KLaw picks Sizemore for MVP, Lee for Cy Young

On the AL MVP: "If you're new here, my main criterion is value. And that's the second criterion, and the third one too."

On the AL Cy: "K-Rod was about 140 innings short of making my ballot."

On the NL Cy: "Lincecum got to face the lineups of the Rockies, Padres, and Diamondbacks -- three awful offensive teams -- repeatedly, while Santana has to contend with the Phillies, Marlins, and to a lesser degree the Braves."

On the NL MVP: "Also missing the cut [for the top 10] is Ryan Howard, who is getting MVP love but isn't even the most valuable player on the right side of the Phillies infield. The infatuation with boiling an MVP or Cy Young vote down to a single counting stat like home runs or pitcher wins is an ongoing failure of the awards process."

9 months ago Jay Comment 49 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

I think this article bears repeating, because I don’t think a lot of people saw it originally. They agree with the Sizemore pick.

Also! Keith Law’s Facebook status is:

Keith is impressed by Sabathia … but let’s cut the crap about him winning MVP.

And goes on to elaborate.

He did not contribute enough value to crack the top 3 among NL pitchers. It was only 17 starts. BP has him 7th in the NL in VORP:
http://www.baseballprospectus.com/statistics/sortable/index.php?cid=309869
and the Hardball Times has him 10th in PRC:
http://www.hardballtimes.com/thtstats/main/?view=pitching&league_filter[]=2
You can see that he’s not even close to Lincecum or Santana.

Keith is on the “NL only” side of the debate.

Steel Nick

by nickjs21 on Sep 30, 2008 12:38 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

How does VORP measure a players ability to almost singlehandly carry his team to the playoffs?

by world dictator on Sep 30, 2008 1:36 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I dunno – ask Manny.

Resident LGT beer kinda sewer

by mauichuck on Sep 30, 2008 2:20 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I’m not sure how I’m supposed to argue this. It sounds like, “But how does OPS+ measure a man’s heart??”

Steel Nick

by nickjs21 on Sep 30, 2008 10:33 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

There’s a big difference between a “warm and fuzzy” quality like heart, or grit, and the value you bring to your team by doing something like pitching the must win game your team needs to make the playoffs on 3 days rest.

I’m hesitant to say the word “clutch” because of the arguments about our ability to measure whether someone is a clutch player or not. But I think we can clearly evaluate when someone performs in a clutch situation.

And thats something that doesn’t reflect well in stats.

by world dictator on Sep 30, 2008 11:51 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

The fact is that the game CC pitched on Sunday was no more important than any game he pitched while he was a Brewer. Which is to say they were all important, because they only won the Wild Card by a game. And I’m sure you’re not considering CC for the MVP because he pitched the last game of the season?

Steel Nick

by nickjs21 on Sep 30, 2008 12:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I think the argument that every game CC pitched was important therefore none of the games he pitched was really “important” is absurd.

That’s like saying hitting a 2 out walk off HR to win game seven of the world series has equal value to the bloop rbi single you hit in the first inning.

CC pitching in the last game is just an example of his value which can’t be measured in stats. If we were comparing an average pitching season with clutch performances versus a great pitching season you might be correct in your point. But we’re not. CC was lights out in his time in the NL AND a clutch performer throughout the season. All of this in addition to his ability to pitch late into games, relieving the stress on the bullpen.

by world dictator on Sep 30, 2008 1:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Me:

The fact is that the game CC pitched on Sunday was no more important than any game he pitched while he was a Brewer. Which is to say they were all important, because they only won the Wild Card by a game.

You:

I think the argument that every game CC pitched was important therefore none of the games he pitched was really "important" is absurd.

You interpreted the exact opposite of what I said. Hard to do. I’m almost impressed.

You think I’m devaluing Sunday’s game, but in reality I’m stressing that his first win as a Brewer was just as important. What good would Sunday’s win had been if the Brewers had lost any other game he pitched in? Any two?

Steel Nick

by nickjs21 on Sep 30, 2008 1:58 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Okay look, I don’t mean to sound snarky. I just don’t buy it. That’s a horrible MVP vote. Really bad. It’s just my opinion, and I’ll leave it at that.

Steel Nick

by nickjs21 on Sep 30, 2008 2:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Although the weight of that importance (of the first game that is) wasn’t full realized, while the weight of the importance on Sunday was fully realized prior to pitching the game. To simply state that each game was equally important and that CC pitched each game realizing the equal importance is incorrect (not that you exactly stated that, but its the point world dictator is making and you are responding to, so its assumed).

but yeah I don’t buy CC as MVP, mostly because of the league thing.

by hans on Sep 30, 2008 6:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

To simply state that each game was equally important and that CC pitched each game realizing the equal importance is incorrect

The first half of that sentence is correct— that each game carries equal weight in the standings. The second part was never implied by me, mostly because it doesn’t matter to me. What CC thought about a game doesn’t make it any less important.

And if there’s a pitcher out there, CC included, who pitches any game in July for a contending team and thinks to himself “this game isn’t that important,” he doesn’t belong in the Major Leagues.

Steel Nick

by nickjs21 on Sep 30, 2008 7:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

We can tell ourselves that something is really important, but when the direct result of our actions is staring us in the face, the new circumstance change our behavior.

In class, every point counts. But at the end of the semester when your grade is on the borderline between a Pass or a Fail, your last test isn’t just “another test”

by world dictator on Sep 30, 2008 8:19 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

To you it isn’t. But you wouldn’t be on the border line if you had done better on a previous test. What is so hard about that? In the standings, that game is not more important.

Steel Nick

by nickjs21 on Sep 30, 2008 10:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

hindsight is 20/20

Its easy to say what you could have done, all that matters is what you have the ability to do

by world dictator on Sep 30, 2008 11:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Oof, that’s weird logic. It still doesn’t affect how much the earlier game means in the standings.

Aaaaand, we’re going in circles. I always find myself in these kinds of discussions.

Steel Nick

by nickjs21 on Oct 1, 2008 10:43 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

We’re going in circles because you’re responding to a point not being made. This debate hinges on the definition of “value” or “important”

You keep saying that every game is worth one win or one loss. Yes, I know. I never argued that games started to become with 2 or 3 wins as the season went on.

The point thats being made, to which im still unsure of your response, is that when a team has a MUST WIN game, ie win or go home, that game has more importance. Sure the game is still worth the same in the win/loss column, sure they shouldn’t have blown that game in April, but all thats relevant at that moment is winning the game right now.

If every game “mattered” the same then teams wouldn’t have their ace pitch on three days rest. In game seven of the world series, all things being equal, do you want your Ace pitching or your mediocre 5th starter?

by world dictator on Oct 1, 2008 3:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

But I don’t see how this affects CC’s MVP odds. If by your definition of “value,” meaning performing more when the pressure is on and the games seem more important (but aren’t), then Carlos Delgado should be your MVP.

Steel Nick

by nickjs21 on Oct 1, 2008 9:58 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

You see, you are correct and world dictator is correct. You are arguing about two different things. He’s giving CC credit for enduring the psychological stress of being the pitcher that helped his team win on Sunday, which despite your incorrect assertion that a pitcher should consider every game he pitches equally important (and if they don’t then they don’t belong in the Major Leagues), is much more stressful than his first game pitched with the Brewers.

Your last paragraph is simply incorrect, as long as there is a chance that he could make up for a poor outing in the future, a person will feel less stress than if he knows that a poor outing will result in no future (i.e. out of the playoffs) and no chance at correcting that.

by hans on Oct 1, 2008 3:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Exactly.

Its a semantics argument about the definition of “important”

…also known as Topicality for those of us who did debate in High School or College :-)

by world dictator on Oct 1, 2008 3:44 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Except for in extreme cases where you’re either in the basement or Manny Ramirez, every player in the Major Leagues should be giving maximum effort every game. With the small percentage of players that actually make it to the bigs, I just don’t see how you make it on a ML team if you don’t.

What I’m saying is, I don’t care if CC realizes how important the game is. He isn’t “upping” his performance at all. It shouldn’t be physically possible.

And if all we’re doing is crediting him for not buckling under pressure, whoop de do, you did your job. You did what you get paid to do. I’ll give you a cookie, but not an MVP award.

Steel Nick

by nickjs21 on Oct 1, 2008 10:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Why celebrate a walk off HR, a perfect game, or winning the world series? They were all just doing their jobs.

You can argue about the way the world should work until the cows come home. The fact is that its impossible, in a 162 game season, to treat every game, every at bat the same.

Players wear down psychologically and physically. More importantly, there’s no magic adrenaline button that we can push so that we feel like every game is game seven of the world series.

by world dictator on Oct 1, 2008 10:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Some great players—Ty Cobb, Rickey Henderson, Pete Rose— seem to have had adrenaline buttons they could push 600 times a year. They were driven by rage, fury, intensity.

by odradek on Oct 1, 2008 10:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

If this is true (I didn’t see Cobb play), they were being horrible teammates all those other times they weren’t driving themselves.

Steel Nick

by nickjs21 on Oct 1, 2008 11:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I didn’t say don’t celebrate. Don’t award him the National League MVP for it, that’s what I’m saying. This is where the discussion started.

Steel Nick

by nickjs21 on Oct 1, 2008 11:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

What I’m saying is, I don’t care if CC realizes how important the game is. He isn’t "upping" his performance at all. It shouldn’t be physically possible.

Thats factually incorrect. People have been shown to increase their physical performance, strength for example due to the release of adrenline

by world dictator on Oct 1, 2008 10:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

If anything this would be detrimental to a pitcher. This isn’t hockey. You can’t just get jacked up and hit a guy.

Steel Nick

by nickjs21 on Oct 1, 2008 11:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

If we are going to play this game, how was C.C. any more clutch than Johan down the stretch?

In August, Johan’s line: 42.1 IP 1.91 RA 34 K
September: 44.1 IP 1.83 RA 47 K

C.C.’s August: 48.1 IP 1.30 RA 51 K
September: 42.2 IP 2.95 RA 43 K

by ClarkM on Sep 30, 2008 2:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

can’t we all just talk about what a fickle fellow manny is?

by Brick. on Sep 30, 2008 2:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Actually, I believe you’ll find that the HR and the bloop single are each worth one run. You’ll further find that the walk-off HR ceases to walk anywhere if you don’t get that first-inning run, and in many cases you don’t even get the opportunity to hit it. There is very little value in baseball that can’t be measured in stats.

by FredOx on Sep 30, 2008 2:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

There is very little value in baseball that can’t be measured in stats.

Except, of course, the value that Derek Jeter Jeter brings to a team. His winning aura is just so great that its value is unmeasurable.

The best thing probably is to hit [Grady] 2nd -- Jay

by Buckeye Brad on Sep 30, 2008 2:46 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

It’s actually the Calm Eyes, not the Winning Aura.

Steel Nick

by nickjs21 on Sep 30, 2008 3:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

C’mon Nick, you’re better than this.

Leverage, my man… LEVERAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGE!!

Don't be stupid. PUT IN MELOAN.

by gte619n on Sep 30, 2008 2:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Doesn’t leverage apply more to men on base, a certain number of outs, etc? How important it is to get a particular batter out?

Steel Nick

by nickjs21 on Sep 30, 2008 3:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

That’s the most commonly used meaning of leverage in baseball analysis, but it can mean other things. In terms of pennant-winning value, C.C.‘s stretch drive obviously was higher leverage than Cliff’s. You can also think of leverage in terms of the ROI on player salaries, where the theory is that money spent to improve a team that’s already 85-win caliber is inherently more valuable than improving a 75-win or 95-win team, hence higher leverage.

by Jay on Sep 30, 2008 4:07 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Additionally, I would say that later games are more important just as later innings are more important. The further along in the season you go, the less opportunity you have to correct mistakes, make fundamental (personel changes), etc.

Also, I think the physical and mental accomplishment of pitching a “MUST WIN or the season is in the toilet” on 3 days rest against, arguably, the best team in baseball, is clearly more impressive than turning in a quality start against the Nationals in April.

Don't be stupid. PUT IN MELOAN.

by gte619n on Sep 30, 2008 7:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Not. In. The. Standings.

Say it’s more impressive, but it’s not more important.

Steel Nick

by nickjs21 on Sep 30, 2008 7:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Impressive versus important is just semantics, at leas the way you break it down.

I don’t think anyone is saying that in a 3-2 game, the first two runs don’t matter/weren’t necessary.

But what I am saying is that in baseball, sports, and in life, a lot of people almost win, almost get the job promotion, almost seal the deal. But very few people hit the game winning 3 pointer.

by world dictator on Sep 30, 2008 7:58 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I think you’re losing me here. I’m getting confused.

Steel Nick

by nickjs21 on Sep 30, 2008 10:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

i agree that grady has had an awesome, MVP-like season (actually, for the 2nd time—his season in 2006 was also pretty amazing), i think mauer has to get the award this year. sizemore leads mauer in VORP by like eight runs, but he is sixth in the AL overall. what really seals the deal for me are his WPA numbers. for an award like the MVP, i’m inclined to go with the argument Ken Tremendous at FJM made a few days ago—VORP has a place, but so do the backward-looking stats, even if they have no predictive power whatsoever. the idea is to credit a guy for what he’s done, not to honor him based on probable future performance.

anyways, while grady is certainly deserving, when you’ve got a few candidates who are closely bunched up and no one just blows you away, i think the tiebreaker goes to the guy who got the biggest hits and did so while his team was contending for a playoff spot.

by Cap'n Snegiryov on Sep 30, 2008 7:33 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

^^^^the antecedent to the “he” in the second sentence is mauer, not sizemore. yikes, that was poorly constructed.

by Cap'n Snegiryov on Sep 30, 2008 7:37 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Where you been? You missed the Braves outing!?

Don't be stupid. PUT IN MELOAN.

by gte619n on Sep 30, 2008 2:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

what’s up dude

hey a lot has happened since we talked about that

yeah, i didn’t move to atlanta. lol. i got a last minute scholarship offer from a different law school, so i switched up, and now i’m in virginia. how was it though?

by Cap'n Snegiryov on Sep 30, 2008 6:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs