Vote

[Guest Edgy DC]

Name your top ten players in each league and let's produce our own MVPs.

[nymr83]

it would be nice if we could get the same 32 voters as the NL has to compare numbers, if we fall a few short lets give the actual vote, win shares, and a few other things their own "ballot"

American League
1. Mauer
2. Jeter
3. Santana
4. Ortiz
5. Morneau
6. Dye
7. Sizemore
8. Guerrero
9. Hafner
10. Thome

National League
1. Howard
2. Pujols
3. Beltran
4. Berkman
5. Cabrera
6. Utley
7. Reyes
8. Wright
9. Jones, A.
10. Oswalt

[Guest attgig]

American League
1. Mauer
2. Jeter
3. Ortiz
4. Thomas
5. Dye
6. Santana
7. Hafner
8. Guerrero
9. Thome
10. Verlander

National League
1. Pujols
2. Howard
3. Beltran
4. Berkman
5. Soriano
6. Utley
7. Cabrera
8. Reyes
9. Hoffman
10. Nomar

[MFS62]

Point of Order.
Do you want the 10 players we think are the best in each league, or the ones we think are most valuable this year?
There's a difference, especially if one player was injured for most of this year, but when healthy is one of the best.
edit: or, if a great player had an off year this year, but is generally one of the best.

Later

[Guest Edgy DC]

The 10 net winningest performances this year.

[metsmarathon]

MFS62 wrote: Point of Order. Do you want the 10 players we think are the best in each league, or the ones we think are most valuable this year? There's a difference, especially if one player was injured for most of this year, but when healthy is one of the best. edit: or, if a great player had an off year this year, but is generally one of the best. Later

it's not the most talented award.

"net winningest" is likely the best way to describe what i think the mvp is trying to award.

[nymr83]

less talking, more voting.

[MFS62]

Net winningest?
Oh well, that answers about this year or career and eliminates some players (like Lee of the Cubs and Sheffield of the Yanks) who were injured this past year.
So, here's how I prepared my list. I evaluated players:
Against other player in their league
Other players at their position
Total contribution as a player. To me that includes defense. So some famous names from that league where pitchers don't bat are omitted from my list. This also means that I gave extra consideration to players who play more difficult defensive positions.
I also considered pitchers on this list who I felt were the "top" in what they do.

Then I ranked each league's players against each other to come up with my rankings(best to worst among their league's top 10).

Here goes:
AL

Santana
Vlad Guerrero
Carlos Guillen
Jater
Mariano Rivera
Joe Mauer
Jermayne Dye
Manny Ramirez
A-Rod
Robinson Cano

NL
Ryan Howard
Albert Pujols
Webb
Soriano
Beltran
Reyes
Utley
Oswalt
A. Jones
Bay

Later

[nymr83]

i agree that being a DH should hurt you, but not more than being a terrible fielder, leaving Ortiz completely off the ballot isn't fair.

[metsmarathon]

vlad?!

[Guest patona314]

this top 10 is a waste of time. too many avenues to contemplate.

example.. how does mike young equate to derek jeter. or albert equate to ryan.. etc etc etc

[Guest Edgy DC]

A waste of your time, maybe.

[metirish]

Wham...

A question,how do they determine who votes, I read Klapisch today and he said he was one of two area writers that had a vote ,the other was at the Bergen Record....Klap voted for Jeter and the other guy voted for the winner....how does it work?

[Frayed Knot]

The votes rotate via some method governed by the BBWA (Baseball writers assoc).
Especially in a big city like NYC where there are more writers than awards, a guy from the Post might get the NL ROY vote, while the NYDN may get the AL CY, the Bergen Record could get one of the MVPs, etc. The NYTimes doesn't allow their guys to vote - trying to avoid even the appearance of conflict of interest.

[metsmarathon]

its the offseason. what else is there to do than waste time with rankings both meaningless and meaningful?

[Guest patona314]

="Edgy DC"]A waste of your time, maybe.

AL

ortiz
santana
rivera
dye
thomas
jeter
morneau
sizemore
damon
suzuki

NL

howard
pujols
reyes
soriano
beltran
cabrera
berkman
jones
hoffman

[MFS62]

Last time I heard, to be eligible to vote, a writer has to currently cover baseball as his (her?) regular beat, and have covered baseball for at least ten consecutive years.
Many of the long-term writers in New York have moved on to become "columnists" (e.g.- Mike Lupica) and I don't think they're eligible to vote.

Later

[Guest Iubitul]

Frayed Knot wrote: The NYTimes doesn't allow their guys to vote - trying to avoid even the appearance of conflict of interest.

Why do I find this ironic and funny?

[Frayed Knot]

The 10-year rule as a BBWA member is the minimum to get an [u:cfc5f6ecc3]HoF[/u:cfc5f6ecc3] ballot. Once a writer has obtained that they don't lose it - although some choose to stop voting if they no longer feel they follow the sport closely enough.

For the yearly awards I'm sure a seniority thing plays into it but I don't know of any strict cut-off date. The various BBW chapters distribute them in each city among the regular beat and all-purpose baseball writers on a rotating basis; ergo an overall columnist like Lupica wouldn't be in that rotation but strictly baseball guys like Klapisch, Madden, Heyman, etc., would even though they don't cover just one team specifically.

[Frayed Knot]

Iubitul wrote: Why do I find this ironic and funny?

For the same reason as I do.

[nymr83]

Iubitul wrote: ="Frayed Knot"]The NYTimes doesn't allow their guys to vote - trying to avoid even the appearance of conflict of interest. Why do I find this ironic and funny?

because the Times is one of the most biased and slanted papers in existence, to the point that their anti-war views led them to omit any mention of a soldier from NY being post-humously awarded the congressional medal of honor for jumping on a live grenade to protect his fellow soldiers?

but hey, its nice to know the sports section ain't conflicted, because thats whats really important

[nymr83]

Frayed Knot wrote: The 10-year rule as a BBWA member is the minimum to get an HoF ballot. Once a writer has obtained that they don't lose it - although some choose to stop voting if they no longer feel they follow the sport closely enough. For the yearly awards I'm sure a seniority thing plays into it but I don't know of any strict cut-off date. The various BBW chapters distribute them in each city among the regular beat and all-purpose baseball writers on a rotating basis; ergo an overall columnist like Lupica wouldn't be in that rotation but strictly baseball guys like Klapisch, Madden, Heyman, etc., would even though they don't cover just one team specifically.

i really feel that half the voters don't know whats going on outside their own city (and maybe its biggest rival(s).) they should let the managers or fellow players vote, if the players got it wrong i'd be more able to stomach it.

[metsmarathon]

the players suffer from the same problem as the writers - lack of exposure to the out-of-division teams.

improved definition of the judging criteria, and enforced visibility into the votes is likely the best method, regardless of who actually pulls the lever or hangs the chad.

[metirish]

] because the Times is one of the most biased and slanted papers in existence, to the point that their anti-war views led them to omit any mention of a soldier from NY being post-humously awarded the congressional medal of honor for jumping on a live grenade to protect his fellow soldiers? but hey, its nice to know the sports section ain't conflicted, because thats whats really important

yet the NYT help sell this war to the nation with the reporting of Judith Miller,she's gone now though.

[nymr83]

your liberal koolaid is too hard to stomach, i prefer the blue and orange stuff Sal accused everyone of downing. there is ZERO excuse for what the Times did.

[metirish]

Are you saying that Miller's reporting on WMD's didn't help sell this war....shit it was her false reporting that got her fired.....and I never drink koolaid...and I am not a lib...I'm a free thinker and make up my own mind on issues...

[Elster88]

This discussion really doesn't belong in this forum.

[Guest patona314]

Elster88 wrote: This discussion really doesn't belong in this forum.

agreed, but let me say this, i'm a republican and reading the sunday times is one of highlights of my week. go figure

[Frayed Knot]

]i really feel that half the voters don't know whats going on outside their own city (and maybe its biggest rival(s).) they should let the managers or fellow players vote, if the players got it wrong i'd be more able to stomach it.

The individual votes aren't traditionally released so it's tough to claim that some sort of regional bias is the reason behind bad votes. And the managers vote on the 'Gold Glove' awards and those usually turn out worse than anything the writers are responsible for.

[Guest iramets]

I for one would be happiest if the players voted. Then it's not regional or any bias on the part of stupid writers or dopey fans or anything but what your peers thought of you. "Hey, Derek, what can I tell you--the men you play against think you stink on ice, okay? Deal with that."