Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
devilsrule33

2012 MLB Thread

103 posts in this topic

Nats topped the Phils, clinching the #1 seed in the NL. NLDS format is as follows:

Nats vs Winner of Braves/Cardinals

Reds vs Giants

A's are up 8-5 going to the bottom of the 7th. A's bullpen really stepping up after Griffin laid an egg. Can't believe Texas is 6 outs away from that scary 1-game playoff....

Edit: A's win! AL West Champs! Oakland was 13 games out of 1st on June 30th and 4 out a week ago...

Edited by nmigliore

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see how Cabrera can lose the MVP. This hasn't happened in 45 years

Mike Trout's season was also historic. To whit:

First player in history to steal 45 bases, score 125 runs and hit 30 home runs in a season

First player in history to hit .320 with 30 HRs and 45 SBs in a season

First rookie ever with a 30 HR/40 SB campaign.

Trout joins Ted Williams, Mel Ott and Alex Rodriguez as the only players to hit .320 with 30 HRs during their 20-year-old seasons.

He is one of only five players in the Live Ball Era (post 1920) to score at least 130 runs in less than 140 games. Remember, Trout didn't get called up until a few weeks into the season.

At 21, he is the youngest player to steal 40 bases in a season since Ty Cobb in 1907.

Successful in 49 of 53 stolen base attempts this season (92.5%). Since 1920, only two other players have accomplished a better stolen base success rates in a season.

The kid will likely win a Gold Glove, according to FanGraphs, he's saved 22 runs on defense this year which ranks fifth in the Majors.

Oh, and there's the 10.7 WAR, as opposed to Cabrera's 7.2

I think Cabrera will get it because his team went into the playoffs, but I don't think either choice is necessarily wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nothing more shows the divide between the traditionalists and the "moneyball stat nerds" than this MVP race. Both parties think the decision isn`t even up for debate.

Edited by devilsrule33

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What about the Cy Young races? Finalists, winners? A lot of local talk that RA Dickey deserves it, although I can't say that for sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nothing more shows the divide between the traditionalists and the "moneyball stat nerds" than this MVP race. Both parties think the decision isn`t even up for debate.

Probably the most accurate thing I've seen written about the AL MVP race yet. It astounds me that the Trout backers think there's NO way Cabrera should win it. It's less surprising most of the Cabrera backers think it's an open and shut case because of the Triple Crown. In this, I lean toward the traditionalistic point of view, especially given Cabrera did better down the stretch than Trout.

The WAR stat means very little to me when you're comparing different positions, of course Trout's 'value' is going to be higher than Cabrera, centerfield is not as deep a position as third base.

And as far as the Cy Young, I don't want to hear about Kimbrel winning it either. You can't give the best pitcher in the league to someone that has 45 meaningful innings pitched when you have two 20-game winners and another worthy candidate in Kershaw. I don't want to hear about Gio Gonzalez either, since he wasn't the most hyped pitcher on his own team and it's a lot different winning 21 for the team with the best record as opposed to 20 for a horse**** team.

Edited by NJDevs4978

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And as far as the Cy Young, I don't want to hear about Kimbrel winning it either. You can't give the best pitcher in the league to someone that has 45 meaningful innings pitched when you have two 20-game winners and another worthy candidate in Kershaw. I don't want to hear about Gio Gonzalez either, since he wasn't the most hyped pitcher on his own team and it's a lot different winning 21 for the team with the best record as opposed to 20 for a horse**** team.

IMO wins are a horrible determinent for Cy Young...if your team sucks the long fatty, 16 wins should be enough for consideration.

But that said, I'm going to devil's advocate for Kimbrel in the NL, who's a sure lock for the Rolaids award.

So you don't need to be a Maddux brother to see this has somehow evolved into a starting pitcher's award. But it doesn't have to be. In fact, as my friends in the Baseball Writers' Association told me in 2010 when they shot down my proposal for a new relief pitchers' award, the rules clearly say we can vote for a reliever -- and we should, they told me vociferously, if we think a reliever deserves it.

Well, I'll tell you (and them) right now: I think this is one of those years.

Has any starting pitcher in the National League been even remotely as dominating as Craig Kimbrel or Aroldis Chapman? That answer, beyond dispute, is no. And this hasn't been just routine domination. This has been historic levels of domination -- particularly in the case of Kimbrel, who has had possibly the most dominant, overpowering season any NL closer has ever had.

So why should any voters feel compelled to vote for a starter in a season like this, just because there are 20 years of newfound tradition that say they should? I ran that question past one longtime dominating starter -- ESPN's own Curt Schilling -- and he laughed at the idea that starters "deserve" to be considered first.

"I have ZERO bias one way or the other," Schilling wrote, via the miracle of email. "Cy Young is for the BEST pitcher, not most valuable or anything else. When anyone in this game does something that hasn't been done in 112 years [as Kimbrel has], it bears noticing. Relievers, in my opinion, HAVE to have insanely dominant seasons given that they throw 150+ fewer innings than a starter. [but] 'tradition' is something I feel we need to move farther and farther from."

Ready for Kimbrel's historic credentials? Fasten your seat belts. (Note: To rank Kimbrel's place in history, I compared him only to pitchers -- starters or relievers -- who worked at least 50 innings in a season.)

Strikeouts: 105 in 57 1/3 IP, the best strikeout ratio ever (16.5/9 IP)

Opponent AVG.: .128, the lowest against any pitcher since 1900

Opponent OPS: .368, the lowest against any pitcher in the expansion era

WHIP: 0.68, best by any National League reliever since 1900

Percentage of hitters struck out: 49.5 pct., best in live-ball era

Strikeout-to-hit ratio: 105 whiffs, 25 hits (4.2), best of all time

And then there's the other stuff. With runners on base, he's faced 71 hitters -- and allowed a hit to four of them. … With runners in scoring position, he's faced 29 hitters -- and given up a hit to one of them. … Of his past 125 outs, 81 of them have come on strikeouts. … He's had eight outings in which he struck out all three hitters he's faced -- more than Chapman, Fernando Rodney, Jonathan Papelbon, Rafael Soriano, Jim Johnson and Jason Motte combined. … And have we mentioned this man has whiffed 11 more hitters for the season than his rotation amigo, Tim Hudson -- but in 107 1/3 fewer innings?

"He's a special guy," one NL scout said of Kimbrel. "When you go and watch him pitch, it's absolutely amazing. The hitters can't swing and hit the ball. It's that simple. They can't time him. You see guys try to cheat or do everything they can do to hit him. They can't do it."

Looking for a good definition of a Cy Young? "The hitters can't swing and hit the ball" sure works for me. So if I had to vote right now, it would be for Craig Kimbrel. No contest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even wins for a bad team isn't enough I agree, but when you combine it with Dickey's other numbers he should be a more than deserving winner. I doubt he gets it though, there's too much anti-knuckleball bias in the establishment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The WAR stat means very little to me when you're comparing different positions, of course Trout's 'value' is going to be higher than Cabrera, centerfield is not as deep a position as third base.

I'm sorry but this post is just completely wrong. WAR is designed to compare players across different positions. Fangraphs also uses the SAME positional adjustment for 3B and CF, so that argument rings hollow anyway. To take this further, Cabrera actually received MORE benefit from his position (+1.5) than Trout did (-0.2) since Trout played 67 games in LF this year. This whole idea that Trout is being favored by WAR solely because of position is completely wrong. The positional value between the two players was basically nothing and Trout was a much better defensive player.

By the way, even ignoring defense and position (so basically just looking at offense, which is unfair, but we'll throw the Cabrera folks a bone), Trout was STILL superior once you adjust for parks: 175 wRC+ for Trout compared to Cabrera's 166 and 171 OPS+ for Trout compared to Cabrera's 166.

People/voters will unfortunately get hung up in the Triple Crown and the fact Cabrera is on a playoff team while Trout isn't. Cabrera had an excellent year, but it wasn't as good as Trout's. The Triple Crown accomplishment is cool and all, but we need to stop using stats from the early 20th century as accurate measures of offense and value.

Edited by nmigliore
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What about the Cy Young races? Finalists, winners? A lot of local talk that RA Dickey deserves it, although I can't say that for sure.

Dickey in the NL, easily Verlander in the AL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bobby V was fired by the Sox today. I think everyone saw this coming but yeah, so much for that experiment....

Edited by nmigliore

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People/voters will unfortunately get hung up in the Triple Crown and the fact Cabrera is on a playoff team while Trout isn't. Cabrera had an excellent year, but it wasn't as good as Trout's. The Triple Crown accomplishment is cool and all, but we need to stop using stats from the early 20th century as accurate measures of offense and value.

Amen!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see how Cabrera can lose the MVP. This hasn't happened in 45 years

Trout had a helluva year. I want Miggy to win it, but I do believe it will be close. Of course, Fish gets Rookie of the Year honors to console him.

..., but we need to stop using stats from the early 20th century as accurate measures of offense and value.

Really? Because baseball has changed so much since then, and getting the triple crown is just soooo common?

remember, Cy Young played at the turn of the century, and nobody will ever touch his stats, and if anyone does, it will be an amazing accomplishment, just like Cabrera being able to maintain the lead in all 3 major batting categories. That stat goes beyond numbers and enters into the folklore realm that makes baseball special and therefore making the person doing it a Most Valuable asset to the game and its following.

Keep the MVP in D! :thumbsup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Triple Crown accomplishment is cool and all, but we need to stop using stats from the early 20th century as accurate measures of offense and value.

lol at stats from the early 20th century. This is where I can't take the 'stat revolution' seriously. Particularly when it comes to treating batting average as a garbage stat. There will always be value in being able to get a base hit, very few players can be useful entities hitting .200 (probably nobody that isn't named Adam Dunn). It's pretty hard to get walks - the center of the stat revolution - if you can't get at least get some base hits. Why would anyone pitch around guys that can't hit, unless they're just a major mistake hitter like Dunn or Carlos Pena? And those are the true feast or famine players, you don't need advanced numbers to tell you that.

And a base hit is just flat more valuable than a walk (they get treated as equals these days) - certainly doubles, triples and HR's accomplish more than walks. Some singles also can drive a guy from first to third, or second to home. You can't walk the runner in from third unless the bases are loaded.

There's certainly value in HR's and RBI's, I don't see how that can be denied. HR's are the best thing that can possibly happen when you're at the plate. Statistically, they jack up slugging, which jacks up OPS - another of the newer stats (one that has some value cause it combines real stats, although it's basically a slugger stat since the middle-of-the order hitters have the highest OBP's and slugging percentages). And I don't get the constant poo-poohing of RBI's these days either. Driving in and scoring runs is how you win. Runs produced is a pretty good stat and yet I don't hear it 1% as much as I hear about WAR. And btw WAR says David Wright was more valuable than Cabrera this year too and that's ludicrous. It's a made-up statistic, a computer-generated ranking like college football's BCS ranking.

Edited by NJDevs4978

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Man some of you guys who just think WAR is made-up and has no correlation to the game going on the field are completely lost. At least read how it's created and the DATA behind it before throwing it under the bus as some "made-up nerd stat." And again, who said you even have to use WAR to show Trout was better? OPS+ and wRC+ both rated Trout as a BETTER hitter. I don't even think you need defensive metrics to tell you Trout was a great fielder while Cabrera was predictably bad at 3B either.

Regarding AVG/HR/RBI - you actually could good get a decent feel for whose good and not with this, generally. The problem is that it's also very limited and flawed. I mean think about it... why limit yourself to 3 freakin' statistics? Why would you COMPLETELY ignore the value of OBP? Base hits are more valuable than walks, yes, but I'm not saying AVG is useless; I'm saying looking at that alone (or with HR/RBI) will not tell you enough. What about defense? What about making accurate adjustments for parks/leagues/era and for the positions that players play? I can't imagine why anyone would ignore these things when there are freely-available metrics and data to support them.

RBI sucks because it's too dependent on lineup position and/or the hitters batting above the player. Check out the percentage of PA with runners on base (min 400 PA): Miguel Cabrera 48% (26th), Mike Trout 33% (176th). But, sure, let's hold RBI against him!

And where is this "Mike Trout faded" garbage coming from? He had a 154 wRC+ in September. For reference, Miguel Cabrera's career wRC+ is 148. Or if you want something simpler, how about Trout's September triple slash line: .289/.400./500; so the guy hit for a high AVG, had an elite OBP and SLG, but, for whatever reason, it's stylish to say he faded.

Edited by nmigliore

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RBI sucks because it's too dependent on lineup position and/or the hitters batting above the player. Check out the percentage of PA with runners on base (min 400 PA): Miguel Cabrera 48% (26th), Mike Trout 33% (176th). But, sure, let's hold RBI against him!

Great find, I think this is the ultimate difference maker.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And why make offense the only criteria to winning the MVP as well, which is what we are saying with the triple crown. Trout is arguably the best defensive player in the game and maybe the best base runner this season. WAR is calculating that as well.

Everyone has touched on the RBI notion. Having a ton of RBI meant you had an excellent season, but if you didn;t, it doesn't mean everything. You really need to really peel back the layers to find out why exactly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And why make offense the only criteria to winning the MVP as well, which is what we are saying with the triple crown.

The funny thing is, once you delve deeper than just the Triple Crown crap, Trout was actually a better offensive player too. It shows in wOBA, wRC+, OPS+, and Fangraphs' batting runs above average. The crazy thing about that last one (batting runs above average) is that it works as a counting stat and Trout topped Cabrera despite 58 less PA. That's impressive.

Once you include defense and baserunning into the equation, then the race becomes a joke; Cabrera was terrible at those things (-11.5 runs) while Trout was great (+20.1 runs); that's approximately a 3-win difference there. That's huge and shouldn't just be ignored.

Edited by nmigliore

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The funny thing is, once you delve deeper than just the Triple Crown crap, Trout was actually a better offensive player too. It shows in wOBA, wRC+, OPS+, and Fangraphs' batting runs above average. The crazy thing about that last one (batting runs above average) is that it works as a counting stat and Trout topped Cabrera despite 58 less PA. That's impressive.

Once you include defense and baserunning into the equation, then the race becomes a joke; Cabrera was terrible at those things (-11.5 runs) while Trout was great (+20.1 runs); that's approximately a 3-win difference there. That's huge and shouldn't just be ignored. Not to mention, again, you probably didn't even need metrics to tell you any of this last bit.

I'm with you. But most will just look at the HR and RBI total to say who had the better offensive year. No point in even really debating this since we know what the voters will do. I mean some of them have just figured out we need to decide the Cy Young by something other than win totals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And now Guillen is fired after Miami posts the same record as Boston. Isn't it crazy the way the Marlins go through coaches? It's like they're looking for a new coach every offseason. What kind of professional organization does that? ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And now Guillen is fired after Miami posts the same record as Boston. Isn't it crazy the way the Marlins go through coaches? It's like they're looking for a new coach every offseason. What kind of professional organization does that? ;)

A-Rod for player-manager of the Miami Marlins! :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Marlins pull this act often (including dumping players). Also, their own mayor burned them:

The mayor of Miami stepped in it recently when he said that if Fidel Castro dies and there are big rallies and protests and things in Miami, that “protestors go to the Orange Bowl.” Of course there is no Orange Bowl anymore. That’s where Marlins Park sits.

The mayor corrected himself and noted he was speaking from an old script. Then he added that, no, people should not go to the same location because …

“I don’t think the Marlins would want that … Knowing them, they would charge to protest.”

Zing!

Edited by nmigliore

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

lol at stats from the early 20th century. This is where I can't take the 'stat revolution' seriously. Particularly when it comes to treating batting average as a garbage stat. There will always be value in being able to get a base hit, very few players can be useful entities hitting .200 (probably nobody that isn't named Adam Dunn). It's pretty hard to get walks - the center of the stat revolution - if you can't get at least get some base hits. Why would anyone pitch around guys that can't hit, unless they're just a major mistake hitter like Dunn or Carlos Pena? And those are the true feast or famine players, you don't need advanced numbers to tell you that.

And a base hit is just flat more valuable than a walk (they get treated as equals these days) - certainly doubles, triples and HR's accomplish more than walks. Some singles also can drive a guy from first to third, or second to home. You can't walk the runner in from third unless the bases are loaded.

There's certainly value in HR's and RBI's, I don't see how that can be denied. HR's are the best thing that can possibly happen when you're at the plate. Statistically, they jack up slugging, which jacks up OPS - another of the newer stats (one that has some value cause it combines real stats, although it's basically a slugger stat since the middle-of-the order hitters have the highest OBP's and slugging percentages). And I don't get the constant poo-poohing of RBI's these days either. Driving in and scoring runs is how you win. Runs produced is a pretty good stat and yet I don't hear it 1% as much as I hear about WAR. And btw WAR says David Wright was more valuable than Cabrera this year too and that's ludicrous. It's a made-up statistic, a computer-generated ranking like college football's BCS ranking.

Admittedly, quite a few sabermetricians can come off as alternately pompous and annoying...some would-be sabes guys watch "Moneyball" (an extremely flawed movie that left out a LOT of facts and revised a lot of history...it's entertaining enough, but full of falsehoods), read up a little on advanced metrics, and become instant know-it-alls who won't listen to anyone who doesn't agree with them or doesn't see things exactly as they do...suddenly they think they're Billy Beane. This kind of sabes guy isn't right about eveything, but he sure thinks he is.

That being said, a lot of the sabes and newer stats out there do a very nice job fleshing out those "early 20th century" numbers, especially on offense...for so long it was just BA, HR, and RBI. It's easy to see a high RBI total and say "Man, that guy's an RBI beast!", but as some have pointed out, there's more than meets the eye that goes into RBI totals...how many opportunities does a guy get to drive in runs, etc. You can have a lousy BA with RISP but still drive in over 100 runs if the guys in front of you are getting on base at a high clip. Obviously it's going to help if there's runners to drive in!

In fairness to some people over-emphasizing OB% (and I agree, you need guys who get on base, but can still be counted on to get actual base hits when needed), Billy Beane and those of his ilk also emphasized slugging%, so they were looking for guys who could get on base AND provide some power when they made contact...best of all worlds, really. To put it simply, it's not so bad if the guy is hitting .265 if he's drawing a reasonable number of walks AND getting a nice chunk of extra base hits...if he's getting on base 35% of the time and slugging .450 or so, .265 is just fine.

I'll never buy into the "no such thing as clutch" argument, and the sabes guys will tell you that one over and over again, because it can't be as sharply defined statistically as other player attributes, or neatly wrapped up in an acronym. No one gets it done 100% of the time, especially in a high-failure rate game like baseball, but some guys clearly have "the knack" for getting it done in the big spots (not all of the time, but enough so they are remembered as such), while others clearly get that deer-in-the-headlights look in the same spot, or aren't nearly as productive. My main problem with sabes is that sabermetricians have a way of looking at players like they're almost robotic, a bunch of Mr. Spocks, and all equal above the neck...clearly they're not...some guys clearly wilt on the big stage in defining moments.

Edited by Colorado Rockies 1976

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What a pathetic trade by the Marlins: http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2012/11/blue-jays-close-to-acquiring-josh-johnson.html

The Blue Jays have reached agreement on a deal with the Marlins that will send right-hander Josh Johnson, left-hander Mark Buehrle, shortstop Jose Reyes, outfielder Emilio Bonifacio, and catcher John Buck to Toronto for shortstop Yunel Escobar, infielder Adeiny Hechavarria, right-hander Henderson Alvarez, left-hander Justin Nicolino, outfielder Jake Marisnick, catcher Jeff Mathis, and right-hander Anthony DeSclafani. The deal, which will also call for the Marlins to send $4MM to the Blue Jays, is awaiting MLB approval

Jeffrey Loria should not be owning or running an MLB franchise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I strongly dislike the Marlins but I feel absoultey horrible for their fans, not only for blowing the team up once again, but for all the public money that went into the new stadium (subsidized 70 percent of his $515 million ballpark in Miami.). Loria is a dick.

I still have to look into the prospects going to the Marlins but looking at what the Jays recieved they have to be cautiously excited in my opinon. I'd be concerned about Reyes on turf and Buehrle in the AL East. Still nice to see them doing their best to make it more competitive, makes it more exciting of a regular season now.

Giancarlo Stanton doesn't approve of the move though: "Alright, I'm pissed off!!! Plain & Simple"

They'll hold him captive until he gets close to free agency but I would find it hilarious if he pulled a move from Slapshot...."Trade me right fvcking now!....*hangs up*"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0