The insane MVP voting in 1999...and why Pedro is the GOAT

[BaseballJones]

1999 was a crazy year in MLB when it came to the stats and the MVP voting. First, here's the top 18 in MVP voting in each league, then I'll offer some comments.





Ok so first things first. It's a travesty that Ivan Rodriguez won the MVP that year. Great player, obviously, who had a really good season. 6.4 WAR is nothing to sneeze at. But he finished 6th in WAR in the AL.

Manny hit 9 more homers, drove in 52 more runs, scored 15 more runs, had a .191 higher ops, and had 0.9 more WAR than Rodriguez, yet finished third. Griffey hit 48 homers, drove in 134 runs, scored 123, and had an ops of .960...and finished TENTH. ARod had 42 homers, drove in 111 runs, and finished *15th*. Insane.

In the NL, you had two guys hit 60+ homers (McGwire with 65 and Sosa with 63) and they finished a very distant 5th and 9th, respectively. I mean, McGwire hit 65 homers, drove in 147, and had an ops of 1.120 and finished fifth. Crazy. Larry Walker had 37 homers, 115 rbi, and slashed .379/.458/.710/1.168 and finished TENTH.

I'm not even saying all the voting was out of whack. It's just that the offensive era these guys played in was just bonkers. Just compare McGwire's stats with Judge's 2024:

1999 McGwire: 118 r, 65 hr, 147 rbi, 1.120 ops, 5.2 WAR
2024 Judge: 122 r, 58 hr, 144 rbi, 1.159 ops, 10.8 WAR

Very similar numbers, but Judge's 2024 season was worth more than twice what McGwire's was. I know position matters (CF vs. 1b) but man, that's bonkers.

The last - and most important - point is the greatness of Pedro Martinez. In an era when these guys were putting up absolutely insane offensive numbers, look what Pedro did.

23-4, 2.07 era, 313 k, 1.39 fip (!), 243 era+, 0.92 whip, 13.2 k/9, and 9.8 WAR, which was 3.4 more WAR than Rodriguez. He was the only pitcher to receive more than 21 vote points. Of the top 13 point getters in the AL, only one was a pitcher (Pedro). And in the NL, the top 14 point getters were all hitters.

So amidst all this unbelievable offense stood one pitcher, Pedro F-ing Martinez.

And the crazy thing is... he might have been even better in 2000.

 

[Kliq]

I go back and look at MVP voting results all the time and think about how people must have voted back then. Most of the time it comes down to someone winning the batting title or driving in the most runs, and playing for a good team. So many of the stats we use to evaluate players now simply were not used, or were non-existent so its hard to blame voters.

The peak of the roid era was truly insane--just going through the different rosters and seeing how much the OPS+ stat is skewered is always funny, like Carl Everett with a .969 OPS and an OPS+ of just 146--this year that would probably be around 170+.

Because of how stupidly high the hitting stats in that era were, nobody is touching Pedro's run of ERA+ dominance over his peak stretch. It's the perfect storm of an all-time pitcher hitting his peak while the offensive stats around the league were at an all-time high (and pitching in a hitters park!). I do wonder if you plucked other all-time great pitchers and dumped them into the late 90s if they could approach Pedro status. Maddux was close, but his peak (the early-mid 90s) was just before the offense reached its peak--by the late 90s he was still an ace but not quite at his peak.

 

[BaseballJones]

Just look at these numbers - era, ERA+

1968 Gibson: 1.12 era, 258 era+
1966 Koufax: 1.73 era, 190 era+
1994 Maddux: 1.56 era, 271 era+
1972 Carlton: 1.97 era, 182 era+
2002 Johnson: 2.32 era, 195 era+
1971 Seaver: 1.76 era, 194 era+
1990 Clemens: 1.93 era, 211 era+
2014 Kershaw: 1.77 era, 197 era+

Now Pedro in 1999 and 2000

1999 Pedro: 2.07 era, 243 era+
2000 Pedro: 1.74 era, 291 era+

Pedro's 2000 season was just so so much better given the era in which he was pitching. 291 era+??? That's beyond absurd. Even though as a raw era, it was much worse than 1968 Gibson, relative to the eras they were in, Pedro's 1.74 was way, way better than Gibson's 1.12, which is crazy. But true.

 

[NYCSox]

Wasn't 1999 the season that fuckwad George King refused to vote for Pedro because he's just a starting pitcher when he had previously voted for some MFY starter?

 

[BaseballJones]

Wasn't 1999 the season that fuckwad George King refused to vote for Pedro because he's just a starting pitcher when he had previously voted for some MFY starter?

Yes, and here's what he wrote in his defense.

"Martinez, who wasn’t among the 54 voices on my answering service so I know he isn’t hacked off, is a pitcher. In the past I have included hurlers on my MVP ballot. However, after listening to respected baseball people at last year’s Winter Meetings grouse about giving $105 million to a pitcher (Kevin Brown) who would work in about 25 percent of the Dodgers’ games, I adopted the philosophy that pitchers — especially starters — could never be included in the MVP race.

Furthermore, pitchers have their own award, the Cy Young, something position players aren’t eligible for. Martinez, the AL Cy Young winner, appeared in 29 games this year for the Red Sox. That’s 18 percent of Boston’s games. For all of Martinez’ brilliance, shortstop Nomar Garciaparra was more valuable to the Red Sox. So, too, was manager Jimy Williams, the AL Manager of the Year....

No the reason I put Jeter on top is because he is the AL MVP. Ivan Rodriguez may have won it, but again everybody else has it wrong except me.

You want to howl about balloting injustice? Try Jeter getting one first-place vote? He led the league in hits (219), multi-hit games (67), finished second in batting average (.349) as well as runs scored (134) and is far above average in the field. Without Jeter the Yankees don’t win the AL East. That’s why he is the MVP, not a pitcher who worked in less than a quarter of his team’s’ games."


So..... Jimy Williams was more valuable to the Red Sox in 1999 than Pedro Martinez was? You could actually have made a case for Jeter (8.0 WAR that year) but holy smokes.

 

[Kliq]

Just look at these numbers - era, ERA+

1968 Gibson: 1.12 era, 258 era+
1966 Koufax: 1.73 era, 190 era+
1994 Maddux: 1.56 era, 271 era+
1972 Carlton: 1.97 era, 182 era+
2002 Johnson: 2.32 era, 195 era+
1971 Seaver: 1.76 era, 194 era+
1990 Clemens: 1.93 era, 211 era+
2014 Kershaw: 1.77 era, 197 era+

Now Pedro in 1999 and 2000

1999 Pedro: 2.07 era, 243 era+
2000 Pedro: 1.74 era, 291 era+

Pedro's 2000 season was just so so much better given the era in which he was pitching. 291 era+??? That's beyond absurd. Even though as a raw era, it was much worse than 1968 Gibson, relative to the eras they were in, Pedro's 1.74 was way, way better than Gibson's 1.12, which is crazy. But true.

Maddux had a 271 ERA+ in 1994 and then a 260 ERA+ in 1995.

For the late-1960s guys, it does bring into question, even with optimal pitching conditions, how low an ERA can really go? Gibson had 13 shutouts in 1968--it would seem impossible for a pitcher to be more efficient, regardless of conditions. The fact that Gibson had a 258 ERA+ in an era where it was harder to have a high ERA+ because of the pitching standards around the league is actually more impressive than Pedro's 291 ERA+, in my opinion. That's only just talking about ERA+, Pedro might have very well had the more impressive season, but the quirks of ERA+ make it pretty difficult for any pitcher to match Pedro's 2000.

 

[BaseballJones]

Maddux had a 271 ERA+ in 1994 and then a 260 ERA+ in 1995.

For the late-1960s guys, it does bring into question, even with optimal pitching conditions, how low an ERA can really go? Gibson had 13 shutouts in 1968--it would seem impossible for a pitcher to be more efficient, regardless of conditions. The fact that Gibson had a 258 ERA+ in an era where it was harder to have a high ERA+ because of the pitching standards around the league is actually more impressive than Pedro's 291 ERA+, in my opinion. That's only just talking about ERA+, Pedro might have very well had the more impressive season, but the quirks of ERA+ make it pretty difficult for any pitcher to match Pedro's 2000.

Good point about how low an era can go. Let's go back to the dead ball era.

1909 Mathewson: 1.14 era, 224 era+
1913 Johnson: 1.14 era, 259 era+
1968 Gibson: 1.12 era, 258 era+
1994 Maddux: 1.56 era, 271 era+
2000 Pedro: 1.74 era, 291 era+

In 1909, NL teams averaged 3.65 runs scored a game. Mathewson's era was 2.51 lower.
In 1913, AL teams averaged 3.92 runs scored a game. Johnson's era was 2.78 lower.
In 1968, NL teams averaged 3.43 runs scored a game. Gibson's era was 2.31 lower.
In 1995, NL teams averaged 4.63 runs scored a game. Maddux's era was 3.07 lower.
In 1999, AL teams averaged 5.18 runs scored a game. Pedro's era was 3.44 lower.

 

[Kenny F'ing Powers]

I've come to terms that this is just one of those things that will bother me for the rest of my life. If he had even just put Martinez in 10th on his ballot, Pedro wins the MVP. What a coincidence that the Yankees beat writer for the Post kept Pedro off his ballot. It was petty bullshit.

"Oh, he only pitched in 18% of the teams games! You can't vote for him!" Neat. He pitched in 835 ABs. That's 200+ more ABs then Jeter saw, so let's just say those extra 200 ABs even out for any defense that Jeter provided and call it a wash.

And the Kevin Brown winter meetings thing is fucking stupid. People complaining about a big contract is the reason you can't vote for a pitcher for MVP? Doesn't seem like a great reason, but considering George King had TWO pitchers on his MVP ballot the season prior (including Yankee David Wells...shocking) it must have been really compelling for him...

 

[Kliq]

The most annoying voting results of all time for me are Ted Williams missing out on the 1947 MVP to Joe Dimaggio:

https://www.baseball-reference.com/awards/awards_1947.shtml#all_AL_MVP_voting

The voters hated Ted, guy should have a half-dozen MVPs.

 

[Max Power]

What was up with the ball in the AL in 1947? Kiner and Mize each hit 51 homers in the NL, but Ted won the AL Triple Crown with 32 homers.

 

[bankshot1]

The most annoying voting results of all time for me are Ted Williams missing out on the 1947 MVP to Joe Dimaggio:

https://www.baseball-reference.com/awards/awards_1947.shtml#all_AL_MVP_voting

The voters hated Ted, guy should have a half-dozen MVPs.

A couple of MFY Joes in 1941 and 1942 got MVPs, while Ted got the silver.

Ted got screwed so often by the press he carried a Phillips head in his back pocket.

 

[ifmanis5]

I was thinking you forgot Barry Bonds but you really didn't. General consensus seems to be that he started using PEDs in 1999 but his stats didn't escalate until 2000. So he was not really in the mix in 1999, although it's a good year.



And yeah, I wish they could retroactively give Pedro his deserved MVP for 1999. He deserved it.

 

[E5 Yaz]

This piece goes into the King and Neal controversy of not putting Pedro on their ballots
https://jeremylehrman.medium.com/the-bbwaa-ignores-its-own-rules-it-cost-pedro-martinez-the-mvp-award-d71b1b925808

 

[Kliq]

I was thinking you forgot Barry Bonds but you really didn't. General consensus seems to be that he started using PEDs in 1999 but his stats didn't escalate until 2000. So he was not really in the mix in 1999, although it's a good year.

View attachment 90983

And yeah, I wish they could retroactively give Pedro his deserved MVP for 1999. He deserved it.

LOL at those Bonds years at the bottom.

 

[mikeford]

LOL at those Bonds years at the bottom.

Any excuse to repost this gem

 

[Seels]

The 90s era in general had some pretty stupid MVP voting results. How did Juan Gonzalez win a single MVP? It was obvious to everyone in the world that Junior and Arod were the best players in the AL. If you need a guy from a playoff team, how do you not pick Thome? Or Belle? 1998 JuanGone was like the 12th best pick, even factoring in the slugging stats, even factoring in the winning team trope. At least 1996 was close, winning by 3 votes over Arod. In 1998 he was far and ahead the leader. How does that make sense?

Admittedly biased, but I always thought Griffey should have won all of the MVPs from 93-98 except his injured year. Guy has a 6 year stretch of 158 ops+, 9 war per 162, and in the discussion for best defensive outfielder in baseball, while being the face of the sport, and wins a single MVP.

 

[CaptainLaddie]

Any excuse to repost this gem

I see Bois, I have to say hell yeah.

 

[GrandSlamPozo]

The 90s era in general had some pretty stupid MVP voting results. How did Juan Gonzalez win a single MVP? It was obvious to everyone in the world that Junior and Arod were the best players in the AL. If you need a guy from a playoff team, how do you not pick Thome? Or Belle? 1998 JuanGone was like the 12th best pick, even factoring in the slugging stats, even factoring in the winning team trope. At least 1996 was close, winning by 3 votes over Arod. In 1998 he was far and ahead the leader. How does that make sense?

Admittedly biased, but I always thought Griffey should have won all of the MVPs from 93-98 except his injured year. Guy has a 6 year stretch of 158 ops+, 9 war per 162, and in the discussion for best defensive outfielder in baseball, while being the face of the sport, and wins a single MVP.

In 1996 the conventional wisdom was that RBI was the best statistic for capturing player value and JuanGon was an RBI machine in those days (144 in only 134 games in 96... Belle actually had more that year but the media hated him too much to vote for him as MVP)

 

[ALiveH]

Yeah this is a travesty.

Pedro should have won in a landslide if it weren't for the anti-pitching bias. Alot of the debate past that is really about the tradeoff between defense / offense and plus-defenders at less important defensive positions.

Jeter / Nomar make no sense to me at 6th and 7th - they play the most important positions on the diamond and gave better offense, but were ranked way behind Alomar & I-Rod. The latter two are considered better defenders but at less important positions, so it should have been a lot closer between those four & really Jeter / Nomar should have been near the top.

Plus there's Manny who went bonkers & was the greatest hitter in a season filled with great hitters but gives you nothing defensively. He would rightfully be in the mix too.

 

[jose melendez]

When one looks back with modern state, is this the worst screw job? There have to have been worse ones.

 

[jose melendez]

When one looks back with modern state, is this the worst screw job? There have to have been worse ones.

Jeez, 1947 is really rough. Ted even had a better dWAR

 

[jose melendez]

Mo Vaughn's win was rough too.

 

[BaseballJones]

Mo Vaughn's win was rough too.

Mo was much better the following year, when he only finished 5th in MVP voting (1996).

 

[jose melendez]

Mo was much better the following year, when he only finished 5th in MVP voting (1996).

Sort of forgot that Johnson was hurt that year as I tried to figure out why the Mariners weren't better in 96. Still, if they'd replace their negative WAR guys, with 0, they might have been contenders.

 

[ngruz25]

There was about a decade long stretch where the writers awarded the AL MVP to three different relievers. Eck winning both the Cy Young and MVP in 1992 was the peak of the silliness. What’s crazy that his award winning season as a reliever wasn’t even as good statistically as Pedro’s non-winning seasons.

 

[snowmanny]

Rose’s MVP in 1973 was annoying. I was expecting Willie Stargell to win. But really Pete’s teammate Joe Morgan was already a better player than Rose and probably a better choice than either of them.

As a kid, I learned that OBP is more important than BA largely from Morgan/Rose.

 

[E5 Yaz]

Not a win, but the lone first-place vote for Cesar Tovar is both pathetic and hilarious

 

[The_Powa_of_Seiji_Ozawa]

The 90s era in general had some pretty stupid MVP voting results. How did Juan Gonzalez win a single MVP? It was obvious to everyone in the world that Junior and Arod were the best players in the AL. If you need a guy from a playoff team, how do you not pick Thome? Or Belle? 1998 JuanGone was like the 12th best pick, even factoring in the slugging stats, even factoring in the winning team trope. At least 1996 was close, winning by 3 votes over Arod. In 1998 he was far and ahead the leader. How does that make sense?

Admittedly biased, but I always thought Griffey should have won all of the MVPs from 93-98 except his injured year. Guy has a 6 year stretch of 158 ops+, 9 war per 162, and in the discussion for best defensive outfielder in baseball, while being the face of the sport, and wins a single MVP.

Like a lot of folks, I always felt that Gibson in 1988 was a weak choice for NL MVP, but I hadn't looked at all the stats in a long time. Interesting exercise. That was a pretty rough offensive year in the NL. Looking back now, I suppose the choice of Gibson is somewhat defensible, even if he shouldn't have been the top choice. Strawberry and Clark had the best offensive stat lines, Larkin probably the best overall player (for which he did not get a single MVP vote), but they were not particuarly outstanding. What I had forgotten about 1988 was how Clemens got screwed by the voters for AL CY. Even if Viola was deserving as winner, Clemens should not have finished a distant 6th behind Bruce Hurst. Besides his 8 shutouts and better WHIP, Clemens led the league with 291Ks, almost 100 more than the next guys, Viola and Stewart.

 

[Max Power]

It's important to remember what stats voters may have had at their disposal 30-50 years ago. You had the regular counting stats, AB, H, BA, 2B, 3B, HR, R, RBI, and SB. You probably didn't have SLG or OBP, and lots of times not even CS. On the defense side, you had Errors and word of mouth. Some of these decisions don't look as bad in a pre-internet world.

But Ted Williams was still totally fucked over by the writers who hated him.

 

[BaseballJones]

It's important to remember what stats voters may have had at their disposal 30-50 years ago. You had the regular counting stats, AB, H, BA, 2B, 3B, HR, R, RBI, and SB. You probably didn't have SLG or OBP, and lots of times not even CS. On the defense side, you had Errors and word of mouth. Some of these decisions don't look as bad in a pre-internet world.

But Ted Williams was still totally fucked over by the writers who hated him.

Let's go back to 1999 then and just use those old school stats.

Rodriguez: 116 r, 29 2b, 35 hr, 113 rbi, 25 sb, .332 avg
Ramirez: 131 r, 34 2b, 44 hr, 165 rbi, 2 sb, .333 avg

Manny: more runs, more doubles, more homers, more rbi, better batting average.

Never mind Pedro's ridiculous stats.

 

[Petagine in a Bottle]

Let's go back to 1999 then and just use those old school stats.

Rodriguez: 116 r, 29 2b, 35 hr, 113 rbi, 25 sb, .332 avg
Ramirez: 131 r, 34 2b, 44 hr, 165 rbi, 2 sb, .333 avg

Manny: more runs, more doubles, more homers, more rbi, better batting average.

Never mind Pedro's ridiculous stats.

Defense? Maybe there weren’t metrics being analyzed but people knew Manny was a zero in the field, and Pudge was seen as an excellent defensive catcher.

Think voters live the overachieving teams too- Manny was the best hitter on a loaded team.

 

[Max Power]

Defense? Maybe there weren’t metrics being analyzed but people knew Manny was a zero in the field, and Pudge was seen as an excellent defensive catcher.

Think voters live the overachieving teams too- Manny was the best hitter on a loaded team.

Right. Great defensive catchers were supposed to be zeroes on offense. Pudge could hit and steal bases. That excited a lot of voters who were bored of giving the award to the best slugger every year.

 

[Kliq]

Right. Great defensive catchers were supposed to be zeroes on offense. Pudge could hit and steal bases. That excited a lot of voters who were bored of giving the award to the best slugger every year.

And historically, MVP voters valued catchers very highly as captains of good teams.

 

[Kliq]

When one looks back with modern state, is this the worst screw job? There have to have been worse ones.

One of the odder moments was in 1982, Cal Ripken Jr. wins the MVP in 1983 with a superb season, 8.2 bWAR, 144 OPS+ with elite defense. The next year, Ripken is even better, has a 10.0 bWAR season, 146 OPS+, and finishes TWENTY-SEVENTH in the AL MVP voting. Willie Hernandez, a Detroit reliver, wins the MVP and the Cy Young that year with a bWAR of 4.8.

In 1983 the Orioles won 98 games and the World Series--in 84 they only won 85 games and finished fifth. So that explains some of the fall from grace, but it was still bizarre how voters seemingly ignored him one year after he won the MVP and was the star of a World Series team. And Ripken's teammate, Eddie Murray, finished fourth in MVP voting in 84, so it's not like the team was being dismissed for underachieving.

 

[Petagine in a Bottle]

MVP picks are often about narratives that develop over the course of the season, that often look really silly especially without any context years later.

 

[Deweys New Stance]

One of the odder moments was in 1982, Cal Ripken Jr. wins the MVP in 1983 with a superb season, 8.2 bWAR, 144 OPS+ with elite defense. The next year, Ripken is even better, has a 10.0 bWAR season, 146 OPS+, and finishes TWENTY-SEVENTH in the AL MVP voting. Willie Hernandez, a Detroit reliver, wins the MVP and the Cy Young that year with a bWAR of 4.8.

In 1983 the Orioles won 98 games and the World Series--in 84 they only won 85 games and finished fifth. So that explains some of the fall from grace, but it was still bizarre how voters seemingly ignored him one year after he won the MVP and was the star of a World Series team. And Ripken's teammate, Eddie Murray, finished fourth in MVP voting in 84, so it's not like the team was being dismissed for underachieving.

Hernandez was 4th on his own team that season in WAR behind Trammell, Chet Lemon and Kirk Gibson. But he pitched 140 innings in 80 games and the narrative became that he was the Tigers' big weapon.

 

[Max Power]

Hernandez was 4th on his own team that season in WAR behind Trammell, Chet Lemon and Kirk Gibson. But he pitched 140 innings in 80 games and the narrative became that he was the Tigers' big weapon.

And here's a case where the advanced stats actually back up the writers.




The highest hitter was Eddie Murray at 6.9. Hernadez was the most valuable player in the league when it came to helping win actual games.

 

[Deweys New Stance]

And here's a case where the advanced stats actually back up the writers.

View attachment 92027


The highest hitter was Eddie Murray at 6.9. Hernadez was the most valuable player in the league when it came to helping win actual games.

Thanks for sharing. That’s quite interesting, and makes me want to go back and compare the MVP votes from other seasons to the WPA leader list.

 

[snowmanny]

1979 AL MVP voting was ridiculous. Don Baylor won on the basis of RBIs and his team finishing first. Fred Lynn had an incredible year, finished fourth. To find another vote-getter with a WAR as low as Baylor you had to go down to 19th place (Mark Clear!)

https://www.baseball-reference.com/awards/awards_1979.shtml#all_AL_MVP_voting

 

[Ale Xander]

1979 AL MVP voting was ridiculous. Don Baylor won on the basis of RBIs and his team finishing first. Fred Lynn had an incredible year, finished fourth. To find another vote-getter with a WAR as low as Baylor you had to go down to 19th place (Mark Clear!)

https://www.baseball-reference.com/awards/awards_1979.shtml#all_AL_MVP_voting

RBI (or R’sBI)

/pedantic

 

[snowmanny]

RBI (or R’sBI)

/pedantic

Never heard that before.

 

[terrynever]

What was up with the ball in the AL in 1947? Kiner and Mize each hit 51 homers in the NL, but Ted won the AL Triple Crown with 32 homers.

Mize was a lefty pull hitter. Polo Grounds 258 feet down RF Line.

Ralph Kiner benefited from Pirates signing Hank Greenberg. Hank wanted the fence moved in before signing. Pirates moved LF in from 360 feet to 335 and named the area “Greenberg Gardens.” That garden got Kiner into the HOF.

https://pittsburghquarterly.com/articles/ralph-kiner-frank-thomas-and-greenberg-gardens/

 

[epraz]

MVP picks are often about narratives that develop over the course of the season, that often look really silly especially without any context years later.

This. MVP used to be much more of a liberal arts award--what story can be told? These days there's much more of a STEM grounding.