SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
MLB Awards: Who Should Win - Who WIll Win
|
Post by bigpupp on Nov 8, 2016 0:12:26 GMT -5
MLB Award Finalists have been announced. Thought it would be interesting to see where everyone stands on the awards. Who should win - who will win?
MVP American League Jose Altuve Mookie Betts Mike Trout
National League Kris Bryant Daniel Murphy Corey Seager
Cy Young American League Corey Kluber Rick Porcello Justin Verlander
National League Kyle Hendricks Jon Lester Max Scherzer
Rookie of the Year American League Michael Fulmer Tyler Naquin Gary Sanchez
National League Kenta Maeda Corey Seager Trea Turner
Manager of the Year American League Jeff Banister Terry Francona Buck Showalter
National League Dusty Baker Joe Maddon Dave Roberts
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Nov 8, 2016 2:28:13 GMT -5
MLB Award Finalists have been announced. Thought it would be interesting to see where everyone stands on the awards. Who should win - who will win?
Should/Will: Trout/unsure, I think it's a tossup Betts vs. Trout Kluber if you're an advanced stats guy/Porcello (I think it's close enough and enough writers are old-school enough that wins seals it) Sanchez/Sanchez. I hate it, but the whole "partial season" argument falls apart quickly. He could've had another 200 AB and been mediocre, and he'd still be close to .300 with 25 HR or so, as a catcher. His partial season was historical. Seager/Seager. But Turner really, really got screwed with his timing, because he was awesome. Francona/Francona. Showalter has no chance. The WC game will matter, even though it's not supposed to. Bannister just got really, really, really lucky. Teams don't go 36-10 or whatever it was in 1-run games because of the manager. That's almost wholly blind chance. Tito is the man. Dave Roberts/Joe Maddon. Roberts did the better managerial job, losing the best pitcher since Pedro and keeping his team level (plus dealing with some personality issues); Maddon wins because, despite playing something like 6 games UNDER the team's expected W-L, the media eats up his b.s., and, you know...Cubs win. CUBS WIN!!
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Nov 8, 2016 2:57:34 GMT -5
AL MVP I think it's Betts and he deserves it. He's so close to Trout and the fact his team won, seals deal for me.
AL Cy Young I think Porcello Wins due to wins, but it probably should go to Kluber or Verlander, it's really toss up.
AL ROY It's got to be Fulmer. I don't see how Sanchez is even a finalist, 53 games is just not enough games in my opinion. He hit .299, so another 200 ABs of so-so production could have killed his average. He had a historic run, but it was just too short. Fulmer's 1.9 edge in bwar seals deal for me. The award is rookie of the year, not rookie of the last two months.
AL Manager I think Francona should win, but just have a feeling Banister will win. I agree it was most likely luck, but looking at run differential it sure looks like he got more wins out of that team than you should have expected.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Nov 8, 2016 6:13:48 GMT -5
I'll go on record as predicting a landslide write in victory for Farrell.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Nov 8, 2016 8:28:29 GMT -5
I'll guess Trout and Bryant are MVPs, I'd pick Kluber over Porcello, but I think the voters will pick Porcello as Cy Young along with Max Scherzer (although wouldn't a Lester/Porcello tandem be more appropriate given that they were ultimately dealt for each other with Cespedes serving as middle man of the deal?).
I think it will be Seager and Sanchez as ROY winners. Sanchez was so dominant in his limited time, I think he'll get the vote. Voters aren't going to say he would have crashed to earth had he had 200 more ABs. He might have leveled off but odds are his numbers still would have been damn good.
I think Bannister and Dave Roberts should be managers of the year given how much Texas overachieved and considered what a patchwork team the Dodgers were and yet they won their division. I think the voters will vote for Bannister and Maddon.
|
|
|
Post by Don Caballero on Nov 8, 2016 11:00:45 GMT -5
Love you Tito, but Jeff Banister should win this one in a landslide. That team absolutely sucked and yet he overachieved to bejesus and back and finished with the best record in the AL. Now that's a job well done and anything other whan a win here is flat out robbery.
The other awards should go to Trout or Betts, Klubot, Fulmer and let's be honest here who cares about the NL.
|
|
|
Post by rookie13 on Nov 8, 2016 11:01:53 GMT -5
Trout/Betts: There's absolutely no way to argue that Trout isn't the best player in the league, but I see voters taking Mookie since the Sox won their division.
Bryant: The best NL player on the best NL team, this one probably won't even be close. As if his offense isn't enough, he played at least 50 innings at 4 different positions, and was good at all of them. Should be the first player since Pedroia to win RoY and MVP in back to back years.
Kluber/Porcello: This is the closest race, in my opinion. Most of their stats are so close that I think Porcello will got the nod for his 22 wins. I'd personally give it to Kluber who I think was just *slightly* better.
Scherzer: Higher ERA than Lester and Hendricks, but with the league lead in wins, innings, K's, K/BB, and WHIP, I see this as an easy win for Scherzer.
Sanchez: SSS or not, he was extremely impressive for a catcher and I really wish he played for anyone but the Yankess.
Seager: This is the slam dunk of slam dunks, it'll be unanimous and he would be my second choice for MVP.
Banister/Francona: I think Tito wins this since the Indians had the best record in the league and dealt with several significant injuries. I would vote for Banister because the Rangers had just as many and massively overperformed this year, and I think he was the main reason for that.
Roberts/Maddon: I see this as Maddon's to lose. He's a lovable manager and his team led baseball in wins, so I see the voters picking him. I'd go with Roberts seeing as how he dealt with a ton of injuries for basically the whole year, and the Dodgers still won their division. I thought he held the team together great.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Nov 8, 2016 11:14:24 GMT -5
Love you Tito, but Jeff Banister should win this one in a landslide. That team absolutely sucked and yet he overachieved to bejesus and back and finished with the best record in the AL. Now that's a job well done and anything other whan a win here is flat out robbery. The other awards should go to Trout or Betts, Klubot, Fulmer and let's be honest here who cares about the NL. If there was a post-season manager award Tito would win that hands down. Tito was great with an Indians team that had injury problems and wasn't exactly built like a juggernaut, but given how Texas won 95 games while being outscored there's a lot of luck involved and some good managing to win those close games, especially when they don't exactly have a Mariano Rivera closing.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,923
|
Post by ericmvan on Nov 8, 2016 14:50:11 GMT -5
Love you Tito, but Jeff Banister should win this one in a landslide. That team absolutely sucked and yet he overachieved to bejesus and back and finished with the best record in the AL. Now that's a job well done and anything other whan a win here is flat out robbery. The other awards should go to Trout or Betts, Klubot, Fulmer and let's be honest here who cares about the NL. So, MoY goes to the guy whose team was luckiest? Altuve finishing 3rd in the AL is a joke. And the clear MVP any way you define it in the NL was Buster Posey.
|
|
|
Post by Don Caballero on Nov 8, 2016 17:46:18 GMT -5
So, MoY goes to the guy whose team was luckiest? Yes and it also goes to the manager that for whatever reason overcame the greater odds and overachieved harder. Call it luck or call it competence, no team had bigger discrepancy between talent and actual performance than the Rangers.
|
|
|
Post by ramireja on Nov 9, 2016 0:07:05 GMT -5
Wait, why doesn't Verlander get any love in the Cy Young race?
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Nov 9, 2016 10:56:12 GMT -5
Mookie Betts wins the AL Gold Glove in RF-- well deserved.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Nov 12, 2016 1:14:36 GMT -5
Mookie also won the Wilson Major League Baseball Defensive Player of the Year Award. m.mlb.com/news/article/208655822/defensive-player-of-the-year-awards-announced/ Wilson Sporting Goods announced its 2016 Major League Baseball Defensive Player of the Year Awards on Friday during an hourlong special on MLB Network, and Betts, the dynamic Red Sox right fielder and American League MVP candidate, headlined the group by being honored as Wilson's overall individual winner, while the San Francisco Giants were honored as the top defensive team of 2016. lol, I'm not so sure about that one but hey, a certain former Yankee SS recently won a gold glove so, in the words of Pope Francis, who am I to judge. ADD: Proof of why I shouldn't be the judge: The Wilson Defensive Player of the Year Awards winners are determined using a formula that combines traditional defensive stats with advanced metrics, as well as the data logged by the baseball experts working for the scouting service Inside Edge.
|
|
|
Post by telluricrook on Nov 12, 2016 15:00:11 GMT -5
Klubers post season performance changed your minds on who should win the Cy young.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Nov 16, 2016 0:20:26 GMT -5
Former Sox in the driver's seat, Francona and Roberts named managers of the year. We still have Farrell
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Nov 16, 2016 2:39:03 GMT -5
Love you Tito, but Jeff Banister should win this one in a landslide. That team absolutely sucked and yet he overachieved to bejesus and back and finished with the best record in the AL. Now that's a job well done and anything other whan a win here is flat out robbery. The other awards should go to Trout or Betts, Klubot, Fulmer and let's be honest here who cares about the NL. If there was a post-season manager award Tito would win that hands down. Tito was great with an Indians team that had injury problems and wasn't exactly built like a juggernaut, but given how Texas won 95 games while being outscored there's a lot of luck involved and some good managing to win those close games, especially when they don't exactly have a Mariano Rivera closing. Not to mention, 36-10 in 1-run games is almost exclusively luck. Bannister had essentially nothing to do with their record, at least in terms of it being so exceptional.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Nov 16, 2016 2:42:45 GMT -5
So, MoY goes to the guy whose team was luckiest? Yes and it also goes to the manager that for whatever reason overcame the greater odds and overachieved harder. Call it luck or call it competence, no team had bigger discrepancy between talent and actual performance than the Rangers. The point is that the manager has very little to do with the outcomes of 1-run games. That's just a fact. It's almost exclusively luck, too, unless you have an elite arm at the end (which doesn't take good managing to elicit use...the closer is pretty standard). MOY shouldn't be awarded for a statistical anomaly.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Nov 16, 2016 8:28:58 GMT -5
Yes and it also goes to the manager that for whatever reason overcame the greater odds and overachieved harder. Call it luck or call it competence, no team had bigger discrepancy between talent and actual performance than the Rangers. T he point is that the manager has very little to do with the outcomes of 1-run games. That's just a fact. It's almost exclusively luck, too, unless you have an elite arm at the end (which doesn't take good managing to elicit use...the closer is pretty standard). MOY shouldn't be awarded for a statistical anomaly. I honestly don't know. It occurs to me that if a team wins a ridiculous amount of close games by a run, then they must be at least or multiple of these: 1) Extremely lucky, 2) have a manager who makes pretty good decisions that impact games, 3) have an amazing lock-down closer. We know the Rangers don't have #3 so I suspect it's heavily 1 and a good dose of 2. I mean how many winnable games did the Red Sox lose that were close where we were scratching our heads saying "If only Farrell was a competent game manager..." I have trouble believing that managerial decisions to show up in the closest of games. I'll give you support for the opposite argument - Joe Maddon won a 1 run game in Game 7 and mismanaged that game pretty badly - the Cubs should have won by 3 or 4 runs, so it goes in as a 1 run victory for him. But I have trouble believing their record was that good because Bannister turned a bunch of blowout wins into close games. What I'm trying to say (and failing pretty badly at it) is that while luck is indeed a huge factor I have to believe that managerial decisions do show up in close games. That said, I have no problem with the outcome of the voting. Tito Francona is as good a manager as anybody in the game. He mixes effective managerial decision making with creating an atmosphere that helps his players thrive. Like anywhere you work if your boss makes you tense and miserable it doesn't help with your productivity, but if your boss is encouraging, challenges you when you need it in a way that encourages you, then you're more likely to perform at your best. Tito has that in spades, so I'm happy for him. Weird how he has 2 World Series rings with Boston and 2 Manager of the Year Awards with Cleveland. It's like the world has just started seeing how excellent a manager he is, something we as Red Sox fans have known for a long time. Francona is the best manager the Red Sox have probably every had. Dick Williams might have been the greatest for one year, but when you're like that (acerbic), it's hard for that type of managerial style to work for more than 1 year. And congrats to Dave Roberts. I thought that was well deserved, too. That was a patchwork team he kept together. I'm glad to see him succeeding. Nothing like those 2004 Red Sox - Tito and Roberts!
|
|
|
Post by Don Caballero on Nov 16, 2016 14:01:12 GMT -5
The point is that the manager has very little to do with the outcomes of 1-run games. That's just a fact. It's almost exclusively luck, too, unless you have an elite arm at the end (which doesn't take good managing to elicit use...the closer is pretty standard). MOY shouldn't be awarded for a statistical anomaly.Why not? I never understood this kind of argument. Maybe luck doesn't bode well for future performance, but why should we exclude anyone who has been tremendously lucky from this kind of conversation? Maybe he got a few breaks, but you can't give 0 credit to Banister for whatever the hell happened to the Rangers. And what measures a job well done if not having a team overplaying greatly what should have been their record? Regardless of how he's done it, that to me is more impressive than anything else in the race. Again, it taking that sorry Rangers team to the best record in the league is not something that should be awarded for, what should be? How on earth did Francona or Buck do something more impressive than that?
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Nov 16, 2016 14:11:35 GMT -5
Michael Fulmer won AL ROY and it wasn't even close.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Nov 16, 2016 14:23:13 GMT -5
The point is that the manager has very little to do with the outcomes of 1-run games. That's just a fact. It's almost exclusively luck, too, unless you have an elite arm at the end (which doesn't take good managing to elicit use...the closer is pretty standard). MOY shouldn't be awarded for a statistical anomaly.Why not? I never understood this kind of argument. Maybe luck doesn't bode well for future performance, but why should we exclude anyone who has been tremendously lucky from this kind of conversation? Maybe he got a few breaks, but you can't give 0 credit to Banister for whatever the hell happened to the Rangers. And what measures a job well done if not having a team overplaying greatly what should have been their record? Regardless of how he's done it, that to me is more impressive than anything else in the race. Again, it taking that sorry Rangers team to the best record in the league is not something that should be awarded for, what should be? How on earth did Francona or Buck do something more impressive than that? Because the award should, to me at least, be based on skill. Some merit. Not an average schmoe who lucked into a 26-game above .500 advantage in 1-run games. MOY should be, you know, for *managing*, not for the vagaries of universal whimsy.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Nov 16, 2016 14:28:25 GMT -5
Notably, that 26-win advantage is just about how much better than their expected record the Rangers were. Awarding MOY to Bannister is similar to awarding Bob Welch the Cy Young because he won 27 games. Yes, he had something to do with it, but run support is basically luck. There are vastly more deserving candidates out there. And, the most deserving won, for a change.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Nov 16, 2016 14:31:55 GMT -5
I think Texas got lucky overall, but to think the coach didn't help them win close games is crazy. Close games is were good managers separate themselves from bad ones. The Manager wasn't the sole reason for the great record in one run games, but he is a major reason.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Nov 16, 2016 14:35:11 GMT -5
Notably, that 26-win advantage is just about how much better than their expected record the Rangers were. Awarding MOY to Bannister is similar to awarding Bob Welch the Cy Young because he won 27 games. Yes, he had something to do with it, but run support is basically luck. There are vastly more deserving candidates out there. And, the most deserving won, for a change. The Bob Welch comp is a good one, because you can include Roger Clemens having the best season of his career but going "only" 21-6 for a worse team as proxy for Terry Francona, who is baseball's best manager and had the best season of any manager. At least until intentionally walking Rizzo.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Nov 16, 2016 14:48:19 GMT -5
Notably, that 26-win advantage is just about how much better than their expected record the Rangers were. Awarding MOY to Bannister is similar to awarding Bob Welch the Cy Young because he won 27 games. Yes, he had something to do with it, but run support is basically luck. There are vastly more deserving candidates out there. And, the most deserving won, for a change. The Bob Welch comp is a good one, because you can include Roger Clemens having the best season of his career but going "only" 21-6 for a worse team as proxy for Terry Francona, who is baseball's best manager and had the best season of any manager. At least until intentionally walking Rizzo. That's exactly why I picked it. Clemens was the vastly superior pitcher, with simply less gaudy wins (and the same number of losses). Welch stumbled into the transcendent record by blind luck. He was good...but just good. He should've been 17-10 or 18-8 even (or 15-11) for that A's team. But they averaged something like 7 runs a game.
|
|
|