CDIH

Who are your picks/who do you think will win:

NL MVP
AL MVP

NL Cy Young
AL Cy Young

NL ROY
AL ROY

NL MOY
AL MOY

Bonds, Vlad
RJ, Santana
Greene, Morneau
Tracy, Scosia

I wanted to go with randy johnson but I dont think he will win cause of the wins and losses, even though he'd easily have 20 wins if he was on a mediocore team at the very least instead of a fuckin high school level talent team.

I don't think RJ will win because baseball writers are a bunch of idiots, but he's clearly the best pitcher on the planet and should run away with the award.

I agree 100% but the fact still remains, what makes sense doesn't always happen. He definitly deserves the cy young but I really dont see it happening, I hope im wrong.

Quote:I agree 100% but the fact still remains, what makes sense doesn't always happen.

So true. See: Dontrelle Willis, 2003 Rookie of the Year

there's no other NL pitcher who was good enough to make the fact RJ didn't get many wins that important.

Clemens wasn't nearly as good in the second half and still only had two more wins the RJ
Schmidt was pretty good, but also only had two more wins.
Oswalt had a lot of wins, but had much worse ERA than RJ
RJ had a 2.2 ERA after the all star break
There was a 3 game stretch where he was 0-2 in 24 innings with 4 ER and 40 strikeouts
There were a few of those runs.

Sir O Wrote:

Quote:I agree 100% but the fact still remains, what makes sense doesn't always happen.

So true. See: Dontrelle Willis, 2003 Rookie of the Year

Scott Podsednik fan?


Also I agree with you galt, RJ deserves it by all means.

The 14 losses just weigh heavily I think, sure clemens only has 2 more wins but he also has 10 less losses. The strikeouts, the era and the perfect game though are all johnsons numbers and the ones that count. It doesnt matter if he pitches well if the team doesnt score and the bullpen gives up 5 runs, yet he gets charged with the loss. He was just a victim of his teamates in the long run.

Quote:Scott Podsednik fan?

I thought Brandon Webb deserved the ROY last year, with Podsednik second and Willis third despite his terrible second half. But Willis was the media darling, so the hype clouded the fact that Webb was the superior pitcher...

What about this whole idea that the MVP has to show how much he carried his team? Alex Rodiguez won the MVP while on a lousy team, was it merely statistical, could Ichiro be thought of an MVP just because of the hits he produced? Or is it all about run production?

Sir O Wrote:

Quote:Scott Podsednik fan?

I thought Brandon Webb deserved the ROY last year, with Podsednik second and Willis third despite his terrible second half. But Willis was the media darling, so the hype clouded the fact that Webb was the superior pitcher...

I agree, so much so that I picked him in fantasy for all 3 leagues I was in, that worked out well.

The Jays Wrote:What about this whole idea that the MVP has to show how much he carried his team? Alex Rodiguez won the MVP while on a lousy team, was it merely statistical, could Ichiro be thought of an MVP just because of the hits he produced? Or is it all about run production?

We had this argument a couple years ago, I remember sir o was in that debate. If I am not mistaken he and I were of opposite opinions on the topic.

I simply believe that the most valuble player is across the board stats, whoever puts up the best numbers regardless of team. He was on the side that its who is the most valuble to his team.

Indeed, I believe it was me and Sean Cold on one side, with you and Sleeper on the other. I was also insanely drunk at the time.

But yeah, I still stand by the belief that it's Most Valuable Player, and not simply just Best Player. Using the Ichiro example, he'd be much more valuable on a team that could actually drive in runs, rather than smacking a jillion singles in front of mediocrities like Randy Winn and Brett Boone...

I think it started over the fact of wether a rod deserved to be MVP, it was before the year he won.

Yeah, I was saying that Tejada deserved it even though A-Rod put up better numbers, because A-Rod could've won the triple crown and it wouldn't have made a lick of difference playing on such a shitty team.

Turns out the voters agreed with me...wait, what did I say about baseball writers being a bunch of idiots? :30:

Quote:whoever puts up the best numbers regardless of team.

A person's number of rbi's and runs scored is a reflection of the team. OBP, Avg, SBs, walks, and Slg are things a batter has some control over. But he can't do anything if the guys around him can't draw walks, can't get singles or get on base. If you had a person who had outstanding average, let's say .400, could totally dominate the ball, gets on base, steals bases, but no one can knock him in or advance the runner, what's that player's value? Is he more valuable than someone who has over 100 rbis, and produces over 100 runs?

I still stand by it being a player award, its for the player who had the best year that season. Ofcourse best season is just as open to debate, its what each person considers more important, is it avg, homers, runs, obp, rbis? etc.

I can see your argument I just don't agree that its a team thing because unlike the other sports, one person cant take over control of the game. Bonds cant take all the at bats in the last 3 innings, the only person who has anything akin to that type of control is the pitcher. Even then he doesn't conrtol how many runs his team scores or what the bullpen doesn when he's gone.

In the NBA, NHL, and football I can see it being more of a team award.

In baseball though I think its different, so it should be a player award.

Just as RJ deserves the cy young even though hes on a shit team.

Quote:Ofcourse best season is just as open to debate, its what each person considers more important, is it avg, homers, runs, obp, rbis? etc.

That's why I thought the idea of Win Shares was interesting- it creates a stat which shows how important a player's contribution was to winning ball games.