Hello as always, HHSers! Dr. Doom here again.
Let’s get to the main event: the minor awards. Jackie Robinson Rookie of the Year and Manager of the Year, in both leagues. They may be the hardest to evaluate, and the ones that are most likely to make you throw up your hands and shout, “Oh who knows?!” So let’s hop to it with some thoughts!
In the NL, the media will tell you that it looks to be a battle between Ronald Acuna and Juan Soto for rookie honors. Don’t sleep on everyone else, though. Harrison Bader plays astonishing CF and hasn’t been bad with the bat. Another Cardinal, Jack Flaherty, has turned in a pretty great season – about 150 innings with a 3.34 ERA ain’t bad for a rookie. Even better was Walker Buehler with 3.4 WAR and 2.62 ERA in 23 starts and 137.1 IP. Others to consider include Brian Anderson (3.9 WAR) and Dereck Rodriguez (2.81 ERA in 19 starts and 118.1 IP). But remember, your ballot has only three slots.
Over in the Junior Circuit, Shohei Otani grabbed the headlines early, and with good reason. However, the AL rookie WAR leader, with a creditable 4.3 score (3.7 on FanGraphs), was (senior citizen) Joey Wendle, a 28-year-old who played all over the diamond. Brad Keller, a “swing-man” for the Royals, put up a nice 3.08 ERA in 140 innings (other notables with rookie seasons of 20+ starts and 20+ relief appearances include Orel Hershiser, Dean Chance and Mike Garcia). The only rookie All-Star was Gleyber Torres with his .275/.343/.482 slash playing 2B and SS on the big stage in the Bronx next to Miguel Andujar, he of the 47 doubles (tied with Fred Lynn for the AL rookie record) and 27 dingers. And, don’t forget Ryan Yarborough in Tampa with 147.1 IP and 16 wins; those totals are the most for any reliever (80% of appearances), never mind a rookie, since, respectively, 1991 and 1977.
As for managers… well, what do you like? Do you like those guys who’ve met high expectations in the AL, like Alex Cora, A.J. Hinch, or Aaron Boone. Or, are you a fan of Bob Melvin‘s overperforming A’s? In the NL, do you think Dave Roberts overcame the most injuries and deserves credit for bringing the Dodgers as far as they’ve gotten? Do you want to reward Bud Black, Craig Counsell, or Brian Snitker for getting their teams there a year or two before they were supposed to get there? Or maybe Mike Schildt, for turning around a .500 Cardinal team and almost taking them to the post-season? Or do you think the grand Gabe Kapler experiment has been enough of a success to merit a vote, despite a late-season collapse? Let us know!
Rules: Vote by making a comment below and numbering your choices with 1 being the MOST preferred candidate, and 3 being your LEAST preferred candidate of your three choices. Please vote under only one screen name (I’m looking at you, RockInTheHall; it’s been five years, but I haven’t forgotten). Your ballots will be EXACTLY three places for each award, just as the BBWAA does. Scoring will be 5-3-1, just as the BBWAA does. You may post all your ballots in the same comment, or you may vote in separate comments. You are not required to vote in all elections; only vote in the ones you would like to vote in. You may make vote changes, if the discussion so moves you. If you change your vote, please do so in a new comment, not as a reply to your original comment (it’s a lot easier to find new comments than replies to old ones). Please don’t vote strategically; we’re trying to get the best result, not to manipulate the vote totals based on what others have done . Voting will remain open about one week.
Sorry for the late posting, folks. I’ll get things rolling with these picks in the NL.
1. Buehler – allowed 2 runs or less in 19 of 23 starts. Take away his lone relief outing, and his ERA shrinks to 2.31.
2. Soto – virtually identical numbers to Acuna. Gets the edge with more walks (Soto is on a short list of 10 rookies since 1901 with a 16% walk rate in 400+ PA).
3. Acuna – led MLB rookies with 2.6 WAA. Led NL leadoff hitters in all three slash components (min. 300 PA batting leadoff), and close second in MLB behind Betts.
In the AL, had Andujar been just a mediocre fielder, he would have made my ballot, and probably would have been at the top if only an average fielder. But, he was an awful fielder, negating a large chunk of his significant offensive contribution. So, I’ll go with this selection.
1. Ohtani – led MLB rookies with 5.1 combined WAR, despite playing with and losing time to injury
2. Wendle – led AL rookies with .300 BA and 2.4 WAA (better than Ohtani’s combined 2.3). Only MLB rookie with 2.0 oWAR and positive R scores for fielding, baserunning and DP.
3. Torres – solid all around season on the biggest stage. Scorching .356/.457/.559 filling in for Gregorius at short.
Will post my manager picks later.
Who, me? What?!?
Whoever wrote this, you are hilarious, and you make me happy.
It was me, the real RockInTheHall (aka Dan McCloskey). I vaguely remember voting as RockInTheHall as well as myself for something, but I think it was something really important, like Tim Raines’ Circle of Greats vote. Am I right?
Rookie of the Year—an award I don’t much like. It lumps together players of all ages, first of all, since the only criterion is lack of prior experience in the Bigs. Sam Jethro won it at 33, which statistically used to be—maybe not anymore—the year most likely to be the last really good one in a longer career. All the same, a surprising number of winners have been 27 or older, taking advantage, perhaps, of a maturity that younger players competing against them for the award had in short supply.
By my informal count, so I may have missed somebody, there have been 15 ROY winners so far who made the HOF. Through 1995, the year before the next obvious HOFer, Derek Jeter, won the award, 98 players rang the award bell, meaning that as a predictor of greatness, the award is around 15% accurate. How many HOFers did it miss between 1947 and 1995? Well, let’s see. There’s Robin Roberts, Duke Snider, Richie Ashburn, Larry Doby, Whitey Ford . . da-da, da-da . . Alan Trammell, Jack Morris, Jim Thome, Vlad Guerrero. Sixty-nine by my informal count. Only one pitcher (that’s 1%) has made it to the Hall who also was Rookie of the year (Quiz: who was it?), whereas 26 of my 69 non-ROY post-1946 HOFers made it through their exploits on the mound. Has the ROY ignored pitchers? Nope. Twenty-four of the 98 (24.5%) ROY winners through 1995 were hurlers, hurlers too often like Joe Black and Harry Bird, Butch Metzger and Mark Fidrych.
Nope. Not my favorite award.
I suppose you could look at it in two ways….15% as a predictor of greatness is not at all bad when you consider the total population of rookies that come up, or not picking the 85% of those who would be HOF.
How about a table with the career WAR of ROY? BTW, recent ROY’s seem to be a stronger cohort.
I agree about the age gaps, but when you’re voting, all you can do is consider actual performance, not who you think will be a Hall of Famer. Now, should a 20 year old who had a slightly worse line than a 27 year old be given more weight because we know how the aging curve goes and we know that a 20 year old star is likely going to be a superstar, whereas lots of good 27 year olds will peter out quickly because they’ve already peaked? That I’m not sure about.
To give one example, in 1994, Manny Ramirez finished 2nd in AL ROY voting to Bob Hamelin. Ramirez was 22 and was Baseball America’s #7 prospect going into the year. Hamelin was 26, had been the #31 prospect in 1990 but had faded and was a classic case of a younger guy with “old player skills.” I don’t think a single person, even in Hamelin’s family, thought he was destined for a better career than Ramirez, who had absolutely crushed the ball in the minors and was a safe bet to be a star. But Hamelin clearly had the better year in 94 – played more games, hit better, and both were zeroes on defense. Give me a ballot in 1994, I probably vote Hamelin. But ask me who was a more likely Hall of Famer? Not even close – Manny by a mile.
Nsb, you might be overthinking this one a bit.
Predictor of greatness? Who has ever said that that is what the award is about?
It is the award for the best rookie. Pretty straightforward. And I’m sure the guys who have won it felt great.
Why not have a sophomore of the year award, or a best third year award? I disagree that there isn’t an element of expectation about the future in this award, or it wouldn’t be in existence.
As for picking the best rookie, it very often hasn’t done that, not even in its initial year, when Larry Jansen’s season was really much better that Jackie Robinson’s.
Further—a negative point I left out above—some years there simply aren’t any first year players who do much. In the MVP and CY votes, even in sparse years we can find fairly outstanding performances that are deserving of recognition whether the vote goes their way or not—this year’s AL Cy Young, for instance. In the 1962 NL ROY, the only players receiving votes were the winner, Ken Hubbs (0.0 WAR) and Donn Clendenon (1.7 WAR). Hubbs won in a landslide 19-1 vote, probably because Clendenon only started 73 games. Hubbs died tragically, of course, before he could prove or disprove his long-term worth, but the gap between his or Clendenon’s performance and that of Mike Trout in 2012 at the other end of the spectrum is huge.
So, sure, the award only picks the best rookie season, or tries to, but I stand by my reasons for disliking it.
1963 Pete Rose won the ROY award and he isn’t ever going to make Cooperstown.
1964 Allen and Oliva won and had good careers but I don’t believe anyone from this class made the Hall
1965 Jim Lefebvre won over a more-deserving Joe Morgan who, obviously, made the Hall
I guess this kind of stuff happens. Years ago, maybe in the 1985 Baseball Abstract annual, Bill James suggested Julio Franco would have the better career of Franco and Ron Kittle because he was younger (not so much in reality but Franco at one time was holding a 1961 birth certificate) and emphasized that Ryne Sandberg’s breakout season in 1984 was inevitable since he broke in at age 22 and had a relatively long career ahead of him. But, yeah, it’s the “Rookie of the Year” award and there isn’t much we can do about the disparity in ages. By the same token, we should celebrate these young guys like Acuna and Soto who make such a serious impact on the field…..like Aaron, Mays, Robinson (age 20) debuts and Arod and Junior Griffey…..and Trout….and Harper
AL ROY
1. Wendle (I believe there is an added value to super-utility guys that even the omniscient WAR doesn’t account for. Tony Phillips should be on that dopey ballot with Steinbrenner)
2. Sho Oh.
3. Gleyber. (21 year old SS.
———-
NL ROY
Miami is clearly rated as a terrible place to hit. Anderson and Bader had nearly identical OPS.
But their OPS+ are 115 & 106
It really is amazing how close Soto and Acuna are numbers. I’d give Acuna the edge for wheels and D.
1. Acuna
2. Buehler
3. Bader
1) Ohtani – Would have been an incredible season if not for the injury
2) Wendle – From Avon Grove (PA) HS – approximately 7.5 miles from where I sit and type. I guess I have to vote for him
3) Torres – The younger of the two Yankees
1) Acuna – more of a total package than Soto
2) Soto – that’s an incredible eye and patience (Mel Ott ?)
3) Anderson
1) Snitker – Wow, the Braves
2) Counsell – great year
3) Black
1) Melvin – nice surprise
2) Boone – the young guys really surprised
3) Cora – incredible talent and he didn’t screw it up
Manager of the Year—according tho whom? The Sporting News began such an award in 1936—one winner per year through 1985, one per league since. The current ‘official’ award began only in 1983. The AP had one for awhile, too.
But how do you evaluate managers—really? Won-lost record, improvement over previous season, outdoing the Pythagorean norm? What they do with their lineups, how they adjust in late innings in close games? To me it’s all pretty nebulous. Some may manage well but are betrayed by their players’ lack of talent. Some may win in spite of their own lack of talent, because their players overcame their incompetence.
How can we know the dancer from the dance?
Okay, I’ll join you in the Curmudgeon Corner on this one.
NSB, Manager Mythology is a part of publicizing the sport (any sport), and the media loves to play it that way. The hero-worship is probably worse in football (especially college football) but it’s all of a piece…that every man can be a Lombardi
It is the dumbest award. Usually, people are just rewarded for doing “better than we thought.” The problem is, expectations vary from year to year. Honestly, Terry Francona is, for my money, probably the best manager in baseball. I don’t think that’s likely to change this year. I also don’t think I’ll be voting for him. It’s kind of like if they’d given the MVP to Mickey Mantle like 10 straight years. Might’ve been deserved, but it wouldn’t have been that interesting. And I say that as someone who’s voted for Trout a LOT of times in various internet awards things. It is, frankly, more interesting when you vary your choices, even if it means a sort of intellectual dishonesty in which you have to not vote for the “best.”
By that criteria, which honestly seems equally relevant than any other criteria for the award I’ve ever heard, I’d probably vote for Maddon and Francona, yes. I think some of it is “being interesting for fans” when that may not actually help his team win games. For example I think Boone did exceedingly well for a rooking manager in NYC but he will never last because he is not interesting enough in a city that demands it.
My criterion would be the manager who got the most out of what he had to work with. Did that team’s players perform better than would be expected based on their past performance and, if so, did that level of performance translate into an expected or better win total. Pretty hard for a team to do those two things and not be well managed.
Of course, that’s a lot easier to say than to measure, but if you see several players on a team having close to or career best years, or a return to form after a down year or two, that’s probably a good indicator for the first part. The second part is trickier, as it’s not just meeting or exceeding Pythag, but whether the team scored and allowed the runs that would be expected (or better) based on their stat lines. Runs Created will help in this regard. Anyway, that’s probably how I’d go about it, if I wanted to evaluate a team’s performance and results completely objectively.
The most important thing a manager can do is not screw up all the smart stuff the front office did over the winter. Who was it that sais that? I think it was Sparky Anderson or Earl Weaver.
As Yogi once said when he was managing, “What makes a good manager? Good players.”
So. I’ve looked at some of the possible criteria in my previous comment about evaluation of managers, and the one guy who stands out on the basis of team results up and down the line has yet to be mentioned in this thread. Maybe I’m ignorant in the extreme: Seattle’s a long way off, and it’s a team I’ve never paid a bit of attention to, even when they rang up 116 wins that year.
But—
Scott Servais must have done something right or else the fates simply intervened. Last year the team was 78-84, expectation 79-83. This year they improved by 11 wins to 89-73 which was 12 games above Pythagorean expectation. They obviously got hammered a lot when they lost and had a 17-26 record in blowouts. In games when they scored 2 runs or less, though, they were 11-26, a creditable result. In one-run contests they were 36-21, a .632 pace. In extra innings they were 14-1.
On the basis of these criteria, Servais deserves both league awards.
Let’s get it over with.
NL
1) Acuna
2) Buehler
3) Soto
AL
1) Ohtani
2) Wendle
3) Keller
NL
1) Counsell
2) Snitker
3) Roberts
AL
1) Servais
2) Cora
3) Melvin
Here’s my vote. I’m only voting for ROYs.
AL
1) Ohtani
2) Andujar
3) Torres
NL
1)Acuna
2) Soto
3) Buehler
The book is closed on Chase Utley.
Hall of Fame?
Circle of Greats?
Among our inductees, he has a very low total of plate appearances to go with his 65.4 WAR.
Disincluding Catchers, and guys who lost time to military and segregation:
8220 … Grich
8030 … Larry Walker
7863 … Utley
6676 … HR Baker
Baker lost a season to a contract dispute, and another to the death of his wife.
Voomo:
Utley’s glory days are so far in the past in baseball terms that I had to look up his record for a refresher. He was certainly at the heart of the minor Phillies dynasty of the 2000s into 2012, but so was Rollins. Teammates Rollins and Howard won MVPs, but Utley never came close to that recognition, presumably doing good by stealth. A rather large chunk of his WAR total comes from dWAR, notably the 3.5 figure from 2008. In 2005 the Phillies infield registered 0.7 dWar from Howard, 2.7 from Utley, 2.7 from Rollins, and 2.0 from Bell. Got to wonder a little if those numbers carry that much weight.
Among contemporaries at second base, he ranks second of five at JAWS, pretty far behind Cano, well ahead of Kinsler, Pedroia, and Kent, only on the basis of fielding with Kent, though, who also scored an MVP. And yet Utley is or was hardly overlooked for other awards, Silver Slugger 4 times, All Star 6.
Tried comparing him with Ryne Sandburg. In an an era of somewhat greater run scarcity, Sandburg scored a lot more, stole a lot more bases. Otherwise they’re a fair match in raw stats at the plate. Might be deceptive, since Sandburg led the NL in oWAR three times, Utley came in 3rd once. Sandburg was regarded as an incredible fielder in his time—9 Gold Gloves. Utley 0, although the winners in his era seem not to field notably better than he does by dWAR standards. Never followed him at all. Did he lack flash?
Grich 62.6 oWAR, Walker 62.8, Baker 59.4, Utley 51.2. So it seems to come down to Utley’s glove. Will the HOF and COG voters buy into that dWAR figure sufficiently to enshrine him?
Good comment, Voomo. I suspect he will get votes in five years, although his career may fade somewhat in people’s memories.
Anyone understand why all the trade boards are saying that Cleveland is interested in shopping Kluber and Carrasco?
Makes no sense to me. They both have 3 years left on their contracts, and Cleveland is a contender.
Sure they can get a haul, but what is more valuable than an Ace?
Supposedly they can’t sustain their payroll near the cap they have to lower it or risk insolvency. Even winning their division, Cleveland baseball interest is low. They seem to lose fans to the Reds, Pirates, Cubs, and White Sox even in their own town.
I don’t know how much of it is eye wash, to use Cone’s phrase, but supposedly they’re looking at $150M max for a team payroll and that means cuts.
I see. That makes sense.
Still, Id try to move Encarnacion, Kipnis, Hand, Gomes, Salazar, and Alonso before Kluber and Carrasco.
I’m hoping they’re ‘listening’ in the same way that the Nationals were ‘listening’ on Harper prior to the break, but sadly the Dolans might just be broke. They’ve taken a lot of crap over the years for being cheap but the fact is that they’ve massively upped payroll in the past few years, and as mosc noted, it hasn’t done all that much for attendance. The Tribe has been to a WS, had a 22 game winning streak, and made the playoffs three straight years – at this point I don’t know what more they can do to get fans.
They are also listening on the names you mentioned, Voomo – Kipnis and Alonso and Encarnacion and Gomes have been noted as being up for grabs. Problem is, who wants them? I suppose Encarnacion is still productive enough, but $20 million is a lot to swallow for a guy on the wrong side of 35. Of course, he’s only under contract for 2019 and a team option for 2020 ($5 million buyout to avoid a $20 million option year), so he’s probably the easiest to move. Gomes shouldn’t be too hard to move, but he only saves you $7 million. Meanwhile I just can’t see anybody ponying up for Kipnis.
All that being said, I’m not sure how much payroll they really have to clear. Brantley, Allen and Miller leaving already freed up $30 million. If the hard cap for them is $150m, they’re still well under that – problem is they can’t afford much beyond bargain basement FAs. Luckily they don’t need very much, but to compete with the superteams some bullpen arms and a corner OF bat would certainly help, and we just don’t have the cash to pursue either one. It’s going to have to be a glove-first OF and a patchwork BP.
First move should be to allow everybody in the greater Cleveland area to suggest and vote for a new team nickname. That would generate interest and investment and make things feel fresh .
I disagree – I think fan backlash would overwhelm any positive gains from making the fans ‘feel involved.’ I hate to even think it because I live and die Indians baseball, but I think their days in Cleveland may be numbered. It’s so frustrating just overhearing casual fans who still won’t let go of the 90’s, even though the teams the past three seasons have been every bit as good as the 90’s squads, outside of the 1995 team which was a once in a generation assemblage of talent and it’s hard to expect that kind of success again. There’s always some excuse – the weather, kids still in school, LeBron and the Cavs pulling away fans. But LeBron leaving in FA didn’t do much for August and September ticket sales.
Fan backlash from what? That folks are attached to the “indians’ name?
Interesting.
Part of what I find amazing about that 1995 team is that with Thome, Belle, and Manny having extraordinary years, Omar Visquel was the number 2 hitter.
Baerga was the 3-man, which isnt so crazy given his previous record.
It was both Manny and Thome’s first full-full seasons.
They batted 6th and 7th.
Does that team hold the record for the most players with at least 287 career home runs?
612 … Thome
555 … Manny
504 … Eddie Murray
465 … Dave Winfield
381 … Albert Belle
315 … Jeromy Burnitz
287 … Brian Giles
Oh, and Albert Belle’s projected numbers, had they played 162 instead of 144:
137 R
195 H
58 2B
1 3B
56 HR
142 RBI
.317 / .401 / .690 / 1.091 …… 427 Total Bases
WAR , 2B (70% G), ages 26-30
1 Rogers Hornsby 43.5
2 Chase Utley 39.7
3 Eddie Collins 39.5
4 Joe Morgan 36.2
5 Robinson Cano 34.6
6 Rod Carew 34.6
7 Nap Lajoie 33.2
8 Frankie Frisch 29.4
9 Chuck Knoblauch 28.4
10 Dustin Pedroia 27.2
oWAR, same parameters as above
1 Rogers Hornsby 43.8
2 Eddie Collins 36.8
3 Joe Morgan 33.9
4 Rod Carew 33.4
5 Nap Lajoie 31.6
6 Robinson Cano 30.6
7 Chase Utley 29.4
8 Chuck Knoblauch 26.7
9 Craig Biggio 26.6
10 Charlie Gehringer 24.6
Voom,
Utley gets a huge bump in his best years from dWAR. He was a great base-runner but his fielding wasn’t as, shall we say, “eloquent” as Cano’s. He wasn’t a smooth fielder and you could literally see him “digging” to get to the ball. BUT, he did get to the ball….He played in an extreme hitter’s park in an extreme hitter’s era.
You can see how oWAR treats Ryan Howard’s production during the years 2006-2011 and, despite AN AVERAGE OF 44 HR’s and 133 RBI for the 6 seasons, it’s almost like he’s thought of as an average middle of the lineup guy:
oWAR, 2006-2011, >50%G, 1B or DH
1 Albert Pujols 38.9
2 Miguel Cabrera 35.7
3 Mark Teixeira 25.7
4 Adrian Gonzalez 25.5
5 Kevin Youkilis 25.4
6 Prince Fielder 24.6
7 Lance Berkman 24.4
8 David Ortiz 21.4
9 Ryan Howard 21.2
10 Joey Votto 20.5
I guess I would agree with the thought Utley hung on too long and those best years are a mere distant memory.
Re: Ryan Howard –
I have a friend who’s a big Phillies fan. I am a big Brewers fan. We had a LOT of arguments in that era as to whose bulky, defense-avoidant first baseman was the more valuable player. He seemed to (usually) have the advantage in counting stats in his favor, but I think Fielder was actually the better player, and I believe the sabermetric numbers (beyond WAR, even) bear that out (I also think Fielder, who could really move pretty well at that point in his career, was a much better… [ahem] fielder than Howard).
OPS+, Fielder leads 144-139; WPA, Fielder leads 26.9-26.8.
Those numbers are, for all practical purposes, equal. But if you acknowledge Prince as better defensively, you can’t help but come to the conclusion that he was the better player. So the difference, then, is that Howard played in a ballpark that made the same underlying ability make him average 44/133 over that time, while Fielder averaged 38/108.
Doom,
It’s not Coors Field for inflating offensive stats but, yeah, Citizens Bank Ballpark is pretty bad. Neutralized career slashes:
.253/.337/.502 Howard (125 OPS+)
.278/.377/.497 Fielder (134 OPS+)
As far as fielding, it’s a case of putting lipstick on your sow of choice. I find it somewhat comical that the Prince was a vegetarian
All I remember of Prince’s fielding is his botching a routine catch in the first inning of the All-Star game, and the cameras cutting to his father in the stands, looking surly.
Prince fell off a cliff defensively pretty quickly but as a young man, he moved pretty damn well. He also took a liking to Teixeira’s way of receiving which helped immensely over Howard (who was awful at everything other than hitting HR’s)
Lowest ops+ in a season with 145+ RBI:
125 … Ryan Howard (2008)
127 … Andres Galarraga (Coors)
131 … Al Simmons
131 … Miguel Tejada
135 … Hardy Richardson (of the 1890 Players League)
(some RBI opportunities on a team with 426 stolen bases)
137 … Vern Stephens
141 … Johnny Bench
146 … Hal Trotsky
146 … Manny Ram
148 … Tommy Davis
149 … Juan Gone
Here’s another wrinkle. Shifting was still fairly uncommon through Utley’s prime but the phillies shifted more than most. Utley was one of the first second basemen to regularly play on the SS side of the bag against certain right handed hitters. Metrics did not separate back them (do you remember Brett Lawrie being the greatest third basemen glove ever simply because they swung him over to the 1B side of second base against lefties?) and I’m not sure how much that “inflates” Utley’s glove. I live nearby, I saw him play plenty. He was excellent on a lot of little things even if his range wasn’t historic and his arm lead to some errors. Rollins to Utley was always an impressive turn. Utley was certainly not going to hold back to give the runner space.
IMHO: before about 2010, our defensive metrics flattened everybody. Bad players were too close to average, good players were too close to average. Brooks Robinson compared to Bubba Phillips was probably a bigger throw than we like to admit (though I’m of the opinion Machado/Arenado could keep up with him but they have modern advantages). In the old game, defensive differences were more extreme that we see in the modern game. Guys sucked or simply got old (without modern surgeries!) and fielding from the gloves, spikes, and growndskeeping to the positionings, spray charts, and athletic conditioning has spoiled us.
Hall of Stats has Utley with a 136 rating, easily into HoF territory. Other second baseman with similar HoS ratings.
Whitaker – 145
Grich – 141
Frisch – 138
Sandberg – 130
Randolph – 124
Gordon – 118
If we use B-R and neutralize their stats to the 2009 Philadelphia Phillies, we get:
.275/.358/.463 with 1,882 H 1,096 R 254 HR 1,017 RBI for Utley
.285/.345/.453 with 2,424 H 1,347 R 285 HR 1,081 RBI for Sandberg
If we combine the two we get Chase & Sandberg – not quite the coffee maker of old and a current subsidiary of Sara Lee. But, I digress. I have to believe Sandberg was the better base stealer and hit with more power in his prime. By the same token, who knows what kind of numbers Utley may have amassed if he would have forsook UCLA and signed out of HS. I guess those modern fielding metrics are the basis of Utley’s more favorable Hall of Stats rating?
Hall of Stats has Utley with 172 Batting runs and 141 Fielding runs (and 113 runs for baserunning, DP and position).
So, HoS is saying Utley was a better base runner than Sandberg and a better fielder. “Geeze, it’s a pleasure to meet you, Mr. Utley.”
1 Torres
2 Ohtani
3 Andujar
1 Acuna
2 Soto
3 Buehler. Buehler?
I don’t have a manager of the year preference. I think manager’s impacts are generally over-hyped in the modern era. Especially in today’s game, it’s a big staff of people and the big league staff works more intimiately with GM’s and the farm system folks.
My manager picks.
1. Melvin
2. Cash
3. Cora
1. Snitker
2. Conine
3. Black
Doug,
we all seemed to have forgotten about Cash in the AL despite a great job….but is “Conine” really supposed to be “Counsell”
Indeed, it was meant to be Counsell. Don’t know where Conine came from (channeling ’97 Marlins, I guess).
I wasn’t going to do managers, but Im not quite old enough to be a curmudgeon all of the time.
1. Kevin Cash (the balls and freedom to innovate and make it work)
2. Bob Melvin (13 SP with at least 5 starts, and a payroll only higher than Cash’s)
3. Cora
1. Don Mattingly (he should get some recognition for coming to work)
2. Counsell (with a nod to his GM)
3. Bud Black
I’m sitting this one out — I just don’t track the season in a way that gives me the background for these votes — but I logged on after thinking about the early votes here to ask why no one had proposed Cash for Manager of the Year. I see that Doug and Voomo have already made that question irrelevant. I don’t think Cash’s approach is good for baseball, but it seemed to be good for the Rays, which is all he’s paid to consider.
I’m with Bob on this. I usually sit out the re-votes of these awards anyway, and I don’t feel I have enough granular info to contribute. And I’m definitely with him on Cash–both sides of it. Really striking that Tampa had only 5 players with more than 96 games, and only two pitchers with more than 96 IP. If that’s the direction of the game, it’s really boring.
I just realized two things:
1.) I never posted my votes, and
2.) I never set a date for this to close. Let’s try to get all our votes in my Sunday night, if you’re still considering posting one.
So, I’ll post my votes now.
NL ROY:
1. Ronald Acuna –
2. Juan Soto –
3. Harrison Bader –
HM: What more can you say about Walker Buehler? He had a really great year, and composed himself like a veteran. Looks like he’ll have a nice career ahead of him.
AL ROY:
1. Shohei Ohtani –
2. Gleyber Torres –
3. Miguel Andujar –
HM: Joey Wendle isn’t named on my ballot, not because of his performance, but because I’m not sure he should really have rookie status. He’s nearly as old as I am, and I don’t think I deserve awards for being young anymore; additionally, he just barely avoided his rookie status being run out in previous seasons.
NL MOY:
1. Craig Counsell – Unashamed homer pick. I mean, I also think he did a great job making the team come together a year or two ahead of schedule, but I think it’s deserved.
2. Brian Snitker – Speaking of a year or two ahead of schedule…
3. Bud Black – The Rockies? The Rockies! They made the playoffs! Their pitchers were somehow the strength of the team! Good for Black.
HM: Gabe Kapler could’ve easily been on the list. I think people are blaming him for the second-half fade, rather than appreciating the fact that they had no business being in contention in the first place. I think it was impressive to keep them in the running as long as he did.
AL MOY:
1. Bob Melvin – I mean… 100 wins. Seriously?! With THAT team?!
2. AJ Hinch – What else can you say about the job this guy does? Probably baseball’s best team, in spite of the difficulty of the “hangover” year.
3. Scott Servais – It’s a really impressive job. Yes, they slipped in the second half of the season, but they were in baseball’s toughest division, and they performed remarkably well.
I didn’t vote for Cora, because I’m not convinced he had that much to do with the success of the BoSox this year. I also think that, all things considered, Mike Scioscia did one of his best jobs as a manager this season.
Homer vote? well, they give each city in the league two votes if they can fill them. In 1998, Mark McGwire had 70 homeruns and only two first-place MVP votes — both from St Louis writers.
NL ROY
1. Acuna
2. Soto
3. Buehler
AL ROY
1. Ohtani
2. Andujar
3. Torres
NL MOY
1. Snitker
2. Black
3. Counsell
AL MOY
1. Melvin
2. Cora
3. Cash
Any comment on the official CYA voting?
If the writers didn’t care about W-L for deGrom, they must have been swayed solely by WAR, don’t you think, since Snell had many Ws and a kind of rigged WAR. But the AL was a turkey shoot.
Actually, now that I’ve looked, deGrom’s WAR wasn’t the highest, so the vote seems even more unlikely—not that he won so much as the 29 firsts.
Actually, deGrom did have the highest WAR – on Fangraphs, anyway. But I kinda doubt the BBWAA is made up of guys who consulted that site for their votes. Most likely, they actually watched him pitch, and between that and the ERA, figured he deserved it.
Why is Snell’s WAR rigged? He had roughly the same park factors and defense as Verlander. Verlander pitched 35 more innings, yes. And as for him going deeper into games, Ver faced 26 more batters after the sixth inning.
And Verlander’s ERA in the sixth and seventh inning was 4.80 and 4.65.
Snell was 2.18 and 2.61
He wiped out lefties to a .413 ops.
You may not like the direction that Kevin Cash moved baseball in terms of pitcher use, but a 1.89 RA with three unearned runs is legit.
Voomo,
On Verlander’s late-inning ERA, let’s not blow off the fact that he had an 0.00 RA in 4.2 IP covering the 8th and 9th (Snell also had an 0.00 RA, but it covered only 1.0 IP in the 8th). Even so, I found you “late” inning ERA comparison a good argument for Snell, given the issue of his short starts.
No one is arguing that Snell’s numbers are not superior, and Verlander was not the kind of workhorse he once was. But what I think nsb means by “rigged” was that Cash pulled Snell before he got into trouble, anticipating that his performance would decline. Snell could pour it on in the 6th and 7th, confident that he wouldn’t be going further. I don’t know Verlander’s record as well, but I assume that Hinch allowed him to stay in until there were signs he was losing effectiveness. Those signs (of tiring) account for his higher late-inning ERA, and the fact that in many of Snell’s starts he was pulled before he got into trouble is I think what nsb meant by “rigged.”
And, as for the basics, Verlander pitched an average of a half-inning more per start than Snell, and he started about 10% more games. Snell never pitched more than 7.1 IP, and of his 31 starts, 12 did not go 6 IP, which compares to Verlander’s 6 in 34 starts.
Snell’s record wasn’t so much rigged as it was guided by a novel theory that asked less of him. He proved able to provide what was asked of him exceptionally well. But some of his CYA competitors were working on a different basis, being asked to give everything they had.
nsb, the “new orthodoxy” for the BBWAA seems to be ERA, rather than wins. I think that pretty much explains it. As for Snell, I think it’s pretty well-tested that, if you lead in both ERA and Wins, the voters are going to go for you. I recall thinking that David Price didn’t deserve the award he won, but he led in both of those categories, so there wasn’t really any other way that was gonna go.
I think there was never any real doubt, but I was glad to see your guy get the NL MVP, Doom. He earned it. It should have unanimous, but at least the missing vote went to deGrom, rather than to another hitter with an inferior record. Converting apples and oranges can yield some odd calculations, but no hitter could compete with Yelich this year.
Good morning, friends. I thought I’d share a Bill James tweet. “If people ever decide that a given measurement–WAR or Win Shares or whatever it is–if people ever decide that a measurement is perfect and should be assumed correct, then analysis is dead. At that point there would be nowhere else for us to go.”
Mike L
I believe when confronted with the possibility of a stat that was superior to all others as a measurement of performance James indicated (years ago – in the dark ages before Twitter) something along the order of “we’ll just have to come up with another one.”
Question for Doug. The new HOF ballot is just out…can we start a post on the topic? Last year, partially based on conversations on HHS, I wrote a piece on HOF voting for 3Quarksdaily.com. I don’t plan to do it again, but the thoughtful discussions by the HHS commenters were invaluable, and I’d like to see them continue here. It continues to be a packed ballot.
Definitely would like to have a discussion about that.
Meanwhile, the rich just get richer….Paxton to the Yanks. But the Mariners pick up Justus Sheffield in the deal.
I agree with Mike. There are 34 names on the full ballot (newbies and . . . olderbies) and two months to the announcement of results. Voters have to submit ballots by Dec. 31, and we certainly want them to have plenty of time to read and reflect on the views of the influential HHS community. (Right?)
More to the point, this a seriously fun exercise that may draw back some of our missing regulars and warm us up for the CoG round to come.
And it’s going to require real effort to make sure Rick Ankiel is enshrined in the Hall before his MLB comeback succeeds. . . . A real effort.
Yes, will get that up as soon as I can (have a lot on the go right now). Also working on a McCovey piece.
Looking forward to both, Doug. A good time, perhaps, to thank you once again for all your work sustaining this site . . . after all, where I’m sitting and typing now thanksgiving has just become the order of the day.
Results!
Sorry for not posting these for a long time; my wife’s grandmother passed away, work has been busy, and I’ve been paying too much attention to the chess world championships. As always, I’ll list vote points, then first place votes in parentheses. Without further ado:
NL ROY:
1. Ronald Acuna, 36 (7)
2. Juan Soto, 19
3. Walker Buehler, 14 (1)
4. Harrison Bader, 2
5. Brian Anderson, 1
Only Acuna was named on all 8 ballots. Bader and Anderson were only given third-place nods, therefore the other three really separated themselves from the pack. Richard Chester, mosc, and Josh Davis all had the exact order of finishers on their ballots.
AL ROY:
1. Shohei Ohtani, 36 (6)
2. Joey Wendle, 14 (1)
3. Gleyber Torres, 13 (1)
4. Miguel Andujar, 8
5. Brad Keller, 1
Ohtani alone appeared on all 8 ballots. Torres appeared on 7 ballots, but most of his voters (three) had him third, so he didn’t manage to crack the top-2. Joey Wendle was only named on half of ballots… but those who felt him worthy always had him first or second. Doug and Paul E nailed the top-3 in order.
NL MOY:
1. Brad Snitker, 21 (3)
2. Craig Counsell, 20 (2)
3. Bud Black, 7
4. Don Mattingly, 5 (1)
5. Dave Roberts, 1
This was actually the only competitive/interesting race. With only six ballots cast, the numbers were tight, and both Snitker and Counsell had great years with division-winning teams most people didn’t expect to compete at all. Counsell came in second, but was the only manager named by all six voters. Paul and Doug had all three in order on their ballots.
AL MOY:
1. Bob Melvin, 24 (4)
2. Alex Cora, 9
3. Kevin Cash, 9 (1)
4. Scott Servais, 6 (1)
5. Aaron Boone, 3
6. AJ Hinch, 3
Weirdly, the other three awards had exactly 5 people receive votes. The AL Manager award ruined the streak. To remind you of my tie-breaking procedures, the first is the number of ballots the person was named on (this broke the Cora-Cash tie). The next is highest-ballot placement (this was not relevant to any of these ties). Finally, if after all things are tied, we take away ballots from the bottom until we break the tie (this broke the Boone-Hinch tie). Anyway, Melvin was the only manager named on all six ballots. And only Josh Davis nailed the top three finishers in order.
Thanks for participating, everyone! I always enjoy seeing how our community compares to the BBWAA, since we have a lot of thoughtful people around here!
Good series of posts, Doom. Sorry your family suffered a loss.
If you’re galvanized by the chess match, I can understand why you’ve expressed less alarm at pure-TTO baseball than some of us. You must have such a keen eye for fine detail that the satisfaction of seeing a ball in play or a game actually won is insignificant. In baseball terms, it looks to me as though the chess competitors are effectively in a scoreless tie after 90 innings, with maybe only four or five real scoring threats having been foiled. I know where I’d be if it were a long, long day at the ballpark, but chess folks being what they are, it seems the stands are still packed.
Thanks for the condolences, Bob.
On the one hand, my interest in this particular chess match is that it HAS been so even – the same way that an awful lot of people think that 1991 Game 7 is the very best baseball has to offer… and other people will see 9.5 boring innings of nothing happening. It’s all in your perspective on the thing. I see two titans playing at peak level (at least in 3-4 of the games, particularly Game 10), the unstoppable force and the immovable object, locked in a struggle. Their ELO ratings are only 3 points apart (2835-2832). I’m hoping we’ll see a championship today. Also, I find the “best of 12” format to be hilarious.
As for TTO results, I wouldn’t say I’m not troubled by them; I much prefer baseball with lots of hits, balls in play, stolen bases. That’s MUCH more fun to watch as a fan. The issue I have is that I think people are lobbying the players and coaches, as if THEY’RE going to be the ones to change the game. People say stuff like, “Why don’t these coaches tell batters/pitchers to focus more on _____?” Well, it’s pretty obvious to me: the best results come from finding the best TTO players, and letting them do their thing. That’s just backed up again and again, study after study; pure TTO pitchers are better; pure TTO hitters are better. It’s a condition of the game.
Therefore, what I see as the problem is that those players/coaches have to be disincentivized by the powers that be in the game with rule changes, equipment changes, etc. As you know, I’ve been a proponent of a bat-handle thickness adjustment – remove the “whip” of the bat, and you’ll stop having guys built like Jose Altuve and Francisco Lindor hitting 20 HR. I would also think that shrinking the strike zone would be another alternative – force pitchers to sacrifice some of that prodigious power for precision, thereby putting more balls where batters can hit them. Require relievers to face 3 batters. There are things that can be done, I think. But I feel like a lot of the hand-wringing is misdirected at the people who are doing their jobs – a.k.a. players and coaches who are just trying to win the game – instead of those who are failing to do their jobs – a.k.a. MLB management who are supposed to be entertaining us. I think it almost goes without saying that increasing balls in play ALSO speeds up the game, which seems to be MLB’s primary concern at the moment, and (I believe) could be fixed by also improving the game.
So, overall, I’m on your side in this debate. 1980s baseball was quite probably the most fun baseball, in terms of the diversity of styles of play and the lack of dominance of any one skill (except maybe stolen bases, but I think it’s very much an open question as to whether that actually was, overall, a helpful strategy at the time). I just want to see changes coming from the commissioner’s office, not from people who are never going to change because it would actively harm them to do so. So when I see Chris Sale’s numbers, I ooh and aah, because I’m impressed by them, and I see a player adapting to what he should do, given the game in which he plays. But I’m not going to ask him to become a less effective pitcher just because it would make the games more fun for me to watch. Instead, I’d rather see it become more difficult for him to do the kinds of things he makes look routine. I hope that makes sense.
I don’t think the Stolen Bases are coming back.
It was, by far, my favorite aspect of the game, both as a fan and as a player (in Babe Ruth league I was Joe Sewell at the plate, and Rickey on the bases).
But… injuries.
Stealing bases is dangerous, and baseball is rapidly moving toward protecting its investments.
What we saw in the 80’s was an anomaly. Rickey was a freak of nature. And Raines carried cocaine in the back pocket on his uniform.
That extracted quote from Machado last month that was used for clickbait?
His full quote was a lot more reasonable. And coming from a guy who hasn’t missed a game with an injury in the 4 years since his knee problem, it will age well:
“Obviously I’m not going to change, I’m not the type of player that’s going to be ‘Johnny Hustle,’ and run down the line and slide to first base and … you know, whatever can happen. That’s just not my personality, that’s not my cup of tea, that’s not who I am.
“Should I have run on that pitch? Yeah … but I didn’t and I gotta pay the consequences for it. It does look bad. It looks terrible. I look back at the video and I’m like, ‘Woah, what was I doing?’ You know, just the emotions of the game … I’m the type of player that has stayed in the zone, I’m playing and I’m just in the zone.”
Machado went on to say that when he hits a grounder to short, the shortstop is already preparing to throw before he even gets much of a jump out of the box. He admitted that it looks bad not to run, but generally, it’s not going to make much of a difference.
“On 3-0, I’m trying to drive one out. I hit a 100 mph groundball (actually 76 mph) right into the shift, right to the shortstop … before I even step out of the box, I look to the shortstop, he has the ball in his hands and I’m like, ‘I’m out.’ … I mean, what am I going to do?
“Should I have given it a little more effort? One hundred percent. (It’s) my fault like always, I mean that’s just my mentality when I’m in the game. (There are) things that you learn, things that you gotta change. I’ve tried changing it for eight years and I still can’t figure it out but, one of these days I will.”
I mean, he still sounds like a knucklehead. And I personally prefer the player who will run full speed into a wall.
But players rarely get hurt on strikeouts, walks, or home runs