David Wright got screwed

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
vhawk, i dunno. the mvp award is a regular season award, so its actually 1st-4th, and not 1st-4th (in each league). giving the mvp award to a player on a team that doesnt make the playoffs is like giving the world series mvp to a player on the losing team imo.

[/ QUOTE ]
Why couldn't the most valuable player in the WS be on the losing team?

[/ QUOTE ]

again, because baseball is a team game, your goal is to win

[/ QUOTE ]

So youre saying that he could put up the exact same numbers every year and yet his value would fluctuate depending on who pitches for the mets?

That makes sense not.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why? If he can put up 40 HR for 10 million, that is more valuable to his team than putting up 40 HR for 18 million, on just about any team except the Yankees. Because now they have 40 HR and a free 8 million to spend on more wins.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a lot different than what I was saying. I was talking about value contributed to the team in the traditional sense of the award, not production per dollar. Obviously if a player puts up the exact same numbers but makes a different amount of money his relative "value" changes.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry I went back and edited my post, you are right I was reading you as saying something you werent.

[dkgojackets]

[ QUOTE ]
vhawk,
The problem with using salary is it means every MVP would be under 25.

[/ QUOTE ]

Right. It will always be a guy in his first three years not eligible for arbitration.

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
vhawk,
The problem with using salary is it means every MVP would be under 25.

[/ QUOTE ]

Right, like I said, you'd have to modify it a bit. You couldnt just have a straight 1:1 ratio between performance and cost to determine your value. Twice as many HR is worth way more than twice as many dollars. But 38 year olds with huge albatross salaries really do crush some teams and so they should have to perform accordingly.

I'm just trying to salvage the MVP here, I think the obv solution is to ignore this stupid award and just give a "best player" award and stop even mentioning something as silly as MVP. But barring that I think there is some merit to focusing on financial value.

[MikeyPatriot]

Bill Conlin is a moron, and is a perfect example of how I picture the majority of sportswriters to be like.

vhawk,

I'm not digging your peformace:contract idea. As others said, reserve/arbitration players would always win, and even if you were able to account for that fairly, you're punishing guys who go out and get the best contract available. It would be unfair to punish A-Rod if he had swindled someone into giving him a $40m/year contract.

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
Bill Conlin is a moron, and is a perfect example of how I picture the majority of sportswriters to be like.

vhawk,

I'm not digging your peformace:contract idea. As others said, reserve/arbitration players would always win, and even if you were able to account for that fairly, you're punishing guys who go out and get the best contract available. It would be unfair to punish A-Rod if he had swindled someone into giving him a $40m/year contract.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why would it be any more unfair than punishing a guy for taking a big deal with a team that is unlikely to make the playoffs? Or punishing a guy for remaining loyal to his small-market team that developed him and that has little chance to make the playoffs?

There are always going to be limitations and people who get penalized. At least in this scenario, we are penalizing guys who actually ARE doing something that hurts their team. Signing for an extra ten million really does hurt the team. DISCLAIMER: Not that I am ripping on these guys for getting every single penny, this isnt a bad thing, I'm just saying it clearly hurts the team more than working for peanuts would.

[dkgojackets]

[ QUOTE ]
One of those sportswriters, Bill Conlin of the Philadelphia Daily News, got into a email battle with the blog Ashburn Alley,

[/ QUOTE ]

Obvious 2p2 reference in that blog. I wonder if hes a poster.

[Tweety]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Wright was the best all-around player in the NL in 2007.

That's all.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's called "Most Valuable Player". Not "best all-around player."

Of the top 10 vote-getters, three were paid less than DW. Per baseball-reference.com:

Wright finished 4th, and earned $1.25M in 2007
Fielder finished 3rd, and earned a paltry $415K
Howard finished 5th, and earned $900K
Hanley finished 10th, and earned $402K

I know it's the MLB, and $800K is peanuts, but one could argue that at least Fielder and Howard were more "valuable" than Wright, who was paid 3 times as much money.

Rollins and Holliday were a close 1, 2. Rollins earned $8M, and Holliday earned $4.4M.

There are several ways to define the "MVP" award, and most of them suck. The award should be terminated.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is the kind of non-standard reasoning I can honestly get behind. When I think value, this is what goes through my mind. Its not IMPOSSIBLE for guys like Arod to be the best value but its pretty hard.

You'd have to make some amendments though, you'd have to establish some kind of minimum salary or service time, because otherwise its guys like Arod and Pujols trying to compete with every single rookie and 1 year service time guy who has a pretty decent bustout year. they make 20 times as much money, they arent going to provide twenty times as much value very often.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you are going to get into the value per dollar angle to this analysis, it might also be worth looking at the player's salary as a percentage of his team's payroll. A $5 million a year guy who is only slightly less valuable than a guy making $9 million a year might not necessarily be more valuable to his team if the $5 million guy is playing for the Devil Rays and the $9 million guy is playing for the Yanks.

[FlyWf]

I love all these debates. Sportswriters pretend that there aren't stated criteria for the MVP because it lets them get away with the assorted retarded MVPs they've given out, but the BBWAA sets out the following:
"
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. Keep in mind that all players are eligible for MVP, and that includes pitchers and designated hitters.

Only regular-season performances are to be taken into consideration."

Team performance is not one of the listed criteria. The end.

[dkgojackets]

that isn't a bad idea tweety

[dkgojackets]

[ QUOTE ]
I love all these debates. Sportswriters pretend that there aren't stated criteria for the MVP because it lets them get away with the assorted retarded MVPs they've given out, but the BBWAA sets out the following:
"
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. Keep in mind that all players are eligible for MVP, and that includes pitchers and designated hitters.

Only regular-season performances are to be taken into consideration."

Team performance is not one of the listed criteria. The end.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was beginning to wonder if anyone else had read that. The most value is clearly defined to be the strongest offense and defense. Not some wishy washy thing about if his team is in contention at the end.