“July 4, 1994 I was at the Cubs/Rockies double-header at Wrigley Field. The first game had a long rain delay, the second went 15 innings. Midway through game 2 nearly everyone had gone home, and 2 friends and I were sitting in the first row, right behind the visitors on-deck circle. We had been taunting and drinking all day (I’m not a Cubs fan, so I was taunting both sides :D ), and then Rockies 3rd baseman Charlie Hayes stepped into the on-deck circle. Hayes had gotten hit by a pitch earlier that season, breaking his cheek bone. Thus, he wore a clear plastic shield on his face for protection. Of course, this was too much for us to resist.”

The amazing thing for me is that Bichette finished 2nd in the voting and Maddux finished 3rd. Bichette had 0.3 WAR; Maddux had 8.8. FWIW, Hayes had 1.2, and was an above-average defensive third baseman according to TZ for years. Of course, 1995 was a decade before sabermetrics was invented. :)

Well, maybe you do. He’s never finished higher than 7th for MVP voting, which is just weird since his average ranges between .280 and .330 and he’s basically a 30HR 100RBI 100RS, 4-time AS 4-time SS guy … and plays on a winning team (to say the least).

Once you factor in his position, and how much better he hits than the average 2B, and it’s ridiculous he’s no a perennial top 5 MVP candidate.

I lloked at the voting and players of the 06-09 years, and well, some of those years there are just some monstrous offensive performances. But, in 08 he finished behind 3 pitchers, Geovany Soto, and Ryan Howard’s 48HRs. I think we could say he should not finish behind either of those 5. Even this year, he’s still finishing behind the corner sluggers with big counting numbers. Doesn;t look like many voters are willing to put a guy with 30HRs in front of guys with 40 HRs, unless his name is Hanley Ramirez.

Even Sandberg had 3 years of top 5 final voting, including the year he won it (84).

Maybe the 09 post-season clued the country into who is the “real deal” in red pinstripes. I just love watching his short, powerful stroke. I can’t figure out how any pitcher is able to throw anything by him.

And there isn’t anything that we can do about it, is there. I mean, other than write angry letters and stuff like that. we can’t actually change anything.

God, this was a terrible revolation for thanksgiving day.

First of all, thanks for the help in things like “quote” advice and things of that nature. I’m new here and don’t know all of the formatting things associated with the website, and I occassionally post from my iphone where things like the “reply” button are not visible or featured.

As for being contrarian … I completely agree. That’s likely NOT the best way to jump right into a new forum/situation, and I apologize. I’ve made a stink in some areas where I wish I could go back and edit some of my comments or at least change my approach. I’m not really trying to be a dick, but understand how that could be the case. I’ll work on it.

As far as sabermetrics not being as prominent as some think …

[1] I think, in some areas, players and FO people (and especially some fans) are WAY ahead of where some voters are, and I was specifically talking about the prominence of sabermetrics in awards VOTING … not specifically about the prominence of sabermetrics in general.
[2] I would also point out that sabermetrics are also being included in next generation video games, which is pretty cool to me as I was thrilled to see Win Expectancy included in 2K baseball games, as I am a video game nut going all the way back to Microleague on Apple 2e and Earl Weaver Baseball on IBM.
[3] At this point, I am like 70/30 in my approach of (A) traditional baseball thinking, and (B) “new” thinking (sabermetrically). So, I likely have some advancement to make in my own thinking.
[4] Building on #3, I (and I believe others too) learn far more in a debate (even losing the debate) than I/we do in any manner of discussion.
[5] What I and others that are fairly new to sabermetrics need is more “teaching” or explaining and less “you’re an idiot” stuff.
[6] When I do argue “against evidence” I am not so much arguing against the “consensus”, but the application of the “consensus” to all situations. Ex: I believe Jeff Kent’s drastic change in 2002 performance was due to hitting in front of Bonds rather than behinid him, although I am aware that there is no overall or general merit to the “protection” arguement. I also think it depends on the hitter being ‘protected’ and the hitter providing ‘protection’.

Most of the other stuff I’ve been getting hammered on, namely giving extra points to AW50 and CC29 for pitching outstanding down the stretch run, or pitching for a winner is more preference than it is evidence.

So, I will tone down much of my contrarian postings as I generally get along with everyone and don’t want to cast a negative tone on what I view as a very valuable website, I would also request more “instructing” in responses and less bashing. I certainly understand that when one comes on too strong, that the approach might not warrant anything more than a “you’re a moron” response. The ol “you make you bed, now lie in it” thing.

Having said that, I would rather be HERE getting schooled on things that I might not know so much about, than be elsewhere having others just agree with whatever I say because I had a lot of success as a player and coach … if that makes sense.

So, I would like to apologize to all for my initial approach and tone, and being contrary as a newbie to the site. I should have “teo-tested” the waters, before just “cannonballing” into the pool … splashing water on everyone.

~blockquote~text~/blockquote~

Replace the ~ with a where appropriate.