With yesterday's HR, is there ANY chance Chris Davis could get MVP?

[BohKnowsBmore]

While they may not sere as the best indicator of how those players would perform in a vacuum with a completely controlled set of variables relative to their peers, those stats do keep a record of actual results in terms of scoring runs, which is the point of the game. Now, do I want to rely on those numbers in choosing who I want on my team next year, certainly not. Do I think they serve a purpose for crowning this seasons mvp, yes, some consideration is due.

[bluedog]

In the minds of many MVP voters, yes. In reality, not so much.

Ultimately the game is about scoring runs. We often get lost in the other stats and forget this. If someone leads the league in Runs & RBIs, the rest of it is window dressing IMHO. Find me someone with 100+ runs and 140+ RBIs at any point in MLB history who wasn't worthy of MVP consideration.

Also, it seems to me that because Davis has more extra base hits, his Runs/RBIs totals would be more independent of the performance of the team around him. When a player hits a HR, he's 100% responsible for all the scoring. When he hits a single and drives in 2 runs, his RBIs are at least half due to the players being on base and in scoring position. This would seem to suggest that Davis' RBI & Run totals reflect a larger individual contribution than Cabrera's which are more largely due to him being surrounded by a better offense (and having more people on base and in scoring position) than Davis.

[larrytt]

Find me someone with 100+ runs and 140+ RBIs at any point in MLB history who wasn't worthy of MVP consideration.

How about Miguel Tejada in 2004, who had a nice .894 OPS with 150 RBI and 107 R? He might have been considered MVP worthy because he played SS (and he did finish 5th), but suppose he was a DH or 1st baseman like Chris Davis? Then he wouldn't have been close - the .894 was only 12th in the league, with five players over .980. The reason he got a league-leading 150 RBI was because he was hitting behind Brian Roberts (.344 OBP, 50 doubles) and Melvin Mora (.419 OBP, 41 doubles, .981 OPS). The reason he scored 107 R was because he was hitting in front of Rafael Palmeiro (23 HR, .796 OPS), Javy Lopez (23 HR, .872 OPS), and Larry Bigbie (15 HR and .768 OPS). Despite all this, the Orioles went 78-84, 3rd in the AL East - so all those RBIs and runs didn't even lead to a winning team.

[Frobby]

Ultimately the game is about scoring runs. We often get lost in the other stats and forget this. If someone leads the league in Runs & RBIs, the rest of it is window dressing IMHO. Find me someone with 100+ runs and 140+ RBIs at any point in MLB history who wasn't worthy of MVP consideration.

Let's say the first batter singles, the second batter singles to send the runner to 3B, and later another batter hits a sac fly. Was the second single any less important to that run scoring than the first single or the sac fly?

I'm rooting for Davis to win the MVP because I'm a shameless homer. Cabrera is the more valuable offensive player due to his much higher BA and OBP. Also, he's been playing hurt the last 3 weeks or so, which has allowed Davis to catch him in the RBI column and pad his lead in the HR column. Cabrera was on a real tear before getting hurt. The fact that injuries are limiting his production shouldn't really matter in the MVP voting, as it is production that counts, not the reasons for it. But I thought it should be pointed out that it probably wouldn't be close in the RBI column if Cabrera were fully healthy.

As to Trout, he has a very good case, but as a practical matter, he won't win.

[DrungoHazewood]

Ultimately the game is about scoring runs. We often get lost in the other stats and forget this. If someone leads the league in Runs & RBIs, the rest of it is window dressing IMHO. Find me someone with 100+ runs and 140+ RBIs at any point in MLB history who wasn't worthy of MVP consideration.

In 1996 Dante Bichette had 141 RBI and 114 runs scored and was a below-average player in the ridiculous run scoring environment of Colorado that year.

In 2008 Ryan Howard had 144 RBI and 105 runs, but since they came in 700 PAs batting cleanup on a very good offensive team, and he had negative defensive value at first and negative baserunning value, it would be a stretch to say he was an average player. Much less a real MVP candidate.

There have been sixteen players who meet your criteria who also had an rWAR less than 5.0, which I think is a reasonable minimum to define as "worthy of MVP consideration." Most years 5 rWAR puts you in the 5th-10th range in value in the league.

And then there are cases like Juan Gonzalez in 1996, who rode his 144 RBI to an MVP award despite scoring fewer than 100 runs and realistically not being among the 10 best players in the league, and just miles behind Arod and Griffey.

Also, it seems to me that because Davis has more extra base hits, his Runs/RBIs totals would be more independent of the performance of the team around him. When a player hits a HR, he's 100% responsible for all the scoring. When he hits a single and drives in 2 runs, his RBIs are at least half due to the players being on base and in scoring position. This would seem to suggest that Davis' RBI & Run totals reflect a larger individual contribution than Cabrera's which are more largely due to him being surrounded by a better offense (and having more people on base and in scoring position) than Davis.

There's no reason to use RBI or runs as a measuring stick for anything besides the very narrow things they measure (i.e. number of runs driven in given the opportunities presented).

Using them as a gauge for overall value obscures more than it enlightens.

[Pheasants]

Sorry to switch this from stats back to opinion, but the guys on MLBNetwork this morning said that Davis should now be in the conversation for MVP.

While I tend to like the new stats and consider per opportunity performance to be important, I do think there are things that don't show up either in new or old.

Last night, Ortiz got 2 rbi's, so did Davis. Are they really equal?

Last night Ortiz hit a home run, Davis a single. In terms of counting stats (HR) Ortiz wins. In terms of Slugging and OPS, Ortiz wins. Does he really?

I'm not going to try to find changes in WAR and all the others, but I'll bet most show Ortiz as having the superior night. Did he?

Of course, stats from one game are virtually meaningless to the statistical systems. In the long run, a HR is an HR, etc. I've never read that any of the systems tries to have a way to figure in "clutchness," and I doubt if it could be statistically calculated, but some things mean more than others because of context.

It's like Jim Palmer saying that when he was ahead in a ball game, he'd give up hits (I think he said solo home runs.) to young ball players so they would be over-confident the next time they faced him. I'm sure those hits would hurt him in all the new stats, but none of them were important because he won the game. Oh, yeah, wins don't count.

[MurphDogg]

Sorry to switch this from stats back to opinion, but the guys on MLBNetwork this morning said that Davis should now be in the conversation for MVP.

While I tend to like the new stats and consider per opportunity performance to be important, I do think there are things that don't show up either in new or old.

Last night, Ortiz got 2 rbi's, so did Davis. Are they really equal?

Last night Ortiz hit a home run, Davis a single. In terms of counting stats (HR) Ortiz wins. In terms of Slugging and OPS, Ortiz wins. Does he really?

I'm not going to try to find changes in WAR and all the others, but I'll bet most show Ortiz as having the superior night. Did he?

Of course, stats from one game are virtually meaningless to the statistical systems. In the long run, a HR is an HR, etc. I've never read that any of the systems tries to have a way to figure in "clutchness," and I doubt if it could be statistically calculated, but some things mean more than others because of context.

It's like Jim Palmer saying that when he was ahead in a ball game, he'd give up hits (I think he said solo home runs.) to young ball players so they would be over-confident the next time they faced him. I'm sure those hits would hurt him in all the new stats, but none of them were important because he won the game. Oh, yeah, wins don't count.

What you seem to be describing is WPA. And yes, by that stat Chris Davis had a much better night.

http://www.fangraphs.com/wins.aspx?date=2013-09-18&team=Red%20Sox&dh=0&season=2013

[Can_of_corn]

Sorry to switch this from stats back to opinion, but the guys on MLBNetwork this morning said that Davis should now be in the conversation for MVP.

While I tend to like the new stats and consider per opportunity performance to be important, I do think there are things that don't show up either in new or old.

Last night, Ortiz got 2 rbi's, so did Davis. Are they really equal?

Last night Ortiz hit a home run, Davis a single. In terms of counting stats (HR) Ortiz wins. In terms of Slugging and OPS, Ortiz wins. Does he really?

I'm not going to try to find changes in WAR and all the others, but I'll bet most show Ortiz as having the superior night. Did he?

Of course, stats from one game are virtually meaningless to the statistical systems. In the long run, a HR is an HR, etc. I've never read that any of the systems tries to have a way to figure in "clutchness," and I doubt if it could be statistically calculated, but some things mean more than others because of context.

It's like Jim Palmer saying that when he was ahead in a ball game, he'd give up hits (I think he said solo home runs.) to young ball players so they would be over-confident the next time they faced him. I'm sure those hits would hurt him in all the new stats, but none of them were important because he won the game. Oh, yeah, wins don't count.

I am no doubting he said it but that sounds like a load of hooey. Just like when Jack Morris supporters claim he pitched to the score.

[DrungoHazewood]

It's like Jim Palmer saying that when he was ahead in a ball game, he'd give up hits (I think he said solo home runs.) to young ball players so they would be over-confident the next time they faced him. I'm sure those hits would hurt him in all the new stats, but none of them were important because he won the game. Oh, yeah, wins don't count.

Players say that kind of thing all the time, and it should be easy to verify, but never works out. As can_of_corn notes Morris supporters always cite him "pitching to the score" but his numbers didn't change at all based on the score of the game.

In Palmer's case his performace with 0-2 runs of support is essentially identical to his performance with 6+ runs of support (read that as: Palmer is ahead), right down to home run rate.

                                                                                                                              I             Split   W   L W-L%  ERA   G  GS GF CG SHO SV     IP    H   R  ER  HR  BB IBB  SO HBP BK WP   BF  WHIP SO/9 SO/BB   0-2 Runs Scored  34 105 .245 2.90 163 163  0 62  16  0 1198.1 1031 426 386  90 395  21 650  11  4 29 4896 1.190  4.9  1.65   3-5 Runs Scored 114  40 .740 2.59 200 200  0 80  22  0 1495.0 1251 481 431 113 465  13 863  15  4 35 6050 1.148  5.2  1.86    6+ Runs Scored 114   3 .974 2.98 158 158  0 69  15  0 1163.2  974 427 385  89 399   2 629  11  3 18 4768 1.180  4.9  1.58

[Can_of_corn]

I have also heard the story told from the opposite side, where an elite hitter would intentionally badly miss on a particular pitch to entice the pitcher to throw it again in a higher leverage situation.

[Dipper9]

How about Miguel Tejada in 2004, who had a nice .894 OPS with 150 RBI and 107 R? He might have been considered MVP worthy because he played SS (and he did finish 5th), but suppose he was a DH or 1st baseman like Chris Davis? Then he wouldn't have been close - the .894 was only 12th in the league, with five players over .980. The reason he got a league-leading 150 RBI was because he was hitting behind Brian Roberts (.344 OBS, 50 doubles) and Melvin Mora (.419 OBP, 41 doubles, .981 OPS). The reason he scored 107 R was because he was hitting in front of Rafael Palmeiro (23 HR, .796 OPS), Javy Lopez (23 HR, .872 OPS), and Larry Bigbie (15 HR and .768 OPS). Despite all this, the Orioles went 78-84, 3rd in the AL East - so all those RBIs and runs didn't even lead to a winning team.

New question on the SAT exam:

One of the names above is not like the others. Identify it.

[Dipper9]

Let's say the first batter singles, the second batter singles to send the runner to 3B, and later another batter hits a sac fly. Was the second single any less important to that run scoring than the first single or the sac fly?

I'm rooting for Davis to win the MVP because I'm a shameless homer. Cabrera is the more valuable offensive player due to his much higher BA and OBP. Also, he's been playing hurt the last 3 weeks or so, which has allowed Davis to catch him in the RBI column and pad his lead in the HR column. Cabrera was on a real tear before getting hurt. The fact that injuries are limiting his production shouldn't really matter in the MVP voting, as it is production that counts, not the reasons for it. But I thought it should be pointed out that it probably wouldn't be close in the RBI column if Cabrera were fully healthy.

As to Trout, he has a very good case, but as a practical matter, he won't win.

The MLB Tonight crew discussed this last night, including our boy Billy. Basically, they all said if it was a "best player" award, then Trout is in the conversation and possibly leading, but its a "Most Valuable to your team" award, and thus the race is Miggy and Davis and no one else, and they all agreed that Davis is more valuable to the O's than Miggy is to the Tigers.

[Dipper9]

He's the MVP in my heart. Thats what matters most to me.

Man, this should be a Hallmark card!

Front: You may not have won the World Series...

Open the card: But you're the MVP in my heart!

[El Gordo]

Over on the Bill James site they have a stat called Total Runs. It consists of RC, RS, and Base Running Runs, plus a positional adjustment. Trout leads MLB with 155 total runs(136 RC, -8 RS, 4 BRR). Second in the AL is Cabrera with 140 RS(135 RC, -18 RS, 2 BRR) Surprisingly Manny is only 1 TR behind Cabrera at 139 TR(83 RC , 33 RS , 0 BRR) and leads Davis at 133 (127 RC, -8 RS, 2 BRR)Interesting. I think the value of defense is generally dismissed in it's importance in favor of offense.

[Beast]

Infrequent poster but long-time (since 1960!) fan here, savoring what is special about this year, whether we get to the post-season or just miss. I have always interpreted MVP as the player who did the most to help his team get to (or close to) the post-season. To the extent you believe WPA (which unfortunately does not incorporate fielding), Davis has added 7.76 wins so far to the Orioles, Cabrera has added 6.84 wins to the Tigers and Trout has added 4.71 wins to the Angels. All according to the Fangraphs site. This takes into account leverage of situations in which they have performed. If you take those wins away from the respective teams, the O's go from in the wild card chase to sub-.500, the Tigers go from clear division winners to in the wild card chase, and the Angels go from irrelevant to more irrelevant. So there are certainly "advanced" stats that can support my bias that, in fact, Crush deserves the MVP. Nonetheless, I believe Cabrera will win it, and obviously also has a super-strong case. Davis is most likely to come in second, with Trout third.