Master Index of Archived Threads


It's Rollins

metsguyinmichigan Nov 20 2007 12:02 PM

According to AP

TransMonk Nov 20 2007 12:04 PM

Yeah, no breakdown of votes yet. Rollins would have been 4th on my list.

HahnSolo Nov 20 2007 12:07 PM

http://www.baseballwriters.org/awards/2007/2007_NL_mvp.html Wright fourth.

G-Fafif Nov 20 2007 12:11 PM

Geez, four writers weren't Wrighters at all.

Edgy DC Nov 20 2007 12:12 PM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Nov 20 2007 12:43 PM

Oh well, file it under increased motivation for next year. Already he softened up after nearly winning a silly homerun contest last year, possibly costing him the hot start that would have put him over the top in this contest. We certainly don't want him to get the dreaded Greg Brady Big Head Disease. I welcome the slings and enthusastically greet the arrival of arrows.

metsguyinmichigan Nov 20 2007 12:13 PM

G-Fafif wrote: Geez, four writers weren't Wrighters at all. Heck, he didn't even get a first-place vote.

HahnSolo Nov 20 2007 12:13 PM

Lots of guys who voted him 5th place and below. Surprising.

sharpie Nov 20 2007 12:14 PM

Reyes in 16th with 16 points, Beltran tied for 20th with 6.

Edgy DC Nov 20 2007 12:15 PM

Reyes gets one sixth-place vote, two seventh-, one ninth-placer and one tenth-. Beltran walks home with one eighth place vote. Tulowitzki outpaces Ryan Braun in a rematch.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Nov 20 2007 12:15 PM

I'm blind. I really thought Wright would win this thing. He needs more exposure, obviously.

metsguyinmichigan Nov 20 2007 12:16 PM

G-Fafif wrote: Geez, four writers weren't Wrighters at all. Leaving him off the ballot entirely is inexcusable! Freaking Carlos Marmol got a vote!

bmfc1 Nov 20 2007 12:16 PM

HahnSolo wrote: Lots of guys who voted him 5th place and below. Surprising. Plus, four clowns didn't even have Wright on their ballot!

Valadius Nov 20 2007 12:20 PM

Seriously, Carlos Freaking Marmol?!?!?!? That Chicago writer is a freaking imbecile!!! I knew he'd come in fourth.

G-Fafif Nov 20 2007 12:21 PM

I guess we always have to remember how this exercise lends itself to a bit of myopia down the ballot. The writers from the Central or West who may have seen Wright early and then hardly at all can be if not excused then almost expected to skip over him a bit. He's just some New York player to them and they're more focused on who they see every day or at least 19 times a year. Not necessarily proper, but the way it goes.

seawolf17 Nov 20 2007 12:24 PM

Carlos Marmol?!? Somebody revoke this guy's BBWAA membership and give it to me.

SteveJRogers Nov 20 2007 12:35 PM

Not to go all Yankee Fan about this, but who cares, all that matters is if Wright ends up with a ring. The MVP thing can be chalked up the same as the No-Hitter, as the years go by it seems more of a good quirk that the Mets never had one than if they did.

Valadius Nov 20 2007 12:47 PM

No, all that matters is that Wright ends up with a ring in a Mets uniform.

Edgy DC Nov 20 2007 01:07 PM

An MVP and a no-hitter are very different things.

Benjamin Grimm Nov 20 2007 01:10 PM

Yes. While I no longer give a fig about a no-hitter, having a Mets player have an MVP season would be a very nice thing. It's sustained enjoyment over six months rather than nine innings.

attgig Nov 20 2007 01:19 PM

wow, Neyer actually defends Wright. In the insider blog, he talks about how he asked someone why not Wright, and they were saying because he didn't carry the team down the stretch. And then Neyer goes on about all the stats he put out down the stretch, and how that's totally wrong. He still thinks Rollins goes ahead of Wright, but he puts Wright above Fielder.

duan Nov 21 2007 10:06 AM

well Joe Sheehan constructed a decent argument for Pujols and then Wright. He also made exact reference that Wright had a fan freakin' tastic September and the Mets would have never got to being in contention on the last day without him.

OlerudOwned Nov 21 2007 01:43 PM

http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/7470516 Dayn Perry, a contributer to FOX Sports who I've never heard because really, who wants to listen to logical arguments and all the crap, sez it shoulda been David. ]On the year, Wright authored a batting line of .325 AVG/.416 OBP/.546 SLG with 74 extra-base hits, all while playing his home games in a park that's quite tough on right-handed batters. Throw in his Gold Glove defense and his 34 steals in 39 attempts, and you've got an MVP season. It's also worth noting that Wright hit like a house afire down the stretch (.394 AVG/.516 OBP/.657 SLG in August and .352 AVG/.432 OBP/.602 SLG in September/October), even as the rest of the team fell apart. He also delivered in clutch situations: Wright batted .310 with runners in scoring position, .332 with runners on, .346 in "close and late" situations, .375 when the score was tied, .353 when the margin was one run, and .366 when the margin was two runs. Heck, Wright even slugged a robust .614 in games against the rival Phillies this season. When it came to producing in the clutch, Wright this year was better than Rollins, Holliday and Fielder. Overall, once you correct for home park and positional scarcity, Wright has better offensive numbers than anyone in the NL except for Ramirez. Once defense is taken into account, Wright easily moves past Ramirez in terms of overall value. In other words, no matter how you slice the numbers, Wright was a better player in 2007 than Rollins or Holliday or Fielder or anyone else in the National League. As indicated in the brief discussion above, if you choose not to give the award to the best player in the league — Wright, who put up the best numbers and delivered in the clutch — in favor of an inferior player who happened to have better teammates, then you're penalizing said best player for things beyond his control. That doesn't make any sense. That's also why David Wright, without question, should have been the NL MVP. Word, broseph.