Is Joe Mauer really the MVP, and are saberists really arrogant turds?
ByIt’s true: near everyone who pays close attention to the numbers believes Joe Mauer should be the AL MVP. He not only leads the AL in OPS, but he’s doing it as a catcher, the most difficult defensive position. He’s outperforming first basemen and outfielders, players expected to put up big numbers. Where other teams have catchers with OPSs in the mid-.700s, Mauer is at 1.051. It’s an enormous advantage at a position where defense reigns.
This is, simplified, why those who pay attention to the numbers think Mauer is the MVP. It’s not just that he leads the league in OPS, but that he’s doing it from a position where no one else even comes close — of catchers with over 350 at bats, Jorge Posada is closes with a .881 OPS. Yes, Kevin Youkilis and Miguel Cabrera have pretty numbers, but they come from first base (and a little third for Youk), positions where big production is more expected. Derek Jeter plays a tough defensive position, and is playing it sell this year, and has a case. But his numbers all fall well short of Mauer’s.
Ken Rosenthal recognizes all this, and he does agree that Mauer should be MVP. He’s just sick of sabermetricians shouting down dissenters. This is baseball after all, and what is baseball without a good debate? It’s a good point, but Rosenthal goes astray at many points. Most notably:
Here’s the problem: Sabermetricians were ignored for so long, they had to shout to be heard. Now they are getting heard — properly heard in the highest levels of baseball media and front offices. But some continue to shout, dismissing those who disagree as ignorant dolts.
I’m sorry, but the last part of that sentence will not stand. Since the inception of blogs through even today, mainstream media writers have dismissed bloggers as idiots who live in their mothers’ basements. This isn’t just a narrative: see for yourself. Bloggers have been and still are dismissed by elitist writers who think that because some editor gave them a job that their word is more definitive. Clearly, this does not apply to all mainstream writers. It doesn’t even apply to the majority of them. But if Rosenthal is going to charge that bloggers dismiss those who agree as ignorant dolts, he should acknowledge the other side of the coin.
(Need I even go further than Rosenthal’s colleague Dayn Perry shouting down the Teixeira acolytes?)
To take care of the shouting part, we turn to Tom Tango, who is a sabermetrician.
I don’t dismiss those who disagree. I dismiss those who don’t provide evidence for their claims, or refuse to be educated. Refusing to be educated does make you, by definition, ignorant. It’s one thing to have a conversation with someone who is ignorant, it’s another to have a conversation with someone who continues to remain ignorant. One gives me hope, the other is hopeless.
If I shout, it’s to be heard over the gasbaggery of ignoramuses, so that those who want to learn, or want to have a reasonable conversation, can do so. The problem is not those who shout; the problem is those who are on the dance floor who refuse to dance with any rhythm, and don’t even try to. Worse still, they think they have rhythm.
What’s even better, Tango went ahead and made a decent case against Mauer for MVP. “Mauer is not a million miles ahead. Depending what kind of glasses you wear, he’s somewhere between two laps ahead of all the nonpitchers in this marathon to barely ahead, and either tied with Greinke or at least a lap behind Greinke.” There is a sabermetrician, not shouting, not dismissing. In fact, he’s making a case against the very issue about which Rosenthal complains.
I get Kenny’s point. He wants to keep debate alive and robust. Good. So do we. Otherwise, we wouldn’t write this site. He could have made his case a bit better, though. The way he puts it, saberists like Tom Tango are just a bunch of immutable gasbags. Clearly, that is not the case, as the man himself demonstrated. So let’s put aside the name calling and pettiness and talk about what happens on the field. That’s the only thing that matters, anyway.
139 Comments»
RAB Info
The Founders
Mike Axisa, Ben Kabak, Joe Pawlikowski
Editor-In-Chief
Mike Axisa Archives | Email
Managing Editors
Ben Kabak Archives | E-mail
Joe Pawlikowski Archives | E-mail
Contributing Editors
Larry Koestler (Archives)
Moshe Mandel (Archives)
Stephen Rhoads (Archives)
Weekend Writers
Hannah Ehrlich (Archives)
Matthew Warden (Archives)
Special Contributor
J.R. O'Grady (Archives)
Subscribe to RAB by RSS and Twitter
Follow @RiverAveBlues Search RAB
Spring Training Countdown
Just 5 days 'til pitchers and catchers report.Banner Design By
Did I misread or did Rosenthal say sabermetricians, not bloggers?
He did. I lumped the two together because the shouted-down bloggers are usually saber-minded.
Ken Rosenthal is a funny little man.
I am against pitchers for MVP.
I know a lot disagree, and the awarrd is Most Valuabale Player, not Most Valuable Position Player. But it SHOULD be Most Valuable Position Player since pitchers have the Cy Young.
I think most people feel that way, that it would take some fairly extraordinary circumstances for a pitcher to receive the award. But you shouldn’t make the blanket statement of ‘against pitchers for MVP’ In a year where there is no clear position player, and a pitcher who carries his team on his back, it’s warranted. There should be a bias against giving it to a pitcher, but not a blanket rule of thumb.
I agree with that comment.
I do too, which is why I rarely ever put a pitcher at #1 on my ballot, because the best position players are generally slightly more “valuable” than the best pitchers simply because they play more and impact more games.
That doesn’t mean that no pitchers are ever amongst the top 10 in the MVP balloting, just that it’s rare for them to be so dominant (and for no position player to be as dominant) that they’re the very BEST player in the league.
Cliff Lee should of won over Pedroia then.
Perhaps.
Wait, you replied to this, and didn’t drop the requisite link?
http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/couldof.html
Meh, it’s Popavero. He’s a Cowboy fan. If we tried to correct the mental foibles of the Cowboy faithful, we’d be here all night.
If we truly live or die by the sabermetrics, shouldn’t we just all agree on the most valuable player is the player with the best WAR?
2008 WAR:
Cliff Lee – 7.3
Dustin – 6.6
To me, this tells me that Lee was better than Pedroia despite effecting more games. I don’t fully understand how WAR and other stats on fangraphs work, but this tells me that Cliff Lee should of been the MVP.
Does that mean it is accurate?
Not necessarily. Ever heard of VORP (vlaue over replacement player?). I don’t know too much about it, but it differs from WAR. For example, Jeter has a lower WAR than Zobrist but a higher VORP.
Does that mean it is accurate?
It could of been. Indeed, it could of been.
For a pitcher to win, I don’t think they just need to be dominant. I think they need to be incredibly, almost impossibly dominant, while at the same time no position players are making themselves really stand out. Nobody really jumped out last year, but while Cliff Lee was dominant I’m talking Pedro/Gibson/Koufax type stuff.
Sure, but here’s the thing:
You need to view each year in a vacuum. It doesn’t matter if the best pitcher in the league wasn’t as good as the best pitcher in the league from a previous year; if he’s the best pitcher in the league and clearly more impressive than all the hitters in the league, he should get it even if his greatness was merely great but not transcendently great.
True, but there were position players who reallystood out. Pedroia just wasn’t one of them.
I liked Hamilton for MVP. Sizemore also had a great year.
I’ll buy Sizemore.
Hamilton? Yech. I prefer my MVP candidates to not hit .345/.408/.611 in the best hitting park in the planet but only .263/.331/.448 on the road, thank you very much.
Minor pet peeve with the whole home/road splits thing.
Hamilton is hitting great on the road this year and horrible at home. Obviously that must mean he’s been stupendously affected by great home ballparks.
Of course, that’s not true. I’m just content to accept that Hamilton is a great hitter who happens to be more comfortable hitting in his home ballpark, along with whatever boost in stats he gets from. Mark Texeira has hit 35 HR’s this year. I’m sure he’s hit more at home on the road. Does that mean he can only hit in Yankee Stadium? I don’t think so because he’s always been a great power hitter. And of course on the flip side is Swisher.
Not to mention I don’t particularly like the arguement that a player with worse statistics deserves the ward because they hit well both at home and on the road, just not as well as one player overall.
Home/Road splits are generally the huge caveat with Texas and Colorado guys, though. They often mash and thus, look like MVP frontrunners, when they’re just products of their ballpark.
Hamilton was not demonstrably better than any of his peers, he was pedestrian. He just lucked into having half of his games played in a launching pad that made him look way better than he was.
I don’t think so though because this year he’s hitting much better on the road than at home. I think it actually hurts him to be hitting in Arlington because it gives the perception that he’s not as vlauable as he really is.
“I think it actually hurts him to be hitting in Arlington because it gives the perception that he’s not as vlauable as he really is.”
But this makes no sense in the context of his 2008 stats, which is the year in which you thought he should have been MVP, which showed that he was much better at home than on the road.
Yes he was. And this year he;s much better on the road than at home.
Clearly there’s a pattern here. If he’s the most valuable player (I’m not even sure if he would be anyway. There’s still Sizemore) he’s the most valuable player. The best numbers are the best numbers.
Clearly there’s a pattern here.
Yes, and that pattern is “Don’t trust the overall numbers of Texas guys.”
Hamilton’s 2009 splits are the exception that proves the rule. They’re not a refutation of the pattern.
Yes and Yes!!!!
I love that Tom Tango paragraph. Brilliant.
I love it because it’s exactly what I wanted to say. He just saved me the trouble of writing it myself. It’s probably better that way.
I’ll co-sign both your comments on what Tango wrote. It’s perfect. I wish people would read that and really think about what he’s saying, what it means, and how to implement it into their own thought, and argument, processes.
But some continue to shout, dismissing those who disagree as ignorant dolts.
The issue is sabermatricians are shouting down the same idiots they’ve always been shouting down, only now people are less likely to blindly listen to the idiots & less likely to blindly ignore sabermatricians.
Just because they’re now more heard, shouldn’t mean they should change.
I don’t dismiss those who disagree. I dismiss those who don’t provide evidence for their claims, or refuse to be educated.
Gold, so many times people refute a statistical claim for no reason, get ripped on this board, and then complain about being outsider or something else random as why that was the case, when the issue was not actually having any proof of their claim.
From Dayn Perry’s linked article:
My 10-man AL ballot:
1) Joe Mauer
Mark Teixeira
2) Zack Greinke
3) Ben Zobrist
4) Derek Jeter
5) Jason Bartlett
6) Felix Hernandez
7) Kevin Youkilis
9) Miguel Cabrera
10) Nails Krzyzewski
Mark Teixeira is cool, huh?
Cooler than B.J. Upton, my man!
2 things:
1. I stated earlier why, while not technically prohibited, I would not have pitchers on my MVP ballott.
2. Doesn’t Jeter also deserve a sunglasses emoticon?
My two responses:
1. I’m not you.
2. I hate that damn emoticon and wish there was a way to eliminate it, but WordPress auto-inserts emoticons. If anyone knows of a way to disable that, I’m all ears.
I know you’re not me. I’m not allowed to say that I would not put pitchers on the list? Debate is largely one of the reasons the blog is here. This wouldn’t even be a mean spirited debate. In the end it really doesn’t matter.
That emoticon is really just Nick Swisher sticking his face into the computer.
I’m not allowed to say that I would not put pitchers on the list?
Of course you’re allowed to say that.
Does you saying that mean I should not put pitchers on my list? No.
I’m not sure where you’re going with this…
Nowhere. But I made my opinion on the subject and you shot it down with “I’m not you”.
Well of course not. I’m just saying that was not the list I’d make.
Whatever. Moving on.
Nowhere. But I made my opinion on the subject and you shot it down with “I’m not you”.
No, you didn’t. You made your opinion on the topic known.
I, NOT REPLYING TO YOU, MIND YOU, BUT STARTING A SEPARATE CONVERSATION TRACK ON MY OWN, listed my ballot. You came in as a non-sequitur and said “I don’t put pitchers on my ballot”. I replied, “I’m not you.”
Who is shooting whom down here?
———————
You: Here’s what I think.
(pause)
Me: Here’s what I think.
You: That’s not the way I’d do it.
Me: Um… okay?
There’s a reply button there for a reason. Instead of saying “Um…okay?” you said “I’m not you.” which you have to admit sounds at least as if you’re slightly annoyed (which, clearly, you are). Anyway you made a comment, and I gave my two cents on it. It’s not there to be preserved for posterity. I said “I wouldn’t put pitchers and earlier I explained why.” The response I expected was “Well, the reason I put pitchers is…”
Anyway.
There’s a reply button there for a reason.
Exactly.
That’s why I didn’t reply to your comment, because my inclusion of pitchers on my ballot was not a reply to your statement about excluding pitchers.
I only got annoyed when you came with the “I’m not allowed to say that I would not put pitchers on the list?”
Nothing I did or said indicated that I was claiming monopoly on the “pitchers should or should not be included” debate topic. Quite the contrary, YOU said something that claimed that monopoly, when you listed YOUR provision that YOU don’t put pitchers on YOUR ballot in DIRECT RESPONSE to MY ballot, apropos of nothing.
You made your comment… Way above TSJC’s comment, and way before he posted his comment. Everyone knows how you feel about this issue. There’s no reason to re-state it every time someone who disagrees with you puts a pitcher on their ballot. It’s not like you added anything to your comment, it’s not like you backed it up with further evidence or engaged TSJC’s comment in any way other than to just say, again, “I don’t think pitchers should be on MVP ballots.”
That’s why it’s irritating.
Just for fun, and to illustrate how to engage someone’s comment instead of just stating your already-stated opinion, how do you feel about this argument:
The Cy Young Award is for the best pitcher in each league. The Hank Aaron Award is for the best offensive performer in each league. The MVP Award is for the best player in each league, overall. Thus, the Cy Young Award doesn’t exclude pitchers from MVP consideration any more than the Hank Aaron Award excludes position players from MVP consideration.
Fair enough.
I’ll just say that the reason I responded the way I did is because I was surprised at your answer. I expected your response to be, “The reason I put pitchers on is…” not, “I’m not you.” However I accept that as a valid response. I will also say that my response was not meant to be a monopoly on the subject, merely a debate starter.
THCM:
I made it way above TSJC’s comment. But I didn’t repost it, I simply pointed it out since the subject was the MVP candidacy.
The Hank Aaron player is for the best offensive player in the league, yes. But it doesn’t get nearly as much hype or fanfare as the Cy Young or MVP. If it did, I’d probably make Greinke MVP.
Okay then. (internet handshake).
I have joined your debate, above.
http://riveraveblues.com/2009/.....ent-585623
Good talking with you, old sport (expertly blows on pipe).
“The Hank Aaron player is for the best offensive player in the league, yes. But it doesn’t get nearly as much hype or fanfare as the Cy Young or MVP. If it did, I’d probably make Greinke MVP.”
Fair enough. But then I think what we should do is argue for people to pay more attention to the Hank Aaron Award. I think it makes much more sense to have one award for pitchers-only, one for hitters-only, and then one for the best out of the whole lot, than it does to exclude one of those two groups just because their exclusive award is more popular than the other group’s exclusive award. We already have all three of those awards, so we can do this the right way, let’s just hype up the Hank Aaron Award more. Otherwise there’s no point in even having a Hank Aaron Award.
“just because their exclusive award is
moreless popular than”(fixed)
I’d love to hype up the Hank Aaron award more, and maybe that is the best solution in a perfect world, but it’s not going to happen.
In 1969 we put a man on the moon. David Hasselhoff tore down the Berlin Wall. We just elected a black man named Barack Hussein Obama to the office of President of the United States. I think we can, over time, create a world in which people realize that, because the Hank Aaron Award and the Cy Young Award are given to the best hitter and best pitcher in each league, respectively, the MVP Award should be given to the best/most valuable/whatever player, hitter OR pitcher, in each league.
The difference is nobody is particularly interested in putting up the time or effort to campaign for it.
New RAB t-shirts:
“Save the Big Hank Aaron Award!”
Nah, that’s short-sighted. Is anyone passionate about the Hank Aaron Award? No. But if, every time we have this discussion, we make the point that these three awards exist and are supposed to (and should) be treated this way, the word will, in fact, spread. Opinions change over time. This isn’t the biggest deal in the world, but people have a hard time dismissing a logical and reasonable argument (that they know is right) if enough people keep repeating it over enough time, no matter how long the counter-argument (which is incorrect) has been accepted.
Well then I live for the day that this world exists. Right now though, it does not.
Spread the good word and keep the faith.
NL:
1.) HanRam
2.) PooHoles
3.) Lincecum
4.) Utley
5.) Carpenter
6.) Wainwright
7.) Upton
8.) Fielder
9.) Cain
10.) Braun
HanRam over Pujols? Completely understood but very bold.
It’s a flip-flop for me. Ask me again tomorrow, I may change my mind.
What HanRam is doing from the SS spot this season is otherworldly. .357/.422/.567. Put that in your pipe and smoke it.
I think Utley deserves the nod over Hanley if we are going with a non-Pujols pick. Coming off off-season hip surgery, the man is a near-one-win player on defense.
That top foursome is a total grab bag. I would not be upset or offended in the least if any of Pujols, Utley, Ramirez, or Lincecum won the NL MVP. Four solid candidates with excellent cases for all of them.
Lamest. Answer. Ever. Where’s the snark? Come on, man, that was total TommieBait.
I think Utley deservs it because of his amazing cosistency.
But, it’s still too early to tell at this point.
Why is Zobrist? No criticism, just wondering?
Why is Zobrist so high? (that’s what I meant.)
.283/.395/.525 (137+) with plus-plus defense at 2B and RF, with the occasional 3B/SS/LF/CF mixed in.
Sour D, man.
ietc
Two-win player on defense at an up-the-middle position; second-highest WAR total of 7.2 to Mauer’s 7.5 in the AL. I don’t agree with Tommie that he should be that high (Jeter’s VORP has him worth more than win than Zobrist, and the latter doesn’t even have the highest VORP on his own team – Bartlett does), but there are arguments for such a ranking.
I think I’d rank Jeter higher.
But it’s close. Definitely.
Some surprise MVP candidates on the Rays this year.
Peña, Zobrist, Bartlett and Longoria are an amazing foursome. Between them and our infield foursome, that’s 8 legit MVP candidates.
My MVP ballot is as follows:
1: Kevin Youkilis.
2: Derek Jeter.
3: Miguel Cabrera.
4: Mark Teixeira.
5: Joe Mauer.
I now know what Januz feels about this.
Tango’s first paragraph is basically my attitude toward the rift between sabermetricians and those who dismiss them and cling to triple crown numbers.
I may not be able to totally understand FIP, tRA, BABIP and WAR, but I recognize that very intelligent people that really like baseball have taken the time to try to develop metrics that provide more accurate analysis about the game. No statistician or mathematician would spend time doing that if they really didn’t like baseball. So I keep an open mind. Perhaps the triple crown numbers aren’t as valuable when determining a player’s offensive or pitching production as we’ve been led to believe the last century or so.
I also keep an open mind when it comes to the whole MVP debate. Tango also nails it. You can make a case against Mauer, but you better have sound analysis as to why you are taking that stance. Anecdotal evidence isn’t good enough anymore. Baseball, by nature, is built on a foundation of tradition, gut, and anecdotal analysis/evidence as much if not more so than actual statistics.
Is Joe Mauer the AL MVP? I think so. Most statistical measures of offensive production combined with how well he plays his position tell me that he has been the most productive player in the AL this year. Despite that, I don’t dismiss any other candidate totally. I and a lot of people just don’t believe that their resume quite stacks up to Mauer’s.
But, in the end, this all comes down to the nature of the MVP award. As baseball is wont to do most of the time, they rely on an intangible, nebulous factor to carry the discussion. The V in MVP stands for value. How is value meaured exactly?
I’ve been a proponent of dictating that the league MVP must come from a playoff team and a guy like Mauer be the recipient of the Hank Aaron Award as MLB’s official Offensive Player of the Year Award. I think that MLB should dictate that the very same sportswriters vote on the Hank Aaron Award as they would the MVP or CY Young and every other seasonal award with the MVP-playoff team caveat. I am in the camp that believes that the MVP shouldn’t come from a losing team, so just designate that player OPOY.
I like to believe that the debate would end there, but I’m probably reaching.
I may not be able to totally understand FIP, tRA, BABIP and WAR, but I recognize that very intelligent people that really like baseball have taken the time to try to develop metrics that provide more accurate analysis about the game. No statistician or mathematician would spend time doing that if they really didn’t like baseball.
I have nothing to add, I just wanted to repeat that louder to make sure everyone heard it.
I may not be able to totally understand FIP, tRA, BABIP and WAR, but I recognize that very intelligent people that really like baseball have taken the time to try to develop metrics that provide more accurate analysis about the game. No statistician or mathematician would spend time doing that if they really didn’t like baseball.
This one goes to 11.
I’m impressed at how big that is.
(TWSS)
(TWSS)
That’s what she said?
Yes.
Although, for JMK’s case, it would have to be:
(TWTTSS)
That’s what the tire salesman said.
Yep.
(TWSNSTM)
Somehow I just KNEW when the I clicked the Ken Rosenthal link either Youk or VMart would be mentioned in that article.
“This isn’t just a narrative”
Underlying this this simple-minded disdain for “narrative” seems to be some sadly misplaced faith in quantitative analysis. That really worked for Wall Street, didn’t it.
It might be simple minded if I actually disdained narrative. I don’t. I read and write stories every day. In fact, you could say I love narrative.
What I disdain is misplaced narrative. It runs rampant in journalism.
Also, bad example with Wall Street. There was plenty of quantitative analysis that pointed to the problems. People chose to ignore it, though.
There was plenty of quantitative analysis that pointed to the problems. People chose to ignore it, though.
Because the false narrative of “AIG investments are great, they’re guaranteed never to fail” is a false narrative that inspires boldness and makes money.
In the short term.
Real estate will always go up. Always.
What failed Wall Street wasn’t a misplaced faith in quantitative analysis. Quite the opposite, what failed Wall Street was the idea that creating a false narrative to mask the lack of adherence to quantitative analysis creates an unsustainable ponzi-scheme of self-delusion.
Wall Street didn’t collapse because they chose analysis over narrative, they collapsed because they chose narrative over analysis. Analysis would have made them realize they were creating bubbles of false stability.
I think that the whosinwhatsit on wall street collapsed becuase of the quantitative data compiled on a case-to-case basis with the quasi schemes of the physics of the empirical data presented.
Understood?*
*This comment was a joke. I understand TSJC’s point and agree with it.
TSJC I love ya, but that’s pure balderdash you just posted. There’s a zillion analysts working for every Wall Street firm, a zillion analysts working for Investment Banks, Hedge Funds, and another zillion economists coming up with their own numbers. Everyone (with a brain) looks at the numbers on Wall Street. The problem is that there is NO SUCH THING as a predictive model that works.
For a wonderful example of this, read up on the rise and fall of LTC (Long Term Capital) MIT professors, Nobel Prize winning economists and Wall St execs built computerized models that was effectively a printing press for a few years, until a perfect storm of economic events took it down. The best and the brightest, all 100% legit, nothing shady like Nadoff, and completely failed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L.....Management
There’s a zillion analysts working for every Wall Street firm, a zillion analysts working for Investment Banks, Hedge Funds, and another zillion economists coming up with their own numbers. Everyone (with a brain) looks at the numbers on Wall Street.
And those analysts will tell you that predicting the market goes down doesn’t make you as much money as predicting the market goes up.
Often, analysts predict what they think their bosses want them to predict. The investor who comes up with investment strategies that produce great results get rewarded, even if those results involve dangerous, system-threatening risks.
“And those analysts will tell you that predicting the market goes down doesn’t make you as much money as predicting the market goes up.”
Have you ever heard of ‘Short selling’? You make every bit as much money when you bet on the market going down as you do when you bet on it going up. There’s no difference whatsoever.
“Often, analysts predict what they think their bosses want them to predict. The investor who comes up with investment strategies that produce great results get rewarded, even if those results involve dangerous, system-threatening risks.”
Their job is to produce results, the SEC and Federal Reserve are there to the monitor system-wide risks. Two completely different roles, one has nothing to do with the other.
This whole debate is fascinating.
I’m intrigued.
Typical liberal BS
There’s a lack of quantitative analysis on Wall Street? Seriously?
Wild guess, you don’t work on Wall Street or know anyone who does.
Even if Joe Mauer isn’t worthy of the MVP, saberists really are arogant turds, but only when talking baseball.
Why’s that?
I hate that generalization. Yes saber metrics can be arrogant but not all of them are.
And most of the time when sabermetricians are at their most arrogant, it’s when they’re talking about a position where they’re most correct and their opposition is most wrong.
Full of sound and fury, but signifying something.
The B in SABR stands for Baseball. When else would you hear them talking if they’re not talking baseball?
because they don’t only talk baseball.
It’s one thing to have a conversation with someone who is ignorant, it’s another to have a conversation with someone who continues to remain ignorant.
The first part of that sentence, when talking about baseball, is something that can be overcome. I recall a conversation I had with my cousin’s boyfriend recently, in which I cited the FanGrahs version of WAR. He, a huge baseball fan, had no idea what I was talking about but he was willing to learn. The second sentence is a problem that we sometimes run into here and I usually run into with a good deal of my friends or people older than I am (especially when it comes to things like Joba/Hughes as SP/RP) who refuse to see some other way of seeing the game.
So why even vote? Just give it every year to the guy on top in the numbers sheet. You don’t because its not a stat award. Ones idea of valuable might not be someone elses. Its a subjective award. It isnt the award for highest # of win shares.
I agree. That’s why Cody Ransom should be MVP. He took over for A-Rod when he left and that’s a big responsibility.
He gets my vote since we should totally fuck the stats.
No way. Eric Hinske for MVP. His teams have gone to the world series for the past two years and won it once. He came to our team and since we’ve gotten him we’ve had the best record in baseball. Hinske for MVP.
Sal/Bo/Grant/Lanny for MVP. Most Valuable Poster.
You’ve got to admit, with four separate but utterly identical posting personalities, he’s got great plate coverage. His OBP% (Obscenely Banal Posting) is 98.5%, that’s the highest single season OBP since Hitman.
But are his comments more or less for the intelligent fan?
Well, you can’t make lemons with lemonade.
“OBP% (Obscenely Banal Posting) is 98.5%”
Wow, that’s brilliant. I love that. We should come up with a whole new branch of Sabermetrics filled with acronyms and lingo to refer to the old school types and their theories. In our new statistical world, Mike Francesa would be the Babe Ruth of our new metrics.
This deserves its own post and thread. Put the RAB community minds together and see what we can come up with.
Well, we’ve already got OBP and tRA (teammate Rallying Ability) nailed down. Here’s one more I just made this second while typing:
VORP: Very Old Racist Pressman. See Also: Corky Simpson.
A-Rod should get MVP. Since he came back, the Yankees have the best record in baseball, and have just steamrolled the competition.
/Mr. Popavero.
AJ Burnett.
End of story.
Next year, Zig, next year. Us Burnett lovers will have our day, you’ll rue the day
TrebeknoMaas!!!Ummmm… Ken Rosenthal should shut his fucking mouth about people being arrogant and dismissive and shouting down others.
http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=4249289
(Throws a handful of darts at dart board with Rosenthal’s stupid face on it.)
Let’s have some fun with Lil’ Kenny’s quote:
“Here’s the problem:
Sabermetricians wereLil’ Kenny is so short and stupid looking and was ignored for so long,theyhe had to shout to be heard. Nowthey aresomeone gave him a credential and put him on TV so he thinks he is the arbiter of all that is important in sports news and he is getting heard —properlyunfortunately heard in the highest levels of baseball media and front offices. ButsomeLil’ Kenny inexplicably continues to shout, dismissing those who disagree as ignorant dolts, because he’s still short and stupid and can’t actually engage someone in an adult conversation.”(Takes deep breath. That was therapeutic.)
If I were a voter, knowing full well that it doesn’t matter how I vote and there are zero repercussions to fucking up I’d go:
Jeter
Greinke
Teixeira
Mauer
Cabrera
The voters fuck up all the time just this once they can fuck up in Jeter’s favor. Fuck Joe Mauer. However, if I were a voter with credibility and the rest of the BBRAA had the same credibility and it were the vote for the most players that provide/prevent the most runs for their team I’d go:
Greinke
Mauer
Jeter
Teixeira
Zobrist
In the NL
Lincecum
Pujols
Ramirez
Haren
Utley
The voters fuck up all the time just this once they can fuck up in Jeter’s favor. Fuck Joe Mauer.
All you motherf#$%ers are gonna pay. YOU ARE THE ONES WHO ARE THE BALL-LICKERS!!!
I am going to make Joe Mauer eat BBRAA’s shit, shit out it out and eat his shit that is made up of the BBRAA’s shit.
Remember this fucking face, whenever you see CLIT, you’ll see this fucking face!
I’m convinced you’ve never seen a movie that doesn’t feature either Will Ferrell or Jay and Silent Bob. I’ve done a very scientific study on the subject. It’s true.
Hah.
Nah man, Anchorman and Jay and Silent Bob are just two of the favorites. I’m a pretty big movie guy, just lately the movies have sucked so I’ve stayed away for the most part. The Watchmen turned me away.
Also a big Mel Gibson fan.
http://www.spscriptorium.com/S.....Gibson.jpg
I’ve done a very scientific study on the subject. It’s true.
Was this part of the famous Caine-Hackman Theory study?
Haha, awesome.
Caine and Hackman in the same movie! This is my THESIS, man! This is my closing argument! I CAN STOP WATCHING TV!
“A Bridge Too Far”.
If it it makes no difference anyway Jeter for MVP every year for the rest of his life. Even when he retires.
A couple of things…
all the stats in the world can not predict or qualify the human element…many of the new stats that have been created have serious flaws…i don’t mind if some wish to still give them value…I dont want to and never will…Im still going to have an opinion about baseball and it will be based on traditional stats, if you dont like it then thats too bad, you can act like you are superior to me but your not
I think most of this is bloggers who resent their status in relation to newpapers and tv media…while many members of the media are idiots they at least do what they do for a living…the internet is not regulated and nobody knows what content is reliable. you could go to the street corner and yell the most intellectual educated opinions in the world, nobody is going to listen because your on the street…the internet is the exact same thing…
This one shouldn’t take long… let’s go.
all the stats in the world can not predict or qualify the human element…
Agreed. This statement has no constructive purpose to any conversation ever, but yes, you are right.
many of the new stats that have been created have serious flaws…
They probably do. New stats with flaws are still way, way smarter than most of the BBWAA. Hands down.
i don’t mind if some wish to still give them value…I dont want to and never will…
Smashing. This just in: We eradicated smallpox for you. You’re welcome.
Im still going to have an opinion about baseball and it will be based on traditional stats, if you dont like it then thats too bad, you can act like you are superior to me but your not
Okay. I will act like I’m superior to you, because I am. Glad we’re in agreement.
I think most of this is bloggers who resent their status in relation to newpapers and tv media…
Yeah… no.
while many members of the media are idiots they at least do what they do for a living…
Utterly meaningless statement. You have a gift for using a lot of words and not saying anything of substance. It’s eerily similar to the concept of pitcher wins. Chew on that for a minute. Mmm, tasty.
the internet is not regulated and nobody knows what content is reliable. you could go to the street corner and yell the most intellectual educated opinions in the world, nobody is going to listen because your on the street…the internet is the exact same thing…
List of things in history that have been changed because people went and yelled their intellectual educated opinions on the street: Pretty much everything in history changed that way. Seriously, think about it. When people developed advanced knowledge, they took it to the commoners in the streets and that’s when the world changed.
So, thanks for playing, enjoy the RAB Home Game, help control the pet population, blah blah blah.
(dusts hands) I’m finished with this guy.
TSJC just utterly crushed this dude’s soul.
That’s power, man.
Nope, Im just fine, but if picking about my opinion sentence for sentence makes you feel good then great…
heres a question for you then…what if someone does not have the time it takes to read and educate themselves on what is basically a new language…are they somehow forbidden from enjoying or having an opinion on baseball?
“everything that guys just said is bullshit (TSJC), thank you”
Is English also a new language because your grammar was atrocious.
thanks for answering my question…caring about typing fast is much more important
Careful there, pal. Glass houses, etc.
what if someone does not have the time it takes to read and educate themselves on what is basically a new language…are they somehow forbidden from enjoying or having an opinion on baseball?
No. What they’re forbidden from doing, however, is thinking that their language is better than the language they refuse to learn and they’re forbidden from thinking that their opinion is right when compared with the opinion of someone who actually has taken the time to try to understand the game on a deeper, more accurate level.
If I refuse to learn Chinese, it doesn’t mean I’m not allowed to go to China and enjoy myself. It does mean I sound like an ass, though, if I say “The English Language is prettier, more poetic, and easier to understand than the Chinese Language even though I intentionally choose to not understand the Chinese Language.”
It also disqualifies me from being an expert on Modern Languages. In the same way that your refusal to learn more about baseball disqualifies you from being an expert on baseball. You are allowed to watch and enjoy the game, but not share your opinion on what player is good and what player is bad, because you’re a counterintellectual dolt who prefers ignorance over wisdom and your opinion is, by definition, less well formed than the opinion of people willing to take the time to be smarter about things than you.
well you answered my question, you’re a jackass…good for you…
i guess i will just have to comfort myself with the fact that Mauer will win the MVP cause he has the highest batting avg, and sabathia win the cy young cuase he has the most wins…dont get too upset about it ok? too much stress is no good…
Being a jackass >>>>> being willfully ignorant
Tom Tango (above):
“I don’t dismiss those who disagree. I dismiss those who don’t provide evidence for their claims, or refuse to be educated. Refusing to be educated does make you, by definition, ignorant. It’s one thing to have a conversation with someone who is ignorant, it’s another to have a conversation with someone who continues to remain ignorant. One gives me hope, the other is hopeless.
If I shout, it’s to be heard over the gasbaggery of ignoramuses, so that those who want to learn, or want to have a reasonable conversation, can do so. The problem is not those who shout; the problem is those who are on the dance floor who refuse to dance with any rhythm, and don’t even try to. Worse still, they think they have rhythm.”
BTW, direct example of people yelling on the street changing things: Ever heard of Martin Luther? He started the protestant movement Basically by putting a list of pet peeves he had with the Catholics on a Church door or something. And look what’s happened now.
(golf clap)
I can’t help myself, I have to pile on regarding this one point:
“you could go to the street corner and yell the most intellectual educated opinions in the world, nobody is going to listen because your on the street…the internet is the exact same thing…”
I don’t even have anything to add to the idiocy-eradication TSJC just performed, I just wanted to point out that this is one of the dumbest things I’ve ever read. And, Mike, you should know that I just happen to have the most intellectual educated opinions in the world. Sucks for you.
Joe, here’s Neyer’s excellent follow up to the same piece.
http://myespn.go.com/blogs/swe.....Mauer.html
Let’s get some things straight:
1. Not everyone who writes about advanced baseball stats (“metrics”, or “sabermetrics”) is really a sabermetrician. I define the latter as someone who has created/invented some of the stats, and works with them. Writers and bloggers may be extremely informed/intelligent people, but a health reporter is not a doctor (most of the time), and not every writer can or should speak as authoritatively about these stats as they often do.
2. True sabermetricians are not, that I can discern, real statisticians. Statistics is not a hobby one does with a calculator and a perusal of fangraphs.com. It’s a scientific field that involves both calculations on and interpretation of data. The key thing that statisticians do – the most important thing they do – is to evaluate their statistics for parameters like reliability and significance. In other words, you see a difference in WAR or WPA between 2 players…how do you know that difference is attributable to a difference in ability, and not just random variance.
I’m not an expert at stats or sabermetrics, but I’m trained to interpret scientific papers and I know when a study has good stats and when it’s bs.
The problem I have with most of the arguments in sabermetrics is that the significance of the numbers is almost never called into question. People don’t like to hear that a number might be meaningless. “How can it be meaningless, they watch and record every pitch!!” Well, every pitch is subject to random variance, as well as non-random variance. Unless you know what you’re doing, your stat may not be able to separate the two.
So to the guy who says “I dismiss those who don’t provide evidence for their claims, or refuse to be educated,” I say that sometimes the evidence claimed by the sabermetricians is flawed, or flimsy.
I realize my argument is kind of a pissy one….I’m not offering anything better, I’m just saying “your argument might be wrong.” Well, unfortunately that’s the best I can do; I have a full time job. But what I don’t like happening in baseball is that the reliance on sabermetrics is beginning snuff out all other sources of evlauation of players. The non-quantitative opinion of other players, coaches, scouts, managers, etc., shouldn’t be dismissed.
The ease with which numbers can lead to completely incorrect conclusions, because the numbers weren’t properly put into context, can be seen in yesterday’s post about the proportion of blacks in MLB. The number is at historical lows, we’re told. Yet, when one looks at the percentage of US-born players in MLB, the proportion of blacks in that cohort is higher than ever. So any discussion of a “problem” of insufficient participation by US blacks in baseball is patently false.
Great Post, thanks for this fine Post. I will come back later ! Great tips also : how to stop biting nails
tuvalette porno izle