mean, teams fear facing Randy Johnson. He shuts them down. Managers hate to face him, because he is going to get 10-12 Ks a night, and, if the Diamondbacks can get 2 runs or 3 runs, he is most likely going to win.

    But, we dont give out the Cy Young award for the pitcher who really pitches the best, we usually give it to the guy with the best record. The one that helps his team win the most.

    That being said, if you can agree that Bonds plays great, but they arent tearing up the league like the Cardinals are, then somebody with similar stats to his, should be considered above him in the MVP voting. Take away the walks, and Bonds OBP plummets. The rest of his stats are arguably just as good as Rolen's.




I appreciate the thought you're putting into this, but you're going about it all wrong.

First off, as RSN said, the Giants are not in last place. They're right in the playoff hunt, so you can't compare them to the DBacks. You COULD argue that the DBacks are no worse than the Giants, but the fact remains that the Giants have a winning record. Cause of Bonds...and Schmidt.

Which is another point. Randy is NOT the definitive best pitcher in the league. Sure, his ERA is 2.78 and K/9 ratio is great as usual, but Jason Schmidt is putting up nearly identical numbers ignoring W/L records. So there is someone just as good as Johnson.

However, Barry is the best hitter in the league. That's not arguable. You can take away all his walks, but it doesn't change the fact that Barry's batting upwards of 40 points better than anyone on the Cards and is slugging 150-200 points better.

200!!!! While having to be more patient than any batter in the history of the game in regards to swinging at pitches.

You can ask us to ignore Barry's OBP, but the fact of the matter is, if Barely (ha...I mean Barry) was NOT walked 1.5 times every game, he would be dominating your Cards in not only the percentage stats, but in the total stats as well. He'd be 15 homers ahead of Beltre, 20 RBIs ahead of Rolen (probably way more because many of his walks occur with MISP), and 20 points ahead of Mark Loretta in BA. Triple Crown.

I remember sometime around the AS break, there were some columns written giving Rolen the lead in the MVP race. Incredulous, I kept reading. The only percentage stat Rolen had going for him over Bonds was BA with MISP. His was something like .420, an awesome number. So I looked up Bonds. He was hitting around .375 with MISP.

I looked it up today. Rolen's hitting .368. Bonds is hitting .390. He doesn't even have that one stat anymore.

You say someone with similar stats should be given precedence over Bonds if their team is as good as the Cards are. I won't argue that.

The problem is NO ONE has stats similar to Bonds. Absolutely NO ONE.

(edited by Joseph Ryder on 28.8.04 1753)
SC
Potato korv








Since: 11.12.01
From: Valparaiso, IN

Since last post: 1238 days
Last activity: 572 days
AIM:  
#58 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.69
    Originally posted by StaggerLee
    Randy Johnson is probably the best pitcher in the National League this season.


Well, maybe.

ERA WHIP IP BAA K W
J. Schmidt, SFG 2.52 1.02 174.2 .189 193 15
R. Johnson, ARI 2.78 0.89 194.1 .191 227 12



    Randy's team sucks.

    Should Randy win the Cy Young, with a losing or .500 record, because he is the best pitcher in baseball, but nobody who surrounds him does much to help him out?


If he were by far the best pitcher in the league, then yes, he should.


    But, we dont give out the Cy Young award for the pitcher who really pitches the best, we usually give it to the guy with the best record. The one that helps his team win the most.


Yeah, that's kind of what's wrong with the awards, the idea that a team that is better somehow produces the better individual players. Great teams are rewarded by winning things together. The individual awards are meant to recognize the best PLAYER, and that means from any team, good or bad, and not just the ones that are better constructed or had less injury or had a better manager, or whatever.

There is nothing that helps a team win more than having good players. In fact, you need a strong collection of them. But 10 times out of 10 if you take one good player off that team that's winning, it means a lot less than if you take a good player off a team that sucks. And by "means a lot less", I'm talking relatively. Obviously if Randy Johnson got hurt or just decided he wanted to go fishing the rest of the summer, no one would say it ruined Arizona's season, because Arizona is putrid.

As for the Schmidt v. Johnson case, Schmidt happens to be the Johnson of San Francisco, only his team is filled with mediocrity rather than true shittiness. So in essence, the argument is this:

St. Louis > San Francisco means Rolen > Bonds, which is false as they don't have comparable numbers, instead Bonds has a sizable advantage over him

San Francisco > Arizona means Schimdt > Johnson, which is arguable at the least as their numbers are quite comparable


    That being said, if you can agree that Bonds plays great, but they arent tearing up the league like the Cardinals are, then somebody with similar stats to his, should be considered above him in the MVP voting. Take away the walks, and Bonds OBP plummets. The rest of his stats are arguably just as good as Rolen's.


You can't simply "take away the walks" and watch his OBP plummet. He gets the walks. He gets walked. He walks a lot. I know some people treat walking like it's some amazing, new-fangled idea, but Babe Ruth, Ted Williams, Mickey Mantle, Mel Ott, Stan Musial, Gehrig - these guys all took the free base a lot, too. Are you going to take away their walks and guess what their career numbers would be without them, and then go, "What! Walks?! Take those away and we'll see how they match up to Kirby Puckett!"

(edited by ScottChrist on 28.8.04 1849)

dotcom // cubs.org // let's go hero
StaggerLee
Scrapple








Since: 3.10.02
From: Right side of the tracks

Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 12 hours
AIM:  
Y!:
#59 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.20
Goddamnit I hate Barry Bonds.


Nothing more.



Thank you for your irrelevant opinion.

Doe, Ray, Me, Fa, So, La, TITO SANTANA!
Whitebacon
Boudin blanc








Since: 12.1.02
From: Fresno, CA

Since last post: 70 days
Last activity: 23 min.
AIM:  
ICQ:  
#60 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.93
    Originally posted by StaggerLee
    Goddamnit I hate Barry Bonds.


    Nothing more.


So do I. Unfortunately, he's the best in the game.



Pages: Prev 1 2 3 4 Next
Thread rated: 4.98
Pages: Prev 1 2 3 4 Next
Thread ahead: Clubhouse wall 1, Kevin Brown's left hand 0
Next thread: Yankees Get Killed
Previous thread: Countdown to 700 cont.
(931 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
My uncle is an Indians fan, and I'm going to have to call him tonight. He has an irrational hatred of Hargrove that I can't figure out. Are there a lot of Clevelanders who feel this way about him? What's the reason?
- Roy., Mariners hire Hargrove (2004)
The W - Baseball - MVP discussion time.... (Page 3)Register and log in to post!

The W™ message board

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim

This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.121 seconds.