Who is the 2017 Red Sox MVP?

Chris Sale

I agree it's Sale.

I think one could make a plausible argument for Kimbrel, and I think Pomeranz is deserving of the 10th Player Award, but I don't see it being anyone but Sale at this point.

EllisTheRimMan said:

75-57 with 30 games to go and there is no obvious answer.

Click to expand...

Yes there is.

Clearly Sale is 1, Kimbrell is 2. Pom 3???
After that? And on offense???????? Weak all around.... but no stinkers either (for starters).

Sale might very well end up the league MVP. I think it's safe to say he's the obvious choice for the team's...

Mr. Sale

Or Pedro

Just to be a contrarian, I'm going to make a case for Mookie.

BBRef WAR: 4.9 (Next highest is Bradley at 2.9)

Leads the team in games played, plate appearances, hits, runs, RBI, doubles, stolen bases and walks. Second in HR.

Plays every day.

But in my heart I know it's Sale. He made this a different ball club.

EllisTheRimMan said:

I voted Sale too, but there is an argument for the front office and the manager, given the contributions from so many different position players and pitchers.

Click to expand...

The front office and management staff aren't players.

And even if the were, the answer is Chris Sale.

We can hate on fWar all we want. But the metric is useful in a general sense. Sale's fWar is 7.4. Next closest is Betts at 3.9.

Sale and it's not even close.

35 votes cast and Sale has... 35. Lock this.

Is this a serious question?

Sale. He had two bad outings last week, and many (including me) panicked. Tonight's strong outing is yet another example of why he is the MVP.

Jordu said:

Just to be a contrarian, I'm going to make a case for Mookie.

BBRef WAR: 4.9 (Next highest is Bradley at 2.9)

Leads the team in games played, plate appearances, hits, runs, RBI, doubles, stolen bases and walks. Second in HR.

Plays every day.

But in my heart I know it's Sale. He made this a different ball club.

Click to expand...

I'm sure one day, far down the road, somebody who didn't actually spend even a second watching any of these games is going to look up those comparative BREF War totals (assuming it's still even in use) and make that same argument.

Otherwise it's Sale and it's not even close imo.

EllisTheRimMan said:

I am of the philosophy that a starting pitcher going every 5 days has an uphill climb to get a MVP nod. So, I don't think giving it to a pitcher is ever obvious.

Click to expand...

EllisTheRimMan said:

I voted Sale too, but there is an argument for the front office and the manager, given the contributions from so many different position players and pitchers.

Click to expand...

A starting pitcher has an uphill climb to be MVP ... but there's an argument to be made for two guys who never play a game?

Sale makes the most sense but I'll put an argument for Kimbrel. Given the late-inning woes that have occasionally plagued this team, Kimbrel's success rate at getting the last three outs to secure the win is a huge reason this team is still in 1st.

Still voting Sale, though.

Yeah, I appreciate the conversation starter approach, but it's the wrong question. Maybe limit it to offense, or do 'best surprise?/worst surprise?' or something. Sale is just too obvious here, hard to find the argument.

EllisTheRimMan said:

I am of the philosophy that a starting pitcher going every 5 days has an uphill climb to get a MVP nod. So, I don't think giving it to a pitcher is ever obvious.

Click to expand...

Baseball is becoming a game of strikeouts vs. home runs. A pitcher as good as Sale at getting K's and not giving up home runs ought to be at the forefront of league MVP discussion, not fighting for a seat at the table. The way the game is played now, I think he contributes more value than anyone else in the league, regardless of how many games he plays a year.

As for the team MVP, I think he's clear cut.

Sale , and its not even close. If not for his tough August, at least in terms of racking up Wins that some consider to be important, I thought he had a good shot at league MVP. A dominant September could put him back in although Kluber is making a good run for Cy Young/MVP as well

As for honorable mentions, other than Kimbrel there really is nobody. On the position player side guys like Benintendi, Pedroia, Betts, Vazquez, Nunez, Moreland, Devers have had some good stretches. But injuries, number of AB or long bad stretches make it hard to pick any of them

Jordu said:

Just to be a contrarian, I'm going to make a case for Mookie.

BBRef WAR: 4.9 (Next highest is Bradley at 2.9)

Leads the team in games played, plate appearances, hits, runs, RBI, doubles, stolen bases and walks. Second in HR.

Plays every day.

But in my heart I know it's Sale. He made this a different ball club.

Click to expand...

If you're going to use WAR, Sale leads the majors at 7.9 fWAR. The next closest is Rendon at 6.3 and this is before last night's game.

There isn't a credible argument for anyone but Sale no matter what you look at. Even if you're the kind who thinks that a starting pitcher has an up hill climb, it's still not close.

Edit: Though, interestingly enough, he only has 4.9 rWAR which immediately brings to mind the Joe Pos article from last year about Porcello and Verlander and why Verlander's lead in rWAR didn't mean he was the better pitcher.

http://joeposnanski.com/porcello-v-verlander/

Scherzer has the lead in rWAR (for all of the majors) with 7.1, but since baseball-reference.com doesn't attempt to work defense and luck out of their pitcher WAR totals the way that fangraphs.com does, I'm not sure that means all that much.

If you didn't read the Pos piece last year, it's worth it even now. Maybe even especially now, since we're seeing the same kind of effect with Sale's fWAR and rWAR this year, and it serves as a great, accessible and easy to understand primer on pitching-WAR.

While Sale is the MVP, Pom has been the "key" to the season, if you will

tims4wins said:

While Sale is the MVP, Pom has been the "key" to the season, if you will

Click to expand...

This....Sale and Pomeranz have been what we hoped Sale and Price would be.

Sale, the soon to be Cy Young award winner. Most dominant pitcher we've had since vintage Pedro.

Yeah, this isn't even a real question.

I'm starting a new poll for the #2, which might be an interesting debate.

EllisTheRimMan said:

I am of the philosophy that a starting pitcher going every 5 days has an uphill climb to get a MVP nod. So, I don't think giving it to a pitcher is ever obvious.

Click to expand...

Sure.

But the vote at this moment is 113-2. I'd say it's obvious for this team.

Jordu said:

Just to be a contrarian, I'm going to make a case for Mookie.

Click to expand...

What a weird year for Mookie:

0 men on: 686 OPS
Men on: .940 OPS
RISP: 1.018 OPS. His OBP is .467.

EllisTheRimMan said:

I voted Sale too, but there is an argument for the front office and the manager, given the contributions from so many different position players and pitchers.

Click to expand...

This is one of the strangest things I've seen posted in a while. Arguably the best player in all of baseball has an argument for team MVP, and the manager who continually looks lost may be more valuable? And he has a case but Sale's is weakened by the fact that he only plays every five games?

This team would be struggling to get the second wild card without Sale, and may have a bigger division lead without Farrell. It's not even something to debate. Sale is clearly the answer.

I agree on Sale. Anyone else concerned that his ERA for September is a pedestrian 3.82?

So much for the answer not being obvious. Glad we are all in unison on this one. It is pretty cut and dry.

EllisTheRimMan said:

Yes, if you have an ounce of non-linear thinking ability.

Sure, a starting pitcher is the hands down unanimous MVP of the 2017 Sox. This is not usually an obvious/unanimous pick for a first place team and clearly one of the 4 best in MLB... maybe even second best. For you and everyone else being so pedantic, I suggest that the obviousness is not nearly as uninteresting as you make it seem. The overwhelming support for Sale says a lot about the other 24 players on the roster and it's construction. Especially the players who play every day. It's an observation of the unique construction/evolution of this team, this year. I'm at a loss to recall any team like it.

Click to expand...

It has nothing to do with the other 24 players and everything to do with just how amazing a season Chris Sale is actually having. I guess if Betts was on pace for another 9 WAR season.

EllisTheRimMan said:

I am of the philosophy that a starting pitcher going every 5 days has an uphill climb to get a MVP nod. So, I don't think giving it to a pitcher is ever obvious.

Click to expand...

An "every day" player is only involved in about 1/9th of his team's at bats while a starting pitcher is involved in all of his opponent's. Sale has been involved in nearly 200 more plate appearances than, for example, Mookie has. Mookie has been involved in many more defensive plays, but I always feel like the "every fifth day" argument ignores how much more of the games that he's in that the pitcher is responsible for than the every day player.

DennyDoyle'sBoil said:

An "every day" player is only involved in about 1/9th of his team's at bats while a starting pitcher is involved in all of his opponent's. Sale has been involved in nearly 200 more plate appearances than, for example, Mookie has. Mookie has been involved in many more defensive plays, but I always feel like the "every fifth day" argument ignores how much more of the games that he's in that the pitcher is responsible for than the every day player.

Click to expand...

Its always tough though, because pitchers also don't typically go 9 innings. So, say you pro-rate Sale because, say, he goes 6.5 innings on average (random guess). That still leaves 1.5-2.5 innings per game that have to go to relievers, while Betts is still (presumably) out there. Point is, the whole thing is hard to quantify, which is why advanced metrics do the best they can, even if its imperfect.

There's also the bias that "pitchers shouldn't get the MVP because they have the Cy Young award" which I think is ridiculous, but is still an issue for many sportswriters.

EllisTheRimMan said:

Your reply does not address the view that this team is unique in its success. Thanks for adding a platitude about how awesome sauce Sale has been. Lots of interesting debate will sure be stimulated around that nugget.

Click to expand...

Your poll has Sale getting greater than 95% of the vote. There's agreement here ... with little need for debate, "interesting" or otherwise.

Mocking the responses you've received is not a good look.

glennhoffmania said:

This is one of the strangest things I've seen posted in a while. Arguably the best player in all of baseball has an argument for team MVP, and the manager who continually looks lost may be more valuable? And he has a case but Sale's is weakened by the fact that he only plays every five games?

This team would be struggling to get the second wild card without Sale, and may have a bigger division lead without Farrell. It's not even something to debate. Sale is clearly the answer.

Click to expand...

I see a lineup filled with league-average offense, an ace pitcher and an unstable staff of solids with a bullpen of, outside Kimbrel, relative mediocrity and he's going to be at worst 4.5 up on the division on 9/1. His aggressive baserunning has yielded big runs, particularly recently when the whole team is in a general funk. Results mean something.

I vote Sale too, obviously.

EllisTheRimMan said:

I am of the philosophy that a starting pitcher going every 5 days has an uphill climb to get a MVP nod. So, I don't think giving it to a pitcher is ever obvious.

Click to expand...

The Red Sox are 19-8 in games started by Sale. If those games had all been started by an average pitcher, how many would they have won? I'll answer for you. Given the team's distribution of runs scored in the 27 games started by Sale, the most likely outcome would have been 13 wins and 14 losses.

Would the Red Sox have won 6 fewer games if any of their everyday players was replaced by an average player? Obviously, the answer is no. Perhaps you should reconsider your philosophy.

EllisTheRimMan said:

Yes, if you have an ounce of non-linear thinking ability.

Sure, a starting pitcher is the hands down unanimous MVP of the 2017 Sox. This is not usually an obvious/unanimous pick for a first place team and clearly one of the 4 best in MLB... maybe even second best. For you and everyone else being so pedantic, I suggest that the obviousness is not nearly as uninteresting as you make it seem. The overwhelming support for Sale says a lot about the other 24 players on the roster and it's construction. Especially the players who play every day. It's an observation of the unique construction/evolution of this team, this year. I'm at a loss to recall any team like it.

Click to expand...

What is the non-linear explanation for what the "P" stands for in "MVP"?

Anyone else noticed the Vazquez has gotten his OPS up to almost 750? Combined with his defensive chops, that makes him a pretty damned valuable player. I wouldn't rate him #1, but top 5? I think so.

EllisTheRimMan said:

Your reply does not address the view that this team is unique in its success. Thanks for adding a platitude about how awesome sauce Sale has been. Lots of interesting debate will sure be stimulated around that nugget.

Click to expand...

Except it isn't even all that unique. Good pitching wins baseball games? No way. Plus there is zero debate here. Your original statement is "this team has no clear cut MVP" and you were clearly wrong. Back track all you want. We are just used to the Redsox building more around the offense.

Wake's knuckle said:

Anyone else noticed the Vazquez has gotten his OPS up to almost 750? Combined with his defensive chops, that makes him a pretty damned valuable player. I wouldn't rate him #1, but top 5? I think so.

Click to expand...

According to the numbers, he's been a completely average defensive catcher this year. It's Leon that is the one with the defensive chops. They've offered similar overall value according to WAR.

A thought experiment occurred to me last night because of this thread. Imagine two really good position players who add about 5 wins above replacement or maybe 3.75 wins above average over the course of a year. One does it consistently with baserunning, defense, and better than average hitter. One is more of a one-tool player who hits lots of home runs.

Let's say they both are good for about +50 runs a year, give or take. One consistently adds about a third of a run per game, night in night out. One is very silent or downright negative most nights, with lots of nonproductive outs, but one in every five days is good for + 1.5 runs. Maybe he has two games in a row of great production, sandwiched by 8 of nothing, roughly. At the end of the year, whatever your favorite metric for value added, they've added exactly the same number of runs adjusted for all the factors you view relevant. Let's call one of them Aaron Judge and one of them Mookie Betts.

Is one obviously more valuable than the other? Putting Judge in the equation is almost certainly going to detract from the point I'm trying to make, because he has not added his value consistently every fifth day, but instead has been a tale of two halves. But, for purposes of the thought experiment, imagine he has spread it out more over the course of the year.

I don't know that the answer is obvious. Even in a short elimination series, I don't know that the answer is obvious. I do know that we never (rarely?) question position players whose win added distribution is clumpy like we do starting pitchers.

Streaky hitters offer more value than consistent hitters but that's not the same thing you are asking. I think the answer would be the player adding 1.5 runs every every 5th day would be more valuable because he could possibly win you a baseball game every 5th day by himself.