Goodbye Papelbon. It was one hell of a ride.
-
Check out the relaunch of our general collection, with classic designs and new ones by our very own Pissog!
-
Welcome to Smogon! Take a moment to read the Introduction to Smogon for a run-down on everything Smogon, and make sure you take some time to read the global rules.
MLB thread
- Thread starter little gk
- Start date
- Status
I heard yesterday that Ramos was saved. Apparently, he was rescued by a special task force which comprised solely of Drew Storen and Stephen Strasburg throwing high speed fastballs at the captors.
overpaying for relief pitchers (even if he is a top 5 closer in the game)
（ ´,_ゝ`) we have become yankee scums
（ ´,_ゝ`) we have become yankee scums
Hey don't feel bad. It's better tthat you overpayed for Paps than overpaying guys like Lackey, Crawford, Lugo, or JD Drew...
so true.
in the most unsurprising vote ever, Verlander for unanimous Cy Young. certainly deserved it...but CC was a lot better than voters gave him credit for. digging below the surface (and Verlander's .236 BABIP), they actually had pretty comparable seasons.
...that being said, i would have voted Verlander myself. this season he had was magical.
...that being said, i would have voted Verlander myself. this season he had was magical.
Not really liking this constant interleague thing...
the ceiling on draft bonuses (and word is, surpassing the set ceiling for x amount of rounds y times will eventually lead to forfeiture of future picks) will cripple lower revenue teams. this provision helps no one but the rich owners.
oh well. at least we have labor peace?
oh well. at least we have labor peace?
Even though i'm a yanks fan, its sad i must admit this is true.
Interleague play is fine with me, I just don't understand why the Astros are moving instead of the Brewers. The in-state rivalry crap obviously doesn't mean a whole lot (Cards/Royals, Reds/Indians, Yanks/Mets, Rays/Marlins, Cubs/White Sox, a gajillion California teams can't count; Phillies/Pirates only real exception and they're still in different divisions) or they wouldn't have split them all during the 1995 reallignment in the first place. And the Brewers used to be AL anyway. Moving them back would've been a much smarter choice.
They already moved in the 1990s, why would they move back once they had tremendous success this season. Providing a different league for a team who had one of the worst statistical seasons of all time is a good thing, possibly spicing up the AL central. Plus, what if they were already negotiating with the brews/astros and the brewers did not agree? So all those factors lead into why it was the astros. I personally do not want 50+ interleague games, it takes away the effect.
Or that the Astros' fit a geographic need in the league more so than the Brewers without requiring a need for multiple teams to realign.
On another note, anxiously awaiting BBWAA and their mucked up decision for the MVP awards. Will be a shame if Kemp doesn't get it, and realistically in my mind only Ellsbury and Bautista deserve the award in the AL, but who knows the mess with pitchers involved.
My favorite quotation from dumb ESPN writers about Justin Verlander winning -
On another note, anxiously awaiting BBWAA and their mucked up decision for the MVP awards. Will be a shame if Kemp doesn't get it, and realistically in my mind only Ellsbury and Bautista deserve the award in the AL, but who knows the mess with pitchers involved.
My favorite quotation from dumb ESPN writers about Justin Verlander winning -
LOL high grade bullshit. Lee, Halladay and Kershaw all had better years than Verlander... disgraceful.
You can't have a better year than bautista did at the plate... if you are getting intentionally walked as if you are barry bonds, it is probably a sign that you are a scary as fuck hitter and deserve MVP, regardless of arbitrary external factors like being on a .500 team.
ugh ugh ugh its delgado all over again.
You can't have a better year than bautista did at the plate... if you are getting intentionally walked as if you are barry bonds, it is probably a sign that you are a scary as fuck hitter and deserve MVP, regardless of arbitrary external factors like being on a .500 team.
ugh ugh ugh its delgado all over again.
I have no problems with a pitcher winning the MVP, sure they have the Cy Young, but hitters also have the Hank Aaron, awarded to the best offensive player in each league. Obviously the real issue is this award needs to be treated in much higher esteem. The problem with this award is it is fan voted and it really doesn't get coverage, I didn't even know who won this year until I just checked it.
Basically it should be voted on how the MVP and Cy Young are and the awards should be awarded like:
Cy Young: Best Pitcher
Hank Aaron: Best Position Player
MVP: Player most valuable to his team in the league, the winner doesn't necessarily have to be a winner of one of the others (though it would be pretty likely)
Basically it should be voted on how the MVP and Cy Young are and the awards should be awarded like:
Cy Young: Best Pitcher
Hank Aaron: Best Position Player
MVP: Player most valuable to his team in the league, the winner doesn't necessarily have to be a winner of one of the others (though it would be pretty likely)
What? Barry bonds was one hundred times a more feared hitter, who by himself can lead a team to a WORLD SERIES. Sure bautista was "pitched around", but barry was litteraly not pitched to, having TRIPLE DIGIT INTENTIONAL WALKS in a season, which adds up to other team averages. I know its not steroids, but Bautista surely hit a stretch where he's getting pitches to hit, but he cooled down on the homeruns when pitchers finally thought "hey, maybe i shouldnt throw him a meatball down the middle"? Like jason heyward and many young talent breaking in, i think bautista will never reach levels he did this/last year.
Regarding MVP, it is not who is the best hitter or best pitcher or even best fielder, those are decided within cy young, silver slugger (even though it seems non-prestigious), and gold glove. When thinking about mvp, i think about 4 things
1. Will I want this player up if it was game 7 of the WS, down 1 with 2 outs and nobody on
2. Will this player be consistent? (no major slumps throughout the season)
3. Outfield( who do i want the ball hit to at a potential play at the plate)? Infield( is this player a swift fielder/ can be assured that he will not pull a bill buckner)?
4. Did this player bring success to the team/ lead them into postseason?(not mandatory).
Not just offense influences the candidates for me, being a slouch at defense really hurts their chances in my eyes. Plus for a pitcher such as verlander to win, i believe they have to be so dominant that you know (99 percent chance i'm winning today) Verlander was good, but IMO not worthy of MVP. So who do i think should have won it?
Matt Kemp: 5 tool guy
Jacoby Ellsbury: 5 tool, speed and was the reason the red sox even had hope in the 2011 season.
@orbpom - Matt Kemp isn't the best example. Although one might be tempted to say he's a great fielder based off of the fact that he won a couple of Gold Gloves, try not to be blinded by that award. Gold Gloves are voted on based on reputation and hitting, whether we like it or not. Matt Kemp, with all his athleticism, just doesn't have the natural instinct of a fielder, thusly taking bad routes and making late jumps on some balls, cutting down his range, even though he has great speed and a great arm.
But yeah Jacoby was THE definition of a five tool player this year.
It's clear that the BBWAA needs to get some of their English vocabulary in check. What do they define as value? How do they compare the value of pitchers and hitters? The discrepancy present with each definition present among the writers is just awful.
But enough of that, I just find this to be PATHETIC. I am totally ok with their being a case for pitchers to win, because a pitcher can have an affect on as many plays as a position player (like come on Pedro should've won one of those years...). They cannot create runs, but are greatly able to assist in run prevention. This is where the real value of a pitcher comes.
ERA is a number that is based off of results. I understand the workings of xFIP, FIP, and SIERA, as an attempt to find the true luck independent value of a pitcher. But baseball is a game of results, affected by luck. Understand this.
Yet with all the good fortune he received from his LOB%, and his BABiP, he still was not the best at preventing runs in all of MLB. How could he have been so dominating to be named the Most Valuable Player if he was not the best at preventing runs? Hell, he may not have been the most valuable player on his team.
I'm still on the fence as to what order I would have Jacoby and Bautista, but in no way in my mind could I say I would vote for Verlander in the top two.
But yeah Jacoby was THE definition of a five tool player this year.
It's clear that the BBWAA needs to get some of their English vocabulary in check. What do they define as value? How do they compare the value of pitchers and hitters? The discrepancy present with each definition present among the writers is just awful.
But enough of that, I just find this to be PATHETIC. I am totally ok with their being a case for pitchers to win, because a pitcher can have an affect on as many plays as a position player (like come on Pedro should've won one of those years...). They cannot create runs, but are greatly able to assist in run prevention. This is where the real value of a pitcher comes.
ERA is a number that is based off of results. I understand the workings of xFIP, FIP, and SIERA, as an attempt to find the true luck independent value of a pitcher. But baseball is a game of results, affected by luck. Understand this.
Yet with all the good fortune he received from his LOB%, and his BABiP, he still was not the best at preventing runs in all of MLB. How could he have been so dominating to be named the Most Valuable Player if he was not the best at preventing runs? Hell, he may not have been the most valuable player on his team.
I'm still on the fence as to what order I would have Jacoby and Bautista, but in no way in my mind could I say I would vote for Verlander in the top two.
Jacoby and me will always wonder what would of happened if the Sox won just one more game...
ok, let's calm down everyone. it's not like Verlander winning is a huge disgrace; his fWAR (7.0, tied for 7th best with Granderson) underrates him and his rWAR (8.5 tied with Bautista for best) overrates him. split the difference (give him credit for SOME of his BABIP luck, as part of that is a skill of being able to induce weak contact. not like he has great help on defense), add in the fact that he pitched a ton of innings to save bullpen, and you can make the argument that he was the MVP and not seem like an idiot.
should it have gone to Bautista or Ellsbury? probably -- the former because he was easily the best hitter in the league, the latter if you want to give him credit for playing like a gazelle in CF. i would have voted Bautista, Ellsbury, Verlander myself...but to act like Verlander robbed them is silly.
that being said, Verlander likely did not win it because the voters took in to consideration his BABIP and defense. he won it for very wrong reasons: he played on a playoff team, the other two didn't. he won 24 games, etc. i have a huge problem with the BBWAA voting process -- one nigga had Michael Young as the MVP. Verlander winning is certainly defensible...but these are the same guys that denied Pedro back in the day, denied Schilling, and Randy Johnson. it's nice to see that pitchers are being considered (and they should be) but it was the wrong year.
should it have gone to Bautista or Ellsbury? probably -- the former because he was easily the best hitter in the league, the latter if you want to give him credit for playing like a gazelle in CF. i would have voted Bautista, Ellsbury, Verlander myself...but to act like Verlander robbed them is silly.
that being said, Verlander likely did not win it because the voters took in to consideration his BABIP and defense. he won it for very wrong reasons: he played on a playoff team, the other two didn't. he won 24 games, etc. i have a huge problem with the BBWAA voting process -- one nigga had Michael Young as the MVP. Verlander winning is certainly defensible...but these are the same guys that denied Pedro back in the day, denied Schilling, and Randy Johnson. it's nice to see that pitchers are being considered (and they should be) but it was the wrong year.
In other news, Texas makes a really bold move by signing Joe Nathan to close, and moving Neftali Feliz to the rotation. I know they've been wanting to do this for a while, and while the contract was larger than I would have expected for Nathan (2 yr 14.5 mil), it's still not so big that in a pinch Felix couldn't move back to the bullpen and move Nathan into a setup role.
I think the most upsetting things from this MVP ballot are summed up here, though. I mean, it appeared to be a pretty obvious Tier 1/Tier 2 of voting for most people that were actually informed, and the writers just throw that away with nonsensical things that they consider value.
- Status