Nl Mvp

[Say Hey]

These two seem to be the leading candidates, who do you think should win?

[STLCards2]

If the voting happened today...

1. Ryan Howard
2. Albert Pujols
3. Carlos Beltran
4. Lance Berkman
5. Miguel Cabrera
6. Alfonzo Soriano

Don't be too overwhelmed by the fancy 40-40 stat. Soriano still has a low OB%, strikes out a whole lot, and plays a very mediocre defense (the reason he has a lot of assists is because everybody runs on his no-arm self. Heck, Ramirez led the Al in OA one year. Shows the relavance of that stat) He is on one of the worst teams in the NL, and his stolen bases can't make up for the lack of walks he takes compared to the other guys on my list. Sorry, the race is between Howard and Pujols, and you will see that most people will agree with this.

A .350 OB% and a 2.5 : 1 K : BB ratio is not MVP stuff.

[Jose Reyes]

Huh? Where did you pull Soriano from? Pujols is definitely the other contender. I agree with cards' rankings but I would put Reyes ahead of Soriano as well.

[geezer]

Its going to be between Howard and Pujols, case closed.

[soberdennis]

These two seem to be the leading candidates, who do you think should win?
I think that there are definitely other choices as some others have pointed out.
But the bottom line is no matter how many choices you give us, the answer should be Howard.

[Astro]

Howard most likely will win it, if the Phillies make the playoffs I think he is a lock...

If neither the Phils nor the Cards make it, I think Howard wins it

If Phils make it, Cards dont, Howard wins it

Cards make it, Phils dont, its about 50-50

[skyking162]

1. Ryan Howard
2. Albert Pujols
3. Carlos Beltran

4. Lance Berkman
5. Miguel Cabrera

6. Alfonzo Soriano

I like it. Definitely a gap after the top three and again after the top 5. I'm not in the camp that thinks Howard should run away with the vote (although, he probably will.) To round out a top 10 list I'd throw in Reyes, Utley, Holliday, and... Brian McCann. Why not.

[W_Marone]

Ummm....I dont think Soriano is a better Canidate than Pujols, his team is terrible.

[johncap]

I agree that these aren't the two leading candidates. Pujols is certainly there with Howard and because of sentiment, Beltran will be considered. I don't think Soriano is in the top five either, for a few reasons, not the least of which is his team's record.

[Red Sox Rule]

Howard, no doubt! He's had a much better season than Soriano

[hudsonharden]

A guy who's team clinched the playoffs a week ago

[538280]

Pujols or Beltran. Neither of these guys are even close to those two in my mind.

[Myankee4life]

Pujols or Beltran. Neither of these guys are even close to those two in my mind.


Why not Howard?

[538280]

Why not Howard?

Because he lags far behind Pujols in the statistics that really matter...NOT HR and RBI. HR are a nice way to look at power, but SLG is really better for a player's total power. His OBP is nothing compared to Pujols'. They're both 1Bmen and Pujols clearly trumps him offensively. Even after that there's no case. Pujols is better defenisvely as well, for what that's worth. Adjusting for park factors pushes Howard even further back.

Beltran has had a pretty awesome season defensively in CF, and his offense really is only a little bit behind Howard's.

This huge stuff over Ryan Howard is just an example of infatuation with HR and RBI, and the hoopla generated over a high offensive era. Howard's season pales in comparison to say, Dick Allen's rookie campaign in 1964.

[Baseball Guru]

Howard most likely will win it, if the Phillies make the playoffs I think he is a lock...

If neither the Phils nor the Cards make it, I think Howard wins it

If Phils make it, Cards dont, Howard wins it

Cards make it, Phils dont, its about 50-50


That pretty much sums it up IMO....

[EvanAparra]

My top 4 candidates are

1. Pujols
2. Howard
3. Berkman
4. Beltran

I pick Pujols because his stats are all pretty much equal to Howard, and his defense is much better.

By the way, i accidentally picked Soriano in the poll...If someone can change it that would be cool, if not, oh well.

[Baseball Guru]

Because he lags far behind Pujols in the statistics that really matter...NOT HR and RBI. HR are a nice way to look at power, but SLG is really better for a player's total power. His OBP is nothing compared to Pujols'.

This huge stuff over Ryan Howard is just an example of infatuation with HR and RBI, and the hoopla generated over a high offensive era. Howard's season pales in comparison to say, Dick Allen's rookie campaign in 1964.

Howard going into today's game had a better slg% over Pujols..

Uhh, Howards obp% is .420 to Pujols' .426, hardly a big difference at all...

Also, the stats that a lot of people recognize here are not the ones the voters IMO, look at... They are more into the fancy power #'s and all the hoopla they provide which clearly supports Howard, especially if the Phils make it in...

[EdmondsFan#1]

Alfonso? lol.


I think pujols is going to win it.. Or he deserves to win it most.


He is better than Ryan Howard, Ryan Howard might be better offensively but Albert Pujols missed 15 games on the DL, and he was on a roll before he got injured. He also is a better 1st basemen in terms of defense by far.


Then Beltran.

Then Howard.

Then Alfonso.

[538280]

Also, the stats that a lot of people recognize here are not the ones the voters IMO, look at... They are more into the fancy power #'s and all the hoopla they provide which clearly supports Howard, especially if the Phils make it in...

Honestly, who cares what the writers look at? Look, just because the writers are idiots doesn't mean we have to be. Just because the writers can't get past huge RBI and triple crown numbers doesn't mean we have to limit ourselves to the same thing. The BBWAA is not some sacred society, in fact they tend to have little idea about what are appropriate ways to interpret statistics. If you study their voting trends you will find that basically all you need to win MVP is flashy triple crown statistics. There have been some exceptions to this in the history of the award, but for the most part what drives their decisions is no more than BA/HR/RBI. If you are a league RBI leader you have a VERY good shot at winning the MVP, regardless whether or not you do anything else well.

[Baseball Guru]

Honestly, who cares what the writers look at? Look, just because the writers are idiots doesn't mean we have to be. Just because the writers can't get past huge RBI and triple crown numbers doesn't mean we have to limit ourselves to the same thing. The BBWAA is not some sacred society, in fact they tend to have little idea about what are appropriate ways to interpret statistics. If you study their voting trends you will find that basically all you need to win MVP is flashy triple crown statistics. There have been some exceptions to this in the history of the award, but for the most part what drives their decisions is no more than BA/HR/RBI. If you are a league RBI leader you have a VERY good shot at winning the MVP, regardless whether or not you do anything else well.

Ummm, I think we are kinda in agreement so I'm not sure if you misinterpreted my post...

Also, the stats that a lot of people recognize here are not the ones the voters IMO, look at... They are more into the fancy power #'s and all the hoopla they provide which clearly supports Howard, especially if the Phils make it in...

I am supporting your idea that, that is what the voters looks at... Thats why I think Howard will probably win the MVP.. I didnt say I supported that vote or not, just what the voters would look at...

You say who cares what the voters look at? Umm I would say the players do since THEY are the ones voting on the MVP....lol

[Skin & Bones]

Soriano ? Please, Pujols and Beltran should be listed.

[EvanAparra]

And not berkman?

[538280]

Ummm, I think we are kinda in agreement so I'm not sure if you misinterpreted my post...

I am supporting your idea that, that is what the voters looks at... Thats why I think Howard will probably win the MVP.. I didnt say I supported that vote or not, just what the voters would look at...

You say who cares what the voters look at? Umm I would say the players do since THEY are the ones voting on the MVP....lol

Okay, I did misinterpret what you were saying then..I interpreted it as being one of the many posts around here which reply to more advanced (and far more accurate) statistics by saying things like "well, the writers don't look at that so who cares."

The writers vote on the MVP, so, yes, if you want to PREDICT who wins then of course you care what they think. But I'm trying to say who really deserves it, and whatever the writers think has no bearing on that. And BTW the more I look into things, the more I like Beltran rather than Pujols...

[Baseball Guru]

Okay, I did misinterpret what you were saying then..I interpreted it as being one of the many posts around here which reply to more advanced (and far more accurate) statistics by saying things like "well, the writers don't look at that so who cares."
.

lol.. Ok, I kinda figured we lost each other there... My posts usually are not THAT bad;)

[johncap]

...one of the many posts around here which reply to more advanced (and far more accurate) statistics by saying things like "well, the writers don't look at that so who cares.".

You're WAY off on this. NO ONE looks at those stats, and thus, no one cares.

Once more, MVP stands for Most Valuable Player, not best stats, or best fancy stats.

The rule for MVP, unwritten as it is, is that the MVP is the player MOST VALUABLE to HIS team that year. Not the best player, biggiest numbers, but the guy who would have the biggest negative impact to his team should he have not been there. And that's where a team's depth or the fact they easily won factors in.

[EvanAparra]

So then define what Most Valuable to his team means? What do YOU use to measure it??

Advanced stats are the way Chris uses to measure it. I use another way. Writers use other ways. Its all about the way you look at it. There is no right or wrong way.

[johncap]

So then define what Most Valuable to his team means? What do YOU use to measure it??

Advanced stats are the way Chris uses to measure it. I use another way. Writers use other ways. Its all about the way you look at it. There is no right or wrong way.
THANK YOU! FINALLY, acknowledgement that it's a subjective vote and not machinery!

[skyking162]

THANK YOU! FINALLY, acknowledgement that it's a subjective vote and not machinery!

So the debate is really about how we define value and has little to do with determining which player fits any individual definition. I think that's been obvious for a few pages now. Therefore, we might most benefit from answering the question...

How do you define "most valuable"? Try to avoid being vague and feel free to explain using examples.

[Blackout]

no pujols? say hay, explain yourself

[Say Hey]

no pujols? say hay, explain yourself

I really don't know. I was tired when I made the thread and I wasn't thinking straight. I don't want to but someone else can make a new thread with better choices.

[johncap]

So the debate is really about how we define value and has little to do with determining which player fits any individual definition. I think that's been obvious for a few pages now. Therefore, we might most benefit from answering the question...

How do you define "most valuable"? Try to avoid being vague and feel free to explain using examples.
In THIS case, IMO, simply by determining, VERY subjectively, how the respective team would have fared without the candidate's contribution. AND, whether how the team fared meant very much in the end. In other words, what difference did Pujols, Beltran, Howard, etc. make in their respective team's season, and in the end, did it matter. Obviously, if the team finishes 70- 92, what difference did it make. If you figured ther production mattered for 10- 15 wins, so what. On the other hand, if the team won their division or made the WC by 2 games and you figure that guy's contribution mattered for the same 10-15 games, then it was a significant contribution in meaningful circumstances. This is why, to me, it is significant what kinds of players are around a candidate. The case of Beltran to me is the most significant. I really don't think removing him from that lineup would have amounted to a hill of beans difference in their number of wins. I don't even think he was the Met's MVP this year. And you can add to that considering when the last meaningful game they played was.

And, obviously, this is the secondary criteria, after selecting those players who had monster years. Then determining what value it added to their team and whether that value was put to good use.

I also believe this is essentially how most voting writers see this decision and I believe it is traditionally the way the benchmark for MVP has evolved.

As the Cardinals sink, and NOW potentially may not even make the playoffs, (God one can only pray!) Pujols may not even matter by next weekend. But I firmly believe if the Phils make the playoffs, Howard wins in a landslide. If the Phils do not win the WC, but the Cards make it, it'll be close but Howard will beat out Pujols. If neither team makes the playoffs, Howard will still prevail but should the Astros knock out the Cards, Berkman becomes more of a factor in the voting especially if he closes out with a bang.

Looking at this week's schedule makes for a VERY interesting final week for the NL Central, West and Wild Card races and I think some of it may impact this vote as well.