Every year, the BBA (Baseball Bloggers Alliance) selects
noteworthy individuals in the game to win end of the year awards. There are a number of different awards given
away by the BBA. You can find a list of
the awards and my picks for each on my ballot here. This post is a breakdown explaining my
choices for the Ted Musial Award, which compares to the MVP.
Well I bucked the trend here. I can tell you that this is the only award I
selected where neither my AL nor my NL choice aligned with the rest of the BBA
community. In addition, one of my
choices was not the same as both the BBA or MLB. So I’m not afraid to go out on a limb. However I think a lot of that has to do with
my issues with the MVP voting, and the inherent ambiguity that is not only
prevalent, but almost celebrated in the voting process.
In the NL, I went with Paul Goldschmidt, who neither
baseball nor the BBA agreed with. The
reason I selected Paul was pretty straightforward. I went with the player I thought had the best
statistical year. Some say that’s the
wrong way to do things, but I’ll cover that in the breakdown of my AL
choice. Goldschmidt hit 302 with a league
leading 36 HR (tied with Pedro Alvarez) and 125 RBI. He also added 103 R and 15 SB to those totals
while getting on base at a better than 400 clip, slugging over 550 and notching
an OPS of 952. And his defense as first
was great. I don’t know that any single
player compared to him across the board in offensive categories, but maybe some
came close. In addition, he was easily
the most valuable player on a good Diamondbacks team that didn’t make the
playoffs, but finished right at 500 and in second in the NL West.
The winner of both the BBA and MLB award was Andew
McCutchen, who was masterful for the Pittsburgh Pirates in their first winning
season in about 2 decades. McCutchen hit
317 with 21 HR, 84 RBI, 97 R and 27 SB.
He had a 404 OBP, 2 points better than Paul but only a 508 slugging
percentage, almost 50 points less than Mr. Goldschmidt. His 911 OPS was great, but nowhere near what
the Diamondbacks first baseman produced.
It’s easy to look at McCutchen, the leader of a young team that had an emotional
season culminating in a playoff appearance and a win over the Reds in the
Wildcard round (before being bounced in 6 games by the Cards in the NLDS). The Pirates were a great story and McCutchen
was their leader. But he was not the
best player in the league. And while
that may not necessarily be what the MVP was intended to be, it’s what it has
become. McCutchen plays a much tougher
position than Paul Goldschmidt. And he
plays it well. But Goldschmidt plays his
position about as well as you can play it.
McCutchen is a better base runner, but Paul is very good with the most
steals at his position. And while
McCutchen had a slightly better AVG, Goldschmidt was close to as good and blew
McCutchen away in every other category, including R, where you would think
McCutchen had the advantage. McCutchen
also had a better team around him.
Russel Martin was hot entering the post season and cracked 15 HR on the
season. Pedro Alvarez was tied for the
league lead with 36 HR. Francisco
Liriano turned into an ace and Jason Grilli was masterful in the bullpen. For the Diamondbacks, it was Paul and a bunch
of nobodys as Aaron Hill was hurt, Adam Eaton was hurt, Miguel Montero was
hurt, Jason Kubel was ordinary and the pitching was a mess outside of Patrick
Corbin. I never consider that one team
made the playoffs when looking at MVPs, as individual players have little to do
with a team winning. McCutchen played
well on a team that played well that played in a tough division, taking home a
wildcard place at second in their division.
Paul Goldschmidt played well on a team that played in a less tough
division and didn’t make the playoffs.
That had nothing to do with Goldschmidt.
He was a force despite being the only bat in the lineup that anyone
feared. That’s not easy to do. McCutchen had some protection and put up good
numbers. Goldschimdt had no protection
and put up better numbers. So for me,
Goldschmidt was far and away my winner.
And now let’s start the breakdown on my AL Winner, Miguel
Cabrera. Last year’s Triple Crown and
MVP winner had another strong season.
And while last year I mistakenly selected him as my Ted Musial winner
(more on that here) this year I’m more comfortable with my decision. Cabrera led baseball with a 348 ERA. That’s his second straight batting title
(though I never count past achievements in what is supposed to be a yearly
award). And 348 is a phenomenal average,
not like those years when someone hitting 320 steals the title in a weak
year. Cabrera was second with 137 RBI
and 44 HR, trailing only Chris Davis in both categories. He had the best on base percentage in
baseball (442), the best slugging percentage (636) and the best OPS
(1.078). In addition his 193 Hits was
second only to Adrian Beltre in the AL and he scored 103 R. He had a good year. He was still not good defensively; in fact he
was not even average. His base running
was similar to his defense. And yet, I
still chose to give him the award.
I considered 3 other players for the award. Obviously Chris Davis led the league in HR
and RBI. That’s great. But he only hit 286, impressive to be sure,
but nowhere near what Cabrera did. In
addition, Davis is blessed neither with an impressive glove nor superior speed
on the base paths and playing first is easier than playing third, even if you
don’t play third well. Adrian Beltre led
the league in hits and is a phenomenal defensive third baseman. I gave him a quick look also, but the rest of
his numbers (302/30/92/88), while impressive, were not in the Cabrera or even
Davis stratosphere.
However there is one other player who I really seriously
considered giving the award to. And that
was Mike Trout of the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim. He had another great year. He hit 323 with 27 HR, 97 RBI, a league
leading 109 R and 33 SB. He did this
while playing center field for the majority of the year, with some left
sprinkled in. Center field is arguably
the hardest position to play defensively.
In addition, Trout is a phenomenal base runner who took 33 bases in 40
attempts. Metrics put him at creating an
additional 124 runs for his team, both at the plate and with what he is able to
do on the bases. He is a complete
player. I think he is the best all
around offensive player in the game. He
is superior to Miguel Cabrera, Chris Davis, Ryan Braun and Hanley Ramirez. There are few who can do what he does in all
areas of the game. If I were starting a
team, he would be the first guy I would take.
He is, hands down, the best overall player in the game (in my humble
opinion).
So, why does the best player not win MVP? Well, because I don’t think that’s what the
MVP is looking for. At least not
anymore. If you talked to me last year
before the MVP was awarded, I would have said the MVP recognizes and awards the
best player in baseball. However, after
last year’s Mike Trout vs. Miguel Cabrera argument, I no longer am sure. The original rules for MVP balloting are
still used and are somewhat vague. I’ve
listed the original rules for MVP voting below:
The rules of the voting remain the same as they were written on the
first ballot in 1931:
1. Actual value of a player to his team, that is, strength of
offense and defense.
2. Number of games played.
3. General character, disposition, loyalty and effort.
4. Former winners are eligible.
5. Members of the committee may vote for more than one member of
a team.
You are also urged to give serious consideration to all your
selections, from 1 to 10. A 10th-place vote can influence the outcome of an
election. You must fill in all 10 places on your ballot. Only regular-season
performances are to be taken into consideration.
Keep in mind that all players are eligible for MVP, including pitchers
and designated hitters.
The rules tell you to consider not just the offensive
production of a player, but also the defense of a player. Also, to be fair to those who thought Mike
Trout didn’t play a full season, which is why he was not the winner last year,
the rules tell you to consider the number of games played for an individual
player. However Cabrera missed some
games due to injury this year, and ran away with the award. And Trout had comparable numbers to Cabrera
last year, despite playing fewer games.
Doesn’t that make Trout’s overall performance more impressive?
But I don’t want to fall back into last year’s
argument. The point is this; the
“valuable” part of the MVP is still unclear.
Does the value denote how important a specific player is to his
individual team? Does it refer to
overall performance? Number 1 seems to
say both. Yet that can be mutually
exclusive. The most obvious reading of
the rules, specifically number 1, seems to say that a player’s import to his
team is to be chiefly considered, in the strength of his offense and defense
(with base running being considered a facet of offense). So in that case, Trout was by far the most
important offensive player on his team, carrying them to their mediocre
record. Without him they would be lost
completely, as we saw last season when they were abysmal without him for the
first month. By comparison, Cabrera
played on a team where Torri Hunter and Austin Jackson received MVP votes in
the last two years and Prince Fielder was backing him up (though this year was
a down year for Prince). In addition,
Victor Martinez and Omar Infante had strong offensive seasons. And his team featured 2 pitchers who got Cy
Young votes (as well as one who won an MVP in the last 3 years). Trout was the only All Star on his team last
year. So in value to his team, Trout
seems to blow Cabrera out of the water.
He did last year and this year, though last year his offensive stats
were much better, and closer to the lofty stats put up by Cabrera. In addition, you could argue Chris Davis and
Adrian Beltre were more important to their teams than Cabrera was to his. Or Robinson Cano. Or Josh Donaldson. So the “value” portion of the MVP award is
dreadfully vague, and probably is the most in need of being cleared up. In addition, Cabrera was on a playoff team
and Trout was not. I can tell you with a
certainty that that affected the voting.
But I don’t think it should. As I
mentioned in the NL breakdown, individual players help teams to be sure, but
have very little overall impact on a team making the playoffs. In the AL, the West was much tougher than the
Central. I don’t count that against
Trout nor have it help Cabrera. So while
that’s a common criterion used in voting for MVP candidates, it has no basis
and I think is the most over-used and inaccurate measurement for those being
considered for MVP.
History has shown us that generally the MVP is given to the
best player statistically in a season.
However, knowing that offense and defense matter, it can be anyone,
including a pitcher that takes home the honors, as we saw a few years ago with
Justin Verlander. For that reason, I
think it impresses upon voters the need to vote for someone who excels in all
parts of the game, as offense is only a portion of what is counted. If offense counted for more than defense,
than HOW COULD A PITCHER HAVE EVER WON THE AWARD??? So, last year with the offensive stat
categories of Trout and Cabrera being so close, I think Trout’s vastly superior
game on the bases and in the field should have given him the nod over
Cabrera. This year, I think Cabrera was
far enough removed from Trout and everyone else offensively that he could take
home the award based on his offense alone.
This in no way means I think he was the best player in the AL this year. That was still Mike Trout. He is a far better player than Cabrera,
because he comes close to equaling his offensive production and vastly
surpasses Miguel on defensive and base running fronts. Again, it’s not that Trout is just better
than Cabrera in those two facets of the game.
It’s that he’s one of the best in the game in both of those facets, and
Cabrera is among the worst at his position defensively and no better than
average (and that’s generous with his size) on the bases. So while Cabrera was my MVP, I made the
decision based entirely on his offensive achievements being far and away the
best in the AL, enough to make up for any defensive or base running deficiencies. I in no way think he was the most valuable to
his team, as Torri Hunter and Victor Martinez also had strong offensive seasons
on the Tigers and they had a pitching staff with the Cy Young Winner and
another Cy Young candidate. If I had to
choose a player that had the most value to his team, I might go with Josh
Donaldson. And while both Cabrera and
Donaldson were on playoff teams, I still believe the best player in the game
was Mike Trout, on an Angels team that missed the playoffs for the second
straight year.
The BBA actually selected Trout as their Stan Musial Award
winner for the second straight year, whereas baseball selected Miggy as the MVP
for the second straight year. In the NL,
McCutchen took home the award easily, but I think that was way off. However until we clear up some of the MVP
vagueness, we will have the same style of player win every season, even when
others are clearly superior. It will be
the leader of a playoff team that had a good offensive season. Sometimes he will be the best player
overall. Sometimes he will have had the
best season. Sometimes he won’t be close
to either category, but will be valuable to his team. And sometimes, he’s just the leader of one of
the most exciting teams in the game. All
are noteworthy distinctions to be sure.
But all do not singularly nor collectively equate an MVP. I’m okay with the choices, as all the players
had good years. But if we always want
the winner to be from a playoff team, then we should specify that. If we want to focus on value to a team as the
overall most important stat, we should specify that as well. Or if it’s just overall talent or the best
season, we should specify that. But
until we do, we will continue to have these debates and question our winners.
Okay, so that’s it for the awards. Let me know your thoughts. Reach out to me on Facebook or tell me your
thoughts on Twitter (@payoffpitch86).
No comments:
Post a Comment