Jump to content

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


markakis8

Recommended Posts

Is anyone else getting a little annoyed with Gary Thorne and his complete homer and antiquated thinking. Yes Chris Davis might win the Gold Glove. We don't need to hear it every night when we have Machado over there at 3B who should be running away with the 3B gold glove. It's really getting old. Then he goes on to discuss fielding percentage as a Chris Davis advantage/plus. Then he brings up putouts and range factor at 1B. When everybody knows range factor is useless at 1B. It's just so dumb that I mute him. He talks about advanced numbers last night, but not once discusses dWAR and runs saved. Wonder why?

In any case, Cabrera for MVP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 75
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Is anyone else getting a little annoyed with Gary Thorne and his complete homer and antiquated thinking. Yes Chris Davis might win the Gold Glove. We don't need to hear it every night when we have Machado over there at 3B who should be running away with the 3B gold glove. It's really getting old. Then he goes on to discuss fielding percentage as a Chris Davis advantage/plus. Then he brings up putouts and range factor at 1B. When everybody knows range factor is useless at 1B. It's just so dumb that I mute him. He talks about advanced numbers last night, but not once discusses dWAR and runs saved. Wonder why?

In any case, Cabrera for MVP.

I don't know, it seems to me Gary's grasp of advanced numbers isn't any less sophisticated yours appears to be.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is anyone else getting a little annoyed with Gary Thorne and his complete homer and antiquated thinking.

Is this the same Gary Thorne about whom we had a 15-page thread mainly talking about how he gets way too excited when an oppenent hits a home run?

As for antiquated thinking, well, you could do much worse. You've never heard Hawk Harrleson have you? About 12 times a game he mentions how his buddy from the good guys, Adam (no last name necessary), is leading the world in RBIs and heart and therefore is the best player in the world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is this the same Gary Thorne about whom we had a 15-page thread mainly talking about how he gets way too excited when an oppenent hits a home run?

As for antiquated thinking, well, you could do much worse. You've never heard Hawk Harrleson have you? About 12 times a game he mentions how his buddy from the good guys, Adam (no last name necessary), is leading the world in RBIs and heart and therefore is the best player in the world.

Do we really want a completely objective stats guy doing the broadcast chiming in with an orioles flaws or what other player in the league is better every time an oriole player does something good, though? I don't want them to be blind homers, but I personally like the os broadcast being some older guys who like the os and give us a good idea of what's going on at the ballpark while we watch from home. That may just be me, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

I'm not sure how showing me a player that finished 5th in the MVP voting is an example of a player who wasn't worthy of MVP consideration...

Find a 1B or DH with those stats who didn't get MVP consideration and then we'll talk. I can find you dozens of players who finished top 5 in OPS or OBP or BA who didn't get MVP consideration - but I haven't found any 100R / 140 RBI guys who didn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

I think your reliance on BA and OBP as the primary metrics for valuing Cabrera is flawed. Why not take into consideration total bases (Davis 354 to Cabrera 343)? How about P/PA (Davis 3.96 to Cabrera 3.69) or GDP (Davis 3(!!) to Cabrera 17) or ISO (Davis .353 to Cabrera .304) or SECA (Davis .477 to Cabrera .476).

Your argument is fundamentally based on the fact that Cabrera reached 1st base via single or walk 45 times more than Davis during the course of the season.

So honestly, all other things being equal, which would you rather have:

Player A - 66 more singles and walks, one more 3b and one less caught stealing

Or

Player B - 7 more HRs, 15 more 2bs, 14 less GIDP, 5 more HBP, .27 more P/PA

I'd take player B.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think your reliance on BA and OBP as the primary metrics for valuing Cabrera is flawed. Why not take into consideration total bases (Davis 354 to Cabrera 343)? How about P/PA (Davis 3.96 to Cabrera 3.69) or GDP (Davis 3(!!) to Cabrera 17) or ISO (Davis .353 to Cabrera .304) or SECA (Davis .477 to Cabrera .476).

Your argument is fundamentally based on the fact that Cabrera reached 1st base via single or walk 45 times more than Davis during the course of the season.

So honestly, all other things being equal, which would you rather have:

Player A - 45 more singles and walks, one more 3b and one less caught stealing

Or

Player B - 7 more HRs, 15 more 2bs, 14 less GIDP, 5 more HBP, .27 more P/PA

I'd take player B every day of the week and twice on Sunday.

Give me the OBP. There isn't an argument that Davis has been better than Cabrera offensively this year. The angle to take is that he gives enough back in the other facets of his game to close the gap.

wOBA is a much better metric than raw OPS (even though Cabrera wins there too) as it puts the proper weight on OBP. Cabrera leads Davis .461 to .426, not an insignificant difference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Give me the OBP. There isn't an argument that Davis has been better than Cabrera offensively this year. The angle to take is that he gives enough back in the other facets of his game to close the gap.

wOBA is a much better metric than raw OPS (even though Cabrera wins there too) as it puts the proper weight on OBP. Cabrera leads Davis .461 to .426, not an insignificant difference.

Would you take this guy:

400 total bases, 400 singles

over this guy

400 total bases, 100 HRs

?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Give me the OBP. There isn't an argument that Davis has been better than Cabrera offensively this year. The angle to take is that he gives enough back in the other facets of his game to close the gap.

wOBA is a much better metric than raw OPS (even though Cabrera wins there too) as it puts the proper weight on OBP. Cabrera leads Davis .461 to .426, not an insignificant difference.

There are plenty of arguments that Davis has been been equal to (not necessarily better than) Cabrera offensively. You may not agree with them, but they exist nonetheless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would you take this guy:

400 total bases, 400 singles

over this guy

400 total bases, 100 HRs

?

That's not enough information to make a choice. Obviously OBP isn't infinitely more valuable, but there are metrics available that weigh them properly and put it into a nice pretty number. I prefer to use those available metrics rather than try to hash out exactly the same thing those metrics do with subjective opinions and anecdotal evidence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure how showing me a player that finished 5th in the MVP voting is an example of a player who wasn't worthy of MVP consideration...

Find a 1B or DH with those stats who didn't get MVP consideration and then we'll talk. I can find you dozens of players who finished top 5 in OPS or OBP or BA who didn't get MVP consideration - but I haven't found any 100R / 140 RBI guys who didn't.

We're talking about the IDEA that any player with 140 RBI and 100 Runs is an MVP candidate. I gave an example of someone who would have fulfilled that criteria except that he happened to be a shortstop. If he happened to be a 1st baseman with same offensive stats, he wouldn't have gotten such MVP consideration. That he happens to be a shortstop (and is thereby getting MVP consideration because of his defense) is irrelevant to the IDEA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do we really want a completely objective stats guy doing the broadcast chiming in with an orioles flaws or what other player in the league is better every time an oriole player does something good, though? I don't want them to be blind homers, but I personally like the os broadcast being some older guys who like the os and give us a good idea of what's going on at the ballpark while we watch from home. That may just be me, though.

Who said anything about "a completely objective stats guy"? I just want someone who knows baseball, can tell a good story, isn't stupid (or is only stupid in a funny, self-deprecating way), and is open to new ideas. It's fine if you know, down deep, they enjoy the Orioles winning. Like maybe Joe Angel or Jon Miller.

Guys like Harrelson and FP Santangelo and Hunter - I don't believe what they're saying. I can't trust them. I have a strong suspicion (hell, I know) that they're exaggerating or stretching the truth or allowing their emotions to control their mouths because they want their team to win so badly. Or they enjoy their paychecks and suspect their employer wants them to be biased, so they readily toe the company line. They're like political ideologs, in that they start with the conclusion (The Orioles are great!) and work backwards from there to make the "facts" fit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...