I went to Cot’s today to check Robertson’s contract for incentives based on MVP or Cy Young votes. Unfortunately they weren’t there. Would have been awesome if he and some voter went halvsies on a $10,000 bonus.
Comment by peachesnnuts — November 21, 2011 @ 4:34 pm
Doesn’t really relate to the regular season MVP due to the time of the voting, but I think it’s at least worth noting Napoli was probably one strike away from being the World Series MVP. More people may actually take notice of his great 2011 regular season because of his strong showing in the WS.
Michael Young got a first place vote and finished 8th???? That is crazy.
Comment by Hurtlocker — November 21, 2011 @ 5:09 pm
It isn’t the worst MVP vote in recent memory. At the very least the writers have started looking at this season as opposed to operating a season behind while they make up for a mistake the previous year.
Not quite sure why Napoli couldn’t have another season like this. He’s always hit very well in Arlington, even in prior years. I’m not saying it will necessarily be next year, but I would expect one of the next 3 years to be 25+ HR and an average of 0.300+. With that said, as a part time player I don’t think the ceiling goes too much higher either.
As a Rangers fan, I nearly punched my laptop when I saw the voting results. I think you can argue MY vs Kinsler, but Beltre and napoli were the 2 best players on the team. C’mooooon maaaaan!!!!!
Comment by Keystone Heavy — November 21, 2011 @ 5:59 pm
Steve, as someone who will use this MVP ballot as a chance to make snide remarks about the voters, allow me to say: thank you. You’re right–I should be focusing on the players who did well, not the writers who didn’t.
That being said, let’s see if I can give a shout-out or two….
Elvis Andrus: Best BsR and 4.5 WAR made for the best season of his career.
Alexi Ramirez: Not quite as good a BsR or batting line, but his lightly better fielding contributed to a 4.9 WAR this year.
Derek Jeter: Just kidding.
And…in a very different light (and as a Yankees fan), Jesus Montero. Small sample size and .400 BABIP aside, he still had above a 10% BB% and a .6 WAR in only 18 games. I’m excited to see what he does next year.
Let’s see if we can expose the following voters who deserve to have their vote revoked:
Michael Young 1st(Evan Grant, he revealed this himself), Michael Young 2nd, 3rd, 4th, or 5th
Jacoby Ellsbury 10th
David Robertson 10th
Jose Bautista 7th, 8th, 9th
Curtis Granderson 1st(3 offenders)
Anyone who put Verlander 1st but left Sabathia completely off the ballot(Since only 2 had Sabathia on there, we have 11 offenders)
He can’t have another season like this because few people ever have another season like this, let alone a single season like this. How many first basemen do you know that hit a 1.000+ OPS every season? And now how many catchers. Never been done.
Your list is exactly why they ask multiple people to vote, rather than just having one person vote many times.
Many of the things you think unthinkable seem perfectly reasonable to me. Curtis Granderson first? Why not? Some might see him as the best player on the team with the best record in the league (and a team considered to be an underdog going into the season).
Sabathia left off the ballot? Many voters reasonable don’t like to vote for pitchers. Especially pitchers who aren’t even clearly the most valuable player on their own team, let alone the league.
I’m looking at Michael Young’s stats trying to figure out what might theoretically justify a first-place vote. Could it be that he led in hits? Maybe a combination of that, the batting average (T-2) and topping 100 RBI? I’m really not sure what that voter’s explanation would be.
Comment by Justin Bailey — November 21, 2011 @ 9:43 pm
That was not meant to be a reply to that comment.
Comment by Justin Bailey — November 21, 2011 @ 9:51 pm
100% agreed. That Napoli received zero votes is a travesty of justice.
He could and likely will put up impressive seasons with the bat in the future, but I’d be surprised if he hit .300+ multiple times. He doesn’t have the track record of hitting for that kind of average, but he doesn’t really need the BA to remain a very valuable contributor.
Why not Granderson 1st? A .262 hitter who ranked 10th in the AL with a 24.5 K% and whose strongest offensive attribute, his HR power, was greatly inflated by the most home run-friendly ballpark for a left handed hitter in baseball. Did I mention the below average defense?
“Sabathia left off the ballot? Many voters reasonble don’t like to vote for pitchers.”
That is exactly why I said that any voter who put Verlander first AND left Sabathia off the ballot should have their vote revoked. If a voter is giving a pitcher full consideration, it’s utterly unjustifiable to have Verlander first and Sabathia nowhere to be found in the top 10
“Especially pitchers who aren’t even clearly the most valuable player on their own team, let alone the league.”
Sabathia isn’t the most valuable pitcher on his own team? Are you out of your mind? He was 1st in the AL in WAR. He was a full 4 WAR above any other Yankees pitcher. I can tell I’m not dealing with the normal high-intellectual capacity fangraphs reader. Please go back to espn.com
Bill’s point (and it was a fair one) is that a voter CAN make a logically consistent case for excluding pitchers, but there’s NO way you can reasonably vote for Verlander (esp. first overall) but then exclude Sabathia when their seasons were so similar.
Greatly inflated? His ISO was .020 higher at home, hardly “greatly inflated,” especially when we consider that players typically perform better at home. His wOBA and wRC+ were identical at home and on the road, and both were 6th in the AL overall. There are legitimate questions about how accurately his 2011 UZR reflects his defense. I wouldn’t have voted him first, but it’s not horrifically indefensible to do so, and the fact that you used batting average to claim it was makes me wonder how exactly you were evaluating candidates.
Comment by Yirmiyahu — November 22, 2011 @ 7:53 am
The rules state that you cannot categorically exclude pitchers and that you have to consider everyone. If you do that you should not be allowed to vote for MVP
Comment by IvanGrushenko — November 22, 2011 @ 7:56 am
Russell Martin: most valuable catcher in the league, after being non-tendered.
Alejandro De Aza: 2.8 WAR in a 54-game callup.
And you should add Melky Cabrera to the Kotchman/Francoeur category.
Comment by Yirmiyahu — November 22, 2011 @ 8:11 am
Man, I totally screwed the Mariners. Too bad I couldn’t see that I was doing it.
Comment by Casey Kotchman — November 22, 2011 @ 10:14 am
It was a Texas writer, of course.
He said, “My eyes told me Michael Young meant more to the Texas Rangers and their success than any player in the American League.”
The guy’s name is Evan Grant.
Comment by Chozo Ruins — November 22, 2011 @ 11:42 am
Despite your typical fangraphs high intellectual capacity, you seem to have missed my point. The point was that reasonable people might disagree. The reason we take polls is to find a consensus from the diversity of opinion. Yours isn’t the only valid opinion. Disagreement with you is not evidence that someone should have their voting rights revoked.
I don’t think the rules state anything about excluding anyone. I think the rules stipulate that all players regardless of position can be considered. However, if a voter prefers not to vote for pitchers, that is their right.
I don’t think it necessarily logically incongruent to vote for Verlander but not Sabathia. This can happen if a voter does not vote for pitchers except under extreme circumstances. Suppose a voter sees Verlander’s performance as one for the ages, while CC’s performance was just a typical good year for a starting pitcher. A voter who thinks this way may have no problem casting a vote for an alltime performance while ignoring run of the mill performances from other good pitchers. I suspect this is what happened.
i think its justifiable. Maybe not too agreeable but you can make a case for michael young. i know i know from my name im obviously a rangers fan…but still this guy is a total face of the franchise, he played in EVERY infield position (yes, he did have some, uh, minor fielding issues). but still if it werent for michael young, really i dont think the rangers would have won 90 games. Because of his presense (just ask any ranger) i think you can argue he provided 10 wins for the rangers.
and oh yeah mike napoli and ian kinsler were the best rangers by far, but their presense and leadership still werent equal to that of michael young
Comment by dannyrangers32 — November 22, 2011 @ 9:15 pm