Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 122

Thread: what are the worst MVP selections ever?

  1. #26
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Sunny Sweden
    Posts
    1,635
    I don't think Cochrane was a bad choice because I think (though am not by any means sure) he really won it as player/manager. It was his rookie year as skipper and he took 1933's sub- .500 team to 101-53 and the series.

    Having said that, he didn't deserve his 1928 MVP either really. Goslin and Manush seemed to be a lot more productive, and Ruth and Gehrig were certainly more valuable, but were ineligible.

    Peckinpaugh was a pretty lame choice, but it shows how much defense was valued back then. I don't think Bob O'Farrell was a good choice, and he barely won over Hughie Critz- and check out Critz's two top 5 finish seasons and tell me if they scream MVP at you defense wizard or no.

  2. #27
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Northern NE
    Posts
    3,412
    Even with it being wartime, Marty Marion was a pretty bad call.
    "I throw him four wide ones, then try to pick him off first base." - Preacher Roe on pitching to Musial

  3. #28
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    1,953
    Roger Peckingpaugh (2.4 WAR) in 1925

  4. #29
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Chicago Illinois
    Posts
    5,319
    Quote Originally Posted by Joltin' Joe View Post
    Roger Peckingpaugh (2.4 WAR) in 1925
    Plus he cost Washington the WS that year and that was why they started voting in the offseason.
    "(Shoeless Joe Jackson's fall from grace is one of the real tragedies of baseball. I always thought he was more sinned against than sinning." -- Connie Mack

    "I have the ultimate respect for Whitesox fans. They were as miserable as the Cubs and Redsox fans ever were but always had the good decency to keep it to themselves. And when they finally won the World Series, they celebrated without annoying every other fan in the country."--Jim Caple, ESPN (Jan. 12, 2011)

  5. #30
    Dawson was a truly awful choice. As was Mo Vaughn.

    I think the worst was Miguel Tejada over A-Rod though. Both were shortstops and Tejada was worse in just about every single facet of the game.

  6. #31
    Quote Originally Posted by PVNICK View Post
    I'll add Kirk Gibson over Strawberry or McReynolds.
    Did you know Kirk Gibson led the NL in WAR that year? Neither did the voters at the time. But he had a great OBP (.377) and stole 31 bases while being caught four times and did it all while playing statistically the best defense of his career.

  7. #32
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Chicago Illinois
    Posts
    5,319
    Quote Originally Posted by George H Ruth View Post
    Did you know Kirk Gibson led the NL in WAR that year? Neither did the voters at the time. But he had a great OBP (.377) and stole 31 bases while being caught four times and did it all while playing statistically the best defense of his career.
    That is interesting I never woulda thought he had the highest war that season. Yeah i'm sure the voters had no clue on that but I gotta give em credit for realizing how important he was to the Dodgers that season.

    I always thought he was a bad pick for mvp but after learning that i give him alot more credit now.
    "(Shoeless Joe Jackson's fall from grace is one of the real tragedies of baseball. I always thought he was more sinned against than sinning." -- Connie Mack

    "I have the ultimate respect for Whitesox fans. They were as miserable as the Cubs and Redsox fans ever were but always had the good decency to keep it to themselves. And when they finally won the World Series, they celebrated without annoying every other fan in the country."--Jim Caple, ESPN (Jan. 12, 2011)

  8. #33
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Posts
    4,821
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by chicagowhitesox1173 View Post
    That is interesting I never woulda thought he had the highest war that season. Yeah i'm sure the voters had no clue on that but I gotta give em credit for realizing how important he was to the Dodgers that season.

    I always thought he was a bad pick for mvp but after learning that i give him alot more credit now.
    Who else could you pick? Strawberry wasn't going to win it, with his .269 batting average, and nobody really stood out. Gibson was as good a choice as anyone. I'm actually surprised Hershiser didn't win it that year. He was unhittable down the stretch and in the playoffs...even better than verlander this year. I wonder why Verlander won MVP in a relatively common type season (historically speaking), while pitchers of the 80s and 90s who had much better years didn't even come close. I'm thinking guys like Gooden, Hershiser, Saberhagen, Clemens, Randy Johnson, Pedro, and Maddux. Heck even a few more modern seasons, by guys like Greinke and Santana were better than Verlander, and got almost no MVP recognition.Jared Weaver pitched about as well as Verlander did this year, and didn't get a single MVP point, not even a 10th place vote. Was Verlander paying off the voters?
    Last edited by willshad; 11-25-2011 at 03:22 PM.

  9. #34
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Posts
    4,821
    Blog Entries
    1
    xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

  10. #35
    Quote Originally Posted by Honus Wagner Rules View Post
    Andrew Dawson in 1987 really stands out.

    Don Mattingly over George Brett and Rickey Henderson in 1985.
    Agreed about Dawson particularly. He was a broken down corber outfielder by then and racked up big counting numbers but only a .328 on base percentage.

    I count the following players as being more worthy that year:

    Gwynn
    Raines
    Eric Davis
    Jack Clark
    Will Clark
    Strawberry
    Murphy
    Schmidt
    Ozzie Smith
    Wallach
    HoJo and
    Pedro Guerrero
    at least

  11. #36
    Quote Originally Posted by willshad View Post
    Who else could you pick? Strawberry wasn't going to win it, with his .269 batting average, and nobody really stood out. Gibson was as good a choice as anyone. I'm actually surprised Hershiser didn't win it that year. He was unhittable down the stretch and in the playoffs...even better than verlander this year. I wonder why Verlander won MVP in a relatively common type season (historically speaking), while pitchers of the 80s and 90s who had much better years didn't even come close. I'm thinking guys like Gooden, Hershiser, Saberhagen, Clemens, Randy Johnson, Pedro, and Maddux. Heck even a few more modern seasons, by guys like Greinke and Santana were better than Verlander, and got almost no MVP recognition.Jared Weaver pitched about as well as Verlander did this year, and didn't get a single MVP point, not even a 10th place vote. Was Verlander paying off the voters?
    It was not that ridiculous a choice. What happened in previous years is hardly relevent to the current voting year. Beyond your contentions of how poor Verlander's season was historically being extremely arguable, to say the least.

    There was a bit of backlash against Roger Clemens winning the MVP in 1986. At the time a lot of people though Jim Rice or Don Mattingly would have been better choices. Regardless of how Hershiser was in the playoffs, the awards are voted on before the post-season, so that is not a consideration. In a year where there were plenty of fine seasons but no true standout, a pitcher who had the season Verlander did was as good a choice as any if you actually put things in the context of 2011.
    Bill Tom George Mark Bob Ernie Soupy Dick Alex Sparky
    Joe Gary MCA Emanuel Sonny Dave Earl Stan
    Jonathan Neil Roger Anthony Ray Thomas Art Don
    Gates Philip John Warrior Rik Casey Tony Horace
    Robin JEDI

  12. #37
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Posts
    4,821
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Captain Cold Nose View Post
    It was not that ridiculous a choice. What happened in previous years is hardly relevent to the current voting year. Beyond your contentions of how poor Verlander's season was historically being extremely arguable, to say the least.

    There was a bit of backlash against Roger Clemens winning the MVP in 1986. At the time a lot of people though Jim Rice or Don Mattingly would have been better choices. Regardless of how Hershiser was in the playoffs, the awards are voted on before the post-season, so that is not a consideration. In a year where there were plenty of fine seasons but no true standout, a pitcher who had the season Verlander did was as good a choice as any if you actually put things in the context of 2011.
    That still doesn't explain how another pitcher, who also picthed in the same league in the same year, such as Jared Weaver, did not get even one tenth place vote. I admit Verlander was a tiny bit better, but really their seasons were almost identical, besides the won/loss record. I know..the 24 wins, the triple crown, the first place team. To me, it is not right that he could win it, while Weaver doesn't get any votes at all. If their records were switched around, would Weaver have won MVP?

  13. #38
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    4,944
    If Weaver had won the triple crown and carried a team into the playoffs.
    3 6 10 21 29 31 35 41 42 44 47

    Im honored to go into the Baseball Hall of Fame with such a great group of men. - Tom Glavine.

  14. #39
    Quote Originally Posted by willshad View Post
    That still doesn't explain how another pitcher, who also picthed in the same league in the same year, such as Jared Weaver, did not get even one tenth place vote. I admit Verlander was a tiny bit better, but really their seasons were almost identical, besides the won/loss record. I know..the 24 wins, the triple crown, the first place team. To me, it is not right that he could win it, while Weaver doesn't get any votes at all. If their records were switched around, would Weaver have won MVP?
    If Weaver had gone on the winning streak Verlander had when the Tigers were a bit behind in the race, eventually resulting in the Angles winning their division and Weaver winning the pitching triple crown, which, like it or not, resonates greatly with the voters still, as well as being on the winning side of the one time they faced off this year, I would sincerely hope so.

    The little things that separated Verlander and Weaver this year were the right little things. Did Verlander have an all-time great pitching season? No, I don't think so. Did he have a good enough year when his main competitors either cooled off greatly when the games mattered most or had their teams basically fold up as they tried to do their best from keeping it that way? I think so. A lot of factors went into Verlander winning it.

    As much progress as the writers in general are making in the realm of advanced methodology, the general mindset that still hits home easiest with the casual fan is winning the day. Personally, I would have picked Bautista and Kemp this year, but Verlander and Braun were not bad choices like so many that have been named in this thread. With Dawson, they went for the story and the man, not the player. That's too Hollywood for me.
    Bill Tom George Mark Bob Ernie Soupy Dick Alex Sparky
    Joe Gary MCA Emanuel Sonny Dave Earl Stan
    Jonathan Neil Roger Anthony Ray Thomas Art Don
    Gates Philip John Warrior Rik Casey Tony Horace
    Robin JEDI

  15. #40
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Atlanta
    Posts
    2,672
    Steve Garvey (1974). Still one of the most overrated players IMO.
    People ask me what I do in winter when there's no baseball. I'll tell you what I do. I stare out the window and wait for spring. -Rogers Hornsby

  16. #41
    Lots of good and interesting choices. I'll still go with my nominee, Willie Stargell in 1979. I haven't done the research and probably won't, but I think there's a good chance that Stargell had lower WAR and WS totals than any other winner. He also played in only about 70% of his team's innings in the field. He was aided greatly by the fact that Winfield didn't play on a winner and Schmidt had a low BA. Hernandez, the co-winner, probably should have won it outright given the circumstances, but the hoopla surrounding The Famalee, and the reality that Stargell did have a number of big hits late in the season, and the fact that he was perceived as a beloved elder statesman, etc.- sealed the deal for him. Parker was far and away the best player on the Pirates in 79.

  17. #42
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Posts
    4,821
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Francoeurstein View Post
    Steve Garvey (1974). Still one of the most overrated players IMO.
    in defense of Garvey, There were really no 'wow' type of seasons in the NL that year, and , based on the player evaluation methods of the time, his pick wasn't a bad one. This was a period of transition in the NL, as the older stars were passing their prime, men like Stargell, Bench, Brock, and Rose. Also , the newer generation were just starting out...Schmidt, Parker, Foster, Luzinski. It's easy for us to say now: 'Schmidt had 10.5 WAR and Garvey only had 5.1! What a travesty!' But at the time, batting average was looked at more than on base percentage, and there was no OPS+, much less WAR. If a guy hit well over .300 with some power, it was considered a great year, regardless of anything else. From the current point of view we would look at Jim Wynn's year, or Joe Morgan's year, and look at on base percentage, positional value, and stolen bases, and see how it all adds up. But at the time, all that mattered was the fact that Wynn only batted .271 , and Morgan only had 67 RBI.

  18. #43
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Northern California
    Posts
    21,403
    Quote Originally Posted by willshad View Post
    in defense of Garvey, There were really no 'wow' type of seasons in the NL that year, and , based on the player evaluation methods of the time, his pick wasn't a bad one. This was a period of transition in the NL, as the older stars were passing their prime, men like Stargell, Bench, Brock, and Rose. Also , the newer generation were just starting out...Schmidt, Parker, Foster, Luzinski. It's easy for us to say now: 'Schmidt had 10.5 WAR and Garvey only had 5.1! What a travesty!' But at the time, batting average was looked at more than on base percentage, and there was no OPS+, much less WAR. If a guy hit well over .300 with some power, it was considered a great year, regardless of anything else. From the current point of view we would look at Jim Wynn's year, or Joe Morgan's year, and look at on base percentage, positional value, and stolen bases, and see how it all adds up. But at the time, all that mattered was the fact that Wynn only batted .271 , and Morgan only had 67 RBI.
    When I was a kid in the late 1970's Garvey was considered a big star because:

    1) He hit .300 and drove in 100 RBI every year
    2) Played for the Los Angels Dodgers
    3) Had those Pop-Eye forearms and that haircut.
    Strikeouts are boring! Besides that, they're fascist. Throw some ground balls - it's more democratic.-Crash Davis

  19. #44
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Atlanta
    Posts
    2,672
    Quote Originally Posted by willshad View Post
    in defense of Garvey, There were really no 'wow' type of seasons in the NL that year, and , based on the player evaluation methods of the time, his pick wasn't a bad one. This was a period of transition in the NL, as the older stars were passing their prime, men like Stargell, Bench, Brock, and Rose. Also , the newer generation were just starting out...Schmidt, Parker, Foster, Luzinski. It's easy for us to say now: 'Schmidt had 10.5 WAR and Garvey only had 5.1! What a travesty!' But at the time, batting average was looked at more than on base percentage, and there was no OPS+, much less WAR. If a guy hit well over .300 with some power, it was considered a great year, regardless of anything else. From the current point of view we would look at Jim Wynn's year, or Joe Morgan's year, and look at on base percentage, positional value, and stolen bases, and see how it all adds up. But at the time, all that mattered was the fact that Wynn only batted .271 , and Morgan only had 67 RBI.
    This is true, and I do realize that was how players were evaluated back in the day. However, if that was the case today it would definitely be a snub.
    People ask me what I do in winter when there's no baseball. I'll tell you what I do. I stare out the window and wait for spring. -Rogers Hornsby

  20. #45
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Posts
    4,821
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Francoeurstein View Post
    This is true, and I do realize that was how players were evaluated back in the day. However, if that was the case today it would definitely be a snub.
    It would be on the level of Morneau's MVP award.

  21. #46
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    4,944
    '74 is a touch before my time as an active, attention paying fan but I am pretty sure that the Dodgers winning the NL pennant that year was a significant aspect of his MVP award and not just his traditional stats.
    3 6 10 21 29 31 35 41 42 44 47

    Im honored to go into the Baseball Hall of Fame with such a great group of men. - Tom Glavine.

  22. #47
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Rochester, N.Y.
    Posts
    1,983
    It's very easy now to go back and look at numbers and say so and so should have won the MVP because of this stat and that number and these numbers over here and those stats over there, but sometimes you just had to live through a season and see the nuances of how a year may have unfolded to really know.
    Many times, as you know, it's not necessarily what you did but when you did it that matters to many voters. They cover teams and understand why a certain player was more valuable to his team for that particular season that we looking back can't figure out or understand.
    That being said, I thought Ron Guidry got ripped off the year Jim Rice won. Not that Rice didn't have a monster year but I thought without Guidry the Yankees are a distant also ran instead of the World Champions that they became.

  23. #48
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    1,953
    Chuck Klein in 1932. He was a total Baker Bowl fraud. His home/road split that year is laughable at best.

    Home: .423/.464/.799
    Road: .266/.340/.481


    Sure this was before they had home/road splits but couldn't anyone see that he was merely an average hitter who put up Jekyll and Hyde numbers only because of the joke of a park he played half of his games in?

    He almost won it in 1931 and 1933 as well when he came in 2nd both years in the MVP voting.

    1931
    Home: .401/.465/.740
    Road: .269/.327/.421

    1933
    Home: .467/.516/.789
    Road: .280/.338/.436

    I mean do you even need to look at home/road splits to realize that this guy is a fraud of the first degree? You would think the voters would realize this just from watching him play on the road day in and day out.
    Last edited by Joltin' Joe; 02-22-2012 at 12:03 PM.

  24. #49
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    973
    Blog Entries
    195
    Quote Originally Posted by GiambiJuice View Post
    Edgar Martinez may have been even more deserving than Belle. But Vaughn was definitely not the right choice.

    Some other recent ones that come to mind are

    Juan Gonzalez in '96 and '98
    Pudge Rodriguez in '99 (probably about 6 or 7 more deserving players)
    Justin Morneau in '06 (Mauer or Jeter)
    Ichiro in '01 (116 win season and the novelty of a Japanese position player, but Giambi should have been the unanimous winner)
    Pedroia in '08 (Mauer was much better, but somehow Morneau came in 2nd place and got 7 first place votes.)

    It still boggles my mind that Justin Morneau finished in the top 2 in back-to-back seasons. He probably wasn't a top 15 position player in the AL in either season.
    Brett Boone was the best player on the 2001 116 win Mariners and he would have been a better MVP than Ichiro or Jason Giambi.

    stevegallanter.wordpress.com

  25. #50
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    1,953
    Quote Originally Posted by Steven Gallanter View Post
    Brett Boone was the best player on the 2001 116 win Mariners and he would have been a better MVP than Ichiro or Jason Giambi.

    stevegallanter.wordpress.com
    Back then, I thought it should've been Boone too. But now playing Monday morning quarterback, the right guy probably won as he was clean while the other two were not.

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •