Who's your pick for AL and NL MVP?

[RealAccountant]

I find it sad that Adam Jones has become everything that Vernon Wells never became for the Jays

[thatoneguy]

Trout and Kershaw.

[Orgfiller]

I find it sad that Adam Jones has become everything that Vernon Wells never became for the Jays

 

2006 Vernon Wells arguably had a better season than Adam Jones' best season, which if you go by value would be this season. Wrist injuries really derailed his career, but his best 5 years rival Jones' best 5 years to date.

[RealAccountant]

2006 Vernon Wells arguably had a better season than Adam Jones' best season, which if you go by value would be this season. Wrist injuries really derailed his career, but his best 5 years rival Jones' best 5 years to date.

 

I was strictly talking from that consistent CF perspective especially when he let the team down in 2009, with that 27-14 start

 

However that 2009 season where we were all crying about 27-14 pales in comparison to this years downfall

[Orgfiller]

I was strictly talking from that consistent CF perspective especially when he let the team down in 2009, with that 27-14 start

 

However that 2009 season where we were all crying about 27-14 pales in comparison to this years downfall

 

Like I mentioned, the wrist injuries really hurt him, but he was rock solid from about 2003 to 2006.

[jaysblue]

Like I mentioned, the wrist injuries really hurt him, but he was rock solid from about 2003 to 2006.

 

Don't forget 2002, 2008 and 2010 - those were still decent seasons. He was almost worth 4 WAR in 2010 lol.

[Orgfiller]

Don't forget 2002, 2008 and 2010 - those were still decent seasons. He was almost worth 4 WAR in 2010 lol.

 

Yup, shouldn't count those out for sure, but he was the most consistent in the aforementioned years, people forget how good he actually was for the Jays, they only remember untradeable contract Wells.

[Dick_Pole]

f*** this pitch framing ********. If everyone wanted it to be included in WAR and wanted the MVP to be the "most WAR" award then you might as well give it to a catcher every year forever. Catchers have a lot of influence on the game. They touch almost every pitch on the defensive end of the game. Don't you think if Mike Trout could earn 10,000 WAR points by pitch framing from the OF he would? It's not a fair comparison if you're going to base the MVP all on WAR and include pitch framing data because the catcher is the only one who can take advantage of it.

 

But of course all the knob goblins are drooling over the latest baseball nerd stat fad instead of taking a step back and thinking of the implications of what they are suggesting. At a minimum if pitch framing is going to be considered a legitimate countable stat, then there has to be some kind of adjustment for catchers to minimize its impact on WAR when comparing to other players. Catchers already have a huge advantage when it comes to collecting WAR points because the "replacement level" for them is down at Buck Martinez levels of offense. A lot of that defensive impact is baked in because, believe it or not, people involved in baseball for the past 150 years actually recognized the importance of the defensive impact catchers have on baseball and have been willing to look the other way on offense for years.

 

However, my rant doesn't take away from the fact that Lucroy has done exceedingly well in the aspects of the game where he can be fairly compared to his peers in other positions on the field so he should be considered a legit candidate in the MVP discussion.

[BTS]

f*** this pitch framing ********. If everyone wanted it to be included in WAR and wanted the MVP to be the "most WAR" award then you might as well give it to a catcher every year forever. Catchers have a lot of influence on the game. They touch almost every pitch on the defensive end of the game. Don't you think if Mike Trout could earn 10,000 WAR points by pitch framing from the OF he would? It's not a fair comparison if you're going to base the MVP all on WAR and include pitch framing data because the catcher is the only one who can take advantage of it.

 

But of course all the knob goblins are drooling over the latest baseball nerd stat fad instead of taking a step back and thinking of the implications of what they are suggesting. At a minimum if pitch framing is going to be considered a legitimate countable stat, then there has to be some kind of adjustment for catchers to minimize its impact on WAR when comparing to other players. Catchers already have a huge advantage when it comes to collecting WAR points because the "replacement level" for them is down at Buck Martinez levels of offense. A lot of that defensive impact is baked in because, believe it or not, people involved in baseball for the past 150 years actually recognized the importance of the defensive impact catchers have on baseball and have been willing to look the other way on offense for years.

 

However, my rant doesn't take away from the fact that Lucroy has done exceedingly well in the aspects of the game where he can be fairly compared to his peers in other positions on the field so he should be considered a legit candidate in the MVP discussion.

 

Awful post. If catchers impact the game more than any other positions, then that's the way it is.

[Fearthedoc]

Trout and Kersh.

 

I don't like giving MVP awards to pitchers, but what Kershaw is doing is unreal. If they gave it to Verlander in 2011, I have no doubt Kershaw is going to get it in 2014 (considering how much better his year is).

[Dick_Pole]

Awful post. If catchers impact the game more than any other positions, then that's the way it is.

 

And giving catchers an exclusive additional advantage in comparative stats for the election of MVP, over and above the positional advantage that already gives them a 0.5 or 1 WAR advantage over their peers is an equally awful idea to me. You want to use pitch framing data to compare among different catchers, that's fine. That makes a lot of sense. Putting all that data through a computer and comparing catchers versus the rest of the baseball population would suggest that each team should hold several catchers to maximize WAR which is an absurd result because it's an absurd idea. Even if your computer program is smart enough to limit the catching positions to 2 or 3, it's still going to come up with a result that you should spend a disproportionately high amount of your budget on catcher salaries because of pitch framing, another absurd result.

 

There's no real point in further arguing this point. We sit on opposite sides of the fence, plus there's absolutely no way catcher pitch framing WAR is going to garner any sort of mainstream popularity in things like sports writers deciding who to pick for MVP.

[Boxcar]

there is an award already for him to win.

 

Hate it when people play this card. Hitters have the Hank Aaron award. As for playing everyday, when Kershaw pitches, he is directly involved in more than 50% of the entire game where a position player may be involved 4 or 5 PAs plus any random number of plays in the field.

 

I think Verlander's year should be completely irrelevant, it was a mistake, though Kershaw doesn't really have an eye popping candidate beside him like Ellsbury or Bautista this year unless you consider framing which none of the voters will.

[Boxcar]

f*** this pitch framing ********. If everyone wanted it to be included in WAR and wanted the MVP to be the "most WAR" award then you might as well give it to a catcher every year forever. Catchers have a lot of influence on the game. They touch almost every pitch on the defensive end of the game. Don't you think if Mike Trout could earn 10,000 WAR points by pitch framing from the OF he would? It's not a fair comparison if you're going to base the MVP all on WAR and include pitch framing data because the catcher is the only one who can take advantage of it.

 

But of course all the knob goblins are drooling over the latest baseball nerd stat fad instead of taking a step back and thinking of the implications of what they are suggesting. At a minimum if pitch framing is going to be considered a legitimate countable stat, then there has to be some kind of adjustment for catchers to minimize its impact on WAR when comparing to other players. Catchers already have a huge advantage when it comes to collecting WAR points because the "replacement level" for them is down at Buck Martinez levels of offense. A lot of that defensive impact is baked in because, believe it or not, people involved in baseball for the past 150 years actually recognized the importance of the defensive impact catchers have on baseball and have been willing to look the other way on offense for years.

 

However, my rant doesn't take away from the fact that Lucroy has done exceedingly well in the aspects of the game where he can be fairly compared to his peers in other positions on the field so he should be considered a legit candidate in the MVP discussion.

 

I always find it funny that people say "the hive" resorts to insults for no reason.

 

So congrats on showing your glaring ignorance to the world. I don't know all about framing, but I do know that catchers can have thousands of opportunities during a season to utilize it, and a ball changed to a strike I'd imagine has similar value to a good defensive play by an infielder. It's not hard to see how valuable it can be when you pull your head out of your ass.

[Boxcar]

There's no real point in further arguing this point. We sit on opposite sides of the fence, plus there's absolutely no way catcher pitch framing WAR is going to garner any sort of mainstream popularity in things like sports writers deciding who to pick for MVP.

 

Also because you don't seem to know what you're talking about.

[reedjohnsonfan]

The word "clutch" doesn't appear in that article once. Obviously you give more weight to framing with 2 strikes because it results in a strikeout, the best possible outcome for a pitcher. How is this hard to understand?

 

For example, Navarro constantly botches 2 strike breaking pitches in the zone, which means the pitcher not only doesn't get the strike out, but he also has to throw more pitches and has an extra ball in the count.

 

I just mean that clutch framing is implied if you give more weight with 2 strikes. Based on your explanation, it seems the same as saying a player is better because they hit better with RISP. What if a pitcher throws breaking balls 0-0 and Navarro doesn't botch them? Is this accounted for?

[BTS]

And giving catchers an exclusive additional advantage in comparative stats for the election of MVP, over and above the positional advantage that already gives them a 0.5 or 1 WAR advantage over their peers is an equally awful idea to me. You want to use pitch framing data to compare among different catchers, that's fine. That makes a lot of sense. Putting all that data through a computer and comparing catchers versus the rest of the baseball population would suggest that each team should hold several catchers to maximize WAR which is an absurd result because it's an absurd idea. Even if your computer program is smart enough to limit the catching positions to 2 or 3, it's still going to come up with a result that you should spend a disproportionately high amount of your budget on catcher salaries because of pitch framing, another absurd result.

 

There's no real point in further arguing this point. We sit on opposite sides of the fence, plus there's absolutely no way catcher pitch framing WAR is going to garner any sort of mainstream popularity in things like sports writers deciding who to pick for MVP.

 

This is akin to being outraged that starting pitchers are more valuable than relievers because they throw more innings. Why not just accept it? Lucroy contributes very real runs by framing pitched well, and he should be credited for it. Until we have roboumps catchers will continue to have a huge influence on the game because they're involved in more game events than any other player.

[BTS]

I just mean that clutch framing is implied if you give more weight with 2 strikes. Based on your explanation, it seems the same as saying a player is better because they hit better with RISP. What if a pitcher throws breaking balls 0-0 and Navarro doesn't botch them? Is this accounted for?

 

There's no need to throw the baby out with the bathwater though. You can disagree (legitimately IMO) with a portion of what they're doing (assigning different values to different counts), but it doesn't invalidate the entire process.

[jaysblue]

Hate it when people play this card. Hitters have the Hank Aaron award. As for playing everyday, when Kershaw pitches, he is directly involved in more than 50% of the entire game where a position player may be involved 4 or 5 PAs plus any random number of plays in the field.

 

I think Verlander's year should be completely irrelevant, it was a mistake, though Kershaw doesn't really have an eye popping candidate beside him like Ellsbury or Bautista this year unless you consider framing which none of the voters will.

 

Yeah Ellsbury should have won in 2011 over Verlander. I didn't agree with that at all. And with the NL this year, there is really no clear cut winner, so I'm sure Kershaw will get heavy consideration.

 

If Kershaw logged 250-260 + innings, I wouldn't have a problem, though he might not even reach 200 innings this season. I just can't justify a starter winning an MVP award when they don't log close to 250-260 innings in a season, since I place huge value on that in this day of age.

[Nox]

f*** this pitch framing ********. If everyone wanted it to be included in WAR and wanted the MVP to be the "most WAR" award then you might as well give it to a catcher every year forever. Catchers have a lot of influence on the game. They touch almost every pitch on the defensive end of the game. Don't you think if Mike Trout could earn 10,000 WAR points by pitch framing from the OF he would? It's not a fair comparison if you're going to base the MVP all on WAR and include pitch framing data because the catcher is the only one who can take advantage of it.

 

But of course all the knob goblins are drooling over the latest baseball nerd stat fad instead of taking a step back and thinking of the implications of what they are suggesting. At a minimum if pitch framing is going to be considered a legitimate countable stat, then there has to be some kind of adjustment for catchers to minimize its impact on WAR when comparing to other players. Catchers already have a huge advantage when it comes to collecting WAR points because the "replacement level" for them is down at Buck Martinez levels of offense. A lot of that defensive impact is baked in because, believe it or not, people involved in baseball for the past 150 years actually recognized the importance of the defensive impact catchers have on baseball and have been willing to look the other way on offense for years.

 

However, my rant doesn't take away from the fact that Lucroy has done exceedingly well in the aspects of the game where he can be fairly compared to his peers in other positions on the field so he should be considered a legit candidate in the MVP discussion.

 

So in football I guess QBs shouldn't be assigned the value they do either just because it "isn't fair" to the other positions...or something?

 

That was hard to read.

[Dick_Pole]

Thing is, Lucroy has been the most valuable player this year, not counting pitch framing, although I could see why Kershaw could take it.

 

Yes I don't disagree to that statement. I made a mention of it at the end of my rant.

[jaysblue]

http://sd.keepcalm-o-matic.co.uk/i/keep-calm-and-love-jonathan-lucroy.png

[jaysblue]

http://assets.nydailynews.com/polopoly_fs/1.1394149.1404859446!/img/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/gallery_1200/giancarlo-stanton-2013.jpg

 

He's my NL MVP

[jaysblue]

Gayyyyyyyyyyyyy

 

Jonathan Lucroy doesn't have that bod my friend.

[Nox]

http://assets.nydailynews.com/polopoly_fs/1.1394149.1404859446!/img/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/gallery_1200/giancarlo-stanton-2013.jpg

 

He's my NL MVP

 

Looks like the male version of Cristiano Ronaldo in these pics.

[Dick_Pole]

I always find it funny that people say "the hive" resorts to insults for no reason.

 

So congrats on showing your glaring ignorance to the world. I don't know all about framing, but I do know that catchers can have thousands of opportunities during a season to utilize it, and a ball changed to a strike I'd imagine has similar value to a good defensive play by an infielder. It's not hard to see how valuable it can be when you pull your head out of your ass.

 

I made no reference to "the hive" unless you're assuming all these mysterious individuals that belong to it are the knob goblins I'm referring to. And the term knob goblins is not exactly a serious term that's meant to get one's panties in a bunch either.

 

Pitch framing is not a hard concept to understand, of course I get it. I disagree with it being part of the determinant of the MVP award, or the determinant of salary. And since no one is giving MVP awards or 5 year $50 million contracts to 625 OPS catchers because they can put up 3 points of WAR on pitch framing (if/when such calculation happens), baseball seems to agree with me. If some smart GM wants to use these numbers to determine which catcher to use or to try to pry someone off the FA list with a few extra grand, that's a smart idea. But there's no way someone like Erik Kratz is going to be in contention for the MVP award or get bid up to a $70 million contract because he can pitch frame 130 games a year.

 

Now imagine if baseball decided to go with robotic umpires behind the plate. Pitch framing becomes valueless overnight and it's not equivalent to a good defensive play anymore. Pitch framing's closest comparable isn't a good defensive play, its closest comparable is being able to throw a spitball and get away with it, or steal signs, or cozy up to the umpire and get favourable calls during your career. When's the WAR measurement going to come out for all those?

[Dick_Pole]

So in football I guess QBs shouldn't be assigned the value they do either just because it "isn't fair" to the other positions...or something?

 

That was hard to read.

 

Except a QB that's worth anything has to be good at all aspects of his game. A QB who can scramble and rush but who can't throw has limited value.

 

Valuing the MVP award based on WAR and assigning a large value to a catcher who can pitch frame based on it means every year there are going to be candidates who OPS 700 or under in contention for the MVP. It may make sense to a computer or to people who want to live their life like one but conceptually to a baseball fan it doesn't work and will never gain any traction.

 

Ozzie Smith never won an MVP award and the one year he came close was the year he put up his best offensive numbers. The award may be biased to offense-only types but it will never be biased to defense-only types. My preference is that it goes to those who are strong at multiple aspects of their game.

[Nox]

Except a QB that's worth anything has to be good at all aspects of his game. A QB who can scramble and rush but who can't throw has limited value.

 

Conversely, Peyton Manning is probably the least mobile player in the league. All else being equal, mobility helps a QB. Despite him not being good (or even average) at all aspects of the game, he was without question the MVP last year.

 

Valuing the MVP award based on WAR and assigning a large value to a catcher who can pitch frame based on it means every year there are going to be candidates who OPS 700 or under in contention for the MVP. It may make sense to a computer or to people who want to live their life like one but conceptually to a baseball fan it doesn't work and will never gain any traction.

 

Ozzie Smith never won an MVP award and the one year he came close was the year he put up his best offensive numbers. The award may be biased to offense-only types but it will never be biased to defense-only types. My preference is that it goes to those who are strong at multiple aspects of their game.

 

This is all just very wrong. Why does is matter that a .700 OPS player might be the most valuable player in the league? If his outcomes had the most positive effect on his team's run differential, he is the most valuable. How he gets there is pretty irrelevant.

 

The Ozzie Smith argument doesn't move the needle. That era was operating on far less information and quite frankly teams barely knew who was good.

 

Andre Dawson won an MVP despite not being a top 50 player that year. Mitch Williams got MVP votes two years later.

[GD]

Pitch framing is not a hard concept to understand, of course I get it. I disagree with it being part of the determinant of the MVP award, or the determinant of salary. And since no one is giving MVP awards or 5 year $50 million contracts to 625 OPS catchers because they can put up 3 points of WAR on pitch framing (if/when such calculation happens), baseball seems to agree with me. If some smart GM wants to use these numbers to determine which catcher to use or to try to pry someone off the FA list with a few extra grand, that's a smart idea. But there's no way someone like Erik Kratz is going to be in contention for the MVP award or get bid up to a $70 million contract because he can pitch frame 130 games a year.

 

I see what you're saying here, but the thing is that baseball isn't a rational market. Teams are more than happy to trade Danny Valencia for Erik Kratz because they know they can get these guys cheap and they're not going to give them $70/5 until they absolutely need to because they don't want to drive up the price, they want to keep the price as low as possible for as long as possible to keep the skill a market inefficiency. Players don't always get paid what they're worth. Hell, Lucroy is making $2M this year.

[TheHurl]

Kershaw 6.7

 

Isn't Kershaw 7.1?

[Dick_Pole]

Conversely, Peyton Manning is probably the least mobile player in the league. All else being equal, mobility helps a QB. Despite him not being good (or even average) at all aspects of the game, he was without question the MVP last year.

 

The difference with Manning is that rushing is not imperative to QB success. He has found ways around it. A QB who can rush is a nice thing to have but if he can't throw, his success will be limited.

 

Under this pitch framing scenario, it is possible for a catcher that is mediocre or average at hitting and at all other aspects of his defensive game except pitch framing to collect a bunch of theoretical WAR points off of that then get into discussion as one of the best players in the game. If you're a GM constructing a team, sure you look at this type of stuff because you need every advantage you can get. But as a fan, I am allowed to use discretion as to what baseball skills are most valuable. I would say the same goes for sports writers who vote on these things. Erik Kratz is not a MLB-talent player. Jose Molina is not an all-star. My opinion and those of many others aren't going to change just because they can rack up 4 WAR with 3.5 of that being due to pitch framing.

 

Mike Trout earning a 10 WAR season through speed, hitting ability and defense is a truly remarkable talent. He is hard to replace, a rare commodity and is therefore valuable. If your catcher is a top pitch framer, but if this skill can be taught or is a skill held by 50 Erik Kratzes in the minor leagues, even if it is a useful skill, it is not hard to replace, is not a rare commodity and does not make you valuable.