61 replies to this topic

[santadevil]

Wow, the humbleness of Robinson Cano is extraordinary.

This ESPN article doesn't appear that he's speaking tongue-in-cheek.


I really think that Verlander should win, but if he doesn't, Granderson should probably win.

[rembrat]

Yea, Robinson Cano is dumb.

[Snodgrass'Muff]

Yea, Robinson Cano is dumb.

10th in fWAR (Ellsbury has a .6 lead on Bautista for 1st, ftr), 10th in wRC+ (Ellsbury is 6th), 9th in OPS (Ellsbury is 6th), 8th in AVG (Ellsbury is 5th), tied for 15th in HR (Ellsbury is tied for 9th), tied for 2nd in RBI (Ellsbury is tied for 8th).

He has a slight advantage in runs batted in, otherwise is trailing Ellsbury in everything else. Granderson is probably a better candidate with his being 2nd in HR, 1st in RBI, 5th in wRC+ and 4th in fWAR, but his 270 average will probably take some votes from him, fair or not.

I think Ellsbury has a real claim to it, though.

[tims4wins]

Probably not the right thread for this, but with the Sox collapse and Verlander winning however many in a row he has, I could see him winning.

[Snodgrass'Muff]

Probably not the right thread for this, but with the Sox collapse and Verlander winning however many in a row he has, I could see him winning.

If Pedro didn't win, Verlander won't.

[BigMike]

Probably not the right thread for this, but with the Sox collapse and Verlander winning however many in a row he has, I could see him winning.

I have to think it is between Granderson and Verlander at this point. Personally I think it is Verlander in a walk

[tims4wins]

If Pedro didn't win, Verlander won't.

Pedro didn't win because of the hypocritical George King. That won't happen this year.

Edit: by which I mean, King included David Wells and Rick Helling on hs MVP ballot in 1998, and then left Pedro completely off in 1999 due to his own personal agenda of not voting for a Red Sox because he was a Yankee fan. That asshole can burn in hell for all of eternity for denying the greatest pitcher of this generation having the greatest season of his career the honor of being recognized as the best, most valuable, most dominant player in the league.

Edited by tims4wins, 22 September 2011 - 04:53 PM.

[E5 Yaz]

I really think it's Granderson

[Mike Greenwall]

Pedro didn't win because of the hypocritical George King. That won't happen this year.

Edit: by which I mean, King included David Wells and Rick Helling on hs MVP ballot in 1998, and then left Pedro completely off in 1999 due to his own personal agenda of not voting for a Red Sox because he was a Yankee fan. That asshole can burn in hell for all of eternity for denying the greatest pitcher of this generation having the greatest season of his career the honor of being recognized as the best, most valuable, most dominant player in the league.

I did not know the back story. Thanks. I was totally shocked Pedro did not win.

Granderson will win. Tacoby should win.

[BannedbyNYYFans.com]

Yeah but he has a great arm and turns more double plays than Pedroia.

[Wingack]

I really think it's Granderson

Granderson is putting up some historic numbers. Plus I think that he plays the storied position of centerfield for the New York Yankees will vet him some bonus points.

[priestvalon]

I think that while the common wisdom is actually Verlander with that gaudy win total, it really could be Granderson. Lots of writers of the opinion that pitchers get their own award category, and that position players are just more valuable than any pitcher, period.

[Orel Miraculous]

Granderson is putting up some historic numbers.

He is? Shit, how many asterisks are there in the MLB record books?

[jon abbey]

I have to think it is between Granderson and Verlander at this point. Personally I think it is Verlander in a walk

This is what I think too.

[WayBackVazquez]

Granderson is putting up some historic numbers. Plus I think that he plays the storied position of centerfield for the New York Yankees will vet him some bonus points.

Historic how? He's having a good season, but no better than about 5 Griffey (for example if you mean historic for a CF) had.

[Orel Miraculous]

Historic how? He's having a good season, but no better than about 5 Griffey (for example if you mean historic for a CF) had.

Why even bother going all the way back to Griffey? There's 2 other contemporary centerfielders having a better year than him right now.

[WayBackVazquez]

Why even bother going all the way back to Griffey? There's 2 other contemporary centerfielders having a better year than him right now.

Because I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt with respect to "numbers." Ells and Kemp aren't putting up the R, RBI, and HR numbers that Granderson is, but Griffey sure did. On much worse teams.

[Brickowski]

IMHO Adrian Gonzalez has been more valuable to the Red Sox than Ellsbury. I don't believe Ellsbury should even be in the conversation for MVP.

The real MVP is Verlander, but as we all know he may have to settle for the Cy Young. If Verlander does not win it, I think it is a 3-way race between Gonzalez, Granderson and Cano.

Yes, I think that Cano is just as valuable as Granderson, given the outstanding defense that Cano plays at a more demanding position.

[WayBackVazquez]

IMHO Adrian Gonzalez has been more valuable to the Red Sox than Ellsbury. I don't believe Ellsbury should even be in the conversation for MVP.

The real MVP is Verlander, but as we all know he may have to settle for the Cy Young. If Verlander does not win it, I think it is a 3-way race between Gonzalez, Granderson and Cano.

Yes, I think that Cano is just as valuable as Granderson, given the outstanding defense that Cano plays at a more demanding position.

I LOLed.

[Brickowski]

I LOLed.

LOL? I'm old enough to have seen Mazeroski, Nelson Fox, Grich and some others, and I haven't seen anyone turn the DP as well as Cano. Did you see the two plays that ended the game the other night?

Granderson is a good CF, but he's not in Cano's class defensively.

[WayBackVazquez]

LOL? I'm old enough to have seen Mazeroski, Nelson Fox, Grich and some others, and I haven't seen anyone turn the DP as well as Cano.

OH, why didn't you say that in the first place?

[rembrat]

For the last time, turning the double play means dick.

[Snodgrass'Muff]

IMHO Adrian Gonzalez has been more valuable to the Red Sox than Ellsbury. I don't believe Ellsbury should even be in the conversation for MVP.

Can we go back to this statement for a moment? Can you please justify this with some evidence?

[Brickowski]

Can we go back to this statement for a moment? Can you please justify this with some evidence?

Well, look at OPS, OPS+ etc. Ellsbury has had a great year, but who would you rather face with the game on the line?

As for DPs meaning dick, does that mean that catching fly balls means more?

Edited by Brickowski, 22 September 2011 - 07:49 PM.

[Snodgrass'Muff]

Well, look at OPS, OPS+ etc. Ellsbury has had a great year, but who would you rather face with the game on the line?

As for DPs meaning dick, does that mean that catching fly balls means more?

By most advanced metrics, Ellsbury is right there with Gonzalez (and anyone else not named Bautista) offensively, and when you incorporate defensive metrics (flawed as they are, they aren't useless), he pulls ahead. He leads the majors in fWAR and is 3rd in rWAR behind Bautista and Verlander. He's had a solid year defensively at a very demanding defensive position... much more so than Gonzalez or Cano, and has run circles around Granderson defensively, while keeping within sniffing distance offensively by pretty much any advanced metric.

If you want to point to "traditional" metrics, he trails only Gonzalez in BA among MVP candidates, is one of the 8 AL players with a better than .900 OPS sitting roughly as far back of Granderson as Granderson is of Gonzalez (Cano is at .891, which removes him from consideration by your logic), and is close enough in home runs and runs batted in that his 37 stolen bases can certainly close any perceived gap.

There isn't really any statistical evidence that Ellsbury doesn't belong in the conversation. In fact, he's arguably had the most valuable season* of any AL player.

Note: Verlander deserves the award, but I just don't see it going to a pitcher, no matter how dominant he's been.

Edited by Snodgrass'Muff, 22 September 2011 - 09:14 PM.

[billy ashley]

He should get it, it would be funny for the fourth best 2b baseman in the league to win the MVP...


Really, I have no idea who's going to get it in the AL. Verlander would be dumb, he's had a great season but he really hasn't been that much better than Sabathia, and I find it difficult to believe he's had more of an impact than the wide range of awesome offensive contributors this season (Ellsbury, Bautista, Pedroia, Granderson, and Gonzalez. I'm fine with pitchers winning the award, but as awesome as Verlander has been this season, he hasn't really been that much better than the last several Cy Youngs and I'd argue that we've had a stronger than usual field of position players this year.

Edited by billy ashley, 22 September 2011 - 10:20 PM.

[glennhoffmania]

What is the point of talking about advanced metrics when trying to predict the MVP when the writers think they're being progressive when they consider OBP?

[Bob420]

Pedro didn't win because of the hypocritical George King. That won't happen this year.

Edit: by which I mean, King included David Wells and Rick Helling on hs MVP ballot in 1998, and then left Pedro completely off in 1999 due to his own personal agenda of not voting for a Red Sox because he was a Yankee fan. That asshole can burn in hell for all of eternity for denying the greatest pitcher of this generation having the greatest season of his career the honor of being recognized as the best, most valuable, most dominant player in the league.

Greatest season of his career until the next year. Pedro was amazing.

[tims4wins]

Greatest season of his career until the next year. Pedro was amazing.

True - his 2000 was arguably better than his 1999. But 99 was transcendent due to the 15-1 start, the All Star game in Fenway, etc. 313 K to 37 BB. I have those numbers memorized for life.

[Snodgrass'Muff]

What is the point of talking about advanced metrics when trying to predict the MVP when the writers think they're being progressive when they consider OBP?

Well, the point is that Ellsbury has had a better season than Gonzalez and deserves consideration. Even his "traditional" stats should get him some notice. It's not like he has had Dustin Pedroia's 2008 season with 20 home runs and 88 runs batted in... which still won the MVP. I thin you're underestimating the voters a little here. They're behind the curve, certainly, but they've shown significant growth in the last few years when it comes to the MVP and Cy Young awards.

I'm not arguing that it would be surprising to see Granderson win. He's had a great year and wouldn't even be unworthy. But Ellsbury not getting any consideration would be shocking. And specifically in response to Brickowski's claim that Gonzalez was a front runner but Ellsbury is not, Gonzalez doesn't even really have a huge advantage in traditional stats where he's actually trailing Ells in home runs.

I just think it was a ridiculous statement to make.

[glennhoffmania]

Well, the point is that Ellsbury has had a better season than Gonzalez and deserves consideration. Even his "traditional" stats should get him some notice. It's not like he has had Dustin Pedroia's 2008 season with 20 home runs and 88 runs batted in... which still won the MVP. I thin you're underestimating the voters a little here. They're behind the curve, certainly, but they've shown significant growth in the last few years when it comes to the MVP and Cy Young awards.

I'm not arguing that it would be surprising to see Granderson win. He's had a great year and wouldn't even be unworthy. But Ellsbury not getting any consideration would be shocking. And specifically in response to Brickowski's claim that Gonzalez was a front runner but Ellsbury is not, Gonzalez doesn't even really have a huge advantage in traditional stats where he's actually trailing Ells in home runs.

I just think it was a ridiculous statement to make.

Oh I agree that Brickowski's point was ridiculous. A case can be made for either Gonzalez or Ellsbury based on the traditional stats, and I think that should be the main argument. I really don't see many of the voters referencing WAR, UZR, etc. BA, RBIs, HRs, SBs, Runs, OBP, SLG and "what their eyes tell them about defensive ability" seems to be the extent of their criteria.

[Snodgrass'Muff]

Oh I agree that Brickowski's point was ridiculous. A case can be made for either Gonzalez or Ellsbury based on the traditional stats, and I think that should be the main argument. I really don't see many of the voters referencing WAR, UZR, etc. BA, RBIs, HRs, SBs, Runs, OBP, SLG and "what their eyes tell them about defensive ability" seems to be the extent of their criteria.

For the most part, yes. But enough of them looked beyond RBIs and HRs enough to vote Pedroia as the MVP in 2008, though the field had far less "big numbers" guys that year. But just for comparison's sake:

Pedroia: .326/.376/.493 17 HR, 83 RBI, 118 R, 20 SB, .869 OPS
Ellsbury: .319/.374/.539 28 HR, 98 RBI, 114 R, 37 SB, .913 OPS (with 6 left to play)

It's also worth noting that Pedroia's line this year is better than his 2008 above. Anyway, I think Ellsbury has a decent shot, especially when you consider the "more valuable to his team" vote, which might see the scuffling Sox as needing Ells more than the coasting Yanks needed Granderson.

[glennhoffmania]

I also think that Pedroia won that year because the voters considered the fact that he put up those numbers as a 2B, along with your point that there weren't many other big numbers that year.

[Snodgrass'Muff]

I also think that Pedroia won that year because the voters considered the fact that he put up those numbers as a 2B, along with your point that there weren't many other big numbers that year.

Wouldn't Ellsbury being a center fielder, and a good defensive one observationally, help him just as much?

[cheekydave]

Just curious why Miguel Cabrera gets zero consideration?

[glennhoffmania]

Wouldn't Ellsbury being a center fielder, and a good defensive one observationally, help him just as much?

Yes. You keep thinking that I'm arguing against Ellsbury winning. I'm not. My only point was that he may win it based on traditional stats, but not stuff like WAR and UZR.

[Snodgrass'Muff]

Yes. You keep thinking that I'm arguing against Ellsbury winning. I'm not. My only point was that he may win it based on traditional stats, but not stuff like WAR and UZR.

Ah, sorry for misreading you, then.

[SumnerH]

Just curious why Miguel Cabrera gets zero consideration?

He's terrible defensively, and he's not the best player strictly offensively. So he loses out in pretty straightforward comparisons both to people who ignore defense (to Bautista) and to those who value it (to A-Gon, among others--I pick him because the positional comparison is easy).

[BannedbyNYYFans.com]

For the last time, turning the double play means dick.

I hope you realize I was being facetious on the previous page. Mocking the person in the Yankee game thread the other day who re-iterated that point over and over.

[rembrat]

I hope you realize I was being facetious on the previous page. Mocking the person in the Yankee game thread the other day who re-iterated that point over and over.

Totally. I was responding to Brick, who by all accounts, is dead serious. I should use the quote feature more often.

[Brickowski]

Anyway, I think Ellsbury has a decent shot, especially when you consider the "more valuable to his team" vote, which might see the scuffling Sox as needing Ells more than the coasting Yanks needed Granderson.

Err... Maybe one of the reasons why the Yankees are coasting is because of Granderson's run production? And maybe some folks might consider that valuable?

[Snodgrass'Muff]

Err... Maybe one of the reasons why the Yankees are coasting is because of Granderson's run production? And maybe some folks might consider that valuable?

Sure, but the Yankees aren't fighting for a post season spot right now and there always seems to be a swell of support for a player in a situation like that. I'm not saying Ellsbury is the odds on favorite (he's not), but he might get a bit of the... sympathy vote, for lack of a better term, because his team is in dire straits right now.

If he has a few big hits in the next week or so, it'll do wonders for his chances. Meanwhile, anything Granderson does will go largely unnoticed since the Yankees have already locked up the division. It's a matter of additional exposure.

Edited by Snodgrass'Muff, 24 September 2011 - 11:33 AM.

[Brickowski]

Yes, if Ellsbury gets hot for the rest of the regular season-- and in the playoffs (assuming the Sox make it), then I would be more inclined to view him as a viable MVP candidate. While it would certainly be possible for any player to win the MVP with a monster statistical season, in my mind a "most valuable player" has to deliver when the games matter. Granderson delivered throughout August and through the first three weeks of September. That's when it mattered for the Yankees.

As to how the voters will view all of this, who knows?

[Snodgrass'Muff]

Well, you're flat out wrong if you think Ellsbury isn't currently a viable candidate. Again, by traditional or advanced metrics, he's right there with anyone offensively and has a rep as a great defensive center fielder, something Granderson doesn't have. Your continued insistence that Ellsbury isn't a viable candidate smacks of homerism or ignorance... or maybe a bit of both.

The numbers are there, take 15 seconds to look at them. If you think Cano is a viable candidate (as you stated earlier in the thread) for his offensive numbers, you cannot ignore Ellsbury, who is better in every way except RBIs. And his SB total (37 to 8) more than makes up for 18 RBIs.

Edited by Snodgrass'Muff, 24 September 2011 - 12:19 PM.

[Brickowski]

I see Ellsbury's numbers, but IMHO the Red Sox' most valuable player this year has been Adrian Gonzalez, who also has pretty good numbers.

[BellhornIsGod]

Yes, if Ellsbury gets hot for the rest of the regular season-- and in the playoffs (assuming the Sox make it), then I would be more inclined to view him as a viable MVP candidate. While it would certainly be possible for any player to win the MVP with a monster statistical season, in my mind a "most valuable player" has to deliver when the games matter. Granderson delivered throughout August and through the first three weeks of September. That's when it mattered for the Yankees.

As to how the voters will view all of this, who knows?

But Ellsbury has far outperformed Granderson recently, despite the fact that the Yankees are far outperforming the Sox.

At the start of September the Sox led the Yankees by 1.5 games, they are now 7 games behind. But in the month of September the numbers look like:

Granderson: 19 games, .250AVG/.354OBP/.471SLG (.825OPS) 6 DBLS 0 TRPL 3 HRS 12RBI 11 R 0 STL. But the Yankees have gone 13-7.

Ellsbury: 21 gales, .352AVG/.394OBP/.615SLG (1.009OPS) 10 DBLS 1TRPL 4HRS 14RBI 17 R 1STL. But the Red Sox have gone 5-16.

Granderson is not the main proponent, or even a top 5, of why the Yankees have made up 8.5 games on the Sox. And Ellsbury sure as hell isn't the reason the Sox have lost 8.5 games.

Unless you think Granderson is the reason the Yankees pitching staff is outperforming the Sox by so much. Or that Ellsbury is the reason that Lackey, Miller, Weiland, Wakefield and the the majority of the bullpen suddenly turned to shit (or continued being shit).

[rembrat]

I like this line from The Onion's write up

With his impressive run production numbers, Granderson has kept a team with only a handful of All-Stars and future Hall of Famers afloat in the AL East

Just to be clear, I think Granderson has had a monster year and will probably win it. But I also think that if you think that Ellsbury doesn't deserve to be in the conversation then you are a fuckwad homer.

[Toe Nash]

I see Ellsbury's numbers, but IMHO the Red Sox' most valuable player this year has been Adrian Gonzalez, who also has pretty good numbers.

Adrian Gonzalez should probably be in the MVP discussion too. There can be more than one MVP candidate from each team, believe it or not.

[Snodgrass'Muff]

Adrian Gonzalez should probably be in the MVP discussion too. There can be more than one MVP candidate from each team, believe it or not.

Plus, there aren't many statistics that would value Gonzalez as more valuable than Ellsbury this year. And since Brickowski is so fond of coming up big when it "matters most" let's look at how they did with men in scoring position.

Ellsbury: .446 wOBA, .364 AVG, 72 RBIs
Gonzalez: .330 wOBA, .343 AVG, 82 RBIs

So, despite hitting with the drek of the order in front of him, he's only 10 RBIs behind Gonzalez when men are in scoring position in front of him, with a better average (that takes care of traditional stats) and a much higher wOBA (for a more advanced look.)

How about high leverage situatons?

Ellsbury: .420 wOBA, .373 AVG, 19 RBIs
Gonzalez: .392 wOBA, .347 AVG, 18 RBIs

Again, Ellsbury looks better through traditional and advanced metrics.

Since coming up big "when it matters most" seems to be your key criteria, you can't consider Gonzalez a contender and Ellsbury not. Gonzalez actually hasn't come up as big as Ellsbury in those situations, despite the advantage of hitting 3rd in the line up and having Ellsbury and Pedroia getting on base for him for most of the season.

Edited by Snodgrass'Muff, 24 September 2011 - 12:46 PM.

[Brickowski]

On the other hand, Ellsbury may have benefitted from having Pedroia and Gonzalez hitting behind him. It may have been easier to pitch arouind Gonzalez, especially after Youkilis got hurt.

LOL, I'm watching NY Boston right now and the Yankees has no problem pitching around Ellsbury with Crawford hitting behind him. So if you put Crawford in the 2-hole, my analysis falls apart.

Edited by Brickowski, 24 September 2011 - 04:07 PM.