MLB

Picking on the AL MVP Pollsters

11/22/06 in MLB   |   CriticalFanatic   |   respect

In the spirit of FanIQ and holding the experts accountable we simply could not let this slide. So as soon as the individual votes were released, salivation ensued.

If you thought college football pollsters demonstrated homer-ism (yes I enjoy making up new words), the MVP voters took it to another level. Below I'm going to spotlight the most prime examples of bias with the most egregious at the top.

Joe Cowley - Chicago Sun Times
1. Morneau
2. Dye
3. Santana
4. Mauer
5. Ortiz
6. Jeter
10. Pierzynski <<< WHAT?

Wow. Talk about your all time anti-East Coast bias. 4 AL Central players before Jeter and Ortiz. This guy's a complete joke.  Open your eyes Joe, watch a little baseball outside of your Sox. Grade: F

Bob Klapisch - New York
Bergen Record
1. Jeter
7. Ortiz

There is no other way to explain this vote other than dislike for the Boston Red Sox. Do people forget the only reason the Sox even remained in the hunt was a result of Papi's bat.

Jim Ingraham - Cleveland News Herald
1. Jeter
2. Hafner
5. Sizemore
7. Mauer

I'd like to consider myself open minded, but I'm not listening to any debate that argues Sizemore was more valuable than Mauer.

Susan Slusser - San Francisco Chronicle
1. Jeter
2. Thomas
4. Morneau

Did I miss something this season? Frank Thomas?

John Hickey - Seattle Post Intelligencer
5. A Rod

I'm guessing Alex bought John quite a few drinks during his time out there.

Lastly, Mel Antonen - USA Today completely left Johan Santana off his ballot. I can acknowledge adhering to the unwritten rule a pitcher can't win the award. However, you cannot consider yourself a baseball expert if you fail to identify the Cy Young winner as one of the 10 most valuable players. Thank you Even Grant - Dallas Morning News for acknowledging Johan Santana as the AL MVP.

Check out the other ballots. Any other you have an issue with? Let me know in the comments.

Source: (NewsDay)
Notify me by email about comments that follow mine. Preview

11/29/06   |   Pat   |   5229 respect

Freddy Fernande wrote:
I'm not going to look at anything else on this site and I don't care enough about anyone here to see what they might have said in the past. 

But in this thread, you said that Ortiz's 5 walk off hits keeps him in contention.  You didn't mention anything about RBI or HR totals in your comment.  If you meant that his 5 walk off hits (as well as his other season stats) keep him in contention, then I might have agreed.  But you didn't say that.

Regardless, Ortiz didn't win, shouldn't win, and never will win an MVP award.  Once Manny gets traded, he will see maybe 15 pitches to hit all season.  Brilliant move Theo.

My bad...when you said "Please show me where you said that Jeter should have won the MVP," I thought you meant "Please show me where you said that Jeter should have won the MVP." So I gave you the link.

 

And I also didn't feel like I HAD to mention Ortiz' league-leading HR and RBI totals. I figured most intelligent baseball fans already knew about those numbers. I didn't realize people were going to start comparing him to Richie Sexson. I guess I overestimated your knowledge.

11/29/06   |   Freddy Fernande

Pat wrote:

For the facts, click here. Read the first comment. You know, the one that I made about a week ago, when the award was announced. 2 days BEFORE your "blind-to-everything-but-the-Red Sox douchebags" comment.

 

Before you go around calling people douchebags, I suggest you take a look at some of the other things that they say, and save the insults for someplace else. I honestly don't care what you call me personally, but if you ever pull this crap with anyone else on this site, your comments will be deleted and you'll be removed from FanIQ, if it continues.

 

And to answer your question, yes. If Richie Sexson led the league in RBI's and HR's, AND had 5 walk-off hits, then I certainly think that he would deserve some consideration. I don't think that his past performance, and the fact that his name is Richie Sexson should disqualify him.

I'm not going to look at anything else on this site and I don't care enough about anyone here to see what they might have said in the past. 

But in this thread, you said that Ortiz's 5 walk off hits keeps him in contention.  You didn't mention anything about RBI or HR totals in your comment.  If you meant that his 5 walk off hits (as well as his other season stats) keep him in contention, then I might have agreed.  But you didn't say that.

Regardless, Ortiz didn't win, shouldn't win, and never will win an MVP award.  Once Manny gets traded, he will see maybe 15 pitches to hit all season.  Brilliant move Theo.

11/28/06   |   Pat   |   5229 respect

Freddy Fernande wrote:
No, I don't think missing time eliminates Ortiz from MVP contention.  The fact that his team finished in 3rd place in their division does that. 

Ortiz having 5 walk off hits keeps him in contention for MVP?  Are you joking?  So you are saying if Richie Sexon had 5 walk off hits, he would be an MVP candidate?  

No, I wouldn't have kept Pujols off the MVP ballot because he missed time, because--in case you didn't notice--his team made the playoffs.  Howard won MVP because he kept his team in playoff contention until the end.  If the Red Sox won the division, or at the very least stayed competitive through September, then I can see why people would give him MVP consideration.  But seeing as how he couldn't lead his $140 million payroll team to a better record than the Toronto F'ing Blue Jays, his name shouldn't even be in the debate.

edit--And Pat, the blind to everything but the Red Sox douchebag I was talking about was you.  Please show me where you said that Jeter should have won the MVP, because I am just not seeing it.

For the facts, click here. Read the first comment. You know, the one that I made about a week ago, when the award was announced. 2 days BEFORE your "blind-to-everything-but-the-Red Sox douchebags" comment.

 

Before you go around calling people douchebags, I suggest you take a look at some of the other things that they say, and save the insults for someplace else. I honestly don't care what you call me personally, but if you ever pull this crap with anyone else on this site, your comments will be deleted and you'll be removed from FanIQ, if it continues.

 

And to answer your question, yes. If Richie Sexson led the league in RBI's and HR's, AND had 5 walk-off hits, then I certainly think that he would deserve some consideration. I don't think that his past performance, and the fact that his name is Richie Sexson should disqualify him.

11/28/06   |   Freddy Fernande

Pat wrote:

Notice that the "blind-to-everything-but-the-Red-Sox" fan that you're talking about just said that Derek Jeter should have won the MVP. Save the insults for some other place, we don't need that here.

 

But the bottom line is, Ortiz' absence really only proves even more how valuable he was to the Red Sox. It all but proved that they would be nothing without him, and also, his 5 walk-off hits still keep him in contention, in my opinion.


It's fine if you think that an injury keeps someone out of consideration. But does that mean that you would have kept Pujols off your ballot in the NL this year, since he missed more time than Ortiz? Jeter only played 3 more games than Ortiz, and Morneau(the MVP) only played 6 more games. Out of over 150 games played for each player, do those 3-6 games REALLY eliminate Ortiz from MVP contention?

(Edited by Freddy Fernande)

No, I don't think missing time eliminates Ortiz from MVP contention.  The fact that his team finished in 3rd place in their division does that. 

Ortiz having 5 walk off hits keeps him in contention for MVP?  Are you joking?  So you are saying if Richie Sexon had 5 walk off hits, he would be an MVP candidate?  

No, I wouldn't have kept Pujols off the MVP ballot because he missed time, because--in case you didn't notice--his team made the playoffs.  Howard won MVP because he kept his team in playoff contention until the end.  If the Red Sox won the division, or at the very least stayed competitive through September, then I can see why people would give him MVP consideration.  But seeing as how he couldn't lead his $140 million payroll team to a better record than the Toronto F'ing Blue Jays, his name shouldn't even be in the debate.

edit--And Pat, the blind to everything but the Red Sox douchebag I was talking about was you.  Please show me where you said that Jeter should have won the MVP, because I am just not seeing it.

11/25/06   |   fxdirect

Silent Bolt wrote:
"Jim Ingraham - Cleveland News Herald
1. Jeter
2. Hafner
5. Sizemore
7. Mauer

I'd like to consider myself open minded, but I'm not listening to any debate that argues Sizemore was more valuable than Mauer."

Baseball Prospectus rated Sizemore's season 10.7 in Wins Above Replacement Player (3), Mauer 10.6.  The system is entirely objective, as opposed to your open-minded shock at seeing Sizemore above Mauer, so it's possible to take a good, long look at the performance of the two players and come away thinking they were comparable in value even if you don't write for a Cleveland paper.  To be unable to comprehend the thought you must have not followed the AL closely, ignored the Indians because they weren't winning, not bothered to check their performance before reacting to their names alone, or some combination of the above.

Catcher is a much different position than CF.  I would say that while Sizemore might have rated a better WARP than Mauer, it is a lot harder to replace a catcher with the skills of Mauer than it would be to replace a CF. 

 

When it is that close, you have to look at scarcity of position, which I don't think is taken into account in the WARP calculation.

 

And great catchers are much harder to find.

11/24/06   |   Pat   |   5229 respect

Freddy Fernande wrote:
Why didn't Francisco Liriano win Rookie of the Year?  Because he got hurt.  How can you give Ortiz the MVP award when he didn't even finish the season?  I'm not saying Ortiz's numbers weren't impressive, but the "most valuable player" keeps his team alive until the end.  I wouldn't vote Ortiz for MVP for the same reason I wouldn't vote Travis Hafner for MVP.

I've met a lot of blind-to-everything-but-the-Red Sox douchebags in my life, but you put them all to shame.

Notice that the "blind-to-everything-but-the-Red-Sox" fan that you're talking about just said that Derek Jeter should have won the MVP. Save the insults for some other place, we don't need that here.

 

But the bottom line is, Ortiz' absence really only proves even more how valuable he was to the Red Sox. It all but proved that they would be nothing without him, and also, his 5 walk-off hits still keep him in contention, in my opinion.


It's fine if you think that an injury keeps someone out of consideration. But does that mean that you would have kept Pujols off your ballot in the NL this year, since he missed more time than Ortiz? Jeter only played 3 more games than Ortiz, and Morneau(the MVP) only played 6 more games. Out of over 150 games played for each player, do those 3-6 games REALLY eliminate Ortiz from MVP contention?

11/24/06   |   Freddy Fernande

Pat wrote:
Ok. I guess David Ortiz had heart problems because he's just not as valuable to the team as other guys.

I've heard people say some ridiculous stuff, but you pretty much took the cake, there.

Why didn't Francisco Liriano win Rookie of the Year?  Because he got hurt.  How can you give Ortiz the MVP award when he didn't even finish the season?  I'm not saying Ortiz's numbers weren't impressive, but the "most valuable player" keeps his team alive until the end.  I wouldn't vote Ortiz for MVP for the same reason I wouldn't vote Travis Hafner for MVP.

I've met a lot of blind-to-everything-but-the-Red Sox douchebags in my life, but you put them all to shame.

11/23/06   |   outstanding

i am loving the candid debate happening on this thread. nice work. i wanted jeter for mvp, but i understand how the final vote turned out hte way it did. papi is a great player, but his absence dq'ed him from the mvp race. frank thomas certainly deserved some votes by being the best offensive player on his first place finishing team.

one thing i find interesting is that people often say that having multiple players on one team tha tare good take votes away from each other in the mvp balloting, but that certainly did not prevent morneau here. that actually surprises me; i thought that would work against him in favor of jeter. guess derek will have to settle for the ladies....

11/23/06   |   Pat   |   5229 respect

Freddy Fernande wrote:
MVPs don't go on the DL in September.

Ok. I guess David Ortiz had heart problems because he's just not as valuable to the team as other guys.

I've heard people say some ridiculous stuff, but you pretty much took the cake, there.

11/23/06   |   Freddy Fernande

Pat wrote:
That's partially because Ortiz was on the DL. So...they dropped OUT of the race.

MVPs don't go on the DL in September.

11/23/06   |   Pat   |   5229 respect

Freddy Fernande wrote:
Bob Klapisch - New York Bergen Record
1. Jeter
7. Ortiz

There is no other way to explain this vote other than dislike for the Boston Red Sox. Do people forget the only reason the Sox even remained in the hunt was a result of Papi's bat.

Remained in the hunt?  What hunt?  The Red Sox finished in 3rd place behind the Blue Jays.  Ortiz had a great year, but for anyone to say he kept his team "in the hunt" when the team basically folded after the 5 game sweep against the Yankees in August is a joke.

That's partially because Ortiz was on the DL. So...they dropped OUT of the race.

11/23/06   |   Freddy Fernande

Bob Klapisch - New York Bergen Record
1. Jeter
7. Ortiz

There is no other way to explain this vote other than dislike for the Boston Red Sox. Do people forget the only reason the Sox even remained in the hunt was a result of Papi's bat.

Remained in the hunt?  What hunt?  The Red Sox finished in 3rd place behind the Blue Jays.  Ortiz had a great year, but for anyone to say he kept his team "in the hunt" when the team basically folded after the 5 game sweep against the Yankees in August is a joke.

11/22/06   |   CriticalFanatic

Silent Bolt wrote:
"Jim Ingraham - Cleveland News Herald
1. Jeter
2. Hafner
5. Sizemore
7. Mauer

I'd like to consider myself open minded, but I'm not listening to any debate that argues Sizemore was more valuable than Mauer."

Baseball Prospectus rated Sizemore's season 10.7 in Wins Above Replacement Player (3), Mauer 10.6.  The system is entirely objective, as opposed to your open-minded shock at seeing Sizemore above Mauer, so it's possible to take a good, long look at the performance of the two players and come away thinking they were comparable in value even if you don't write for a Cleveland paper.  To be unable to comprehend the thought you must have not followed the AL closely, ignored the Indians because they weren't winning, not bothered to check their performance before reacting to their names alone, or some combination of the above.
(Edited by CriticalFanatic)

Point well taken. But I do watch a lot of AL Central baseball, and it would take more than the BP's WARP to convince me he was a more valuable player. I think it's a fun stat to track, but only if it's not the only one you look at. I think you well know there are some factors involved that have very little to do with the two players at hand. But nonetheless, it's a good point. The players are close enough to merit a debate ... but it comes down to Mauer winning the battle title as a catcher, winning several games with his bat, and playing stellar defense - all while managing one of the better pitching staffs in baseball.

11/22/06   |   Silent Bolt

"Jim Ingraham - Cleveland News Herald
1. Jeter
2. Hafner
5. Sizemore
7. Mauer

I'd like to consider myself open minded, but I'm not listening to any debate that argues Sizemore was more valuable than Mauer."

Baseball Prospectus rated Sizemore's season 10.7 in Wins Above Replacement Player (3), Mauer 10.6.  The system is entirely objective, as opposed to your open-minded shock at seeing Sizemore above Mauer, so it's possible to take a good, long look at the performance of the two players and come away thinking they were comparable in value even if you don't write for a Cleveland paper.  To be unable to comprehend the thought you must have not followed the AL closely, ignored the Indians because they weren't winning, not bothered to check their performance before reacting to their names alone, or some combination of the above.

11/22/06   |   ajacoby

I just found this in a comments section that only confirms that Cowley is a proven low life with regards to MVP voting ...

 

"From the NYPost: In 2003, when he worked for the Daily Southtown, Cowley left Carlos Delgado and Vernon Wells off his ballot. Chicago chapter chairman Paul Sullivan suspended Cowley from voting the following year because he didn't think Cowley took the voting seriously and "embarrassed" the Chicago chapter."

 

(no link provided)

11/22/06   |   MarkTheShark   |   590 respect

ajacoby wrote:

The biggest gaff of the Cowley (Sun-Times) vote was not dropping Jeter to six (although that is terrrible in its own right), but rather, according to the newsday link, Mauer was not on his ballot at all even though he still found room for Pierzynski.  He voted Thomas 4, not Mauer ... not sure how you saw that wrong.

WOW!, If that's true (CF, can you double check that?)...that guy should be thrown out of the voting. Mauer kept that team afloat early til Santana and the rest of his team came around....

11/22/06   |   ajacoby

The biggest gaff of the Cowley (Sun-Times) vote was not dropping Jeter to six (although that is terrrible in its own right), but rather, according to the newsday link, Mauer was not on his ballot at all even though he still found room for Pierzynski.  He voted Thomas 4, not Mauer ... not sure how you saw that wrong.

11/22/06   |   JewelOfSong   |   7 respect

drewstapes wrote:
If the Sun-Times writer would have has Jeter first or second would that have been enough to tip the award to him?  Sorry, I don't follow it closely enough to know that exact scoring breakdown.  If so, that's a major story, one ridiculous ballot might have cost Jeter an MVP. 

I heard yesterday on the radio that the Sun-Times vote didn't cost Jeter the MVP award.

11/22/06   |   drewstapes

If the Sun-Times writer would have has Jeter first or second would that have been enough to tip the award to him?  Sorry, I don't follow it closely enough to know that exact scoring breakdown.  If so, that's a major story, one ridiculous ballot might have cost Jeter an MVP. 

11/22/06   |   The Big Lead

We signed up just to say what a joke some of these awards are. When you've got homers like that assclown in Chicago picking all Central guys .. and Klap showing his obvious bias by putting Ortiz 7th ... this is a complete and utter joke. Is it utter or udder? Whatever. Baseball needs a 7-panel committee of baseball people with no agenda/bias to pick the award winners. This is embarrassing for the sport. About as embarrassing as me misspelling embarrassing.

11/22/06   |   Eric   |   239 respect

CriticalFanatic wrote:
Agree he was the A's MVP ... but come on 2nd Overall?

Definately A's MVP. I won't argue him being second on the list... but geeze... I wouldn't have put him there.

11/22/06   |   Phillygenius82   |   227 respect

You get that regional bias everywhere. Miguel Cabrera probably got higher votes in south Florida  than he did on the west coast. You can see it clearly with the Chicago and New York guys you used in the example.

11/22/06   |   CriticalFanatic

Phillygenius82 wrote:
Maybe you did Frank was a huge part of the A's success this year. 39 HR 114 RBI maybe not second in the MVP voting but he was probably the A's MVP.

Agree he was the A's MVP ... but come on 2nd Overall?

11/22/06   |   Phillygenius82   |   227 respect

Maybe you did Frank was a huge part of the A's success this year. 39 HR 114 RBI maybe not second in the MVP voting but he was probably the A's MVP.