There Is No Obvious NL MVP
Back in August, I wrote about the remarkably crowded NL MVP race. I went through 10 guys with pretty strong cases for the award, and noted there wasn’t much separation between those 10 guys. I ended the piece by noting that “this list will undoubtedly narrow itself”, figuring that down the stretch, a few guys would rise above the rest of the crop and become the clear top candidates.
Well, that didn’t happen. With just a few days left before NL MVP voters are required to turn in their ballots, the reality is that this is the most muddled class of MVP candidates I can ever remember.
Here are the current top senior circuit leaders in WAR.
| Rank | Player | WAR |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Kris Bryant | 6.7 |
| 2 | Anthony Rendon | 6.7 |
| 3 | Joey Votto | 6.7 |
| 4 | Charlie Blackmon | 6.4 |
| 5 | Giancarlo Stanton | 6.4 |
| 6 | Max Scherzer | 5.9 |
| 7 | Tommy Pham | 5.7 |
| 8 | Corey Seager | 5.6 |
| 9 | Paul Goldschmidt | 5.6 |
| 10 | Justin Turner | 5.4 |
Not included in that top 10 is Nolan Arenado, who is tied with Turner at +5.4 WAR, even though UZR isn’t rating him as an elite defender; if you swapped in DRS instead of UZR as the fielding metric of choice, Arenado would be right up near the top. Also excluded from that list is Gio Gonzalez and Clayton Kershaw, who have +6.7 and +6.6 WAR if you go by runs allowed; Scherzer also climbs to +6.9 if you just use run totals to evaluate pitcher performance.
In other words, there are thirteen guys who have some kind of case for a spot near the top of the ballot. The cases aren’t all equal, but the differences between them are mostly small enough that you can reasonably defend a ballot with just about any kind of ranking.
Want to just reward the best hitter? Despite Stanton’s 57 home runs, that’s Votto, who has a 165 wRC+ thanks to being third in average, first in on-base percentage, and sixth in slugging. He’s also the only candidate who has played every single game all year long, so Votto has both quantity and quality on his side. Of course, he’s a first baseman on a losing team, so not everyone will put him at the top of their ballot, but he’s got a good case for those who mostly just value offensive performance.
Want the best hitter, but require your MVP to come from a playoff team? That’s actually Turner, who ran a 151 wRC+ and was one of the main reasons the Dodgers posted the best record in baseball this year. But he missed a month of the season, and so if you want the best hitter from a playoff team who didn’t spend time on the DL, you’re looking at Kris Bryant, last year’s winner and maybe the NL’s best all-around player. But Bryant might get ignored by voters who still value RBI totals, since he has driven in just 73 runs this year.
RBI voters will likely go to Arenado (129 RBIs) or Goldschmidt (120 RBIs) if they care about playoff qualifications, or Stanton (123 RBIs) if they don’t. Of course, RBIs aren’t a metric that serious voters should spend much time looking at, but the concept of rewarding hitters who move runners along the bases is a sound one. Bases-empty hits are worth less than hits with men on base, and guys who distribute their hits into more important situations do help their teams win more games.
So any RBI voter who wanted a better metric to measure the same idea could look at RE24, where Votto comes out on top, but an RE24 voter who wants to reward a player on a contender could see Goldschmidt as the league’s next best hitter.
And then there will likely be at least a few voters who play the “where would this team be without this specific player?” game. I personally hate this argument, since it punishes players who happen to also have good teammates, but of the 30 voters, it’s likely at least a few will try to use the argument that some certain player got his team over the top on his own, as specious as it is. And for those voters, Goldschmidt, Blackmon, and Arenado are probably the most appealing options, since they were the key cogs on the two Wild Card teams, and they don’t have as many great teammates to say “well, they still would have had this guy.”
If I had to guess, I think Rendon, Seager, Turner, and Pham will probably the position players who get the least consideration of the guys in our top 10 in WAR. Rendon, Turner, and Seager aren’t in the top 10 in Baseball Reference’s calculation, and Pham doesn’t have the sexy numbers of the other hitters on non-playoff teams. And since there isn’t one pitcher that has clearly separated himself from the other pitchers this year, I think those guys will end up receiving just a few down-ballot votes.
But even if we think those guys will get mostly passed over, that still leaves six other candidates that the voters will likely be picking from for the top spot on their ballot. And there just isn’t an obvious point of separation between most of them.
This year, the NL MVP really will come down to what kind of secondary numbers a voter looks at in order to split hairs. Maybe most will decide that’s playing for a contender, which would hurt Votto and Stanton’s chances. Maybe it will go towards the guys who were seen as the difference between their team winning and not winning, in which case I’d bet on Goldschmidt slightly edging out Arenado.
But while lots of guys can make a case, the reality is that voters can reasonably defend almost any ranking on their 2017 NL MVP ballot. Some guy who is first on one ballot might be sixth on another, and it won’t be worthy of any kind of outrage. This year, there are so many clustered candidates that voters can basically pick anyone they want, and it will probably be a reasonable selection.
Dave is the Managing Editor of FanGraphs.
Nothing could be more similar than Giancarlo Stanton and Anthony Rendon
Will Ferrell and Chad Smith ?
Joel Osteen and Jesus?
Phambino
So you’re saying is that people can vote Tommy Pham for MVP with a clean conscience? This is excellent news.
BTW, thank you for using RE24 and not “clutch.”
JD Martinez has 2.5 WAR in sixty games. Let’s just give it to him and call it a day.
which works out to 6.7 WAR over 160 games. Good but not overwhelmingly better than the top players who played a full season
45 HR, .306 AVG, 100+ RBI, 80+ runs. These are MVP numbers.
Playing for 2 months is not an MVP number
Fair enough, but it’s not his fault he was traded. Shouldn’t players traded be eligible for some kind of award?
They are eligible. It’s more of an uphill battle.
THIS is why league MVPs are asinine.
Stanton by a landslide. Not saying it is deserved but his HR prowess this year will be too shiny for voters to pass on.
If nothing else, Stanton’s theatrics might have helped Jeff Loria get a cool $1.2 billion, which is certainly one way of putting a “value” on things.
And it helped get rid of Loria. Guy might not deserve the MVP, but if his value helped Loria sell, he might deserve a lifetime achievement award.
It didn’t help McGwire in ’98 or ’99.
Because Sosa was right behind him in HRs and way ahead of him elsewhere. There’s no Sosa to Stanton’s McGwire this year in terms of HRs.
I remember asking in a chat before the 2016 season what a full season of Tommy Pham would look like, not that we’d likely ever get to see it. The answer is even better than I expected, he’s been phamnomenal.
Yeah,
It’s been a Phamtabulous time to make bro-mance
‘Neath the cover of October skies.
(I was holding that one for after the Cards made the playoffs, but oh well… no way now.)
That was solid, hold on to that for next year.
I’d probably pick Nolan Arenado. As Dave notes, he’d be near the top in WAR with DRS instead of UZR, and given his rep & history on defense I think it’s reasonable to grant him credit as a top-tier defender. He’s top 10 in WPA, so his offensive performance is directly helping his team win games. And, if you have to do it, he’s critically important to the playoff chances of the Rockies, who would be toast without him.
As Dave said, you can pick anyone. But Arenado has been great on offense, likely great on defense, gotten hits in big spots, and plays for a contender who needs every last win.
“He’s top 10 in WPA, so his offensive performance is directly helping his team win games.”
Yes, sort of. The problem with WPA is that runs in earlier innings are just as valuable as runs in later inning, but WPA weights it so runs in later innings are more valuable. In other words, a solo home run in the 1st inning with a 0-0 score is weighted as more valuable than a solo home run in the 9th inning with a 0-0 score, and this remains the same no matter what the final score is.
That isn’t true. WPA weights runs in later innings more heavily if the score is close; it weights runs in later innings less heavily if the score is less close. A solo homer in the 9th inning when the team is behind 10-0 is clearly less important than a solo homer in the 1st inning when the score is tied, and WPA reflects this.
True. Given the same score, later innings runs are weighted more. But it is still illogical.
The problem isn’t that it’s illogical. A solo homer with the score tried in the 1st may have no impact on the final result of the game. A solo homer with the scored tied in the bottom of the 9th will affect the result of the game 100% of the time. The problem isn’t logical inconsistency, the problem is that the two outcomes don’t in principle reflect differences in the ability of the hitter, yet he is given different scores for them. But even this is not necessarily the case. A solo homer with the score tied in the 1st inning will on the average be hit against an average starting pitcher, while a solo homer with the score tied in the bottom of the 9th will probably be hit against the other team’s #1 or #2 reliever, so this is a more difficult thing to do and it makes sense to get more credit for it.
Well, its ‘logical’, in that its true that scoring in a tied game late is significantly more beneficial to your chances of winning than scoring in a tied game in the first inning, but that doesn’t mean that the runs were harder to score (though, in modern baseball, sometimes it does, with targeting relief pitching).
That’s not to defend WPA as a stat, but the way it works is certainly logical.
SadT, for all of WPA’s shortcomings, I would stop short of saying that “runs in earlier innings are just as valuable as runs in later innings.” There are true points of value that WPA captures, such as:
— Later runs that earn big WPA tend to be against better pitchers and those with the platoon advantage.
— Other defensive strategies reflect real changes in run value that must be acknowledged. A routine grounder to short may plate a run in a tie game in the 1st, but not in a tie in the 9th.
— The number of opportunities remaining has to count for something. I can’t accept that an out leading off the game is as damaging as the last out of a one-run game.
There are plenty of reasons not to lean heavily on WPA in a value argument. Opportunities to accrue WPA are heavily influenced by the caliber of one’s teammates (which is largely why Trout has a big lead on Altuve), and by chance. But it’s not nothing.
P.S. I think your last sentence says the opposite of what you meant.
Let’s say, hypothetically, that a batter homers in the first PA of the game. The team wins the game 1-0.
Now, let’s say, hypothetically, that a batter homers in the last PA of the game. The team wins the game 1-0.
My understanding is that the batter in the second scenario would have a higher WPA than in the first. This is defensible if you’re looking at WPA as the change in probability in the chance of winning the game. However, it is wrong to suggest that the batter in the second scenario provided more value than in the first. In retrospect, we know that the homer in the first is just as valuable as the one in the 9th.
But when the homer took place in the first case you don’t know if it will affect the game–it may well have no effect. In the second case it decides the game. Plus, as we’ve said, generally speaking the second case will be against a tougher pitcher.
“But when the homer took place in the first case you don’t know if it will affect the game–it may well have no effect.”
This is a good example of why we shouldn’t decide how much value something provides in context until we actually know what the context is! There’s no reason, for purposes of assigning value to players, why we need to assign that value at that point in the game (although it has other valid uses).
There’s no disputing that specific example as one of many WPA flaws. But every stat has examples of catastrophic failure as narrative.
Here’s another WPA example I’d like your opinion on:
— Masahiro Tanaka threw a shutout worth 0.71 WPA.
— A.J. Griffin threw a shutout worth 0.09 WPA.
I’m uncomfortable with the size of the disparity. But I’m just as uncomfortable saying Griffin’s effort had the same value. He led 5-0 before taking the mound, and 8-0 by the 4th, while Tanaka’s team scored one in the 4th and two in the 9th. Tanaka had more pressure. I can’t weigh every factor in every one-on-one comparison, but I’m comfortable with WPA’s binary statement on this one.
Just so, I would never lean heavily on WPA for an awards case. But I would use it in close cases, like last year’s AL Cy Young. The fWAR rankings:
— 5.3 for Verlander
— 5.1 for Porcello, Kluber and Sale
No one else over 4.7. So I’m leaning Verlander, but I don’t want all my eggs in the fWAR basket, and his bWAR lead was also slim over Kluber. So I check WPA for AL starters.
Verlander led that by 3.8 to 3.2 for #2 (Aaron Sanchez). Kluber and Sale were 5th at 2.5, and Porcello 9th at 2.2. That was all about run support — Porcello led the world, Kluber had good support, Sale had the median, and Verlander had poor support. Porcello had 18 games backed by 6+ (going 15-0), Kluber and Sale had 12 (11-0 and 10-1); Verlander had 7 (6-0).
So the runs Verlander prevented tended to be more valuable than the others. He faced more pressure in a typical game; his job was generally harder.
Now, I wouldn’t give the award to just a pretty good pitcher who led in WPA. But I think it’s a reasonable factor in a close race.
Honestly, that example you gave sounds like a lot of work to discount “wins”. It would seem easier to just ignore wins entirely and then who cares about run support? Are we judging MVPs based on the caliber of their teammates now? I know it’s trendy but I would hope not.
This isn’t like the hitter who does a better job with people on base, because that’s supposedly tied back to something the batter did. This is about something hitters did that is totally unconnected to pitching.
I generally take WPA pretty seriously for relief pitchers and i think that it can be useful for offensive value. But for starting pitchers it really is generally pretty bad. It depends much too much on when the starter gets pulled. Try calculating WPA for a starting pitcher who takes a 1-0 lead into the 8th, is clearly tiring, but gets left in the game because the manager is either stupid or doesn’t trust his relievers, and the starter gives up 2 runs in the 8th, which in terms of WPA wipes out all the pluses he’s had up until then. If the manager had just pulled him at the beginning of the 8th he’s have a huge plus in WPA for the game. Things like this happen a lot.
“But Arenado has been great on offense,”
That just isn’t true. He’s 17th in wRC+, which is really good but not good enough for an MVP candidate from a corner position. If he was a defensive standout at short or catcher, then maybe he would have an argument, but he’s a pretty clear step down from Bryant, Rendon, and Turner.
People have a really hard time parsing away the 140+ RBIs to the Coors Field effect.
Nolan Arenado is not an elite offensive player, guys. He’s a good offensive player and an excellent defender in an overwhelmingly favorable circumstance.
It was kind of a travesty he was even on the All-Star team, much less the starter, because he was probably at best the 4th player at his position in the league, and you could make a reasonable argument he was only the 3rd best player at the position in his own division (though I think he’s about equal to Lamb, hes not head and shoulders above him).
Baseball-Reference has Arenado 3rd among NL position players in WAR, 10th in oWAR and 2nd in dWAR. He’s had a terrific season, RBIs or no RBIs, and is a decent candidate to be MVP.
BP has him 6th in the league in WARP, but 2 whole wins behind Stanton and a win and a half behind Votto.
His incredibly high ranking in BR has a lot to do with the fact that DRS is willing to have his children.
But this whole article is about how nothing about the MVP discussion is “clear”. B-Ref says he’s been the NL’s best 3B this year, Fangraphs has him 4th. It’s all just opinion at this point.
JD Martinez for MVP ? Anyone?
6th in WAR among NL players since all star break. Even guys that have blown away the league in similar circumstances (Randy Johnson, Mark McGwire) have not been given serious consideration. Starting with J.D. would be incredibly odd (and undeserved).
I think what you’re looking for is called “NL Player of the Month for September”
You’re not the most valuable anything in the league when you are in the said league for 1/3 of the season.
Goldschmidt (.302/36/120) and Arenado (.305/36/129) both have really, really shiny numbers for playoff teams and of course, still have 3 games to add to them. Here’s the recent list of guys to eclipse .300/36/120:
2016 David Ortiz – finished 6th but he’s a DH and DHs have no shot at MVP
2013 Paul Goldschmidt – finished 2nd in MVP voting
2013 Miggy – won MVP
2012 Miggy – won
2011 Matt Kemp – 2nd
2010 Miggy – 2nd
2009 Pujols – won
2008 ManRam – changed leagues mid-season so he had no chance in either
2007 ARod – won
2007 Holliday – 2nd
2006 Pujols, Berkman, Howard – Howard won, Pujols 2nd, Berkman 3rd
I don’t know if either one will win, but recent history says guys that put up those kind of numbers do really, really, really well in the MVP voting.
(NOTE: Marcell Ozuna will probably get there as well – he’s at .309/36/119 right now, but he has zero shot at MVP)
But many of those players eclipsed those numbers by massive margins. If you made the cut-offs .313, 44 HR and 135 RBI, you’d still have all the guys that actually won, but you wouldn’t have any of these guys.
I agree with you in general where people pick minimum numbers to fit but:
A) both guys have a few games to tack on – ZIPs has them both adding 1 HR and 2 RBI over the weekend.
B) I carefully avoided saying this makes them locks or anything like that.
The point was that guys who put up seasons like both Goldy and Arenado have tend to do very, very well in the voting. I mean, we can argue about who SHOULD win and that’s a separate discussion, but my guess is that the actual voting comes down to Stanton, Goldschmidt, Arenado and Blackmon. Those would be my guesses for the top 4. None of the pitchers have done enough to sway many of voters to put them at the top and most of the rest of the hitters lean too heavily on sabermetric arguments that just aren’t going to get it done. The only other guy whose argument isn’t purely sabermetric is Votto and he plays for a last place team.
I mean, I actually agree with you about who the contenders are. I think it’ll go Blackmon, Goldschmidt, Stanton, Arenado.
I think it’ll be Blackmon or Goldschmidt. Blackmon has gotten a lot of attention as a “leader” and the Rockies are a feel-good story. He really doesn’t have a glaring hole. Goldschmidt is in the same camp, to me, but I feel like there is a narrative for Blackmon and Goldschmidt will be slightly punished (same with Bryant) simply because it is assumed that this is what they are supposed to do. Bryant will be double punished because he won last year.
There’s also a chance they just decide that since none of the playoff guys stand out, might as well give it to Stanton for pushing close to 60 HRs.
For me the hole for Blackmon is his .368 BABIP.
The voters absolutely won’t (and shouldn’t) care about that.
They won’t but they should. He’s getting lucky.
Saying they shouldn’t consider BABIP is exactly the same as saying they shouldn’t consider xFIP for pitchers, you’re saying I don’t care if he got lucky. Do you really believe that?
But the MVP is about actual results. To say that he got lucky doesn’t change the results. MVP voters have no obligation to care that the stats aren’t predictive.
I wouldn’t base my own voting on that, but I can see it’s legitimate. But then by the same reasoning you would have to accept that Arenado’s higher WPA is also about actual results (as opposed to WAR, which is less about actual results), so since Arenado is obviously more valuable than Blackmon defensively, he’s clearly produced better results than Blackmon.
I thought we were past regarding BABIP as just a measure of luck.
Um, .368 for a guy with Blackmon’s peripherals is massive luck. Try learning about xBABIP. If it were .320, okay, but .368 is not .320. And that’s had a huge effect on Blackmon’s WAR.
Its fair to point out that Coors also innately inflates BABIPs so Blackmon’s BABIP isn’t as big of an outlier as it would be for a player on another team.
But like, its happened. BABIP may tell us it isn’t repeatable or wasn’t entirely the result of true skill, but it happened and it was certainly of value regardless of its happening.
Its the MVP award, not the Highest True Skill Award, or we’d give the award to Trout every year on opening day.
Blackmon’s BABIP was .350 last year, and it’s .338 career. You don’t know what you think you know.
The Black(mon) hole is that he’s an average hitter away from home: .276/.337/.447
Arenado is .283/.355/.531 away from home.
Their home stats are the difference, with Blackmon at .388/.464/.772 in Colorado with Arenado at “only” .329/.386/.686.
Blackmon’s overall splits are therefore quite a bit better, but he’s far more a product of Coors (this year) than Arenado. It’s not to say that Arenado is any more deserving, but Blackmon feasts at home the way you would expect a Rockies hitter to do, and Arenado is likely being discounted as if he’s doing the same, when he’s actually not.
It’s not just this year for Blackmon. Outside of 2016 his entire career has been a product of Coors
Arenado, new playoff team, best defender at 3b, has all the big numbers R RBI HR AVG
I think I’d choose Arenado because he appears to be the player who’s made the biggest difference to the final results. Take away any one player from the Nationals, Cubs, or Dodgers and they still come in 1st; take away any one player from the Dbacks and they still have the 1st WC spot; but take away Arenado from the Rockies and they’d probably miss the playoffs. The same argument could be made for Blackmon but his .368 BABIP looks too lucky. This doesn’t mean I’d say Arenado is the best player, but valuable and best aren’t the same thing. Valuable means making a difference, best means being good. I could see voting for quality alone if there’s someone who really stands out, but that isn’t the case this year.
“Take away any one player from the Nationals, Cubs, or Dodgers and they still come in 1st;”
I’m not a big believer in the “what would they do without him” approach, but if you’re going that route, as of the current standings, taking away Bryant’s 6.7 WAR would leave the Cubs a game behind the Brewers and tied with the Cards. So … by your own criteria maybe you should be advocating for Bryant.
I’m assuming the player would be replaced by an average 2.0 WAR player, so the Cubs would lose 4.7 games and still have a 1.3 game lead on the Brewers, while the Rockies would lose 3.4 games and be 0.4 games behind the Brewers. If you want to say the replacement would be 0.0, then the Cubs would be 0.7 behind (could still easily make the playoffs) while the Rockies would be 2.4 behind (almost for sure out). Either way Arenado makes a bigger difference.
LOL. So why not Blackmon?
Blackmon is also possible, for the same reason. His BABIP is very lucky though. For people who don’t like to consider things like BABIP and FIP which try to factor out luck, he would be a better choice.
The other problem with discounting Blackmon’s luck in BABIP is that then there would be no justification for discounting Arenado’s higher WPA, which could also be attributed to luck, so Arenado still comes out ahead offensively (aside from being obviously much more valuable defensively).
Hmm, I see most Fangraphs’ readers don’t appreciate logical thinking. They aren’t intellectually equipped to argue with it, but they don’t appreciate it. Hmm. Actually maybe that’s why they don’t appreciate it?
Hmmm Did it ever occur to you that they just don’t agree with your logic?
According to your reasoning, if the Brewers win their last 3 games and the Cubs rest Bryant while losing their last three, the now narrower Cub margin would make Bryant more valuable than if he had actually played and hit a game winning HR. That’s just … odd.
Yeah man, it’s everyone else that’s stupid, not you. Ignore the fact that people have shown countless times why your arguments are actually stupid and flawed. They’re just dumb and incapable of doing battle with you and your superior intelligence! That’s some delusional levels of narcissism going on…
Your high horse hypocrisy is hilarious, btw. Watching you try to squirm out of stupid things you’ve said by just making more stupid statements always provides me with some enjoyment. Probably shouldn’t, but I guess I have a taste for the cringe. If you are serious in your posts, I feel bad for you, but if you are just trolling people here, then you are doing a fantastic job of it.
Why would you assume that every team has a random 2 WAR player just sitting around waiting to be used?
And I guess by your definition the only team that can have the AL MVP is the Red Sox. Take away Altuve, Judge, Dozier, or Kluber/Ramirez from their teams and they still win the division. So really only Mookie/Bogaerts/Sale can be MVP by your logic.
Yah! The non-Arenado Rockies were good enough to put the team in playoff position, but not good enough to run away with it, so that’s why Arenado should win the MVP award, which is an individual award.
That argument totally doesn’t not make sense. Am I wrong?!
No, they were good enough to put them in position to barely miss the playoffs, and Arenado (or Blackmon) has made the difference terms of putting them in the playoffs. That’s what being valuable is, making a difference.
Actually I can’t even understand what you’re saying. You asking if you are wrong that that argument ‘doesn’t not make sense’. Three negatives in 10 words is not the most effective way to communicate your ideas.
That was kinda my point. I think that statement makes as much sense as your argument.
I don’t know, maybe I am wrong. But in a case like this where there isn’t much of a difference in players 1-5, and only minor differences
for a few spots after that, something has to be used to create a little room between options.
Presented with a top-10 like this, I would personally eliminate Pham and below. I would split the Def difference with Arrenado and put him just above the cut off. My realistic options would then be Bryant, Rendon, Votto, Blackmon, Scherzer, Arrenado and Stanton. Out of that list, in an instance this close, I HAVE to look at the standings. The only three people that make any difference for the end result of their team is Bryant, Blackmon, and Arrenado, remove them from the teams, and if WAR actually measures what it should, those three would cause their teams to fall out of the playoffs. Bryant’s case may just turn into perilously close to missing the playoffs, depending on the results of the last series of the season. Out of those three I would probably land on Bryant, as the other two probably split at each other and make them hard to separate.
There just isn’t a good answer. Most of them would be interchangeable on who could/should win. Nothing really makes any of the options better than the others, so there has to be a little bit or irrationality in the choice. All rational means put them at the same level as each other.
On a tangent, I’m enjoying the fact that J.D. Martinez will go down as the MLB slugging leader, despite not leading either league nor even formally qualifying for the title. His edge is so big that he can easily absorb the penalty ABs.
— His .761 SLG in the NL would be the best non-Bonds mark with 200+ ABs in the NL.
— His NL rate of 1.1 RBI/G would be the best since Hack Wilson, of those with 50+ NL games.
— His 11.7 HR% in the NL would be the best in either league with 20+ HRs. (Btw, Matt Olson is currently setting that AL mark at 11.1%.)
Another guy who is getting a Chase Field bump.
Check out the home road splits.
In close races like this I prefer to vote for pitchers, just to remind people that pitchers are eligible.
I like how you think.
I agree voters will probably be looking at one of Goldy/Arenado/Blackmon because of the gaudy numbers and the whole playoff thing. Arenado and Blackmon will likely hurt each others chances so it’s Goldy for the win (plus he’s got the whole “he’s been all-world for a long time, it’s time he got an MVP” argument going for him)
But let’s not kid one another. Tommy Pham is the best player in the National League currently. 😉
Actually, if you re-order the hitters on the list based on WAR/game, 1-2-3 are Rendon, Pham, Bryant
If you do it by WAR/600 PA, you get:
Rendon – 6.78
Pham – 6.62
Cozart – 6.24
Bryant – 6.08
(Cozart’s not technically on the list, but he is a qualified hitter)
I think I would vote for Votto, Stanton, and then Rendon. I like Rendon, but I’m not as confident that the defensive metrics are correct as I am with the offensive metrics, which is why I’m not as sure about Rendon.
Votto is first in both wOBA and wRC+ by quite a lot. I don’t think there’s any question that he’s been the best hitter in the NL this year.
If you don’t want to vote for a player on a bad team or a first basemen, Stanton seems like the next best option. He’s the next best hitter and easily the best non-first baseman.
After that, you have to really believe in Rendon’s defensive metrics to make up for the gap between him and Votto/Stanton. Given that he’s had a pretty good track record there, I could be ok with someone voting for Rendon first.
Everyone else is a distant back of the pack for me.
going into tonight, Votto led Stanton in wRC+ 165-154. Now after tonight, it’s 165-158. Stanton has a chance to pass him if he has a huge weekend vs the Braves.
“If you don’t want to vote for a player on a bad team or a first basemen, Stanton seems like the next best option.”
Are the marlins not considered a bad team?
Too many other offensive studs on Washington to make Rendon the MVP pick. He may be the 4th best batter on his team.
Do we know who the NL MVP voters are this year?
It seems 20 years ago, it was always the writers for the local newspapers and they focused on things like HR and RBI. But somewhere policy changed and I see more and more analytics savvy BBWAA members voting.
My hunch is the final results will depend a lot if the Chicago writers get off the crazy “Rizzo for MVP” bandwagon.
I would vote for Votto, because he’s a national treasure of two nations, the league’s best hitter, and an absolutely delight in an interview. He’s also sorta dreamy in a way that no one outside of Bryant can claim.
Also, I’m a Reds fan. But that in no way, shape or form is coloring my opinion. I’m totally objective here.
I am not a reds fan. I agree with everything you said.
The upvotes of this post suggest that dual citizenship and being handsome are qualifications for MVP.
I didn’t realize I was redirected to Tiger Beat Graphs.
I think Votto is a legit MVP, but I’ll stick to the pertinent measures like not getting out.
I’m glad that you can see many angles of the MVP argument. So many writers focus on what people shouldn’t vote based on. Personally, if the team doesn’t make the playoffs I don’t feel there is any team value in what the player has done, only individual stat value and that is why there is a Hank Aaron award. So Votto and Stanton would be out. My vote would go to Goldschmidt or Arenado and either winning is well deserved. The dark horse should be Cody Bellinger, when he arrived the Dodgers were in trouble, but he came on board, came alive, and pushed that team to one of the hottest streaks in a long time.
Maybe it is the guy who lovesthe underdog in me, but my vote would go for Pham. He missed 6 weeks almost, and has battled injuries and eyesight issues his whole career. My vote is Tommy Pham.
I think Votto is the better underdog candidate.
saw Stanton hit #58 tonight. He gets up to 60 or more, he’s going to be awfully tough to beat I think.
Aaaaannnnnndddd #59.
The Rockies aren’t a playoff team yet, though. If they fall out of it, that will hurt Arenado’s and Blackmon’s chances.
Home runs alone are no longer something to be valued excessively. Goldschmidt’s consistently great all-around game plus the D-Backs terrific year are more than enough to qualify and he should get additional credit for doing it every year The very fact that Arenado, virtually identical in so many areas,, does not even show up on the WAR eliminates WAR from the discussion, as well as UZR. These flawed defensive metrics, UZR and DRS, so clearly at odds with each other, do make a person who still believes in the eye test, and yes Nolan Arenado passes every eye test, doubt the validity of these, and by association, many of the other metrics being touted as gospel.
You can say that, but the voters may very well have a totally different opinion on that. The fact that it’s every year is completely meaningless. The Award is based on 2017 and 2017 only.
Oh, and Stanton after tonight is up in that 6.7 group. If he has a huge weekend- getting up to 62 or 63 homers- he could very well lead the NL in WAR(he does already lead in bWAR very likely after tonight). He’s going to be a very difficult beat.
I am thinking more and more the winner will be whoever gets the most 2nd and 3rd place votes. There should be a sufficient split, that the order of the ballots will matter greatly.
yeah agree. I think that favors Stanton quite frankly- I think he’s going to be in the top 3-4 in almost every single ballot. I don’t think you can say the same about most all of the others.
If you were one of the “Dave Stewart sucks” people, never comment again. Seriously, get lost.
Dave Stewart sucks.
Revisit his record.
Meme addiction is curable …
What does “revisit his record” mean? Are you referring to his record as a GM, the thing that got him fired?
He was a pretty good pitcher back in the day, I guess
His record as GM.
He was fired prematurely, and the 2017 d-backs have his fingerprints all over them. They wouldn’t be in the playoffs without him.
“MVP is a bit of a joke. One guy does not make a team ‘a winner'”
– Derek Jeter
If stanton makes it to 60 Dongs he will probably win the Award unanimously:
And sadly shouldn’t even be on the ballot.
Gotta love the downvotes there, but there is a big difference between MVP and Offensive Player of the year. He can take that OPOY award with no argument. No playoffs, no value outside of individual stats. And individual stats is where the OPOY comes in.
You can say that, but the fact is that a lot of voters don’t see it that way. I mean last year where were the LA Angels? 74-88 and in 4th place in the AL West. But who won the MVP? That’s right, Mike Trout. Once again, folks here are talking about what they feel should be, and ignore what the reality of the voting is.
I don’t read the articles and join the discussions to say what I think the voters will do. It is about what I think is right and my opinion on it. If all we were doing here is trying to guess what the voters are going to do, that wouldn’t be any fun. It is about arguing what we think the voters Should do. Hell, the main reason I get involved in the MVP discussions is about the issue of the winner being in the playoffs vs. not. That is my main concern every year.
that’s fine as long as you understand that the voters just don’t see it the same way. It’s absolutely not been a disqualifier. We can talk until we’re blue in the face about what it should be. But what it should be and what it is- 2 completely different things.
It’s obvious the voters don’t see it that way, thus the issue each year. I’d really like to see a voter completely leave those players who don’t make the playoffs off their ballot.
1 thing that’ll be interesting with Stanton(and Judge some in the AL)- is how they’re batting 2nd. It’ll be interesting to see if that changes long term thinking for lineups. He’s got 47 homers this year batting 2nd- passing Eddie Matthews for most homers hit out of the #2 hole ever.
saw the nightly update- with that included Stanton is up to 6.9 and now #1 in NL WAR.
One of Goldschmidt’s problems is he’s fallen off a cliff in September. His WAR for September is a putrid -0.3. 51 wRC+. 4th worst player in NL by WAR and wRC+ for September. Can’t limp to the finish line like that.
Arizona was basically locked in to the 1st WC by September 1st. If people are going to give people points for performing when it matters most, they shouldn’t be dinging them for slumping when it doesn’t.
Goldy’s crunch time just happened to come in July and August.
while yes, the D’backs had a 6 game lead for the total WC spot they were only 3.5 up for the WC 1 slot. Hardly locked into the spot….
Final impressions matter in awards voting. Goldschmidt struggling in September matters big time. If he had done more than having a .192/.268/.342 slash line in September he may have had a lot more of a chance.
Part of it is Apr-Aug when he was going great- he had a .367 babip. In September he’s had a .220 babip. I really don’t think Goldschmidt has a real chance.
Too often I feel like peoples thoughts on awards are way too conflicted with what is reality. I mean last night you had someone say that HR alone are no longer something to be valued excessively. Or the AL Cy Young people on here who think Sale is really close- ignoring the fact that Kluber is up by almost 3/4 of a run in ERA. Folks confuse what they feel should be with what reality is. While I think there has been a slight change in what voters look at, guys with a top 10 all time homer total tip the scales every time, and pitcher who is ahead in ERA and wins will win every time. People can talk until they’re blue in the face about how it should be. But reality is that it’s not.
Charlie Blackmon is a below league average player on the road. Not just this year either but pretty much his entire career. Bryant, Votto, Stanton are all monsters regardless of home/away splits. Blackmon shouldn’t be in the discussion
I know the MVP on my fantasy team is Charlie Blackmon
Charlie Blackmon has a .784 road OPS
Jose Reyes has a .794 road OPS
Rendon would get my vote! He leads the league in all round value on a contender that has had a lot of reason to struggle, but hasn’t! If any of this was truly logical and fair he would easily be top 3 and I think he should win!
With all of their injuries they have dealt with this year both Rendon and Murphy should get some high votes. But the combination of Arenado and Blackmon should be ahead of them though.
2 words. Coors Field.
Minimal factor. A bigger factor are the pitching staffs.
He may not be this year’s MVP, but the one thing you simply cannot say about Arenado? That he’s not an elite defender.