Master Index of Archived Threads


Vote

Edgy DC Nov 21 2006 10:25 PM

Name your top ten players in each league and let's produce our own MVPs.

Nymr83 Nov 21 2006 10:38 PM

it would be nice if we could get the same 32 voters as the NL has to compare numbers, if we fall a few short lets give the actual vote, win shares, and a few other things their own "ballot" American League 1. Mauer 2. Jeter 3. Santana 4. Ortiz 5. Morneau 6. Dye 7. Sizemore 8. Guerrero 9. Hafner 10. Thome National League 1. Howard 2. Pujols 3. Beltran 4. Berkman 5. Cabrera 6. Utley 7. Reyes 8. Wright 9. Jones, A. 10. Oswalt

attgig Nov 22 2006 01:24 AM

American League 1. Mauer 2. Jeter 3. Ortiz 4. Thomas 5. Dye 6. Santana 7. Hafner 8. Guerrero 9. Thome 10. Verlander National League 1. Pujols 2. Howard 3. Beltran 4. Berkman 5. Soriano 6. Utley 7. Cabrera 8. Reyes 9. Hoffman 10. Nomar

MFS62 Nov 22 2006 07:15 AM

Point of Order. Do you want the 10 players we think are the best in each league, or the ones we think are most valuable this year? There's a difference, especially if one player was injured for most of this year, but when healthy is one of the best. edit: or, if a great player had an off year this year, but is generally one of the best. Later

Edgy DC Nov 22 2006 07:55 AM

The 10 net winningest performances this year.

metsmarathon Nov 22 2006 10:15 AM

MFS62 wrote: Point of Order. Do you want the 10 players we think are the best in each league, or the ones we think are most valuable this year? There's a difference, especially if one player was injured for most of this year, but when healthy is one of the best. edit: or, if a great player had an off year this year, but is generally one of the best. Later it's not the most talented award. "net winningest" is likely the best way to describe what i think the mvp is trying to award.

Nymr83 Nov 22 2006 12:36 PM

less talking, more voting.

MFS62 Nov 22 2006 09:25 PM

Net winningest? Oh well, that answers about this year or career and eliminates some players (like Lee of the Cubs and Sheffield of the Yanks) who were injured this past year. So, here's how I prepared my list. I evaluated players: Against other player in their league Other players at their position Total contribution as a player. To me that includes defense. So some famous names from that league where pitchers don't bat are omitted from my list. This also means that I gave extra consideration to players who play more difficult defensive positions. I also considered pitchers on this list who I felt were the "top" in what they do. Then I ranked each league's players against each other to come up with my rankings(best to worst among their league's top 10). Here goes: AL Santana Vlad Guerrero Carlos Guillen Jater Mariano Rivera Joe Mauer Jermayne Dye Manny Ramirez A-Rod Robinson Cano NL Ryan Howard Albert Pujols Webb Soriano Beltran Reyes Utley Oswalt A. Jones Bay Later

Nymr83 Nov 22 2006 10:20 PM

i agree that being a DH should hurt you, but not more than being a terrible fielder, leaving Ortiz completely off the ballot isn't fair.

metsmarathon Nov 22 2006 10:36 PM

vlad?!

patona314 Nov 22 2006 10:49 PM

this top 10 is a waste of time. too many avenues to contemplate. example.. how does mike young equate to derek jeter. or albert equate to ryan.. etc etc etc

Edgy DC Nov 22 2006 11:22 PM

A waste of your time, maybe.

metirish Nov 22 2006 11:25 PM

Wham... A question,how do they determine who votes, I read Klapisch today and he said he was one of two area writers that had a vote ,the other was at the Bergen Record....Klap voted for Jeter and the other guy voted for the winner....how does it work?

Frayed Knot Nov 22 2006 11:39 PM

The votes rotate via some method governed by the BBWA (Baseball writers assoc). Especially in a big city like NYC where there are more writers than awards, a guy from the Post might get the NL ROY vote, while the NYDN may get the AL CY, the Bergen Record could get one of the MVPs, etc. The NYTimes doesn't allow their guys to vote - trying to avoid even the appearance of conflict of interest.

metsmarathon Nov 22 2006 11:41 PM

its the offseason. what else is there to do than waste time with rankings both meaningless and meaningful?

patona314 Nov 23 2006 07:04 AM

="Edgy DC"]A waste of your time, maybe. AL ortiz santana rivera dye thomas jeter morneau sizemore damon suzuki NL howard pujols reyes soriano beltran cabrera berkman jones hoffman

MFS62 Nov 23 2006 08:40 AM

Last time I heard, to be eligible to vote, a writer has to currently cover baseball as his (her?) regular beat, and have covered baseball for at least ten consecutive years. Many of the long-term writers in New York have moved on to become "columnists" (e.g.- Mike Lupica) and I don't think they're eligible to vote. Later

Iubitul Nov 23 2006 08:50 AM

Frayed Knot wrote: The NYTimes doesn't allow their guys to vote - trying to avoid even the appearance of conflict of interest. Why do I find this ironic and funny?

Frayed Knot Nov 23 2006 08:59 AM

The 10-year rule as a BBWA member is the minimum to get an [u:cfc5f6ecc3]HoF[/u:cfc5f6ecc3] ballot. Once a writer has obtained that they don't lose it - although some choose to stop voting if they no longer feel they follow the sport closely enough. For the yearly awards I'm sure a seniority thing plays into it but I don't know of any strict cut-off date. The various BBW chapters distribute them in each city among the regular beat and all-purpose baseball writers on a rotating basis; ergo an overall columnist like Lupica wouldn't be in that rotation but strictly baseball guys like Klapisch, Madden, Heyman, etc., would even though they don't cover just one team specifically.

Frayed Knot Nov 23 2006 09:55 AM

Iubitul wrote: Why do I find this ironic and funny? For the same reason as I do.

Nymr83 Nov 23 2006 11:08 AM

Iubitul wrote: ="Frayed Knot"]The NYTimes doesn't allow their guys to vote - trying to avoid even the appearance of conflict of interest. Why do I find this ironic and funny? because the Times is one of the most biased and slanted papers in existence, to the point that their anti-war views led them to omit any mention of a soldier from NY being post-humously awarded the congressional medal of honor for jumping on a live grenade to protect his fellow soldiers? but hey, its nice to know the sports section ain't conflicted, because thats whats really important

Nymr83 Nov 23 2006 11:11 AM

Frayed Knot wrote: The 10-year rule as a BBWA member is the minimum to get an HoF ballot. Once a writer has obtained that they don't lose it - although some choose to stop voting if they no longer feel they follow the sport closely enough. For the yearly awards I'm sure a seniority thing plays into it but I don't know of any strict cut-off date. The various BBW chapters distribute them in each city among the regular beat and all-purpose baseball writers on a rotating basis; ergo an overall columnist like Lupica wouldn't be in that rotation but strictly baseball guys like Klapisch, Madden, Heyman, etc., would even though they don't cover just one team specifically. i really feel that half the voters don't know whats going on outside their own city (and maybe its biggest rival(s).) they should let the managers or fellow players vote, if the players got it wrong i'd be more able to stomach it.

metsmarathon Nov 23 2006 09:52 PM

the players suffer from the same problem as the writers - lack of exposure to the out-of-division teams. improved definition of the judging criteria, and enforced visibility into the votes is likely the best method, regardless of who actually pulls the lever or hangs the chad.

metirish Nov 23 2006 09:55 PM

] because the Times is one of the most biased and slanted papers in existence, to the point that their anti-war views led them to omit any mention of a soldier from NY being post-humously awarded the congressional medal of honor for jumping on a live grenade to protect his fellow soldiers? but hey, its nice to know the sports section ain't conflicted, because thats whats really important yet the NYT help sell this war to the nation with the reporting of Judith Miller,she's gone now though.

Nymr83 Nov 23 2006 10:12 PM

your liberal koolaid is too hard to stomach, i prefer the blue and orange stuff Sal accused everyone of downing. there is ZERO excuse for what the Times did.

metirish Nov 23 2006 10:20 PM

Are you saying that Miller's reporting on WMD's didn't help sell this war....shit it was her false reporting that got her fired.....and I never drink koolaid...and I am not a lib...I'm a free thinker and make up my own mind on issues...

Elster88 Nov 23 2006 10:24 PM

This discussion really doesn't belong in this forum.

patona314 Nov 24 2006 07:12 AM

Elster88 wrote: This discussion really doesn't belong in this forum. agreed, but let me say this, i'm a republican and reading the sunday times is one of highlights of my week. go figure

Frayed Knot Nov 24 2006 09:45 AM

]i really feel that half the voters don't know whats going on outside their own city (and maybe its biggest rival(s).) they should let the managers or fellow players vote, if the players got it wrong i'd be more able to stomach it. The individual votes aren't traditionally released so it's tough to claim that some sort of regional bias is the reason behind bad votes. And the managers vote on the 'Gold Glove' awards and those usually turn out worse than anything the writers are responsible for.

iramets Nov 24 2006 10:45 AM

I for one would be happiest if the players voted. Then it's not regional or any bias on the part of stupid writers or dopey fans or anything but what your peers thought of you. "Hey, Derek, what can I tell you--the men you play against think you stink on ice, okay? Deal with that."

MFS62 Nov 24 2006 02:32 PM

I heard on the radio the other day that one of the Chicago voters, Joe Cowely (it could have been Crowley, so I'm not sure if it is the ex-MLB pitcher), is an admitted "homer" and has an admitted anti- New York bias. So, when it came time for him to vote, he put Jeter as his #6. Later

Frayed Knot Nov 24 2006 04:22 PM

The guy who put Jeter 6th was one of the Chicago writers but it's not the ex-pitcher. Also, I'd love to hear the basis for the claim that he's "an admitted homer" - as if a writer who's given a vote then goes and publicly states that he makes a regular habit of tainting his ballot.

metsmarathon Nov 24 2006 04:24 PM

its also the same guy who had pierzynski at #10.

MFS62 Nov 24 2006 04:56 PM

="Frayed Knot"] Also, I'd love to hear the basis for the claim that he's "an admitted homer" - as if a writer who's given a vote then goes and publicly states that he makes a regular habit of tainting his ballot. That was the comment by the ESPN radio personality who says he has known the writer for a long time. Later

Frayed Knot Nov 24 2006 05:40 PM

Well that's kinda the point. Someone saying he's a homer, or that his votes tend to indicate he is, is one thing. Having the guy come out and say; 'oh yeah, I rearrange my votes according to what city the guy plays in ... do it all the time!', is quite another. Look, I can't justify voting Jeter 6th either, but with approx 200 ballots cast over the course of 'awards season' (ROY, MOY, CY, MVP x 2 leagues) it would be a miracle if there weren't a handful of votes you or I disagreed with. Doesn't necc follow that those were dishonest. It's also worth noting that the only way this guy's ballot could have given us a different winner is if he not only moved Jeter up to 1st but also dropped Morneau down to 5th or 6th (just moving Jeter up wouldn't have been enough) which would have put his ballot just as out of whack with the rest of his bretheren.

Frayed Knot Nov 26 2006 10:49 AM

A discussion about [url=http://www.newsday.com/sports/baseball/ny-sphot264990534nov26,0,7133131.story?coll=ny-baseball-headlines]whether writers should continue to vote[/url] Seems that a few papers - Los Angeles Times, Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Baltimore Sun, South Florida Sun-Sentinel, Palm Beach Post - have, in the last few years, joined long-time boycotters NYTimes & Washington Post in dropping out of the process.