 |
View Old Forum Thread
Old Forum Index » Other Stuff » Sports Talk » Five Paths towards stupidity
ME
and some explanation why on the second page.
Five Paths towards stupidity
September 15, 2005 at 12:59AM View BBCode
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=neel/050914&num=1and some explanation why on the second page.
FuriousGiorge
September 15, 2005 at 01:23AM View BBCode
This bandwagon is gaining momentum. My guess is Andruw with a u will end up with the MVP.
ME
September 15, 2005 at 01:25AM View BBCode
There needs to be a rule that players who can't spell their own first names right can't win the MVP. Andruw Jones (and Jhonny Peralta, and any player named "Wladimir") piss me off every time I have to read their name.
whiskybear
I could care less if Andruw Jones wins MVP. Sure, he won't deserve it, but if the proper guy won every award you wouldn't have any reason to spout "this is gay" all about this message board, and the world would lose a little of the latent sparkle-pixie-fairy-magic that you lend it. Shine on, you crazy diamond!
September 15, 2005 at 02:23AM View BBCode
Speaking of paths, there has to be some 12-step program to curb your endless fellation of sabermetrics, ME.I could care less if Andruw Jones wins MVP. Sure, he won't deserve it, but if the proper guy won every award you wouldn't have any reason to spout "this is gay" all about this message board, and the world would lose a little of the latent sparkle-pixie-fairy-magic that you lend it. Shine on, you crazy diamond!
FuriousGiorge
It's a good thing that the voters are looking at a player because he plays a premium defensive position. They're about 3 years too late on the "Andruw Jones is the best defensive center fielder in the game" bandwagon, since he's not anymore, but it's a nice thought. Unfortunately, voters are still fixated on RBI's and home runs and the parsing of the term "valuable".
September 15, 2005 at 02:29AM View BBCode
Contemporize, man!It's a good thing that the voters are looking at a player because he plays a premium defensive position. They're about 3 years too late on the "Andruw Jones is the best defensive center fielder in the game" bandwagon, since he's not anymore, but it's a nice thought. Unfortunately, voters are still fixated on RBI's and home runs and the parsing of the term "valuable".
DeVeau31
Looks like I just might know what the fuck I'm talking about.
September 15, 2005 at 02:30AM View BBCode
Originally posted by DeVeau31 in another post
The Braves would be nowhere without Jones, the Cards will still be great without Pujols this year.
The Red Sox would NOT be in 1st place without Ortiz, the Yankees would still struggle without ARod.
Looks like I just might know what the fuck I'm talking about.
FuriousGiorge
September 15, 2005 at 02:31AM View BBCode
No, you're simply in tune with the dumber voters. I'm guessing this will make Whisky change his tune on Andruw's MVP case, which will go from "who cares" to "he'd better not win".
DeVeau31
Ortiz and Jones are not only putting up the best numbers, but they have also propelled their respective teams into the playoffs and division titles. Both teams, without each of these players, would NOT win their divisions, nor would they make the playoffs.
so, what this all means is that you really don't know shit about the award and it's meaning.
September 15, 2005 at 02:39AM View BBCode
everything I say you'll turn around on anyways, so this is no surprise either. MVP means Most Valuable Player. If that means by bat, by glove, by both, whatever, then that's who gets it.Ortiz and Jones are not only putting up the best numbers, but they have also propelled their respective teams into the playoffs and division titles. Both teams, without each of these players, would NOT win their divisions, nor would they make the playoffs.
so, what this all means is that you really don't know shit about the award and it's meaning.
whiskybear
Hey DeVeau, have you stabbed any hobos in the chest lately, holding the blade firmly in place while you felt the fading rhythms of their dying hearts, pumping their futile, wasteful sludge into your clenched fist?
September 15, 2005 at 02:43AM View BBCode
Originally posted by DeVeau31
Looks like I just might know what the <b>[Censored]</b> I'm talking about.
Hey DeVeau, have you stabbed any hobos in the chest lately, holding the blade firmly in place while you felt the fading rhythms of their dying hearts, pumping their futile, wasteful sludge into your clenched fist?
skierdude44
Uhhh... no. Last time I checked (which was probably a week ago) Jones had a .354 OBP which is average. Derek Lee was well over .400 which is very good. Derek Lee's slugging percentage is in the upper .600s and well you know what I feel compelled to look it up so...
Jones: .275/.358/.608 49 homers 124 rbi
Lee: .340/.420/.670 42 100
Lee is clearly the better player.
In the AL Ortiz' offensive numbers are not better than A-rod's and he plays no defense so he is really only a one dimensional (though great) player. I don't feel compelled to look up the stats myself but if you do you'll see that A-rod is the better hitter.
September 15, 2005 at 02:58AM View BBCode
Originally posted by DeVeau31
Ortiz and Jones are not only putting up the best numbers,
Uhhh... no. Last time I checked (which was probably a week ago) Jones had a .354 OBP which is average. Derek Lee was well over .400 which is very good. Derek Lee's slugging percentage is in the upper .600s and well you know what I feel compelled to look it up so...
Jones: .275/.358/.608 49 homers 124 rbi
Lee: .340/.420/.670 42 100
Lee is clearly the better player.
In the AL Ortiz' offensive numbers are not better than A-rod's and he plays no defense so he is really only a one dimensional (though great) player. I don't feel compelled to look up the stats myself but if you do you'll see that A-rod is the better hitter.
Smocko
Rodriguez .321/.421/.600 -------- 41 Hr/111 RBI/108 R/13 SB
Ortiz ----- .297/.396/.603 -------- 42 Hr/130 RBI/108 R/1 SB
Would you believe that Ortiz leads Rodriguez 1-0 in triples this season?
Their offensive numbers are basically a wash (though voters like those extra 20 RBIs more than the extra 20 points of OBP), but the simple fact that one of them plays a tremendously important defensive position, and the other doesn't play a position at all, makes Rodriguez the better candidate.
Also, Manny will siphon votes from Ortiz much more than Sheffield/Giambi will from A-Rod.
[Edited on 9-15-2005 by Smocko]
September 15, 2005 at 04:51AM View BBCode
Ortiz and Rodriguez are actually really close statistically, with A-Rod leading a little in BA and OBP....Rodriguez .321/.421/.600 -------- 41 Hr/111 RBI/108 R/13 SB
Ortiz ----- .297/.396/.603 -------- 42 Hr/130 RBI/108 R/1 SB
Would you believe that Ortiz leads Rodriguez 1-0 in triples this season?
Their offensive numbers are basically a wash (though voters like those extra 20 RBIs more than the extra 20 points of OBP), but the simple fact that one of them plays a tremendously important defensive position, and the other doesn't play a position at all, makes Rodriguez the better candidate.
Also, Manny will siphon votes from Ortiz much more than Sheffield/Giambi will from A-Rod.
[Edited on 9-15-2005 by Smocko]
andrew
I have been a big Andruw Jones fan since the WS when hit broke in (yes the name was what got me, I didn't realize he spelled it differently until later), but there is no way he deserves the MVP more than Lee or Pujols.
September 15, 2005 at 05:26AM View BBCode
Originally posted by DeVeau31
everything I say you'll turn around on anyways, so this is no surprise either. MVP means Most Valuable Player. If that means by bat, by glove, by both, whatever, then that's who gets it.
Ortiz and Jones are not only putting up the best numbers, but they have also propelled their respective teams into the playoffs and division titles. Both teams, without each of these players, would NOT win their divisions, nor would they make the playoffs.
so, what this all means is that you really don't know <b>[Censored]</b> about the award and it's meaning.
I have been a big Andruw Jones fan since the WS when hit broke in (yes the name was what got me, I didn't realize he spelled it differently until later), but there is no way he deserves the MVP more than Lee or Pujols.
ShaggySanchez
Why does Jones get credit for his team having injuries and playing with a team of rookies and Pujols doesn't. It isn't like the Braves were bringing up hacks to play this year due to injuries, they were bringing up solid prospects that they knew could play. If you look at the Cards roster Pujols has carried that team as much as Jones has its just the Cards ran away with the division so quick no one payed attention after that. Rolen has played 56 games, Walker 89, Sanders 80, and Edmonds 130. Pujols has been playing with Eckstein, Grudzielanek, So Taguchi, and Abraham Nunez most of the year.
Let us now compare the numbers of Jones and Pujols.
Jones .277/.359/.613 50 Hr/ 125 RBI/ 91 R/ 3 SB
Pujols .335/.432/.626 39 Hr/ 109 RBI/ 117 R/ 15 SB
September 15, 2005 at 05:28AM View BBCode
Originally posted by DeVeau31
Ortiz and Jones are not only putting up the best numbers, but they have also propelled their respective teams into the playoffs and division titles. Both teams, without each of these players, would NOT win their divisions, nor would they make the playoffs.
Why does Jones get credit for his team having injuries and playing with a team of rookies and Pujols doesn't. It isn't like the Braves were bringing up hacks to play this year due to injuries, they were bringing up solid prospects that they knew could play. If you look at the Cards roster Pujols has carried that team as much as Jones has its just the Cards ran away with the division so quick no one payed attention after that. Rolen has played 56 games, Walker 89, Sanders 80, and Edmonds 130. Pujols has been playing with Eckstein, Grudzielanek, So Taguchi, and Abraham Nunez most of the year.
Let us now compare the numbers of Jones and Pujols.
Jones .277/.359/.613 50 Hr/ 125 RBI/ 91 R/ 3 SB
Pujols .335/.432/.626 39 Hr/ 109 RBI/ 117 R/ 15 SB
FuriousGiorge
Seriously, it really doesn't matter, but if you honestly think that Jones deserves the MVP then you are a fool.
September 15, 2005 at 03:33PM View BBCode
Andruw is going to win. It is inevitable now. Voters are talking themselves into it all over the country.Seriously, it really doesn't matter, but if you honestly think that Jones deserves the MVP then you are a fool.
Duff77
I think there should be two MVP awards. The best player is not always the "most valuable" player, at least given how people define value.
September 15, 2005 at 05:09PM View BBCode
Face it--the MVP is not about who deserves it. It's about who has more sex appeal...and triple crown categories are more sexy. It also depends on how you define the MVP. Is it the best player in the league or the player who meant the most to his team? Actually, for most of the writer's it's "the player who meant the most to his contending team, especially if they wouldn't have been competitive otherwise." That's the perception on Jones and that's why he'll win.I think there should be two MVP awards. The best player is not always the "most valuable" player, at least given how people define value.
ME
These 2 things are the same.
September 15, 2005 at 05:14PM View BBCode
Originally posted by Duff77
Is it the best player in the league or the player who meant the most to his team?
These 2 things are the same.
Duff77
September 15, 2005 at 05:20PM View BBCode
Of course they are, but that's not how the writers see it. To them a player's value to their team depends on where it finishes in the standings. Put Jones on a last place team and he gets far less consideration.
Duff77
Not necessairly. Cecil Fielder won a couple MVPs on bad teams. Cal Ripken won an MVP on a bad team. If you put up impressive enough numbers in triple-crown categories, you can win it no matter how much your team sucks.
September 15, 2005 at 07:44PM View BBCode
Originally posted by ME
Duff is right, except "far less" means "zero"
Not necessairly. Cecil Fielder won a couple MVPs on bad teams. Cal Ripken won an MVP on a bad team. If you put up impressive enough numbers in triple-crown categories, you can win it no matter how much your team sucks.
FuriousGiorge
September 15, 2005 at 07:51PM View BBCode
Cecil Fielder won zero MVP's. He finished second twice, because voters have a thing for big fat guys who hit lots of home runs.
ME
The only players on bad teams who have won MVPs were the ones that were vastly superior to everyone else. A guy like Andruw Jones who doesn't deserve the MVP based on statistical consideration alone would never come close to winning an MVP if he wasn't on a contending team that is perceived to be weaker than it is. Travis Hafner in 2004 was one of the 5 most productive hitters in the AL and finished with 2 points in the MVP voting - behind superstars like Chone Figgins and Lew Ford.
September 15, 2005 at 10:02PM View BBCode
Originally posted by Duff77
Originally posted by ME
Duff is right, except "far less" means "zero"
Not necessairly. Cecil Fielder won a couple MVPs on bad teams. Cal Ripken won an MVP on a bad team. If you put up impressive enough numbers in triple-crown categories, you can win it no matter how much your team sucks.
The only players on bad teams who have won MVPs were the ones that were vastly superior to everyone else. A guy like Andruw Jones who doesn't deserve the MVP based on statistical consideration alone would never come close to winning an MVP if he wasn't on a contending team that is perceived to be weaker than it is. Travis Hafner in 2004 was one of the 5 most productive hitters in the AL and finished with 2 points in the MVP voting - behind superstars like Chone Figgins and Lew Ford.
Duff77
September 16, 2005 at 12:02AM View BBCode
Hmm. I guess Ripken was the rare exception. He really wasn't that impressive in '91, and the Orioles stunk.
FuriousGiorge
He was 3rd in the AL in OPS, and the two above him were a 1st baseman who couldn't play 1st and an "outfielder" who was a butcher. He was top 5 in slugging %, hits, total bases, doubles, home runs, RBI, runs created and extra base hits. He played every single game at shortstop, and played gold glove level shortstop (and he really did that year). In short, he deserved it by a mile.
September 16, 2005 at 01:11AM View BBCode
Originally posted by Duff77
Hmm. I guess Ripken was the rare exception. He really wasn't that impressive in '91, and the Orioles stunk.
He was 3rd in the AL in OPS, and the two above him were a 1st baseman who couldn't play 1st and an "outfielder" who was a butcher. He was top 5 in slugging %, hits, total bases, doubles, home runs, RBI, runs created and extra base hits. He played every single game at shortstop, and played gold glove level shortstop (and he really did that year). In short, he deserved it by a mile.
Pages: 1 2