Everyone who says Pujols should be the MVP..

[Transmogrified Tiger]

AVG:

 

Lee .347

Pujols .337

 

OBP:

 

Lee .426

Pujols .432

 

SLG:

 

Lee .676

Pujols .629

 

OPS:

 

Lee 1.102

Pujols 1.061

 

RC:

 

Lee 120.1

Pujols 115.2

 

RC27:

 

Lee 10.56

Pujols 10.03

 

 

ISOP:

 

Lee .329

Pujols .294

 

Pujols makes strides, but Lee still leads all categories except OBP.

[PujolsPower]

What is ISOP?

[XZero771679666304]

What is ISOP?

 

Isolated power.

 

Slugging PCT - Batting average

[SirPlopigus]

If the Cubs make the playoffs, Lee deserves to win. Otherwise it should be Pujols

[imb]

That's the same thing people said that unjustly won Sammy the MVP in 98. Being the MVP should have nothing to do with the quality of the rest of your team.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

If Lee still leads in 3/4 of the major categories, he should still win. As it is right now, it's gotten too close to call.

[SirPlopigus]

But if the team misses the playoffs by, lets say 5.5 games, how valuable was he really to the team?

[imb]

But if the team misses the playoffs by, lets say 5.5 games, how valuable was he really to the team?

 

Valuable enough to carry them to 5.5 games back from a playoff spot. What does that have to do with how valuable he is?

 

If Pujols numbers are better at the end of the season (I've said all season long that they would be), then he deserves the MVP. If Lee's numbers are better, then he deserves it.

 

In 98, did you want Sammy to win the MVP because we made the playoffs and you didnt?

[PujolsPower]

If the season ended today, I think Pujols wins hands down. Lee's decline since the All-Star break has coincided with the Cubs' falling out of wildcard contention. Pujols has gotten better in the second half and the Cardinals took over the best record in baseball today. He is carrying the Cards offense that is missing 4 of its regular starters. Edmonds hasn't been as good this year, and Grudz and Eckstein don't exactly carry an offense. My biased vote goes to Pujols.

[wolf stansson]

If the season ended today, I think Pujols wins hands down.

When somebody has put up the numbers Derrek Lee has put up, there is no possible way they could lose "hands down" to anyone. Especially coupled with the injuries to the Cubs two top starters. Derrek has done everything in his power to make his team a contender; more than any other player in the league according to the statistics.

 

I'd vote for Al, but hey like you I'm biased. Especially with all the injuries to the Cardinals lineup I think he deserves it. I just think it's about as close as any MVP discussion in recent memory. You cannot discount D's year in any way.

[imb]

I hate the "what have you done for me lately" mentality that takes place in these "who should win this award" debates.

 

Lee has struggled recently, and Pujols has done really well, but what about earlier in the season, when Lee was blowing Pujols out of the water, despite Pujols playing amazingly? Those games don't count anymore? Lee's numbers are still better than Pujols, despite his recent struggles.

 

By the end of the season, I think Pujols will deserve to win. But if the season stopped today, Lee should win.

[treebird]

WIN SHARES

 

pujols 30

lee 29

dunn 26

ensberg 25

bay 25

kent 24

clemens 23

edmonds 23

giles 23

abreu 22

 

I'm down with that as my MVP ballot.

 

 

andruw has 20, btw.

[PujolsPower]

I don't think it is so much a "what have you done for me lately" attitude as it is that it is important to finish the season strong to get your team into the playoffs.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

WIN SHARES

 

pujols 30

lee 29

dunn 26

ensberg 25

bay 25

kent 24

clemens 23

edmonds 23

giles 23

abreu 22

 

I'm down with that as my MVP ballot.

 

 

andruw has 20, btw.

 

If I understand the win shares correctly, Pujols has 30 of his team's 228 win shares, or 13%. Lee has 29 of his team's 177 win shares, or 16%. Wouldn't that make him more valuable to his team than Pujols? I don't get win shares as a way of comparing players on different teams.

[SirPlopigus]

What the hell are win shares anyway? I've never even heard of them?

[imb]

I don't think it is so much a "what have you done for me lately" attitude as it is that it is important to finish the season strong to get your team into the playoffs.

 

More important than it is to start the season off strong? A win in April counts the same in the standings as a win in August.

[CardsFanInChiTown]

Who should be the MVP right now based on the numbers? DLee

 

Who would the writers vote right now? AP

 

I don't even think it'd be as close as everyone thinks because of two major reasons:

 

1) The cards better record

2) AP has been better in previous seasons therefore he's "due".

Edited August 18, 2005 by CardsFanInChiTown

[PujolsPower]

I don't think it is so much a "what have you done for me lately" attitude as it is that it is important to finish the season strong to get your team into the playoffs.

 

More important than it is to start the season off strong? A win in April counts the same in the standings as a win in August.

 

Wins do count the same in April as they do in September. On the other hand, if you lose a game in April, you still have 130+ games to make up for it. The later it gets, the fewer opportunities you have to make up ground or maintain a lead.

[imb]

I don't think it is so much a "what have you done for me lately" attitude as it is that it is important to finish the season strong to get your team into the playoffs.

 

More important than it is to start the season off strong? A win in April counts the same in the standings as a win in August.

 

Wins do count the same in April as they do in September. On the other hand, if you lose a game in April, you still have 130+ games to make up for it. The later it gets, the fewer opportunities you have to make up ground or maintain a lead.

 

So who cares what Pujols is doing now, the Cardinals are safely in the playoffs already.

[PujolsPower]

Still need homefield advantage, and it is way too early to relax/assume a spot is locked up.

[treebird]

WIN SHARES

 

pujols 30

lee 29

dunn 26

ensberg 25

bay 25

kent 24

clemens 23

edmonds 23

giles 23

abreu 22

 

I'm down with that as my MVP ballot.

 

 

andruw has 20, btw.

 

If I understand the win shares correctly, Pujols has 30 of his team's 228 win shares, or 13%. Lee has 29 of his team's 177 win shares, or 16%. Wouldn't that make him more valuable to his team than Pujols? I don't get win shares as a way of comparing players on different teams.

 

Win Shares is a stat that tells you how many wins a given player has contributed to his team. 3 win shares = 1 win. 1 win share is hardly conclusive evidence, but it indicates that Pujols has contributed one third of a win more than Lee. If you go by percentage of team's win shares, a good player on a bad team will always look best. Bay and Dunn also rate higher than Pujols.

 

Evaluating two players on different teams is simple, the bigger number the better. However, like I said, 1 win share is definitely not a huge margin.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

WIN SHARES

 

pujols 30

lee 29

dunn 26

ensberg 25

bay 25

kent 24

clemens 23

edmonds 23

giles 23

abreu 22

 

I'm down with that as my MVP ballot.

 

 

andruw has 20, btw.

 

If I understand the win shares correctly, Pujols has 30 of his team's 228 win shares, or 13%. Lee has 29 of his team's 177 win shares, or 16%. Wouldn't that make him more valuable to his team than Pujols? I don't get win shares as a way of comparing players on different teams.

 

Win Shares is a stat that tells you how many wins a given player has contributed to his team. 3 win shares = 1 win. 1 win share is hardly conclusive evidence, but it indicates that Pujols has contributed one third of a win more than Lee. If you go by percentage of team's win shares, a good player on a bad team will always look best. Bay and Dunn also rate higher than Pujols.

 

Evaluating two players on different teams is simple, the bigger number the better. However, like I said, 1 win share is definitely not a huge margin.

 

How is that evaluation fair, since almost every team has a different number of total win shares? If two players hypothetically performed exactly the same, and were on teams with drastically different records, wouldn't their win shares vary as well?

 

EDIT: Here's an extreme example. Pujols gets traded to an expansion team who's pitching staff consists of 9 year olds. That team wins 12 games all year. Pujols if he is 100% of the team gets 36 win shares, a number that Derrek Lee surpasses if he is on a .500 team. So Pujols could never make an out, and not have as many win shares as Lee will at his current pace.

[treebird]

How is that evaluation fair, since almost every team has a different number of total win shares? If two players hypothetically performed exactly the same, and were on teams with drastically different records, wouldn't their win shares vary as well?

 

The reason the team with the better record has a better record is because they have better players overall. Say Neifi and Eckstein have each had the exact same season to this point, value wise. Eckstein won't have a higher value than Neifi because guys like Pujols and Edmonds will be taking up all those extra win shares.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

How is that evaluation fair, since almost every team has a different number of total win shares? If two players hypothetically performed exactly the same, and were on teams with drastically different records, wouldn't their win shares vary as well?

 

The reason the team with the better record has a better record is because they have better players overall. Say Neifi and Eckstein have each had the exact same season to this point, value wise. Eckstein won't have a higher value than Neifi because guys like Pujols and Edmonds will be taking up all those extra win shares.

 

I'm sure now I'm getting into where Win Shares gets really complex, but how do you account for chance? Performance numbers don't correlate precisely with win-loss record, correct?

[treebird]

EDIT: Here's an extreme example. Pujols gets traded to an expansion team who's pitching staff consists of 9 year olds. That team wins 12 games all year. Pujols if he is 100% of the team gets 36 win shares, a number that Derrek Lee surpasses if he is on a .500 team. So Pujols could never make an out, and not have as many win shares as Lee will at his current pace.

 

This is beyond me. I haven't read the book in a while, but I don't remember any way to account for such an extreme example. If someone smarter would like to help, that'd be great. Otherwise, that question is going unanswered.