jimmy rollins NL MVP - Page 11

Benholio · #**101** 11-20-2007, 05:38 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think Matt Holliday clearly should have won. The 20/20/20/20 thing is obviously very impressive. However, Curtis Granderson did the same thing and didn't sniff the MVP or the win a Gold Glove in the AL, despite being one of the top 5 defensive centerfielders in the MLB.

Looking at Holliday's absurd numbers, I think he got absolutely jobbed.

[/ QUOTE ]

Holliday's road #s
.301 11hrs 55rbi .485 slugging .860 OPS

double those and tell me if he didnt play at Coors he was an MVP candidate

[/ QUOTE ]

You can take his Coors numbers and adjust them down, but you can't just replace them with his road numbers. What if a player playing in a hitting-neutral park hit 40 homers at home and 15 on the road, would you throw away 25 homers from his line?

metsandfinsfan · #**102** 11-20-2007, 05:38 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

this isnt the best player award, it is the most valuable player award. THe idea is to win games, and a guy like Hanley on a team that didnt win a lot of games gets less consideration than a guy on a team that does

But i guess this doesnt answer your question does it. My ballot probably would have had Wright 2nd place behind Rollins -- mostly yes because the Phillies won the division. So i guess i am as dumb as the voters

[/ QUOTE ]
If Hanley hit 600 with an .800 OBP 200 HRs and 150 doubles would he deserve MVP if his team didn't win a lot of games?

[/ QUOTE ]

if his team finished 40 games out?
in those extreme circumstances -- probably i guess

the hank aaron award goes to the best hitter -- i dont know why it doesnt get the attention it deserves. and hanley would be the unanimous hank aaron award winner ldo

the mvp -- to me means the most valuable player to helping your team win games. and if your team doesnt win games, you arent that valuable to your team. You may be the best player in baseball, but not the most valuable player in the league. Cause baseball is a team game, and the goal is to win, not put up stats

metsandfinsfan · #**103** 11-20-2007, 05:39 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think Matt Holliday clearly should have won. The 20/20/20/20 thing is obviously very impressive. However, Curtis Granderson did the same thing and didn't sniff the MVP or the win a Gold Glove in the AL, despite being one of the top 5 defensive centerfielders in the MLB.

Looking at Holliday's absurd numbers, I think he got absolutely jobbed.

[/ QUOTE ]

Holliday's road #s
.301 11hrs 55rbi .485 slugging .860 OPS

double those and tell me if he didnt play at Coors he was an MVP candidate

[/ QUOTE ]

You can take his Coors numbers and adjust them down, but you can't just replace them with his road numbers. What if a player playing in a hitting-neutral park hit 40 homers at home and 15 on the road, would you throw away 25 homers from his line?

[/ QUOTE ]

holliday's road #s dont come close to wrights, rollins's, fielders, or whatever other candidate you want to give me.

lastchance · #**104** 11-20-2007, 05:41 PM

Your team wins 70 games. You are responsible for 20 wins out of that 70 (yes, I know, absurd, but w/e, just listen). The MVP of a 90 win team that just made the playoffs is only responsible for 10 wins.

Who deserves the MVP award?

Eagles · #**105** 11-20-2007, 05:42 PM

[ QUOTE ]

Is there no longer anything to the notion of leadership? Are the numbers really ALL that matter?

Willie Stargell co-shared an MVP award when the Pirates ended up winning it all, and if memory is close to correct, his raw numbers weren't so great. But he was recognized for being a great leader.

I think that Rollins deserves some credit for taking the leadership role and prodding his team on. Wright was unable to do the same for his team.

If this award is meant to take into account how the team finishes too - as it certainly has been in the last couple of decades - then the Mets team-wide collapse has a bearing on how Wright should have done on the voting. If you are one of the people who consider this award to be based entirely on individual performance, then that is an entirely different matter.

[/ QUOTE ]

Out of all the writers who vote, how many frequently cover Phillies games? How many of them frequently see Jimmy Rollins leadership and his affect on the team? His "leadership" is almost entirely speculation and 99% of writers cannot accurately determine what if any impact he has.

Willie Stargell co-shared an mvp but it was a terrible choice, he should not have even been considered. I know you don't love VORP but he was ranked 57th in VORP, he played 126 games, even if he played a full season he would be about 30th in VORP. He had nowhere near an MVP season. All this proves is the BBWAA is clueless and gets the MVP wrong so often.

The MVP mainly should go towards individual performance, see my Hanley scenario I asked to metsandfinsfan above.

Hoya · #**106** 11-20-2007, 05:42 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Holliday was a great great fielder for his position.

Rollins was not very good.

Their positional value difference is still significant, it's just not as great as it would first appear.

[/ QUOTE ]

Rollins was still above average, so this is far from accurate.

Edit - I see you acknowledged this.

THAY3R · #**107** 11-20-2007, 05:45 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Holliday was a great great fielder for his position.

[/ QUOTE ]
So Holliday played better defense than Bonds/Burrell/Lee/Dunn?!? Revelatory!

If Rollins/Wright even sniff the offensive production of a corner OF, they are probably more valuable to a team's success. A corner OF with 800 OPS is cheaper (and less valuable) than a SS with 800 OPS. If only there was a way to quantify the valuea cross positions...

[/ QUOTE ]

Yea it's called VORP, and Holliday kills Rollins in it.

He is barely behind Wright and Holliday is better at defense relative to his position compared to Wright so..... yea.

lastchance · #**108** 11-20-2007, 05:47 PM

http://baseballprospectus.com/articl...articleid=6944

/article

Eagles · #**109** 11-20-2007, 05:47 PM

[ QUOTE ]

the mvp -- to me means the most valuable player to helping your team win games. and if your team doesnt win games, you arent that valuable to your team. You may be the best player in baseball, but not the most valuable player in the league. Cause baseball is a team game, and the goal is to win, not put up stats

[/ QUOTE ]
How can players help their team win? I would suggest fielding well and hitting well. The goal is to win but the best way to win is to put up stats. You are arguing a prerequisite to being MVP is having a strong team around you. Do you realize how ridiculous this is?

Mondogarage · #**110** 11-20-2007, 05:50 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

this isnt the best player award, it is the most valuable player award. THe idea is to win games, and a guy like Hanley on a team that didnt win a lot of games gets less consideration than a guy on a team that does

But i guess this doesnt answer your question does it. My ballot probably would have had Wright 2nd place behind Rollins -- mostly yes because the Phillies won the division. So i guess i am as dumb as the voters

[/ QUOTE ]
If Hanley hit 600 with an .800 OBP 200 HRs and 150 doubles would he deserve MVP if his team didn't win a lot of games?

[/ QUOTE ]

Typically, for a player on a losing team to win MVP, they have to have a comparatively historic season, not just a great season. (Such as Andre Dawson in '87)

Hanley had a great '07, but not really any greater than Pujols or Holliday, except for accounting for position, and was pretty awful defensively.

Bump his stats up by 10-12% in the raw numbers, and he probably wins it, despite playing for the Marlins.