2015 Awards Thread

[Ceetar]

Edgy MD wrote: But look at those numbers. He had the worst relative clutch performance in the National League. And so what we're doing by giving him the MVP is rewarding him for theoretical runs he would have produced in an all-situations-are-equal environment, but denying Rizzo, who actually produced more runs in real life.

but like, if you're going to use the heavily luck-based clutch argument, shouldn't he be disqualified for not actually getting his team to the postseason?

Of course the MVP award, much like the Hall of Fame, is designed to spark discussion/argument by being purposely vague and subjective about what we're voting on.

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

You really think it's a feature-not-a-bug thing, this vagueness? I'm not necessarily disagreeing; it's just that I've always just kind of assumed they just erred in leaving the Hall and award guidelines so vague-- a win for poetics over clarity, if you will.

[Ceetar]

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: You really think it's a feature-not-a-bug thing, this vagueness? I'm not necessarily disagreeing; it's just that I've always just kind of assumed they just erred in leaving the Hall and award guidelines so vague-- a win for poetics over clarity, if you will.

I mean

3. General character, disposition, loyalty and effort.

I have a hard time reading that as anything other than "Hey, was this guy cool? gave you quotes? took you to the cool parties?"

and this.

There is no clear-cut definition of what Most Valuable means. It is up to the individual voter to decide who was the Most Valuable Player in each league to his team.

seems pretty clearly not meant to be objective.

[Edgy MD]

Ceetar wrote: Edgy MD wrote: But look at those numbers. He had the worst relative clutch performance in the National League. And so what we're doing by giving him the MVP is rewarding him for theoretical runs he would have produced in an all-situations-are-equal environment, but denying Rizzo, who actually produced more runs in real life. but like, if you're going to use the heavily luck-based clutch argument, shouldn't he be disqualified for not actually getting his team to the postseason?

I'm not sure why you're asking. No, he shouldn't be disqualified. I'm just tempted to vote for Rizzo ahead of him.

[Ceetar]

Edgy MD wrote: I'm not sure why you're asking. No, he shouldn't be disqualified. I'm just tempted to vote for Rizzo ahead of him.

I'm asking because WPA measures how much his actual hits contributed to wins, rather than the average value of getting said hit. If we're extrapolating his hits to how much they helped his team get a win, that means that the win itself is meaningful towards the MVP. As such, the ultimate goal is the playoffs, and that didn't happen. If it's important he has to be knocked down a bit, if not disqualified, because ultimately he wasn't valuable _enough_. In the sense that the 85-90th wins that he didn't get them to are worth more.