Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

very good season - zero MVP votes

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by dgarza View Post
    Here's some good ones...

    Let's drop WAR and remember that MVP often becomes a HR/RBI title award.

    In 1996, Geronimo Berroa hit 36 HRs with 106 RBIs, .290 AVG. Just what voters are looking for, right? No MVP votes.

    In 1999, Fernando Tatis hit 34 HRs with 107 RBIs, .298 AVG.
    Well it was the 1990s. Everyone was hitting 30+ HR and 100 RBI, so a few people got left out.

    Here's a season even better than these two that also got no MVP votes:

    Fred McGriff 1999: .310 / .405 / .552 / .957 / 142 OPS+ / 32 HR / 104 RBI in 144 Games

    Unlike Tatis and Berroa, McGriff was an established star, which makes it more surprising.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by dgarza View Post
      Brett Gardner had a very good year in 2010 (7.0 WAR), but so much of his value was defense, he got overlooked.
      Not even a GG last year, which I think he deserved for leading all players in UZR.
      "Allen Sutton Sothoron pitched his initials off today."--1920s article

      Comment


      • #18
        Tony Batista delivered a .263/41/114 triple crown line in 2000 with nary an MVP vote. He had a horrific .307 OBP, but the home runs and RBI are high enough to surprise me that he got nothing from the voters.
        "Any pitcher who throws at a batter and deliberately tries to hit him is a communist."

        - Alvin Dark

        Comment


        • #19
          Carlos Beltran in 2001: 24 HR / 101 RBI / .306 / .362 / .514 / .876 / 31 SB / 1 CS

          And a 6.1 WAR in 155 Games

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by redban View Post
            Carlos Beltran in 2001: 24 HR / 101 RBI / .306 / .362 / .514 / .876 / 31 SB / 1 CS

            And a 6.1 WAR in 155 Games
            These sort of stat lines are what kills me about that era. There were players whose parks remained unchanged in dimension from the 80s or 70s who consequently put up numbers that looked much like great stat lines from that era (see: williams, bernie) that got completely dwarfed by their contemporaries playing in more offensively inclined home parks. (PEDs are a whole 'nother story)

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by ipitch View Post
              In 1974, the NL MVP (Garvey) had 4.3 WAR, and 2nd place (Brock) had 3.4. Darrell Evans had a WAR of 7.1, but he received NO MVP votes. Are there any better seasons by players that didn't get any MVP votes? Obviously, since 1911 only, and not counting players that weren't eligible to win. Thanks.
              Even more evidence some of these fancy stats overrate ballplayers. WAR just does not rise above like many claim, for if it did, then why would contemporary voters disagree so strongly with the retroactive number crunching?
              Your Second Base Coach
              Garvey, Lopes, Russell, and Cey started 833 times and the Dodgers went 498-335, for a .598 winning percentage. That’s equal to a team going 97-65 over a season. On those occasions when at least one of them missed his start, the Dodgers were 306-267-1, which is a .534 clip. That works out to a team going 87-75. So having all four of them added 10 wins to the Dodgers per year.
              http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p5hCIvMule0

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by ipitch View Post
                Of course. I was just pointing out how ridiculous the voting was. Even without WAR, it's easier to see that Matlack was far better than Billingham.
                Cy Young voters get to list just five guys, right? Back then two, right?
                Your Second Base Coach
                Garvey, Lopes, Russell, and Cey started 833 times and the Dodgers went 498-335, for a .598 winning percentage. That’s equal to a team going 97-65 over a season. On those occasions when at least one of them missed his start, the Dodgers were 306-267-1, which is a .534 clip. That works out to a team going 87-75. So having all four of them added 10 wins to the Dodgers per year.
                http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p5hCIvMule0

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by dgarza View Post
                  In 1936, Moose Solters had 134 RBIs without a vote. That's the highest I've noticed so far.
                  He got votes the year before, likely because he was a Red Sox for part of the season. He was a member of the Browns for a while and teammates with worse numbers received votes, but not Moose. Very strange. Maybe he couldn't field. It was the mid 1930s so 100 RBI was not uncommon, but 134 sure is a lot.

                  His batting average fell of 39 points from the year before. That likely did it.
                  Your Second Base Coach
                  Garvey, Lopes, Russell, and Cey started 833 times and the Dodgers went 498-335, for a .598 winning percentage. That’s equal to a team going 97-65 over a season. On those occasions when at least one of them missed his start, the Dodgers were 306-267-1, which is a .534 clip. That works out to a team going 87-75. So having all four of them added 10 wins to the Dodgers per year.
                  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p5hCIvMule0

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    It's kind of unwise to use WAR to determine what is "very good" since WAR wouldn't have been a thing any of the voters would have been looking at in, say, 1974.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Cowtipper View Post
                      It's kind of unwise to use WAR to determine what is "very good" since WAR wouldn't have been a thing any of the voters would have been looking at in, say, 1974.
                      It depends on how you are looking at it. Good seasons are good seasons no matter how a voter views it. If you want to see how a voter "missed" a player by overvaluing RBI's, Runs, AVG, Wins, Saves or even Team Record/Success, then you may want to avoid looking at advanced Metrics.

                      For those interested in seeing the top players using Baseball-Reference's WAR, I put together a list of the top 20 position players and top 20 pitchers.

                      http://seamheads.com/baseballgauge/blog/?p=225

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        A big part of WAR is defense and defense is rather unreliable in WAR and generally ignored when it comes to voting outside of recognizing a SS or C who hits rather well.

                        Comment

                        Ad Widget

                        Collapse
                        Working...
                        X