Explaining My National League MVP Ballot

As I noted on Tuesday night, I was privileged to be selected to vote on two postseason awards this year; the National League’s Manager of the Year and the Most Valuable Player. As was just announced, the MVP award went to Clayton Kershaw, edging out Andrew McCutchen and Giancarlo Stanton for the top spot. You can see the full results of the voting at BBWAA.com. Below, I’ll explain each of my selections, and why I voted as I did.

First, a very quick overview of my philosophy. I generally think the best player and most valuable player are the same thing, and I don’t really care too much about a team’s performance when trying to determine the quality of an individual player. However, I also don’t think it’s entirely correct to focus solely on context-neutral numbers, as we generally do when trying to evaluate a player’s true talent level. Context-specific specific performance absolutely drives some of the variation in team win-loss records, and distributing your performance into the most critical situations can definitely affect your teams record one way or another.

My goal was to identify the players who added the most wins to their team in 2014, and even though “clutch performance” doesn’t really appear to be a thing a player has much control over, it still matters when tallying up wins and losses. The Royals won 89 games instead of 81 games primarily because of the distribution of their performances, and if we focused solely on the context-neutral contributions of their individual players, we’d come up eight wins shy of their actual total.

So, on my MVP ballot, the timing of performances mattered. I leaned more on RE24 rather than wRC+, and attempted to incorporate high leverage performance into the calculations as well. It might not be a repeatable skill, but I don’t think that’s what we’re trying to measure. We’re just trying to look for who added the most value in 2014, and for that question, I thinking including the timing of events is important.

Okay, now to my ballot.

You Aren't a FanGraphs Member
It looks like you aren't yet a FanGraphs Member (or aren't logged in). We aren't mad, just disappointed.
We get it. You want to read this article. But before we let you get back to it, we'd like to point out a few of the good reasons why you should become a Member.
1. Ad Free viewing! We won't bug you with this ad, or any other.
2. Unlimited articles! Non-Members only get to read 10 free articles a month. Members never get cut off.
3. Dark mode and Classic mode!
4. Custom player page dashboards! Choose the player cards you want, in the order you want them.
5. One-click data exports! Export our projections and leaderboards for your personal projects.
6. Remove the photos on the home page! (Honestly, this doesn't sound so great to us, but some people wanted it, and we like to give our Members what they want.)
7. Even more Steamer projections! We have handedness, percentile, and context neutral projections available for Members only.
8. Get FanGraphs Walk-Off, a customized year end review! Find out exactly how you used FanGraphs this year, and how that compares to other Members. Don't be a victim of FOMO.
9. A weekly mailbag column, exclusively for Members.
10. Help support FanGraphs and our entire staff! Our Members provide us with critical resources to improve the site and deliver new features!
We hope you'll consider a Membership today, for yourself or as a gift! And we realize this has been an awfully long sales pitch, so we've also removed all the other ads in this article. We didn't want to overdo it.

1. Clayton Kershaw, Los Angeles Dodgers

Yes, he only made 27 starts. Yes, position players have the ability to make a larger impact on their team, since they impact both the offensive and defensive side of the ball every single day. But just because position players have a higher ceiling for their performance does not mean that a position player is always the most valuable player in every season. Value is a combination of quantity and quality of performance; focusing solely on the number of games played simply ignores half of the picture.

No one would reasonably argue that every position player is more valuable than every pitcher, simply due to the difference in games played. There is a line at which the performance of a hitter and a pitcher intersect, erasing the difference in games played. This is why starting pitchers are paid as much or more per year as elite position players. This is why teams trade bats for arms. And in this season, I think Kershaw’s excellence, even in an abbreviated season for a starting pitcher, created more value for his team than any other player in the league.

Jeff noted yesterday the tremendous gap between Kershaw and the rest of the pitchers in the National League, and after all, isn’t a demonstrable sustained advantage over your opponents the exact definition of value? Kershaw gave up runs at half the rate of a league average starter, and his fielding independent numbers don’t give us any reason to think that his defense had much to do with that. Kershaw was on another level from everyone else, and the only reason this is even really a discussion is because he missed the first month of the season.

But even with the reduced quantity of innings pitched, I’m comfortable putting him at the top of my ballot. Others played more often, but no one had anything close to the impact that Kershaw on a rate basis, and I think the gap in quality outweighs his deficiency in quantity. There were some really good seasons from other players, including some who played far more often, but I don’t see any other players who had a larger impact on their team than Clayton Kershaw.

And if you think that he shouldn’t be eligible to win the MVP simply because he has his own award, I leave you with the very last line of the instructions on the ballot:

Keep in mind that all players are eligible for MVP, including pitchers and designated hitters.

To exclude pitchers because “they have their own award” is to expressly ignore what we were told as voters. Pitchers are eligible, and pitchers are valuable, so my vote went to the best pitcher on the planet.

2. Jonathan Lucroy, Milwaukee Brewers

This was actually perhaps my easiest selection on the ballot. Lucroy, in fact, was the only player who mounted a serious challenge for the top spot on my ballot; once I determined that the #1 position was going to Kersahw, Lucroy was an easy call as the runner up.

Because of the rigors of the position and the skills needed to excel at it, catchers generally aren’t great hitters, and the regular wear-and-tear means that they play less often than players at other positions, so they face the same quantity problem — albeit to a lesser degree — as pitchers do. Only in Lucroy’s case, neither of those generalities held, as his 133 wRC+ ranked 12th best in the National League, and he did it while playing in 153 games, 136 of them behind the plate. He caught nearly 1,200 innings, and then played another 19 games at first base on top of that. He came to the plate 655 times. This is quality and quantity.

And given what I said in the intro, perhaps you shouldn’t be too surprised that Lucroy’s Clutch rating of 1.46 ranks 4th highest among National League hitters. In low-leverage situations, Lucroy was a league average hitter (99 wRC+), but he elevated his game in normal leverage (181 wRC+) and was nearly as good in high leverage situations (152 wRC+). So not only was Lucroy an excellent hitter who played basically every day, he distributed his hits into the most important situations.

And that’s just the offensive side of things. You probably don’t need me to tell you about Lucroy’s abilities behind the plate, since he’s become something of a poster child for the pitch framing movement. Lucroy gets umpires to give his pitchers a larger zone than almost any other regular catcher in baseball, with StatCorner suggesting that the expanded zone he provided was worth 22 runs to his team’s pitching staff. I’m not entirely sold on the idea that a catcher should get the full credit for the entirety of the framing run calculations — the pitchers know that Lucroy is good at this, so they throw out-of-zone pitches to him on purpose, and their ability to hit those spots is a factor in getting those calls — but it’s clear he should get some credit for this skill.

How much credit was the issue I struggled with, as I wrote about in August. If I bought into the framing calculations completely, and assigned full credit for those additional runs saved to Lucroy, he probably passes Kershaw and sits atop my ballot. But I’m not there yet. I’m not comfortable enough with the calculations to give Lucroy credit for the full range of values being presented by the numbers. Maybe someday, the research will prove definitively that pitch receiving was a market inefficiency, and we spent years misidentifying the true MVPs. It’s possible.

But I think it’s more likely that more research on the topic suggests that we’re overestimating the range of runs saved through this aspect of catching, and we end up giving the catchers a smaller amount of credit for these skills than the publicly published numbers currently show. So, while Lucroy’s receiving skills helped elevate him solidly above the other position players in the NL, I just couldn’t quite give them enough clout to put Lucroy ahead of Kershaw.

3. Giancarlo Stanton, Miami Marlins

This is where things started getting a little sticky, and the next four spots on the ballot changed places a number of times. In the end, though, situational hitting again proved to be the separation point for me.

By context-neutral batting runs, Stanton was 42 runs better than a league average hitter this year, second in the National League. By RE24, he ranked 50 runs better than a league average hitter, #1 in the NL. Stanton was a beast no matter how you measure it, but if you look at his men on base splits, he was even better than his context-neutral numbers suggest: a 158 wRC+ with no one, a 162 wRC+ with runners on base, and a 168 wRC+ with runners in scoring position. These aren’t huge gaps, but they do add up over a full season.

And despite his size, Stanton is not a one trick pony. By both UZR and DRS, he was rated as an above average defender in right field, and he stole 13 bases on 14 attempts to boot. So often, the best hitters get overrated in MVP tallies because voters don’t account for their significance flaws on defense and baserunning, but that doesn’t apply to Stanton; he really is as good as his offense makes him look. The only real knock against him is that he missed the last few weeks of the season, but as I talked about with Kershaw, I’m not looking for the player with the highest quantity of performance, and Stanton’s quality when he played was high enough for me to put him third on my ballot.

4. Anthony Rendon, Washington Nationals

For a long while, I had Rendon third and Stanton fourth. He finished half a win ahead by WAR, and the gap between his RE24 and Batting runs was basically identical. Rendon was by far the most underrated part of the Nationals success this year, and his ability to play both second and third base at an above average level gave the team needed flexibility when Ryan Zimmerman got injured and Danny Espinosa turned back into a pumpkin.

But there’s also this: in 70 high leverage plate appearances, Rendon hit .180/.271/.295, good for a 58 wRC+, which drove his Clutch score down to -1.59, the fourth worst mark in the National League. I put more weight on the base/out performances than the score/inning ones, since there are more obvious adjustments to be made based on the former situation than the latter, but Rendon’s lousy performance in the most important situations he faced dropped him behind Stanton.

There’s no question this is nitpicking; Rendon had an excellent year overall. But with the middle of the ballot all having very similar excellent seasons, nitpicking was required, and this particular nit pushed Rendon to the fourth spot on my ballot.

5. Buster Posey, San Francisco Giants

Almost everything I wrote about Lucroy applies here as well. Excellent offensive season, great clutch performance, batted over 600 times, and was an asset behind the plate for his pitching staff. But while Posey is a catcher first and foremost, he’s not a full-time catcher in the same way that Lucroy is; he spent 929 innings behind the plate, ranking 7th among NL catchers this season. He started 30 games at first base, nearly 20% of the season, and while he has value there as well, it’s not quite the same as a guy who is behind the plate almost every day.

This isn’t a knock against him, of course. Almost no one caught as frequently as Lucroy, and Posey’s workload was entirely normal for an NL backstop. When discussing my calculations with some friends in the game, one mentioned to me that Posey rated first in in their internal calculations, and that calculation included pitch framing data. But, as mentioned above, I wasn’t quite comfortable including the full weight of the framing data in my decision, and so Posey slid in just barely behind Rendon. Really, though, you could look at this as a tie for fourth place. There was basically no difference between these two spots for me.

6. Andrew McCutchen, Pittsburgh Pirates

This is the pick I expect to get hammered for. So, Pirates fans, all I ask is that you hear me out, and remember that I voted for Clint Hurdle for Manager of the Year; I don’t hate your team, I promise. I did not list McCutchen sixth easily, as he had yet another excellent season, and is one of the players I enjoy watching the most.

But as I’ve noted through this list so far, I took context-specific performance into account, and when you do that, McCutchen’s season looks a little less amazing. By batting runs, he was 50 runs better than an average hitter, but only 41 runs better by RE24; a result of his best performances coming with the bases empty. His 173 wRC+ in those situations certainly helped start a lot of rallies for the Pirates, and there’s absolutely value in hitting with no one on base, but getting so many no-one-on hits means that he didn’t quite produce as many runs for his team as a guy like Stanton, who hit better when given a chance to drive runners in.

Yes, he plays center field, and yes, he’s also a good baserunner. He’s probably the best all-around player in the National League, providing value in essentially every way you can provide value. But despite his athleticism, none of the defensive metrics have ever been a huge fan of his performances in center field, so the positional gap is probably a little less than it seems on the surface. And despite being an excellent baserunner historically, he was rated as something closer to an average baserunner in 2014, which is the performance we’re supposed to be evaluating.

I don’t like focusing on the weaknesses of McCutchen’s resume, because there are so many strengths. He’s one of the very best players in the game, and he had another excellent season. The gap between the 3rd and 6th spots on my ballot was very slight, and I won’t argue too strenuously if you think McCutchen deserves to be ahead of Stanton, Rendon, or Posey. For me, though, each of those three just did something slightly better this year. If we were asked to vote in tiers instead of ranking them numerically, McCutchen would have been solidly in the third tier with the three guys ahead of him, but the ballot makes us split hairs, and they just fell against the Pirates center fielder this year.

7. Russell Martin, Pittsburgh Pirates

I know we’re starting to get into broken-record territory, and I’m sorry, but we have yet another terrific defensive catcher who was surprisingly great with the bat, especially when you look at RE24, which rated him as the 13th best hitter in the NL. Martin’s 172 wRC+ with runners in scoring position was 4th best in the NL this year, and on a rate basis, he’s right there with all of the guys ahead of him.

But the quantity argument starts to hold some weight here. He played in 111 games, and only hit 460 times. He did spend more innings behind the plate than Posey did, but he didn’t play when he wasn’t catching, so he added no value in roughly 1/3 of the Pirates contests this year. For a position player, that’s a tough bar to overcome.

Martin almost did it, with truly elite performance when he was in the line-up and a significant impact on the Pirates defense as their catcher, but he just didn’t quite play enough to place higher than this on my ballot. The quality was certainly there, but he just falls a little shy in the quantity department.

8. Devin Mesoraco, Cincinnati Reds.

Hey, look, another catcher. I put a lot of value on catchers who can hit, obviously, and Mesoraco had a breakthrough season at the plate. By wRC+ (147) and RE24 (+42 runs), he was actually the best hitting catcher in the National League this year, ahead of all three of the backstops who rate ahead of him on this ballot. His RE24 is actually third best in the NL, in fact, as he was an absolute monster with men in scoring position, posting a 196 wRC+ in 126 chances to drive runners in. So, again, Mesoraco’s context-neutral numbers don’t capture the entirety of his offensive value to the Reds.

But as good as he was at distributing his hits into the situations where he could drive runners in, he gave back a good chunk of that additional value in the timing of when he got his hits. He was amazing in low leverage (153 wRC+) and medium leverage (150 wRC+) situations, but posted just a 112 wRC+ in high leverage situations. So, while I gave him extra credit for his base/out performances, I docked him a bit for his score/inning performances, and that was enough to push him behind Martin, as he also played in just 114 games and hit 460 times. And of the four catchers on my ballot, Mesoraco is the only one who rated below average in framing numbers.

But there’s no shame in finishing behind any of these guys, and Mesoraco certainly had an excellent season for the Reds. This was a great year for NL catchers, and he was one of the main reasons why.

9. Jayson Werth, Washington Nationals

Trivia fact you could win some money with if you had anyone to play RE24 trivia with: Jayson Werth was the second best hitter in the NL this year, according to that metric. With the bases empty, Werth was good (119 wRC+), but put men on base (166 wRC+) or runners in scoring position (182 wRC+), and he was basically the best hitter in the league. His leverage splits tell the same story, as he performed worst in low leverage situations, and did much better with the game on the line.

So, yes, his +4.8 WAR might have tied him for 20th best in the NL, but almost no one in the league produced more value through situational and clutch hitting than Werth did. And as you’ve clearly ascertained by now, that mattered to me, so Werth passed a number of players who had better seasons when context is ignored, and are very likely better players overall. He can’t be expected to hit that well with men on base again, but for 2014, his performance was extremely valuable.

10. Hunter Pence, San Francisco Giants

I telegraphed these two votes a bit in September, writing about Pence as a “stealth MVP candidate”. Werth’s RE24 was 18 runs better than his context neutral Batting Runs, but Pence wasn’t far behind, adding 15 additional runs with his own fantastic situational hitting. And then Pence added the 5th best Clutch rating in the NL on top of that.

Pence had an excellent season from a context neutral standpoint, but factoring the timing of his hits into the equation pushed him onto the final spot on my ballot. Certainly, there were plenty of other highly deserving candidates, and I was surprised I couldn’t find room for either Johnny Cueto or Adam Wainwright on my ballot. Carlos Gomez was a big piece for the Brewers. Jhonny Peralta helped propel the Cardinals to the NL Central. Troy Tulowitzki created a full season’s worth of value, even without playing a full season. Certainly, there are cases to be made for far more than just the 10 names I settled on.

But I had to pick 10, and I spent as much time as I could trying to come up with the best possible way to pick the 10 final names who made my ballot. I’m sure others had their own process for determining very different lists, and that’s okay; reasonable people can disagree, especially with so many candidates bunched tightly together this year. The only real strong convictions I have about my ballot are in the top two spots. I feel fairly comfortable with Kershaw at #1 and Lucroy at #2.

After that, man, this was really hard. Congratulations to each of the 10 players I voted for on their incredible seasons, and to all those who I couldn’t find space for but were similarly excellent.





Dave is the Managing Editor of FanGraphs.

117 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Robot Dave Cameron
11 years ago

*goes to leaderboard*

*sorts by WAR*

*checks this list*

*fries circuits*

Grant
11 years ago

Then he would’ve had Heyward on the list.

Mark
11 years ago

“…even though “clutch performance” *doesn’t* really appear to be a thing a player has much control over…”

Simon
11 years ago
Reply to  Mark

It’s the Most Valuable Player, not the best player. Clutch performance does help teams win games, whether it’s repeatable or not.

No Comment
11 years ago
Reply to  Simon

I think Mark was pointing out a typo that has since been corrected.

Chris
11 years ago
Reply to  Simon

Sure but with the MVP award you’re trying to reward individual performance, not tell a story. RBI was rightfully dismissed as a stat to measure performance because it’s context-specific. Hitters don’t control how many times they get to bat with runners on base.

By using context to help determine who wins MVP, you’re basically saying Player A wasn’t better than Player B but more of his good play happen to come in key situations. I just don’t understand why you factor in the team and randomness when giving out an individual award.

Cool Lester Smooth
11 years ago
Reply to  Chris

Actually, you’re saying “Player A provided more value to his team than Player B, even though he had slightly worse surface stats.”

Remember what the acronym stands for.

That said, if you ARE going to take context into account, you also have to account for the fact that taking a team from 81 to 88 wins if MUCH more valuable than taking them from 70 to 77 wins.

Cherry-picking which contexts you’re going to account for is just dishonest.

Chris
11 years ago
Reply to  Chris

@Cool Lester Smooth

Not really. MVP should be context-neutral because otherwise, you’re just getting into storytelling and not measuring individual performance. A 1-for-4 game with a 3-run HR might have helped the team more than a 1-for-4 game with a 1-run HR, but the actual performance is just the same.

Being the best player is being the most valuable. I thought most people had already moved on from that nuance. The MVP should go to the player who performed the best, regardless of his teammates, the context, and anything else that he can’t control.

steex
11 years ago
Reply to  Chris

This issue can also be demonstrated by the fact that Cueto finished higher than Wainwright in the Cy Young voting, but finished behind him in MVP voting.

Though I suppose it’s possible that the voters determined fielding/hitting alone were enough to make Wainwright more valuable than Cueto overall while not being the better pitcher, it seems more likely this result is just because the Cardinals made the playoffs and the Reds were mediocre.

Cool Lester Smooth
11 years ago
Reply to  Chris

So, what you’re saying is, even through the three run homer provides more value than a one run homer, that shouldn’t be taken into account when determining the most valuable player in the league?

People haven’t “moved on from that nuance,” because that nuance is important. The award isn’t called “Most Outstanding Player” or “Player of the Year.” There is a meaningful distinction.

Matthew
11 years ago
Reply to  Chris

This is one area where I feel like stat minded fans get it wrong. MVP can’t be context neutral. We are not trying to measure who had the highest talent level in 2014. Player A might have had horrible luck with BABIP in 2014, constantly lining out with hard hit balls. Perhaps when he regresses to the mean in 2015 he will be the MVP. In 2014, however, his actual value was diminished by bad luck. It can’t be about potential value, it’s about what happened on the field. If player B was helped by Coors Field, but clearly contributed more actual value (this is one area where even the discredited RBI is not useless. Driving in runs may be useless for determining repeatable skill, but it’s not useless when we are concerned with who actually contributed to wins in 2014) then player B deserves the award.

Ian R.
11 years ago
Reply to  Chris

There’s a big, big difference between using RBI, which is largely a measure of how good the hitter’s teammates were at getting on base, and using RE24, which measures how well a hitter did in run-scoring situations.

Both are context-dependent stats, sure, but RE24 does a much better job of putting the hitter’s own performance in context without giving him credit for things that someone else did.

Eric R
11 years ago
Reply to  Chris

“So, what you’re saying is, even through the three run homer provides more value than a one run homer, that shouldn’t be taken into account when determining the most valuable player in the league?”

But the 1-run HR was bottom of the 14th inning tie game — and the 3-run HR was in the third inning of a 18-2 game… 🙂

vivalajeter
11 years ago
Reply to  Chris

steex, I don’t think this is necessarily true: “This issue can also be demonstrated by the fact that Cueto finished higher than Wainwright in the Cy Young voting, but finished behind him in MVP voting.”

The same voters don’t vote for every award. Some voters are given MVP, some are given ROY, MOY, CY Young, etc. If the same set of voters voted on both awards, it might demonstrate that issue. But as is, it’s possible that the CY Young voters felt one was better while the MVP voters felt the other was better.

This issue seems to come up a lot, where people point to a winner for a certain year, point to this year’s winner, then make a claim that voters are shifting their thoughts. Isn’t is possible that the individual voters haven’t changed much, but the specific voters for the award were different? If Cameron and Law vote for an award this year, and Stark votes for it next year, you might have different results even though nobody’s opinion has changed.

Neil S
11 years ago
Reply to  Chris

If MVP really means Best Player and context be damned, why look at the stats at all? Let’s run the players through a combine, measure how fast and strong they are, how hard they throw, their route to the ball, their contact rate and speed off the bat? Done.

We don’t do that, though. Because, whether we can say that a skill is reproducible, we like to count outcomes. And if we’re counting outcomes, there’s no necessary reason why we can’t weight some situations (and their outcomes) more than others. Giving more weight to the outcome of an at-bat in the 9th inning of a game where you’re down 1 run, as opposed to an at-bat in the 5th inning of a blow-out? Doesn’t that make an awful lot of sense?

KCDaveInLA
11 years ago
Reply to  Chris

Not all contexts are created equally.

skippyballer486
11 years ago
Reply to  Chris

So when talking about the MVP, we should NOT look only at a player’s overall skill level, that would be silly, because MVP includes VALUE. That’s fine. However, that means we MUST include contracts, because value is production – cost. If you think including contracts is silly than you don’t actually think the V stands for value.

Jon Roegele
11 years ago

I tend to lean toward giving catchers some extra credit as well, given much they are involved with every pitch defensively not just every few balls in play. Some year we may be better at quantifying more things that they do to affect a game.

I haven’t even thought how I would have voted, only that I suspect my list would have had more catchers on it than most voters too.

who cares?? MIKE TROUT IS MVP!!!!!!!!!
11 years ago

`

Well-Beered Englishman
11 years ago

Off-Topic Public Service Announcement

Friends, please do not drink and drive.

Paul
11 years ago

Unless you mean drive people crazy with Notgraphs style humor! Just don’t drink and drive!

Blaker
11 years ago

Sigh…okay *Throws water bottle away*

Well-Beered Englishman
11 years ago

I wasn’t joking. I know I have a reputation for joking, but after hearing the Oscar Taveras news, I looked up an old uni friend of mine and learned that he was killed in a car wreck, and the driver was most likely intoxicated. A friend of mine recently drunk-drove from her office Halloween party to her home, which was just a five-minute drive. She made it home safely, but she was – rightly and justly – fired. I feel lucky that I swore it off after scratching my car.

You don’t need to get a DUI, or to end your life the way Oscar Taveras ended his, to be hurt by drunk drivers. Whether the driver is you or someone else.

Please, friends, don’t.

Matthew TobinMember since 2016
11 years ago

Also, don’t get into a car with anyone you know is that drunk. Tavares drank probably close to 1/2 a liter of a spirit before driving. It is actually pretty impressive he didn’t pass out. I highly doubt this was a situation were people or his girlfriend couldn’t tell.

Teams should probably start babysitting these player. You don’t let millions of dollars ride around with a guard and armored car. You probably shouldn’t let a 23 year old worth tens of millions of dollars ever drive themselves. I’m curious if internal policy will change with teams about keeping an eye on their young players.

Please be Well-Beered resonsibly.

Grant
11 years ago
Reply to  Matthew Tobin

She was probably drunk as well. Otherwise, i don’t see any way in which she would get in the car.

Neil S
11 years ago
Reply to  Matthew Tobin

Players need to take some responsibility, too, though that’s harder said than done. You’re a highly paid athlete? Then you can hire a driver or taxi. But they think they’re invincible, right? Which is thanks in no small part to the sycophants (not just the fans, but the coaches, family, friends…) that surround them.

Analyst
11 years ago

Well said.

Hurtlockertwo
11 years ago

It always seemed to me that an assigned limo/taxi for players would be a small price to pay to keep them safe when partying. But that certainly applies to everyone, a DUI is way more expensive in every way than a taxi fare.

Schide
11 years ago

So I guess we can just throw out single season WAR then. And wRC+.

But I guess we’ll keep weighting single season UZR so highly.

I used to like you Dave, but I guess Vlad was right all along.

Paul
11 years ago
Reply to  Schide

Good point. If we can’t use a statistic in all contexts, then it’s useless. And since we can’t use any statistic to 100% accurately determine who will be the President in 2094, that means all statistics are useless.

Peter R
11 years ago
Reply to  Schide

Not sure that you have actually read any articles on this site…….

Nick
11 years ago

If I’m understanding correctly, one of the reasons you listed for ranking Lucroy so high was the positional scarcity factor (“Because of the rigors of the position and the skills needed to excel at it, catchers generally aren’t great hitters…”). If there were four catchers in the league who were, in your mind, legitimate MVP candidates, doesn’t that make the position Lucroy plays a little less important?

I don’t disagree with Lucroy 2nd, or any of your selections really; the reasoning just seems a little contradictory.

Matthew TobinMember since 2016
11 years ago
Reply to  Nick

I think it means what Lucroy does it so impressive because there are only a handful of catchers that can hit and catch at elite levels in baseball history. Most of them are HoFers. Buster Posey and Lucroy up there

pitnick
11 years ago
Reply to  Nick

Historically, it’s pretty unusual to have so many awesome catchers in one league at one time.

Matthew TobinMember since 2016
11 years ago
Reply to  pitnick

I’m curious how modern good hitting catchers will be treated historically. They get moved very early now to preserve the bat in the lineup. Buster Posey could be a HoF path for example. But I bet he is moved to 1st permenantly relatively soon and that hurts his value a lot.

BipMember since 2016
11 years ago
Reply to  Matthew Tobin

Depending on to what degree you think the toll of catching is a detriment to a player’s hitting, you might expect Posey to get a boost at the plate that could partially offset that.

ElJimador
11 years ago
Reply to  Matthew Tobin

Posey isn’t going to be moved anywhere. He wants to catch, he’s good at it, and the Giants already have a good, cost-controlled 1B for the next several years.

Matthew TobinMember since 2016
11 years ago

Should be give Lucroy extra credit for game calling? Should we give him credit for playing a position that is physically impossible to play every game at? Do we give him credit for having a top 20ish season of all time(most belong to HoFers)?

I would lean Lucroy for the same reason Dave argued for Manager of the Year. We know very little about a catchers influence on defense/pitching. The pitching staff outperformed the peripherals and I give Lucroy some credit for that. You also have to imagine catchers suffer offensive penalties from a demanding position as well.

Lucroy probably had a top 20 catching season of all time.. Kershaw is #168 by RA9-WAR.

Hurtlockertwo
11 years ago
Reply to  Matthew Tobin

Posey was a better hitter than Lucroy last year, his defense may not be close but he is no slouch either.

Jeff
11 years ago

Kinda figured the second place Lucroy vote was you. But thanks for explaining, and I find the logic sound.

No Comment
11 years ago

Nominee for NL MVP Ballot of the Year: Hal McCoy of Cincinnati

Highlights include: Voted Denard Span 4th and Lucas Duda 8th.

BipMember since 2016
11 years ago
Reply to  No Comment

It’s funny to look at the ballots from people who don’t have something like WAR as a reference. Fangraphs readers and writers obviously don’t just read down the WAR list for their ballots, but they also are not going to make picks that fly full in the face of WAR. When someone doesn’t have a sanity-check like that, they can can end up voting for a guy who was probably less valuable than Marcell Ozuna and Billy Hamilton. Dee Gordon got a vote too lol.

Cool Lester Smooth
11 years ago

Fine with Kershaw and Lucroy, but the best hitter in baseball, who lead NL position players in WAR despite a single season UZR that is incongruous with his career defensive numbers, should have finished above the RF with a 10 point lower wRC+.

And that’s not even considering the fact that making the playoffs is valuable to a team.

tungtwista
11 years ago

If you are going to look at context-based numbers, why only look at RE24?
Why not look at WPA, where McCutchen is ranked 3rd after Trout and Stanton,
or possibly, WPA/Li, where Mccutchen is 4th behind Bautista, Trout, and Stanton.
If you think a base hit when the runner is on 2nd is more valuable than nobody on bases,
you can also argue that a base hit at 9th inning of a tied game is more valuable
than a base hit when the game 10-1.
The purpose of baseball is to win games, not to score as many points, right?

Steven
11 years ago
Reply to  tungtwista

WPA/LI is the way to go, IMO.

Joshua_C
11 years ago
Reply to  tungtwista

I agree . . . this is sort of a disappointing ballot. I’m not categorically opposed to using context-based numbers, but if you’re going to do so it seems as though you should at least apply them systematically.

It almost seems as though you ranked McCutchen so low almost to be a provocateur. I’m a Pirates fan who had no problem with him finishing third (I would’ve ranked Kershaw and Molina ahead of him, personally, and I can see the argument for Stanton), but I’m struggling to see a cogent argument for Rendon over McCutchen.

munchtime
11 years ago
Reply to  Joshua_C

If only Dave would write an article, explaining his reasoning…

KCDaveInLA
11 years ago

I’m curious about what your AL MVP vote would look like if you had one. Because Alex Gordon finishing 12th….WTF, BBWAA.

Zachary K
11 years ago
Reply to  KCDaveInLA

Just wanted to point out that Nelson Cruz received 19 votes and Alex Gordon received 12. There are 30 AL MVP votes. I wouldn’t be at all surprised if the two overlapped on only one ballot.

francis
11 years ago

I think Stanton deserved it.

Miami had a bad team even before Fernandez went down and remained respectable until he went down right near the end. That’s a 100 loss team without him last year.

Kershaw was great, but the Dodgers had enough talent to contend without him.

Dave P
11 years ago
Reply to  francis

The Dodgers were near .500 in games Kershaw didn’t pitch, so while they may have talent, it didn’t produce.

ben
11 years ago

Completely off-topic, but I’m giddy over a headline I just saw: Jeff Francoeur agrees with Phillies.

Ruben Amaro. Jr
11 years ago
Reply to  ben

Your welcome, Ben!

Colin Dew-Becker
11 years ago

The Hank Aaron Award needs to be elevated to the same stature as the Cy Young Award.

If the award for the best pitcher and the award for the best batter were treated with an equal amount of reverence by MLB there would be much less of an argument against pitchers winning the MVP Award. As it is, the relegation of the Hank Aaron Award to a casual announcement during the World Series — a tertiary-level award at best — allows the absurd “pitchers have their own award” argument to continue to propagate.

ben
11 years ago

agreed

Matt
11 years ago

Or introduce the Barry Bonds Award.

MB923
11 years ago

I’ve been saying this for a long time now. BBWAA needs to vote on this and announce it around the same time as Cy Young Award/MVP winner. Currently the winner is chosen by the fans!

Thanks, Comcast
11 years ago

I’d have voted Kershaw for the Hank Aaron Award.

Mike Green
11 years ago

Fair enough. The ballot looks nothing like mine, but as far as I am concerned, the top 6 (and perhaps 7) are awfully tight.

Some years, the #1 and #2 choices are pretty clear. Not this one.

Bobby Ayala
11 years ago

This sounds like Cameron’s fanboys here. C’mon, Lucroy 2nd? Half his votes are outliers from the group, does that mean about the BBWAA are a pack of morons?

werthless
11 years ago
Reply to  Bobby Ayala

Argumentum ad populum is never a compelling argument against someone who already knows they are going against the crowd.

Analyst
11 years ago
Reply to  werthless

Yeah, it’s Werthless

Cool Lester Smooth
11 years ago
Reply to  Bobby Ayala

They are mostly morons, but I do disagree with a lot of his choices here.

a eskpert
11 years ago

There’s such a thing as respectful disagreement

Hurtlockertwo
11 years ago
Reply to  a eskpert

Agreed, but not here at fangraphs. If you don’t drink the koolaid you are a moron.

KDL
11 years ago
Reply to  a eskpert

In my experience here, you get called a moron for being a moron.

The people who get the most upset about the so-called kool-aid drinkers rarely have reasons for disagreeing with the fangraphs crowd. But they sure do love using phrases like “drink the koolaid” in lieu of arguments, facts, statistics…

Take this comment thread as an example.
Argument: “This ballot doesn’t look like the others so it must be wrong”. No mention of what is specifically wrong about it.

Who is more of a koolaid drinker…the guy who disagrees with the masses or the guy who says “this doesn’t say what everyone else is saying so it must be wrong”?

KDL
11 years ago
Reply to  a eskpert

^And of course, disrespectful disagreement.

Hurtlockertwo
11 years ago
Reply to  a eskpert

Baseball is a great game, fun to watch, more fun to play. You can’t distil that down to mere statistical analysis, that takes all the fun out of loving the game. This is a stat site, I like reading the analysis and the data. But baseball is more than that. Often if you give an opinion here at fangraphs NOT based on data you are called stupid or moronic. That’s not respectful.

Cool Lester Smooth
11 years ago
Reply to  a eskpert

Exactly. I strongly disagree with a lot of Cameron’s choices, and I can be a dick about it, but I always try to back that up with actual reasoning and evidence.

skippyballer486
11 years ago
Reply to  Bobby Ayala

Lucroy had 6.3 WAR, McCutch had 6.8. If you think Lucroy’s pitch-framing (not currently included in WAR) was worth 5 runs (less than 1/4 of it’s currently assumed value) he would be the NL leader in WAR. If you think it was worth 10 runs (less than 1/2 it’s assumed value) he becomes the league leader. It is hardly crazy to attribute 25% of pitch framing to the catcher. I’d say Lucroy has more of an argument to finish #1 than to finish behind Stanton.

Warren A
11 years ago

Giving context-specific performance any weight at all is treating noise as if it’s signal–I expect better from FanGraphs.

Matt
11 years ago
Reply to  Warren A

No predictive weight. But it happened. So if you believe the award should reflect the actual events of the past season it makes sense. The real flaw was pointed out excellently by tungtwista above. A 1 for 4 with a 1-R HR that ties a game in the 9th inning is easily as valuable as a 1 for 4 with a 3-R HR when the team is already up 7-3 in a blowout. Maybe more valuable, if you’re going to try and reflect who was most valuable based on situational performance.

Johnnie LeMaster
11 years ago
Reply to  Matt

What about adding another layer of leverage based on the predicted probability at the time of winning the World Series? Should the award be given for best performance in the context of an inning? A game? A season? Dave Cameron says “inning.” You say “game.” Others say “season.” I say “whatever satisfies my unconscious biases.”

munchtime
11 years ago
Reply to  Matt

He was actually using the 3-HR vs. 1-HR argument to illustrate why context does not matter. His argument was that in both scenarios, the player hit a home run – therefore the performance was equal.

It ignores context such as game score, inning, outs, etc. Which may not be the way to determine “true talent”, but is absolutely necessary to determine which was ultimately more beneficial.

Johnnie LeMaster
11 years ago
Reply to  Warren A

A shiny, shiny trophy is at stake (i.e., stakes are very low!). Here’s the choice:
1) The player who would have performed the best in 100,000,000 iterations of 2014 with all possible confounding variables randomized in each iteration.
2) The player who actually did the best in 2014.

I choose 2! You choose 1! I am not disappointed by FanGraphs!

skippyballer486
11 years ago

No Johnnie, you don’t choose 2. You chose 3) The player who had the best combination of performance and luck in 2014.

Base-out-state performance is luck. Until such time as players are shown to have a consistent ability to perform differently in certain base-out-states it should be assumed to be luck. Performance is hitting a homerun. Luck is hitting that homerun when the bases are loaded in a tie game instead of empty with your team down seven.

Erik
11 years ago

Who cares if it’s all luck!?

Players play these games to win, to throw out the ultimate goal of the entire game is to completely miss the point of awarding one player the title of ‘most valuable.’

skippyballer486
11 years ago

Erik, I don’t even know HOW to respond to that. Obviously I care if it’s all luck. Since we’re trying to award the MVP to the most deserving player I would hope most people would think luck should not be included.

If you want to reward players based only on the ultimate goal (winning), just look at each player’s individual won-loss record and give the MVP to the player with the best record. If you want to give the award to the most deserving player you would obviously not just do that, but that is the way to reward “accomplishing the ultimate goal.” If you suggest anything else as a better way (except perhaps restricting the award to World Series winning players) you are implicitly agreeing that something matters besides the final results of the games.

Erik
11 years ago

What is a players individual won / loss record? Pitchers have that, but that doesn’t really measure anything all that well, and we are talking MVP here so I don’t know what you want me to look at.

The voting takes place before the post season, so it is also impossible to use post season performance in the calculation.

I have no problem with giving the award to ‘the best player’ but I cannot imagine how that is anything less than based on what actually happened on the field- especially since we are using the term ‘value’ to a players team. We are awarding the best performance of the year, not the “most likely to have the best performance next year” true talent level award.

I don’t see how anyone could say 5 line drives are as valuable as five line drive singles. I don’t see how anyone could say 5 fly balls hit 390 feet are as valuable as 5 homers hit 390 feet. I don’t see how anyone could say 5 homers hit in one run victories are as valuable as 5 homers hit in blow outs.

I also originally stated “Who cares if it’s all luck?” But I’m not convinced it all is. Opposing teams bring in their best guy in the biggest moments. A hitter is much more likely to hit a homer in a blowout than he is to hit one in the bottom of the 9th of a one run ball game. I see no reason to throw that all out.

KD
11 years ago

I think I would agree with at least your top 6 players – gets a little sketchy after that. I think people focus too much on the starting pitcher “only” being out there every 5 games or so. If you count the BF (batters faced) plus CH (defensive chances) and their own PA, a starting pitcher is in on about the same number of plays of a position player (PA + CH). The pitcher gets far greater influence if you look at individual pitches and then critical situations are also tilted more to the pitcher than the critical situations position players face

Nathan Lazarus
11 years ago

You don’t have to believe that Lucroy was worth 22 runs; you’ve got to believe that he was worth 10 (using 10 runs to a win). Lucroy was worth 6.3 WAR, Kershaw 7.2. I think catchers deserve 90% of the credit for framing, while I’ll believe there is 10% in there that comes from pitchers throwing more close pitches. 90% of 22 is 1.98, putting Lucroy over 1 win ahead!

Doug Douglas
11 years ago
Reply to  Nathan Lazarus

^This is a mess.

Frederick Douglas
11 years ago
Reply to  Doug Douglas

You think that’s a mess? Try living in my time period!

BipMember since 2016
11 years ago
Reply to  Nathan Lazarus

Kershaw is farther ahead by RA/9 WAR, which is fair to use in his case.

munchtime
11 years ago
Reply to  Nathan Lazarus

WAR is not accurate to the tenth of a point.

jose
11 years ago

No Trout?

Ian R.
11 years ago
Reply to  jose

As phenomenal as Mike Trout was, I don’t think he’s a particularly strong candidate for the National League MVP. Just a hunch.

Psy Jung
11 years ago
Reply to  Ian R.

Although we should recognize that one day Mike Trout could hit a homer so hard that it creates a singularity, more or less eliminating the disctinction between AL and NL

jose
11 years ago
Reply to  Ian R.

thats the joke

Bill D. Berger
11 years ago
Reply to  jose

With interleague play, Trout did play against NL opponents about as often as Kershaw did. Just imagine if Trout pitched in a blowout interleague game, he would be the NL Cy Young!!!! All hail Trout.

Andy
11 years ago
Reply to  Ian R.

But didn’t he bat .667 vs. Kershaw? Are we going to penalize him because he missed some games vs. NL teams?

BipMember since 2016
11 years ago

I get taking RE24 and leverage into account, but this article reads like that’s the only thing taken into account. I also have a hard time understanding how McCutchen finished behind Rendon, given that he had more WAR, way more WPA, and more RE24. As many pointed out, their WAR was only close because McCutchen’s defensive rating was low even for him.

Jewtini
11 years ago

bleepy blurpy. I am gumbo.

g n to the i and to the f and up the Z

Jason B
11 years ago
Reply to  Jewtini

Look, Well-Beered already gave the drinking and driving warning up above.

KCDaveInLA
11 years ago
Reply to  Jason B

He didn’t say anything about snorting, smoking or huffing, though.

McCroskey
11 years ago
Reply to  KCDaveInLA

Looks like I picked the wrong week to quit huffing benzene and then posting on FanGraphs…

Francisco
11 years ago

I think Dave realized he made a mistake when he explained his vote for Rendon contradicting his criteria. The only voter who put McCutchen as far as 6th place was Cameron and the last voter I thought could do that was him. The only great traditional stat that McCutchen had was Batting Average. McCutchen greatness is given by stats Dave has helped us to understand. So his vote seems more like a traditional voter than a modern one.

M W
11 years ago

Mesoraco wasn’t even close to being the best player on his team.

Player Development Nerd
11 years ago

On Lucroy, how did you split the framing benefit between the pitchers and him? Was it 50-50, or something else? I was curious about this when you wrote the article earlier in the summer. What was your conclusion? And how much share of the framing benefit would you need to give to Lucroy for him to overtake Kershaw on your MVP ballot?

Steven
11 years ago

This is a good question.

Cooper
11 years ago

I would like to thank you for writing about baseball and not writing about fan engagement, TV ratings or ticket prices. You are a great baseball writer!

Patrick G
11 years ago

Dave explain how you aren’t just penalizing McCutchen for having teammates that didn’t get on base in front of him enough?

His splits for Bases Empty/Men on Base/Men in Scoring Position don’t seem like they are statistically significantly different wRC+ of 173/162/146 respectively and his low/medium/high leverage split is 135/223/138

Looks like he was pitched more carefully by the opposition with runners on and in scoring position

None of this looks like his fault.

Please feel free to straighten me out.

munchtime
11 years ago
Reply to  Patrick G

You can’t look at wRC+ and determine how pitchers approached him. You could look at K% and BB%, perhaps ISO as well.

Patrick G
11 years ago
Reply to  munchtime

That’s what i was looking at, didn’t really go for a full rebuttal and im working on <3 hours of sleep

Darkstone42
11 years ago
Reply to  Patrick G

I also <3 as many hours of sleep as possible, and work on getting them when I can. Glad to find someone like-minded on the matter.

Bad Bill
11 years ago

Somehow, the implication that Yadier Molina was considered only the fourth (fifth?) most valuable catcher in his division — not league, division — seems like Cameron at his “best” (sic). The very simple eye test of how St. Louis did with him, compared to without him during his DL stint, says a great deal about his value to the team. Catchers have obvious value to their teams that is not reflected in WAR.

Matthew Murphy
11 years ago
Reply to  Bad Bill

I’m a Cardinals fan, and while you can certainly argue that Yadi is one of the top three catchers in all of baseball, he definitely didn’t have the greatest season. Lucroy, Martin and Mesoraco all had excellent offensive seasons – numbers they may never match again for the rest of their careers. Yadi, meanwhile, was merely a league-average hitter even when he was healthy. Also, the Cardinals struggles without Yadi speaks just as much to the lack of talent at backup.
And I think Dave appreciates the value that catchers have to their teams, given that he had four of them in his top-eight.

Jimmer
11 years ago

I appreciate it when a writer takes the time to thoroughly explain his vote regardless of whether or not I agree with the rankings or explanations. The writer certainly doesn’t need to do this.

APer930
11 years ago

Quick Question: The MVP is for all players, and I’m assuming the Cy Young is just for pitchers, but could I vote for Adam Dunn or Mitch Moreland for Cy Young?

Darkstone42
11 years ago
Reply to  APer930

As a Dangerous Experiment once told us, a team of all Adams Dunn, including the pitching staff, is superior.

We also learned a good deal about Dees Gordon in that experiment, but at a cost. Rest in peace, Dee P. Gordon, you beautiful warrior.

Bomok
11 years ago
Reply to  Darkstone42

#saveNotGraphs

Jon S.
11 years ago

Sound arguments. One question: Did you support Molina in ’12 and ’13? He was equal to our better than 2014 Lucroy as a hitter and as for defense? Well, he’s Yadier Molina.

CircleChange11
11 years ago
Reply to  Jon S.

That’s what I was wondering.

Brian L
11 years ago

Dave, thank you, great job explaining your very logical and well thought out decisions, regardless of whether I or anyone else agree with your choices 100%. Your having a vote is a win for all of us and for baseball overall.

I hope you do not see this thank you b/c you didn’t waste any time/life getting down this far into the comments

Fansofnondodgerteams
11 years ago

Your ballet sucks.

Scott
11 years ago

Let’s use context neutral stats only.
Just kidding let’s use context dependent stats.
But only some of them like RE24 and not WPA/Li.
-Dave Cameron

Luis TorresMember since 2016
11 years ago

Dave, I have a lot of respect for you, but this is a very disappointing ballot. Valuing context is a huge flaw in your process, and quite frankly, I expect a writer for the most sabermetrically friendly website to know better.

Process over results is one of the most fundamental aspects of doing good science, regardless of the field of study. RE24, while I’m sure it measures what it’s trying to measure accurately, is nothing more than RBI under a sabermetric dressing. I’m sure I don’t have to convince anybody on Fangraphs of the uselessness of the RBI. It basically rewards results over process.

Hitting is hitting, regardless of the situation. The skills are the same. It doesn’t matter if it’s a close game in the bottom of the 9th, bases loaded, 2 outs, or bases empty in the 1st. Players can’t control when they get their hits. It’s not McCutchen’s fault that his teammates failed to get on base before the bulk of his hits. The MVP is an individual award, so if we’re going to credit or penalize a player for factors beyond his control, then we might as well flush the award down the toilet.

You cited sabermetric stats in defense of your ballot, but when it comes down to it, you relied on outdated and disproven principles in order to make your final decisions. I know you’re capable of doing better than this, Dave.