PDA

View Full Version : Upset for the MVP?



MikeThierry
11-12-2010, 12:17 AM
I have said on here many times in the past that Votto deserves the MVP this year, though I will always be a Pujols fan. That said, do any of you see an upset this year for the MVP? I ask this because Pujols won the Silver Slugger award today, which was surprising to me. From what I understand, the Silver Slugger is voted on by coaches and managers so it probably has some of the same flaws that the Gold Glove awards have (though there are better stats to go off of when picking an offensive player). However, if you look at some of the advanced saber stats such as WAR and Offensive War (which are stats I hate by the way), Pujols is at the top of those stats. I know there are a lot of MVP voters that follow the more modern day saber stats or at least let those stats have a say in how they vote. Pujols had the highest overall WAR in the NL with a 7.2 and had the highest offensive war in the majors with a 7.4. Again, I hate those stats but those stats cannot be underestimated as far as how it plays into the voting in the MVP. Plus looking at the talent that Pujols had around him this year, I could actually see an upset. We have seen it in the past when Pujols was snubbed several times against Bonds and that one year when Howard won it.

I think Votto should get it but I have just a gut feeling that the voters might select Pujols.

MikeThierry
11-12-2010, 12:33 AM
Also I can think of only one other instance where a player lost the MVP vote while winning the Silver Slugger and Gold Glove in the same year. Derek Lee won the Silver Slugger and Gold Glove in '05. Pujols won the MVP. I give you that the Silver Slugger is a recent award (1980's I think) but all this stuff smells of an upset this year in the MVP race.

scott91575
11-12-2010, 12:40 AM
MVP takes into account team performance, silver slugger does not. Votto wins it easy.

MikeThierry
11-12-2010, 01:42 AM
So because the team around a player sucks, that player should be punished even if he has an outstanding year? There have been several MVP's in which their teams did no make the playoffs yet they won the MVP.

scott91575
11-12-2010, 07:43 AM
So because the team around a player sucks, that player should be punished even if he has an outstanding year? There have been several MVP's in which their teams did no make the playoffs yet they won the MVP.

Re read....


MVP takes into account team performance

takes into account. I repeat, takes into account.

When candidates are close, and sometimes not even that close, the success of the team is a big determining factor. Votto and Pujols are close. The success of the Reds (especially since the two teams are in the same division) puts Votto over the top.

Who cares if it's fair or how you see it? I am not going to argue that. It's just the way it is. Deal with it.

Anyway, I tell you what. Pujols wins, I will never post again. Votto wins, you go away and stay on the Cardinals board. Deal?

jwertz
11-12-2010, 09:00 AM
It is irritating that Cards and Cubs fans always ruin a good time. Fact of the matter is that Pujols as great as he is could not get his team to the playoffs. Even with a rotation made up of CY Young candidates, another MVP caliber player, and one of baseballs all time great managers (as much as I hate him, Larussa is a hall of famer). If you take Votto off of the Reds they don't sniff the playoffs. Stats are great, but what happened to using your eyeballs. Both are great players, but Votto was more "valuable."

code
11-12-2010, 09:30 AM
It is irritating that Cards and Cubs fans always ruin a good time. Fact of the matter is that Pujols as great as he is could not get his team to the playoffs. Even with a rotation made up of CY Young candidates, another MVP caliber player, and one of baseballs all time great managers (as much as I hate him, Larussa is a hall of famer). If you take Votto off of the Reds they don't sniff the playoffs. Stats are great, but what happened to using your eyeballs. Both are great players, but Votto was more "valuable."

I agree with you 100% Mr.JWertz :)

swaisuc
11-12-2010, 10:48 AM
I'm with the majority here....

We're basically splitting hairs in performance between the 2. I would say team success will break the tie.

Vottomatic
11-12-2010, 12:01 PM
I have this bad feeling that CarGo is going to slip in and win it. Kinda feel like Joey and Albert are going to split votes allowing CarGo to get it.

mroby85
11-12-2010, 12:10 PM
I have this bad feeling that CarGo is going to slip in and win it. Kinda feel like Joey and Albert are going to split votes allowing CarGo to get it.

It would be a complete joke if he won it, if you look at his stats away from Coors Field the difference is absurd.

Brandon4MVP
11-12-2010, 12:53 PM
Writers vote on mvp and players and managers vote on gold glove and silver slugger. John Fay has said that he has not talked to a writer who did not vote for Votto. Votto is the MVP easy

Natty Redlocks
11-12-2010, 01:46 PM
Silver Slugger and especially GG always struck me as sort of consolation prizes.

mckbearcat48
11-12-2010, 04:11 PM
Votto should win MVP. Without him, Reds probably aren't as good. Without Pujols, the Cardinals still suck this year.

Kingspoint
11-12-2010, 07:33 PM
Votto should win MVP. Without him, Reds probably aren't as good. Without Pujols, the Cardinals still suck this year.

:D

MikeThierry
11-12-2010, 10:21 PM
Wow, sorry I said anything. I'm just saying there could be an upset, thats all. I never said that Votto didn't deserve it, which some of you think I believe he doesn't. Sorry jwertz if my thread "ruined" the good time you have on these boards or that you would go so far as making a bet to ban each other from this board, scott.

I think if Votto wasn't on the team you guys would have still made the playoffs. The Reds did have statistically the best offense in the NL. Granted, Votto played a huge role but you had a lot of players that played fundamentally sound ball, as far as hitting goes, this year. All I know is that if Pujols wasn't on the Cards, they would have been a step above the Pirates this year if you look at the "talent" that he was surrounded with.

If Cargo wins the award, they just need to get rid of the award all together.

Roush's socks
11-12-2010, 10:28 PM
In all sports, including baseball, the MVP voters would much rather give the award to a player who led his team to the playoffs. It isn't always 100% that way, but it is the general rule.

The idea is that you are measuring "value" to a team in the context of winning and losing. If a team comes in 3rd place, does it really matter if they would have come in 4th place without their best player? Either way it's the difference between 3rd and 4th place. However, with a playoff team you can make the argument that they would not have made the playoffs without their best player, as is the case with Votto.

IMO I agree with this tradition. Many times bad teams have one player with great statistics. But racking up great stats for a losing team that is playing non-competitive games IS NOT the same as playing great for a pennant chasing team. Look at Chris Bosh who looked great playing for losing teams, but now that he is with the Heat playing at a higher level he looks pretty mediocre.

scott91575
11-12-2010, 11:30 PM
Wow, sorry I said anything. I'm just saying there could be an upset, thats all. I never said that Votto didn't deserve it, which some of you think I believe he doesn't. Sorry jwertz if my thread "ruined" the good time you have on these boards or that you would go so far as making a bet to ban each other from this board, scott.

I think if Votto wasn't on the team you guys would have still made the playoffs. The Reds did have statistically the best offense in the NL. Granted, Votto played a huge role but you had a lot of players that played fundamentally sound ball, as far as hitting goes, this year. All I know is that if Pujols wasn't on the Cards, they would have been a step above the Pirates this year if you look at the "talent" that he was surrounded with.

If Cargo wins the award, they just need to get rid of the award all together.

I am testing your conviction to your assertion that you see Pujols winning the MVP.

Man up on the bet, or admit this is pretty much a troll thread.

I know you don't mean to be a troll, but coming to a Reds board as a known Cardinals fan and stating that Pujols will win the MVP if you really don't think that way is a troll move.

So, do you really think Pujols is going to win it, or were you trying to push buttons. You pick.

edit: Your edit of your original post removed some of the troll nature where you felt there was going to be an upset. Sorry, but your original post was pretty much stating you felt not only Pujols deserved the MVP, but was going to win it. Hence my post testing your conviction.

BTW...Votto's rate numbers were better than Pujols. You could make a case Pujols should not have won the Silver Slugger more than Votto not winning the MVP.

MikeThierry
11-13-2010, 12:49 AM
I am testing your conviction to your assertion that you see Pujols winning the MVP.

Man up on the bet, or admit this is pretty much a troll thread.

I know you don't mean to be a troll, but coming to a Reds board as a known Cardinals fan and stating that Pujols will win the MVP if you really don't think that way is a troll move.

So, do you really think Pujols is going to win it, or were you trying to push buttons. You pick.

edit: Your edit of your original post removed some of the troll nature where you felt there was going to be an upset. Sorry, but your original post was pretty much stating you felt not only Pujols deserved the MVP, but was going to win it. Hence my post testing your conviction.

BTW...Votto's rate numbers were better than Pujols. You could make a case Pujols should not have won the Silver Slugger more than Votto not winning the MVP.

You are telling me to re-read what you said? I don't know how you took out of my original post your assumption of what I believe. I made some tweaks from my original thought, not the extreme in which you make it out to be. Chill out man. I was surprised Pujols won the Silver Slugger award when some of Votto's numbers were better. That is why I thought there was a possibility of an upset in the MVP voting or it might be closer than what I originally thought it was going to be.

Now that I think about it, I take exception to your assertion that I "pretty much stated that I felt not only Pujols deserved the MVP but was going to win it". From the very beginning, I said Votto deserved the MVP. If you look at any numerous post on this board since I joined, I stated Votto should win the MVP. I have said during the season that Votto is the favorite to win it. The very first sentence of my original post was unchanged. It read "I have said on here many times in the past that Votto deserves the MVP this year, though I will always be a Pujols fan." I never once said Pujols will win the MVP even in the original, unedited post. I understand if you misunderstood what I originally wrote but please don't misconstrue it into something I never said.

Look, we are fans of different teams. That doesn't mean we can't be civil and have a decent conversation on here.

MikeThierry
11-13-2010, 12:51 AM
Also, there is no bet if the other party doesn't agree to it. Its childish and on the level of "my dad can beat up your dad".

scott91575
11-13-2010, 12:55 AM
Also, there is no bet if the other party doesn't agree to it. Its childish and on the level of "my dad can beat up your dad".

No, it's on the level you don't believe what you say.

Your analogy makes no sense, too. Seriously, you can't back your assertion. Making a bet questions your assertion. You are not strong enough to back it up.

IIRC your initial post said something like "I smell an upset" or something like that. You were clearly trying to back Pujols as an MVP, questioned my assertion that team performance matters, and now you are backtracking.

It's cool. You have pretty much stated what I felt all along. You really don't see an upset, and was starting a troll thread. No matter how many "hey man, I'm cool, you are all upset, I'm a good guy you are mean" posts you want to make won't change that.

BTW...I was never mad. Like I said, I tested your conviction on your initial thought. You have proven that is zero, and you created a troll thread.

edit: BTW, I know you didn't mean it that way (I have already stated that). My bet was to clarify that fact, but you original post and replies implied Pujols should, could, and most likely would win. I made you backtrack really quick, didn't I? Amazing how a forceful act can clarify statements.

MikeThierry
11-13-2010, 01:04 AM
My god man, you are reading too much into what I am saying. Chill out.


I never asserted anything. I just asked if there could be an upset. I had no ulterior motives or anything of that nature. I brought up the topic because the Silver Slugger awards were announced and surprisingly Pujols won. I would have never brought up the topic if Votto won the award, which he probably should have.

I don't understand the hostility.

scott91575
11-13-2010, 01:06 AM
My god man, you are reading too much into what I am saying. Chill out.


I never asserted anything. I just asked if there could be an upset. I had no ulterior motives or anything of that nature. I brought up the topic because the Silver Slugger awards were announced and surprisingly Pujols won. I would have never brought up the topic if Votto won the award, which he probably should have.

I don't understand the hostility.

I'm not upset, so hey, if you want to see it that way, congrats on the thoughts in your head.

You stated you thought there would be an upset, and stated reasons why. I forced your hand, and now you backtrack. It's ok, you have no conviction in your assertions. Just pointing that out.

edit: I really wish I would have quoted your original post.

MikeThierry
11-13-2010, 01:09 AM
There is a difference between me saying that there would be an upset and there could be an upset or the possibility of one. I never said that there would be an upset.

Congrats for twisting someone's words around.

By the way, I never said you were angry, I said you were being hostile. Two different things. Your rhetoric is clearly hostile probably because I'm not a Reds fan.

MikeThierry
11-13-2010, 01:10 AM
I wish you would have quoted the original post too because I never said there would be an upset and I said Votto deserves it.

scott91575
11-13-2010, 01:14 AM
There is a difference between me saying that there would be an upset and there could be an upset or the possibility of one. I never said that there would be an upset.

Congrats for twisting someone's words around.

Well, I guess you can twist your own words when you edit your original post. your original post was pretty much stating you smelled an upset (I believe those were the words). Apparently you didn't think that through.

Alright, now the thread is more clear. You think Votto will win, but Pujols might. Thanks. Awesome thread. CarGo could win too. Yet it's pretty clear Votto is the clear favorite, and in spite of me making the most obvious reason why Votto wins, you still came back at it.

What do you want with this thread?

Here you go, Pujols could win.

end thread.

MikeThierry
11-13-2010, 01:18 AM
Are you always this hostile and rude to people who are fans of other teams or are you a jerk all the time?

scott91575
11-13-2010, 01:28 AM
Are you always this hostile and rude to people who are fans of other teams or are you a jerk all the time?

are you always this wishy washy and create worthless thread about things that have small possibilities that might happen yet can't take a stand on it?

Do you not think before posting? You create a thread about Pujols might win the MVP, with no assertion whatsoever, and hope to get a good response? You actually think Votto should and will win the MVP. How can you actually create an argument against. It's worthless.

At least have some conviction. At least then I would have some respect for you.

At least create a dialogue and debate you can argue. A statement "hey, he might win" is worthless. This whole thread is now "hey, he could win, who knows, I have no idea, I am clueless. Things could happen, but I don't think they will. Let's talk about random things that could happen! Yeah random thoughts!"

MikeThierry
11-13-2010, 01:46 AM
are you always this wishy washy and create worthless thread about things that have small possibilities that might happen yet can't take a stand on it?

Do you not think before posting? You create a thread about Pujols might win the MVP, with no assertion whatsoever, and hope to get a good response? You actually think Votto should and will win the MVP. How can you actually create an argument against. It's worthless.

At least have some conviction. At least then I would have some respect for you.

At least create a dialogue and debate you can argue. A statement "hey, he might win" is worthless. This whole thread is now "hey, he could win, who knows, I have no idea, I am clueless. Things could happen, but I don't think they will. Let's talk about random things that could happen! Yeah random thoughts!"

Why would I be assertive and confrontational when I was asking a question to Reds fans? I wasn't even trying to start a full fledged debate about a topic. Roush's socks had a very logical answer to my question. I guess I could come in with bold threads about Pujols winning the MVP or how the Cardinals are the best team of all time but I don't go down that Jerry Springer route like you would like me to. There were several Cards "fans" who came in here earlier this year who took that tactic and they were banned.

By the way, you wouldn't have respect for me no matter what I say in here so stop fooling yourself.

MikeThierry
11-13-2010, 01:47 AM
I also think Vottomattic brings up a good point about Cargo. I just don't know if it this voting is as clear cut as many people once thought it was, including myself.

jwertz
11-13-2010, 08:20 AM
My bad Mike. The comment I made about Cubs and Cards fans ruining our fun is my attempt at a little humor. I honestly did not intend to insult. However, there is a bit of truth to what I did say. I can't tell you how many times I have been at a Reds event and a bastard cubs fan shows up, usually ignorant and beligerant. I don't think that Cardinals fans are nearly as bad, but it seems that most are upset that the Reds are a viable contender. I think most Cardinals fans are spoiled by the success of their team. Not you personally, I don't know you from Adam, so for me to judge you would be wrong of me. If I have upset you I apologize. I too just want to have a good time, and am sorry if I have wronged anyone. You do have to realize that you are dealing with Reds fans that while die hard, have been tested for the last twenty years. I know I built up alot of angst and frustration over those years. I was five the last time the Reds won the world series, so you can imagine watching the Cubs and Cardinals win year after year while we brought up the rear with Pittsburgh was no fun. Seeing as how this is a Reds message board for Reds fans I can understand how some, if not most would be "upset" with a Cardinals fan for even mentioning Pujols. I am open to discussion about baseball, with just about anybody. But I think both you and I can agree that no one can have an intelligent conversation with a Cubs fan. Sorry again. One thing everyone can agree on is that Pujols and Votto are damn good. Albert Pujols is the best baseball player of my generation, Griffey Jr. included. But Votto should win this award, without him, this team can forget about at least twenty wins.

MikeThierry
11-13-2010, 04:14 PM
jwetz, I understand. Being that the Cubs are the Cards long heated rival, I have experienced that "fandom". You almost have to get drunk on a daily basis to even put up with that fan base.

I think that its not the fact that Cards fans are upset with the Reds for being contenders but how our team was just an epic fail this year. No intensity, no fundamentals. This team set back Cardinals baseball 40 years to those 70's teams that were just bad. We have come to expect through the years that Cards teams would play a hard 9 innings and be fundamentally sound. I was too depressed as a baseball fan to even stomach the dreck I was seeing from our team the last month of the year. I think there was some big headedness in Cardinals nation but it mostly it was due to how bad they were this year, not anything to do with the Reds success within the division.

RedsLvr
11-13-2010, 05:03 PM
It's not all about stats. Think of what MVP means. Most Valuable Player. What value is a player to a team that doesn't even sniff the playoffs? Votto was way more valuable to the Reds in 2010 than Pujols was to the Cardinals.

redsfanmia
11-13-2010, 06:38 PM
I hope Votto is not MVP, he will be cheaper that way.

MikeThierry
11-13-2010, 08:06 PM
Votto will be worth a lot of money regardless if he is MVP or not.

Girevik
11-15-2010, 09:25 AM
Is there any official citeria for MVP? I get so tired of hearing the debate each year about who had he "best year" vs. who "was most important to thier team".

mroby85
11-15-2010, 04:06 PM
Is there any official citeria for MVP? I get so tired of hearing the debate each year about who had he "best year" vs. who "was most important to thier team".

I don't think there are any stipulations, but they usually go to a guy on a playoff team, which is right in my opinion, unless you have some type of record breaking season like Bonds did when he hit 73. Unless it's something ridiculous like that, how valuable were you if your team didn't even make the playoffs? I'm not just being biased because Votto got in over Pujols, the numbers are very similar, and Votto's team got in. Carlos Gonzalez loses because his team didn't make the playoffs, and his splits away from coors field aren't anywhere near his stats there.

Girevik
11-15-2010, 04:24 PM
I don't think there are any stipulations, but they usually go to a guy on a playoff team, which is right in my opinion, unless you have some type of record breaking season like Bonds did when he hit 73. Unless it's something ridiculous like that, how valuable were you if your team didn't even make the playoffs? I'm not just being biased because Votto got in over Pujols, the numbers are very similar, and Votto's team got in. Carlos Gonzalez loses because his team didn't make the playoffs, and his splits away from coors field aren't anywhere near his stats there.

I'd really like to see them do away with the whole "valuable" thing, name the award after a player just like the Cy Young (the "Babe Ruth", maybe?) and come out with a criteria for the award.

Personally, I think it should go to the player who had the best year overall and take the whole "valuable" thing out of the picture. I hate getting into these discussions that "player A isn't as valuable because he had 3 other all stars on this team. Player B didn't have a good year but he's valuable because he's the only decent player on the team". I'd also like to see it restricted to positions players. I know it's rare for a pitcher to win it, but it can happen.