|
Yancy - "At a glance, it seems that the Schaefer method acknowledged more players, and was friendlier to Reyes, Floyd, Wagner, Heilman, and Lo Duca, but less friendly to Castro, Matsui, and Franco."
I think some of the discrepancies occur for the following reasons:
1. With only one vote to cast, it generally goes to the player having the best game. Generally the player getting the most votes in a poll is the same player getting the most Schaeffer points on the ballots for that game.
2. Being able to vote for only the most outstanding player, there is no room to recognize other players that made lesser (yet still important) contributions to the Mets cause in the game. As a result fewer players get recognition. For instance, Reyes was second on the team in nominations with 10, yet he only received 13 votes for the month. Floyd was nominated 5 times, yet he received only six votes all month.
3. One outstanding performance (as in the case of Julio Franco and Chad Bradford) can lead to a landslide victory in which the player garners virtually all of the votes registered. One or two dominant performances, can significantly boost a players postion in the overall standings. Franco received only two nominations, yet he received 14 POTG votes and won the balloting in one game. Chad Bradford won the balloting in the only game he was nominated in.
4. Relievers get robbed in this format. For instance, Wagner received only one POTG vote in the month of April, while Heilman received no POTG votes.
Essentially, the Schaeffer voting better recognizes all the players that made significant contributions in the game and spreads the love. The polls are a one shot deal that essentially recognize only the player viewed as having the most outstanding game.
| 
