The Official 2017 Cincinnati Reds Thread

[wolves82]

Originally Posted by 14Red

Ok, I'll say that while he may not be THE MVP, he certainly should be in the argument. He had a great season, and I think in a sport like baseball, "valuable" is a tough term to determine. Today's version of "value" is different than it was 50 years ago.

When I think of "valuable" I think about where the team would be without that player. Would Toronto win their division without Donaldson? Unlikely. Thus he is valuable.

Would the Reds still be the worst team in baseball with or without Joey? Yep. Not valuable. He is excellent or outstanding, but not most valuable.

[14Red]

Originally Posted by wolves82

When I think of "valuable" I think about where the team would be without that player. Would Toronto win their division without Donaldson? Unlikely. Thus he is valuable.

Would the Reds still be the worst team in baseball with or without Joey? Yep. Not valuable. He is excellent or outstanding, but not most valuable.

Understood, but you are still attached more "value" to one individual player, which we've already determined is not a true indicator of success. I guess I look at Votto in how he stacks up to his peers, and his overall percentage of production for his particular team.

BTW, complete unrelated but still criminal, Votto was bypassed for the NL Silver Slugger by Anthony Rizzo. The definition of the Silver Slugger - based on batting average, slugging percentage and on base percentage. Votto had a better batting average (.326 to .292) slugging percentage (.550 to .544) and on base percentage (.434 to .385). I absolutely have no idea what's going on here.

[wolves82]

I'm with you on the Silver Slugger.

[thavoice]

Originally Posted by 14Red

Understood, but you are still attached more "value" to one individual player, which we've already determined is not a true indicator of success. I guess I look at Votto in how he stacks up to his peers, and his overall percentage of production for his particular team.

BTW, complete unrelated but still criminal, Votto was bypassed for the NL Silver Slugger by Anthony Rizzo. The definition of the Silver Slugger - based on batting average, slugging percentage and on base percentage. Votto had a better batting average (.326 to .292) slugging percentage (.550 to .544) and on base percentage (.434 to .385). I absolutely have no idea what's going on here.

I honestly believed that award was strictly numbers based. Guess I had not paid enough attention to it over the years.

[Monclova Steve]

Originally Posted by 14Red

Understood, but you are still attached more "value" to one individual player, which we've already determined is not a true indicator of success. I guess I look at Votto in how he stacks up to his peers, and his overall percentage of production for his particular team.

BTW, complete unrelated but still criminal, Votto was bypassed for the NL Silver Slugger by Anthony Rizzo. The definition of the Silver Slugger - based on batting average, slugging percentage and on base percentage. Votto had a better batting average (.326 to .292) slugging percentage (.550 to .544) and on base percentage (.434 to .385). I absolutely have no idea what's going on here.

Excellent analysis, 14Red. I remember the good ole' JJHuddle days when you would dismiss these kind of statistical arguments, just because your "eye test" would coincide with what your heart wanted.

You're coming around!

[14Red]

Originally Posted by Monclova Steve

Excellent analysis, 14Red. I remember the good ole' JJHuddle days when you would dismiss these kind of statistical arguments, just because your "eye test" would coincide with what your heart wanted.

You're coming around!

Thank you, it just bothers me that you have awards based on statistics, then throw them out the window when you want to and put give the popular players the awards. Ozzie Smith was a great shortstop, but he won alot of gold gloves because he was Ozzie Smith, did a backflip when running on the field.
Votto was clearly the best offensive first baseman this year and gets no accolades for it. And BTW, Votto does pass my eye test.

[14Red]

Ok folks, the "winning team" philosophy is now out the window with Mike Trout being named MVP.

Now what's your excuse??

Trout (Angles 74-88) Average .315 OBP .441 Slug .550 HR 29 RBI 100 OPS .991
Votto (Reds 68-94) Ave. .326 OBP .434 Slug .550 HR 29 RBI 97 OPS .985

So we're talking about 6 games difference in the standings...Stats are virtually the same.

[Jim Lahey]

Seriously, how stupid are you? How many times do you have to have this explained to you?

Originally Posted by eastside_purple

I don't care how good your second half is, if your first half is boarderline terrible, you don't belong in the discussion for MVP.

For the first two months he hit .318/.419/.573
Meanwhile Votto was putting up .213/.330/.404

[eastside_purple]

Originally Posted by 14Red

Ok folks, the "winning team" philosophy is now out the window with Mike Trout being named MVP.

Now what's your excuse??

Trout (Angles 74-88) Average .315 OBP .441 Slug .550 HR 29 RBI 100 OPS .991
Votto (Reds 68-94) Ave. .326 OBP .434 Slug .550 HR 29 RBI 97 OPS .985

So we're talking about 6 games difference in the standings...Stats are virtually the same.

Votto sucked when when it mattered earlier in the year. Just accept the fact he wasn't consistent enough the entire year to win the award over Bryant.

[Monclova Steve]

Originally Posted by 14Red

Ok folks, the "winning team" philosophy is now out the window with Mike Trout being named MVP.

Now what's your excuse??

Trout (Angles 74-88) Average .315 OBP .441 Slug .550 HR 29 RBI 100 OPS .991
Votto (Reds 68-94) Ave. .326 OBP .434 Slug .550 HR 29 RBI 97 OPS .985

So we're talking about 6 games difference in the standings...Stats are virtually the same.

Based on that analysis, Votto should have tied Trout for MVP of the American League?

[14Red]

Originally Posted by Jim Lahey

Seriously, how stupid are you? How many times do you have to have this explained to you?



For the first two months he hit .318/.419/.573
Meanwhile Votto was putting up .213/.330/.404

So the MVP award is for the player who has the best stats in the first two months, the rest of the season doesn't count? I thought they the award was fro the entire season??

Lahey, I know you're trying to get me going, but let's just say that the baseball writers like Mike Trout? He's in California, he's on TV alot, he's propped up by MLB as one of their marketing tools.

I'm just saying, take the blinders off for just 30 seconds, LOOK at the stats across the board and tell me how one guy gets the MVP in one league with the same stats as a guy who, in the other league, didn't even get a sniff?? And we now can dispell the "one a winning team" excuse.

[14Red]

Check that, Votto got 7th place in NL MVP voting. Incredibly, Freddie Freeman of the Braves finished ahead of him?

[Jim Lahey]

No, the MVP goes to the player who is consistently the best player all year round, not someone who plays at a Triple A level for 1/3 of the season.

Take off the blinders? Comical, take your own advice.

[eastside_purple]

Originally Posted by 14Red

So the MVP award is for the player who has the best stats in the first two months, the rest of the season doesn't count? I thought they the award was fro the entire season??

Lahey, I know you're trying to get me going, but let's just say that the baseball writers like Mike Trout? He's in California, he's on TV alot, he's propped up by MLB as one of their marketing tools.

I'm just saying, take the blinders off for just 30 seconds, LOOK at the stats across the board and tell me how one guy gets the MVP in one league with the same stats as a guy who, in the other league, didn't even get a sniff?? And we now can dispell the "one a winning team" excuse.

Don't be a moron, it has been explained to you several times why he didn't deserve the MVP.

[14Red]

Originally Posted by Jim Lahey

No, the MVP goes to the player who is consistently the best player all year round, not someone who plays at a Triple A level for 1/3 of the season.

Take off the blinders? Comical, take your own advice.

uh....ok...that makes no sense...but ok, it's your opinion.

[14Red]

Originally Posted by eastside_purple

Don't be a moron, it has been explained to you several times why he didn't deserve the MVP.

nice eastside, go back to name calling. BTW, the fact that his stats are nearly similar to Trout's tells me you, again, are wrong. How about coming up with your own take some day rather than just trashing everyone else's takes.

[eastside_purple]

Originally Posted by 14Red

nice eastside, go back to name calling. BTW, the fact that his stats are nearly similar to Trout's tells me you, again, are wrong. How about coming up with your own take some day rather than just trashing everyone else's takes.

I made it pretty damn clear that you can't be an MVP if you flounder in the first half of the season when your team still has a chance. It doesn't matter if you rake like Ted Williams in the second half when your team's season is already dead and buried. And that's beside the fact you keep comparing him to Trout, who he wasn't up against and was voted on by completely different writers. He was up against Bryant, who not only killed it when it mattered early, but also nailed it when it mattered in September and October. I'm not sure why you can't understand that difference. Well, I do know why, but you'll cry about namecalling if I say why. If you want to complain he should have finished higher than 7th, I can get on board with that, but even then my support would be tepid because Votto wasn't just average early in the year, he was brutally bad.

[Jim Lahey]

Originally Posted by 14Red

uh....ok...that makes no sense...but ok, it's your opinion.

It doesn't make sense that the MVP doesn't go to someone who plays at a Triple A level for 1/3 of the season?

[eastside_purple]

Originally Posted by Jim Lahey

It doesn't make sense that the MVP doesn't go to someone who plays at a Triple A level for 1/3 of the season?

He'll act dumb again in response, guaranteed.

[wolves82]

OK I'll try to stay out of the mud-slinging since the election just ended and we have all had our fill of that. But something else to consider...

If the question is "Why can Trout win AL MVP on a bad team, while Votto, with nearly similar stats, finishes 7th in the NL?"

Answer: 14Red picked some categories where Votto compares very well to Trout. But there are other important categories, like SB, Trout had 30 to go with his power numbers.

Additionally, I know 14Red is a baseball purist, as am I. So lets talk defense. Trout plays CF, a critical defensive spot, and plays it very well. Votto plays an average 1B, he ranked 15th at that position in the MLB this year.

Finally, some people don't like WAR stats, but it is a very real measurement of a players value. Trout has far and away the highest WAR in MLB, 10.55; Bryant was 3rd with 7.67. Votto was 72nd at 3.96, due in large part that he has a negative 2.43 on his defense. (His offensive score is 14th best).

There ya go. http://www.espn.com/mlb/war/leaders/...unt/1/sort/WAR

[14Red]

Originally Posted by wolves82

OK I'll try to stay out of the mud-slinging since the election just ended and we have all had our fill of that. But something else to consider...

If the question is "Why can Trout win AL MVP on a bad team, while Votto, with nearly similar stats, finishes 7th in the NL?"

Answer: 14Red picked some categories where Votto compares very well to Trout. But there are other important categories, like SB, Trout had 30 to go with his power numbers.

Additionally, I know 14Red is a baseball purist, as am I. So lets talk defense. Trout plays CF, a critical defensive spot, and plays it very well. Votto plays an average 1B, he ranked 15th at that position in the MLB this year.

Finally, some people don't like WAR stats, but it is a very real measurement of a players value. Trout has far and away the highest WAR in MLB, 10.55; Bryant was 3rd with 7.67. Votto was 72nd at 3.96, due in large part that he has a negative 2.43 on his defense. (His offensive score is 14th best).

There ya go. http://www.espn.com/mlb/war/leaders/...unt/1/sort/WAR

Thanks wolves82, I understand the "new" stat WAR is heavily in favor of Trout, as well as stolen bases (which some TEAMS don't even try anymore). And finally, obviously defense has nothing to do with MVP voting as Kris Bryant is mediocre at both 3rd base and left field. He'd be at first base if the Cubs didn't have Rizzo there.
Next....

[eastside_purple]

Bryant lead the NL in Wins above replacement; his WAR was more than double Votto's. Couple that with Bryant was consistently great through the entire year and Votto waited until the season was already a lost cause before contributing to his team. Finally, while Bryant isn't a great fielder, his defensive rating is slightly above average, while Votto's defensive rating was strongly negative. More likely, Bryant's defense didn't win him the award, but Votto's defense was so bad it likely ruled him out of MVP contention, along with everything else explained to you. Hope this helps.

[Jim Lahey]

Originally Posted by Jim Lahey

It doesn't make sense that the MVP doesn't go to someone who plays at a Triple A level for 1/3 of the season?

14Red, after thinking about this for exactly a week does it still not make sense that the MVP doesn't go to someone who plays at a Triple A level for 1/3 of the season?

[wolves82]

Originally Posted by 14Red

Thanks wolves82, I understand the "new" stat WAR is heavily in favor of Trout, as well as stolen bases (which some TEAMS don't even try anymore). And finally, obviously defense has nothing to do with MVP voting as Kris Bryant is mediocre at both 3rd base and left field. He'd be at first base if the Cubs didn't have Rizzo there.
Next....

I will try to help you connect the dots.
- The goal of all teams is to win.
- WAR is 'wins above replacement', which means it is the measure of a player's value as compared to an average replacement player.
- Thus, WAR is an important way to evaluate the "value" of a player to their team. Without him, they would win "X.XX" fewer games.

Is it your position that the player with the 72nd highest WAR is NL MVP? Just because he had a few excellent stat categories, and he happens to be on your favorite team?

[Jim Lahey]

Originally Posted by 14Red

Thanks wolves82, I understand the "new" stat WAR is heavily in favor of Trout, as well as stolen bases (which some TEAMS don't even try anymore). And finally, obviously defense has nothing to do with MVP voting as Kris Bryant is mediocre at both 3rd base and left field. He'd be at first base if the Cubs didn't have Rizzo there.
Next....

Every time I think you can't get stupider.....

[14Red]

Originally Posted by wolves82

I will try to help you connect the dots.
- The goal of all teams is to win.
- WAR is 'wins above replacement', which means it is the measure of a player's value as compared to an average replacement player.
- Thus, WAR is an important way to evaluate the "value" of a player to their team. Without him, they would win "X.XX" fewer games.

Is it your position that the player with the 72nd highest WAR is NL MVP? Just because he had a few excellent stat categories, and he happens to be on your favorite team?

Oh, so what is really the point of having the Most Valuable PLAYER, when you're going to use team accomplishments as the barometer?? Shouldn't all the Cubs get the awards then??

Look, my single point, which many of you keep seem to miss, is that SUPPOSEDLY...the MVP goes to a player that was on a good team. At least that's what y'all told me when the NL Award was given to Bryant.

But...then the AL gives it to Trout, who's Angles won 6 more games than the Reds this season. If Trout had incredible stats, I'd understand, but Votto and Trout's stats are very, very, very similar.

So please don't give me the garbage that the MVP goes to a player on a winning team, obviously in the AL, the writers used a different metric.

[wolves82]

Originally Posted by 14Red

Oh, so what is really the point of having the Most Valuable PLAYER, when you're going to use team accomplishments as the barometer?? ..... But...then the AL gives it to Trout, who's Angles won 6 more games than the Reds this season. If Trout had incredible stats, I'd understand, but Votto and Trout's stats are very, very, very similar.

Trout's stats are incredible. You just choose to ignore them, and focus on a couple of antiquated metrics that you like. I gave this to you above. Please click on it.
http://www.espn.com/mlb/war/leaders/...unt/1/sort/WAR

This is not about a team winning. It is about a player being far superior to everyone else, based on all aspects of the game.

[eastside_purple]

Originally Posted by 14Red

Oh, so what is really the point of having the Most Valuable PLAYER, when you're going to use team accomplishments as the barometer?? Shouldn't all the Cubs get the awards then??

Look, my single point, which many of you keep seem to miss, is that SUPPOSEDLY...the MVP goes to a player that was on a good team. At least that's what y'all told me when the NL Award was given to Bryant.

But...then the AL gives it to Trout, who's Angles won 6 more games than the Reds this season. If Trout had incredible stats, I'd understand, but Votto and Trout's stats are very, very, very similar.

So please don't give me the garbage that the MVP goes to a player on a winning team, obviously in the AL, the writers used a different metric.

First, WAR isn't a team stat.

Second, I never said the award goes to a player on a winning team. Often it does, but Trouts stats were very consistently excellent throughout the year. He's far and away the best hitter and one of the best defenders in the AL. I think you just need to suck it up and admit Joey doesn't deserve the NL award because: 1) he sucked for 1/3 of the year; 2) he was so terrible at fielding his position he had a negative value rating; and 3) his WAR stats weren't very compelling.

[Monclova Steve]

Originally Posted by eastside_purple

First, WAR isn't a team stat.

Second, I never said the award goes to a player on a winning team. Often it does, but Trouts stats were very consistently excellent throughout the year. He's far and away the best hitter and one of the best defenders in the AL. I think you just need to suck it up and admit Joey doesn't deserve the NL award because: 1) he sucked for 1/3 of the year; 2) he was so terrible at fielding his position he had a negative value rating; and 3) his WAR stats weren't very compelling.

Your arguments clearly carry the day on this topic. In fact, the very reason why 14Red is comparing Votto to Trout (the AMERICAN LEAGUE winner) instead of those with whom he was competing in the NL speaks volumes -- not to mention that, with Trout, he doesn't even consider the stolen bases and defensive performance differences.

Silver Slugger and MVP are 2 different things. 14Red clearly can't tell the difference between the two.

[eastside_purple]

I just don't understand why he wants to double/triple/quadruple down on such an idiotic position.