 |
View Old Forum Thread
Old Forum Index » Sim Forums » Check This Out! » Interesting MVP choice
redcped
Here are the lines for 6 guys, the first 5 from my team and then one from the 2nd-place team. All 5 of the top MVP vote-getters are in this group. How would you have ranked them?
Player 1 1B 124 542 115 180 31 8 31 85 66 97 18 4 7 .992 .401 .590 .332
Player 2 LF 152 613 126 206 29 10 24 94 74 102 20 5 4 .942 .408 .533 .336
Player 3 RF 126 513 86 160 22 8 28 84 46 88 2 3 3 .920 .371 .550 .312
Player 4 3B 129 528 89 158 22 6 26 99 59 80 8 4 13 .878 .367 .511 .299
Player 5 CF 160 661 121 194 22 7 48 138 62 116 12 7 2 .917 .351 .566 .293
2nd place team's top vote getter:
Player 6 3B 148 635 121 216 33 11 17 85 62 83 20 8 16 .905 .398 .507 .340
Interesting MVP choice
December 12, 2011 at 03:43PM View BBCode
So I think ABE had a hard time picking from among my lineup (runaway league champ), because the leader changed a few times. I'm curious to see if people agree that the system worked in this case.Here are the lines for 6 guys, the first 5 from my team and then one from the 2nd-place team. All 5 of the top MVP vote-getters are in this group. How would you have ranked them?
Player 1 1B 124 542 115 180 31 8 31 85 66 97 18 4 7 .992 .401 .590 .332
Player 2 LF 152 613 126 206 29 10 24 94 74 102 20 5 4 .942 .408 .533 .336
Player 3 RF 126 513 86 160 22 8 28 84 46 88 2 3 3 .920 .371 .550 .312
Player 4 3B 129 528 89 158 22 6 26 99 59 80 8 4 13 .878 .367 .511 .299
Player 5 CF 160 661 121 194 22 7 48 138 62 116 12 7 2 .917 .351 .566 .293
2nd place team's top vote getter:
Player 6 3B 148 635 121 216 33 11 17 85 62 83 20 8 16 .905 .398 .507 .340
redcped
Player 1 led the league in OPS by 34 points and SLG by 24 points but had a 21-day injury.
Player 6 was 2nd in the league in hitting, with Player 2 and Player 1 just behind him.
Player 5 led the league in HR by 9 and RBI by 16. He was 2nd in SLG and tied for 1st in AB.
Player 2 was 2nd in Runs and tied for 2nd in Hits.
Player 6 led the league in Hits.
December 12, 2011 at 03:49PM View BBCode
A few additional notes:Player 1 led the league in OPS by 34 points and SLG by 24 points but had a 21-day injury.
Player 6 was 2nd in the league in hitting, with Player 2 and Player 1 just behind him.
Player 5 led the league in HR by 9 and RBI by 16. He was 2nd in SLG and tied for 1st in AB.
Player 2 was 2nd in Runs and tied for 2nd in Hits.
Player 6 led the league in Hits.
barterer2002
December 12, 2011 at 05:44PM View BBCode
I probably would pick Player 5 given the information given. I haven't run the info but would initially guess that ABE selected Player 3
redcped
Voting went:
Player 2
Player 5
Player 1
Player 3
Player 6
For much of the season Player 5 wasn't even in the top 5 despite huge power numbers. Once his AVG climbed from the .270s to the .290s he moved in there.
Player 1 was winning easily before he got hurt.
December 12, 2011 at 05:50PM View BBCode
I also felt Player 5 deserved it since he was dominant in the main power categories and had the AB. His AVG was solid enough not to hurt him.Voting went:
Player 2
Player 5
Player 1
Player 3
Player 6
For much of the season Player 5 wasn't even in the top 5 despite huge power numbers. Once his AVG climbed from the .270s to the .290s he moved in there.
Player 1 was winning easily before he got hurt.
Metsamess
December 15, 2011 at 08:03AM View BBCode
Player 5 deserved the award. His home run and rbi numbers are the two stats that really stand out. And, a .293 average for a guy who can do that much damage with the bat is just fine for anybody not named Albert Pujols.
Metsamess
December 15, 2011 at 08:03AM View BBCode
Player 5 deserved the award. His home run and rbi numbers are the two stats that really stand out. And, a .293 average for a guy who can do that much damage with the bat is just fine for anybody not named Albert Pujols.
mukilteomike
Player 2 was the next best hitter. If the battle was just between these two, you could talk me into either being the MVP...
except for the fact that Player 5 should have been the easy MVP winner. I think it's fairly obvious that #5 would have won in MLB. 48 HRs/138 RBIs vs. 24/94 are the big numbers that would supersede the BA/OBP percentages.
ABE makes mistakes in close calls quite frequently. How about putting up the vote totals? I'd like to see how close it was.
December 15, 2011 at 08:30AM View BBCode
Player 1 was definitely the best hitter. His injury, though, cost him a shot at the MVP.Player 2 was the next best hitter. If the battle was just between these two, you could talk me into either being the MVP...
except for the fact that Player 5 should have been the easy MVP winner. I think it's fairly obvious that #5 would have won in MLB. 48 HRs/138 RBIs vs. 24/94 are the big numbers that would supersede the BA/OBP percentages.
ABE makes mistakes in close calls quite frequently. How about putting up the vote totals? I'd like to see how close it was.
redcped
1 Rafael Guerrero Brooklyn Blind Bats 1,521
2 Maurice LaRussa Brooklyn Blind Bats 1,470
3 Hal Lacy Brooklyn Blind Bats 1,409
4 Steve Lewis Brooklyn Blind Bats 1,366
5 Mike Rigney San Diego Blind Fury 1,321
Link to team stats:
http://www.simdynasty.com/stats.jsp?mode=batter&teamid=10136&year=2071
[Edited on 12-15-2011 by redcped]
December 15, 2011 at 06:23PM View BBCode
Rank Name Team Votes1 Rafael Guerrero Brooklyn Blind Bats 1,521
2 Maurice LaRussa Brooklyn Blind Bats 1,470
3 Hal Lacy Brooklyn Blind Bats 1,409
4 Steve Lewis Brooklyn Blind Bats 1,366
5 Mike Rigney San Diego Blind Fury 1,321
Link to team stats:
http://www.simdynasty.com/stats.jsp?mode=batter&teamid=10136&year=2071
[Edited on 12-15-2011 by redcped]
barterer2002
Rollins instead of Howard in 2007
Kent over Bonds in 2000
Both cases where you could argue that the teammate that won the award had lesser stats than the one that didn't. In both cases, as with Jason's here, the guy who didn't win had previously won the MVP award.
There are plenty of other examples for non teammates where a previous MVP lost a close vote to someone new
Votto over Pujols in 2010
Pedroia over Morneau in 2008
Howard over Pujols in 2006
Suzuki over Giambi in 2001
Giambi over Thomas in 2000
Kent over Bonds in 2000
Jones over Bagwell in 1999
This isn't to say that a former MVP can't win again. The formula and MLB both clearly allow for multiple MVPs but there is a small bias that when presented with two qualified potential MVPs, with all else being either equal or close, give it to the one who hasn't won before.
In Jason's case here. LaRussa would have been the MVP by a slight margain had he never won before
December 15, 2011 at 08:28PM View BBCode
I tend to think that the voting in this case follows several MLB votes. SpecificallyRollins instead of Howard in 2007
Kent over Bonds in 2000
Both cases where you could argue that the teammate that won the award had lesser stats than the one that didn't. In both cases, as with Jason's here, the guy who didn't win had previously won the MVP award.
There are plenty of other examples for non teammates where a previous MVP lost a close vote to someone new
Votto over Pujols in 2010
Pedroia over Morneau in 2008
Howard over Pujols in 2006
Suzuki over Giambi in 2001
Giambi over Thomas in 2000
Kent over Bonds in 2000
Jones over Bagwell in 1999
This isn't to say that a former MVP can't win again. The formula and MLB both clearly allow for multiple MVPs but there is a small bias that when presented with two qualified potential MVPs, with all else being either equal or close, give it to the one who hasn't won before.
In Jason's case here. LaRussa would have been the MVP by a slight margain had he never won before
mukilteomike
December 16, 2011 at 02:10AM View BBCode
Aaaaaaaaaah. We weren't told about the slugger who won the award the previous year. That is, indeed, an important factor. That being the case, I don't dispute the results. I wouldn't say the MVP is necessarily correct, but it isn't "wrong" either. It really could have gone a number of ways.
tm4559
http://beta.simdynasty.com/player.jsp?id=65783
this from the same team, led all players in all star votes, led the league in home runs. it was fifth in the MVP voting (two other players on the same team finished ahead of it in the MVP vote)
http://beta.simdynasty.com/player.jsp?player=nobody&mode=stats&id=66638
it won the MVP last season, so, got the deduction i guess for this season. the other thing got the bonus for shortstop and all. it (schofield) was second in all star votes overall. this stuff is kind of fun truly. Little had a monster year in 2106, beating out a centerfielder and a catcher from two other teams, schofield (ss) and the first baseman from its own team. a third baseman has to have a really big year to win the MVP.
December 16, 2011 at 02:40PM View BBCode
yeah, this one won the MVP in the beta leaguehttp://beta.simdynasty.com/player.jsp?id=65783
this from the same team, led all players in all star votes, led the league in home runs. it was fifth in the MVP voting (two other players on the same team finished ahead of it in the MVP vote)
http://beta.simdynasty.com/player.jsp?player=nobody&mode=stats&id=66638
it won the MVP last season, so, got the deduction i guess for this season. the other thing got the bonus for shortstop and all. it (schofield) was second in all star votes overall. this stuff is kind of fun truly. Little had a monster year in 2106, beating out a centerfielder and a catcher from two other teams, schofield (ss) and the first baseman from its own team. a third baseman has to have a really big year to win the MVP.
redcped
That is an excellent explanation.
December 16, 2011 at 03:38PM View formatted
You are viewing the raw post code; this allows you to copy a message with BBCode formatting intact.
I actually had no idea about the previous winner deduction.
That is an excellent explanation.
tm4559
December 16, 2011 at 03:47PM View BBCode
yeah, bryan is all over this thing. the previous winner thing is one of those things he has in there that makes the past winners (of the real life award) come out right in more years. it really doesn't matter whethr the real life voters had that in their decision or not (nobody knows what they collectively think), it just matters that it makes the formula work better to pick the past winners. it is just really quite awesome.Pages: 1