There seems to be no clear cut MVP candidate for the AL. The vast vast majority of the time an offensive player wins the MVP award, but when the offensive class becomes weak, we start to hear rumblings and grumblings of the Cy Young winner deserving the MVP (see: Johan Santana in 2006 when his teammate Justin Morneau, undeservingly, won the MVP). We're starting to see that this year with everyone seemingly on the Justin Verlander bandwagon. I won't scream outrage if Verlander wins it, but I don't believe he does deserves it.
I believe Jacoby Ellsbury does.
First, I'll give my arguments why I believe Ellsbury is the best player in the American League. Then, I will give reasons why Ellsbury is better than the two other leading AL MVP candidates: Jose Bautista and Justin Verlander.
The main reason why I believe Ellsbury deserves the MVP is because he has the best WAR (9.2) in the American League. He actually has the best WAR in all of baseball. No one else has a WAR above 9.0- except Ellsbury.
I think people think of Ellsbury as this speed guy who can steal 70 bases and is a pretty decent lead off man. But in 2011 he changed his entire game by adding power and a lot of it. Right now Jacoby Ellsbury has 31 home runs- which is tied for 5th in the AL. Ellsbury actually leads his team in home runs. He has more homers than Adrian Gonzalez (27), David Ortiz (29), and Dustin Pedroia (20). However, I believe this perception that Ellsbury still is this speed guy plus the fact that he plays with such offensive powerhouses overlooks just how good Ellsbury has been on offense.
Ellsbury's triple slash line is this: .322/.377/.551. Ellsbury is hitting the ball, hitting the ball with power, and getting on base. That's two of the five tools right there.
While Ellsbury is hitting for power he still has retained his speed stealing 38 bases (4th in the American League) and is the only American League player in the 30/30 club this year. That's three out of the five tools.
Despite how good Ellsbury has been on offense this year, the main reason he deserves to be the AL MVP is because of the fourth tool- his defense. There are absolutely at least five other AL offensive players that are better than Ellsbury, but they do not have the kind of defense that Ellsbury has. Ellsbury is 4th in the AL in defense according to the Fangraphs Fld stat, 5th in the AL in UZR/150, and 2nd in the AL in Revised Zone Rating. No matter what defensive metric you use, Ellsbury has been amazing at it.
Bill Simmons thinks (and frankly so does most baseball fans) that the MVP should go to the best offensive player. Simmons thinks one should vote on MVP candidates based on how fearful do pitchers feel pitching to a particular batter. I think this is faulty reasoning in today's day and age considering all we know and can measure about baseball players. While offense is obviously extremely important, it's ignorant to think that you should discount a players defense when half of every game a player plays he is also on defense. We can now measure (admittedly not with the great preciseness and efficiency that we can measure offense) how well a player plays on defense and how that contributes to how many wins they add to their team.
As DME posted in this article about how he believed Chase Utley deserved the 2009 NL MVP over Albert Pujols, defense matters- especially the defensive position you play. Ellsbury plays at a premium defensive position (CF) and is very good there.
I will note that Ellsbury is terrible at the last of the five tools- defensive arm- but to me that's the worst of the five tools, an overrated measure of any player's game, and is probably an archaic notion by now- especially if you have fantastic range.
Now let's talk about why Ellsbury deserves the MVP over Jose Bautista. The simple and easy answer is defense. While Jose Bautista is far and away the best offensive player in the American League (1st in wOBA, OBP, and SLG) he still is 0.8 points behind Ellsbury in WAR- because his defense actually helps lose games for Toronto. Bautista has a -4.5 Fld, -11.2 UZR/150, and a .922 RZR (good for only 15th in the AL). Plus, Bautista plays at a non-premium defensive position (RF).
DME argued with me that Baustita deserves the MVP more than Ellsbury because when two players are close in who deserves to be the MVP, you have to discount defense because you can't really measure it as well as offense so you have to use offense as the tiebreaker. I think this logic is flawed in two ways. First, the basic premise of this argument discounts everything baseball has done in the past five to ten years establishing defensive statistics. If you're going to discount the metrics we have available to us to determine MVP candidates then you need to discount them entirely. You either believe in them or you don't. You can not say you believe in them in one aspect but not in another. Next, he says that different sites and experts have different evaluations of how to measure defense which contributes to why defense should be discounted. How Fangraphs measures defense is much different than how The Hardball Times measures it. However, no matter if you're using an old school scout's eye or an advanced stats website, Ellsbury is far and away the better defender this year.
Lastly, I believe Ellsbury deserves the award over the great Justin Verlander. People seem to forget just how much pitching only 35 games out of the 162 game season limits how much you contribute to how many wins your team has. Currently Justin Verlander only has a 7.0 WAR. Ellsbury, Bautista, Dustin Pedroia, Curtis Granderson, and even Ian Kinsler have better WARs than Verlander. In fact, Verlander is tied for first in pitching WAR with C.C. Sabathia! Verlander's not even the clear cut #1 picther in his league (although he obviously is the AL Cy Young winner and the best pitcher in the AL in 2011).
The only way I'll give an MVP to a pitcher is if the pitcher has one of the greatest pitching seasons ever. While Verlander has having a very good season, this season doesn't come close to either of Pedro Martinez's 1999 or 2000 seasons (and both of those seasons even Pedro didn't win the MVP). As much as I like and respect Verlander and his amazing season, he doesn't play in enough games to deserve the MVP. That's why we have a Cy Young category to begin with.
In conclusion, GO ELLSBURY! I'm fine sitting on this island by myself. If you believe Verlander or Bautista deserves the MVP more than Ellsbury, that's fine and I won't vehemently diagree with you. If you believe anyone else like Granderson or AGon deserves the MVP then you're an idiot and I will vehemently disagree with you.
Showing posts with label AL MVP. Show all posts
Showing posts with label AL MVP. Show all posts
If I Could Turn Back Time: 1995 AL MVP Edition
Cubsfan and I were talking a few weeks ago and the old Cleveland Indians happened to come up. I was looking into their great hitters like Manny and Jim Thome back in the day, but then I "stumbled" onto Albert Belle's numbers. I use the word stumbled very loosely because the dude was just fantastic and the best hitter on the great early 90's Indians team. But I never truly realized just HOW good he was until I compared his numbers to everyone else in baseball.
The dude never won an MVP and it's truly a travesty. TBO tells me the dude was a huge asshole and so the baseball writers decided to stick it to him by never giving Belle an MVP award. This is why we need retroactive voting for all things including Oscar winners and MVP voting. I'd encourage you to look over Mr. Belle's fantastic career, but I'd like to focus your attention to the 1995 season.
In 1995 Boston's Mo Vaughn took home the AL MVP.
Before I tell you the standings, keep in mind that in 1995, an MLB season only lasted 144 games, not the 162 it lasts now. That year the Red Sox won 86 games and the AL East. The Seattle Marines won 79 games and the AL West. The other AL team that won their division? You guessed it, the Cleveland Indians. The Indians won 100. I don't think that got through to you, the Indians won 100 games- in only 144 chances. To put that into perspective, it's really hard to win 100 games in a 162 game season. The only other team in 1995 to win over 90 games was the Atlanta Braves- who won 90. The fact that the Indians won 100 is really impressive and should already be a notch in the belt for Belle.
Even though team records are dumb to see who should be MVP, this was still the logic of how baseball voters thought back then. Another dumb statistic used to measure baseball players but was used back then: batting average.
In 1995, Vaughn hit .300. Still pretty impressive, but not as good as Belle's .317.
In fact, let's go back and compare Vaughn to Belle in all the other major categories.
OBP
Vaughn: .388
Belle: .401
Winner: Belle
SLG
Vaughn: .575
Belle: .690
Winner: Belle
WAR
Vaughn: 4.2
Belle: 6.6
Winner: Belle
Belle obviously beat Vaughn in OPS if he beat him in both OBP and SLG. Belle also had more runs, more hits, more walks, and the same amount of RBI's. Vaughn had more stolen bases (11 to 5) and four more at bats.
But here's the kicker. Albert Belle hit 50 home runs that year. FIFTY! FIVE-ZERO! Mo Vaughn only hit 39.
Yet Albert Belle was second in MVP voting to Vaughn by eight votes.
Just because I'm biased I decided to compare Vaughn to Chicgo's Frank Thomas. In 1995, Thomas had a better batting average, better on base percentage, better slugging percentage, more home runs, more runs, more walks, and a better WAR. In 1995, Thomas led all MVP candidates with 136 walks (which led the majors). ONE HUNDRED AND THIRTY SIX!
If you go back and truly analyze the statistics and only go by WAR, Seattle's Edgar Martinez (7.7 WAR) and Randy Johnson (7.8 WAR) probably truly deserved it over Belle (6.6). But because Belle hit 50 HR, his team won 100 games, and because the dude had never won an MVP before, I would have given it to him.
Before I wrap up, here was Randy Johnson's statistics in 1995: 18 W, 3 L, 2.48 ERA, 1.05 WHIP, 294 K in 214.1 IP. How's that for a fantasy line? Eat your heart out Roy Halladay! The dude won the AL Cy Young (deservingly) yet was the highest 2nd pitcher in MVP voting behind Jose Mesa- the Indians closer.
Moral of the story: we should wait to vote on these things instead of being caught up in the heat of the moment and go by the mainstream media idea.
The dude never won an MVP and it's truly a travesty. TBO tells me the dude was a huge asshole and so the baseball writers decided to stick it to him by never giving Belle an MVP award. This is why we need retroactive voting for all things including Oscar winners and MVP voting. I'd encourage you to look over Mr. Belle's fantastic career, but I'd like to focus your attention to the 1995 season.
In 1995 Boston's Mo Vaughn took home the AL MVP.
Before I tell you the standings, keep in mind that in 1995, an MLB season only lasted 144 games, not the 162 it lasts now. That year the Red Sox won 86 games and the AL East. The Seattle Marines won 79 games and the AL West. The other AL team that won their division? You guessed it, the Cleveland Indians. The Indians won 100. I don't think that got through to you, the Indians won 100 games- in only 144 chances. To put that into perspective, it's really hard to win 100 games in a 162 game season. The only other team in 1995 to win over 90 games was the Atlanta Braves- who won 90. The fact that the Indians won 100 is really impressive and should already be a notch in the belt for Belle.
Even though team records are dumb to see who should be MVP, this was still the logic of how baseball voters thought back then. Another dumb statistic used to measure baseball players but was used back then: batting average.
In 1995, Vaughn hit .300. Still pretty impressive, but not as good as Belle's .317.
In fact, let's go back and compare Vaughn to Belle in all the other major categories.
OBP
Vaughn: .388
Belle: .401
Winner: Belle
SLG
Vaughn: .575
Belle: .690
Winner: Belle
WAR
Vaughn: 4.2
Belle: 6.6
Winner: Belle
Belle obviously beat Vaughn in OPS if he beat him in both OBP and SLG. Belle also had more runs, more hits, more walks, and the same amount of RBI's. Vaughn had more stolen bases (11 to 5) and four more at bats.
But here's the kicker. Albert Belle hit 50 home runs that year. FIFTY! FIVE-ZERO! Mo Vaughn only hit 39.
Yet Albert Belle was second in MVP voting to Vaughn by eight votes.
Just because I'm biased I decided to compare Vaughn to Chicgo's Frank Thomas. In 1995, Thomas had a better batting average, better on base percentage, better slugging percentage, more home runs, more runs, more walks, and a better WAR. In 1995, Thomas led all MVP candidates with 136 walks (which led the majors). ONE HUNDRED AND THIRTY SIX!
If you go back and truly analyze the statistics and only go by WAR, Seattle's Edgar Martinez (7.7 WAR) and Randy Johnson (7.8 WAR) probably truly deserved it over Belle (6.6). But because Belle hit 50 HR, his team won 100 games, and because the dude had never won an MVP before, I would have given it to him.
Before I wrap up, here was Randy Johnson's statistics in 1995: 18 W, 3 L, 2.48 ERA, 1.05 WHIP, 294 K in 214.1 IP. How's that for a fantasy line? Eat your heart out Roy Halladay! The dude won the AL Cy Young (deservingly) yet was the highest 2nd pitcher in MVP voting behind Jose Mesa- the Indians closer.
Moral of the story: we should wait to vote on these things instead of being caught up in the heat of the moment and go by the mainstream media idea.
Hamilton or Cabrera for MVP?
Inspired by an ongoing debates in the comments section over at THT Live, I propose to you the following considerations:
- Josh Hamilton’s AVG/SLG stats (.359/.411/.633) are slightly better than Miguel Cabrera’s (.328/.420/.622), but Miggy has a slight edge in OBP (which is more valuable than slugging).
- Even with park factors considered, Miguel Cabrera’s wOBA is .427. Hamilton’s is .447
- In terms of total batting production, Hamilton’s BRAR is +55.5, having missed almost a month of play. Cabrera’s is +55.3 with an additional 17 games played.
- Miguel Cabrera’s 1B fielding is was indexed at -6.1 UZR/150 (take 1 year UZR with a serious grain of salt), while Hamilton’s OF fielding per 150 was +10.8. Hamilton plays the relatively more premium fielding position.
- Hamilton’s cumulative WPA on the season was +6.25, whereas Cabrera’s was a higher +7.42. If we keep everything constant and pro-rate Hamilton’s playing time to match Cabrera’s, Hamilton’s extrapolated WPA becomes 7.09. Thus, it’s closer than it seems, but Miggy does out-edge Hamilton here.
- In terms of pure raw peripherals, Miggy edges Hamilton in ISO (.294 vs .274) and owns him in BB% (13.7% vs 7.5%).
- Hamilton was the more prodigious clipper (22.0% LD% vs 18.9% LD%) and Hamilton grounded into less double plays per AB (2.1%) than Miggy (3.1%)
So yes, the overall end of season numbers are pretty darn close, but when you consider that Hamilton’s team made it to the playoffs (a major factor in G/9 analysis) and that Hamilton was just as valuable over 17 less games, you honestly have to give the edge to Hamilton. Plus Hamilton didn’t get to drink any champagne (though he did never dress up in the raincoat with duck tape over his mouth as he promised the media...). Accordingly, this is why I feel that he most deserves the award.
