Is Ryan Braun the NL MVP?
by KLSnow on Aug 25, 2008 2:44 PM CDT
41 comments
Wow, that could've been the most boring Fanpost ever.
Several months ago, a group of bloggers came together to create a weekly blogpoll for MVP, Cy Young and Rookie of the Year. I'm pretty sure that's defunct now (haven't heard about it in a while, at least), but it forced me to really think about how to pick an MVP. As a result, I have a spreadsheet sitting on my desktop. I put in the raw numbers and it gives me the following output:
The Snow Index:(TB+(BB*.864)+(SB-(2*CS)))/(AB+BB)
If you're curious about how I developed that or want to see what people at Baseball Think Factory said about it years ago, here's the explanation from back when I thought I knew everything. Certainly, people who are smarter than me have come up with better stats. But this one is mine, which means it's the one I use when I've got time to kill and no one is here to attempt to publicly tear it to shreds.
From there, I tinker with the numbers a bit by adding bonuses or penalties for the following:
Playing for a winning team, or a playoff team: I added .0075 to a hitter's Snow Index for teams at or above .500, and .015 for playing on a team that would make the playoffs if the season ended today.
Playing a premium defensive position: For this purpose, I give catchers a .02 bonus and second basemen, shortstops and center fielders a .01 bonus. In the AL, I subtract .02 from the score of designated hitters.
Plate appearances per game: This doesn't always get thrown into the MVP conversation, but a guy who plays enough to rack up 4.5 PA/G is more valuable than a guy who produces at the same rate but only comes up 3.5 times per game. For these purposes, I give .02 points to batters who hit more than 4.2 times per game, +.01 for over 4, -.01 for under 3.6 and -.02 for under 3.2.
Since I'm usually drawn to a spreadsheet when I've got time to kill, today I dumped 50 top NL players into the spreadsheet to see how close Ryan Braun is to being MVP:
1. Albert Pujols, STL .689
2. Lance Berkman, HOU .673
3. Matt Holliday, COL .664
4. Ryan Ludwick, STL .635
5. Ryan Braun, MIL .630
6. Chase Utley, PHI .628
7. Hanley Ramirez, FLA .622
8. Pat Burrell, PHI .616
9. David Wright, NYM .612
10. Chipper Jones, ATL .610
Other Brewers making the top 50:
15. Mike Cameron, .582
20. Prince Fielder, .573
26. Corey Hart, .551
32. J.J. Hardy, .533
So what do you think? Where does Ryan Braun belong on this list? Are you bored enough on this off day to make a better list?
0 recs |
41 comments
Email
Print
Comments
I haven’t done a thorough review, but my gut reaction is to basically agree with your rankings. I would tend to slightly devalue Pujols and Ludwick (and Utley and Burrell) because I have an irrational problem with two teammates both being considered MVP candidates. But that’s just me.
Slightly off-topic: how unusual is it for a team such as the Cubs that is performing so well to have nobody in the MVP conversation? I suppose that speaks to their lineup “balance” or whatever, but it still strikes me as odd.
It's called "playing the percentages."
by hilbelink on Aug 25, 2008 3:27 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Cubs in the rankings
There weren’t any Cubs in the top 10, but there were a handful in the top 50:
18. Geovany Soto .580
21. Aramis Ramirez .571
22. Mark DeRosa .565
28. Derrek Lee .549
Hence my decision to call it "screwing around" as opposed to "in-depth study."
by KLSnow on Aug 25, 2008 3:43 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It is incredible
The contrast between the 2008 and 2006 Cubs teams is an amazing demonstration of the value of not making outs.
by Ikcelaks on Aug 26, 2008 7:59 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
For MVP discussions (i.e. answering the question “Who was the best player this year?”, rather than “Who is likely to be the best going forward?”) I like WPA/LI with some defense and common sense sprinkled in.
BCB's "very own marginally deserving all-star!"
by battlekow on Aug 25, 2008 3:36 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Also...
My initial 50 didn’t include a single National, since there’s not a National among the top 40 in the NL in OPS, and no Nats appeared among my wild card additions, so I just added their top 2 OPS producers (Lastings Milledge and Cristian Guzman) to the list. Both rank lower than Willy Taveras, but ahead of Juan Pierre.
Hence my decision to call it "screwing around" as opposed to "in-depth study."
by KLSnow on Aug 25, 2008 3:49 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I'd pretty much agree
Pujols is having another good year. Chipper has had a good one off an amazing start, injury knocked him from the race as usual. The Berkman has had a great season, just devalued being on a struggling team I’d say.
I would however have Braun a notch ahead of Ludwick though. Not to knock on Ludwick, but he isn’t that team’s wrecking ball like Braun is for our team’s offense. Both have great numbers, but there’s a leadership value I kind of account in most valuable.
Now, let’s knock Pujols and Ludwick out of MVP contention shall we Crew :D
by Lavender on Aug 25, 2008 4:06 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
It depends how you define value
I think Pujols is clearly the best player in the National League (statistically or otherwise), but how much do you adjust for the fact that Chase Utley plays 2B or Holliday plays in Colorado (or for the fact that Braun gets to hit in front of Prince Fielder)?
It’s kind of a silly award considering it ends up being so arbitrary of a decision. I would go with Utley, but Braun is definitely in the running.
In a related arbitrary award discussion, does anyone else think Braun should legitimately get a Gold Glove this season?
Ryan Braun: He loves it.
by SRB on Aug 25, 2008 4:46 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Well
After a bit of looking, only starter in LF without an error (he’s misplayed some balls, sure, but outfield errors are hard to come by short of straight-up dropping a ball), first in putouts by quite a ways, first in innings, 3rd in assists (this is all NL only) – sure, why not add a gold glove to his RoY? If he starts coming on strong to finish the season, maybe hits a couple walk-off dingers, he could get an MVP too. Contract doesn’t look like quite such a good value if he keeps getting these award bonuses :)
by Wayfaerer on Aug 25, 2008 6:25 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Pujols is the clear choice.
I believe that he is the most valuable player on any team. When you look at what he has done on the team that he has done it with, I think that it is the clear choice.
Ludwick benefits directly from batting near Pujols and because of that shouldn’t be in the top 10.
I would place Braun third behind Pujols and Berkman. Given Brauns power and average, while switching positions puts him in front of Holliday’s inflated numbers
by Saberilliterate on Aug 25, 2008 5:04 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
"Since I'm usually drawn to a spreadsheet when I've got time to kill"
I really, really, have no business hanging around this site whatsoever.
FDR can suck it. - Jeff Sackmann
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Aug 25, 2008 6:27 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
yeah, geez
doesn’t he use SQL databases like the rest of us?:P
by PagsBrewCrew on Aug 25, 2008 6:29 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
To me, Most Valuable Player...........
………… means the player that is most valuable to his team. As in, the team benifitted the most from this one player’s performance than any other team and player (if that makes sense). So, foe example, when Tom Brady won MVP last year I was disappoined not just because of my irrational hatred of the Patriots (and, by the transitive property, him) it was because I believed the Patriots team would have been good without him. So to me the MVP shouldn’t necessarily be the player who putts up the best numbers.
"Get up, get up, get outta' here, GONE!!!"
by BrewerLover on Aug 25, 2008 6:59 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
you're insane
anyone who doesn’t think tom brady deserved the MVP last year either doesn’t watch football or is an immediate member of brett favre’s family
"You guys know me. I take a long time to analyze things."
- Ned Yost
by SunglassesAtNight on Aug 25, 2008 11:40 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Randy Moss or Albert Haynesworth had far more of an argument than Tom Brady.
by HRF on Aug 26, 2008 4:22 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
He deserved it in a sense that he put up the best numbers.........
………what I’m saying is that he wasn’t the most valuable player to his team. His team would have done well with even a mediocre player at quarterback. Thats what I’m saying.
"Get up, get up, get outta' here, GONE!!!"
by BrewerLover on Aug 26, 2008 10:52 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think that's crap.
Case in point: the performance of his backups this preseason. That is not a team with overwhelming offensive talent outside of their 1st and 3rd WR. And if a mediocre QB had been playing in NE, Moss would have crawled into the tank in week 6 like he did in Oakland the previous few years, and even the advantage they had at #1 WR would have been gone. Their RBs are ordinary (particularly the way they use Maroney), and their linemen just ok. Brady made that team go, and the offensive prowess they demonstrated covered up a mediocre defense most of the year. Without Brady, that team wins 10 games at most, not 16 in the regular season and likely doesn’t have home field advantage in the playoffs, and likely doesn’t make the title game. If that doesn’t make Brady the MVP, throw the trophy out because there isn’t one in the league.
FDR can suck it. - Jeff Sackmann
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Aug 26, 2008 6:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
All Tom Brady did........
……… was throw little check-downs and chuck the ball up somewhere so Moss could run underneath it and catch it. If someone has Madden, you could replace Tom Brady with somebody and simulate a few games. I do agree that the Patriots defense was ok at best last year, and their linebackers sucked, but Brady wasn’t the most valuable player to his team in the league, the way LT was last year.
"Get up, get up, get outta' here, GONE!!!"
by BrewerLover on Aug 27, 2008 10:44 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Madden? Seriously?
Sorry if this offends, but that might be the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard.
FDR can suck it. - Jeff Sackmann
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Aug 27, 2008 7:07 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Going to have disagree with you by a lot. A whole, whole lot.
Welker’s average route was less than five yards. As a third wide receiver one isn’t going to face the top corners. They’re getting nickelbacks and linebackers. He’s solely a product of going against poor defenders.
Their average route ran by someone not named Randy Moss was a shade over five yards and one foot. That is not impressive. Were the numbers gaudy? Yes. But, like RBIs and Wins and Losses, the context of the numbers has to be taken into account. You shit on their Oline calling them just ok. That ‘OK’ O-Line led the league in adjusted run yards: (see here:http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/ol.php). They were fourth in league in pass protection.
Take Moss out and more than half his yards came after the catch. That isn’t just Rich Gannon-esque. That’s Rich Gannon.
Because of Moss who was always double-covered, every other receiver would be zone covered or man-to-man’d. And on short patterns with all day to throw the ball it’d be hard NOT to achieve that level of success. Hell, Pennington would’ve been a better fit for the system as he makes his receivers adjust less than Brady. Hell, anyone could have success in that system. If they can complete a five yard pass, they can have success in that system.
Look at Culpepper with then without Moss. Now look at Brady with then without Moss. Does Brady have better numbers without Moss than Culpepper without Moss? Yes. Did (and does) Brady have a system tailor made to hide his at the time poor arm strength?
The Patriots have been near the top of the league in average starting field position ever since Brady has been at the helm. Their defense has routinely been giving the offense a short field. Of course there’s going to be success when you have shorter to go than everyone else. When your average route is five yards OF COURSE you should be having 21 for 24 days. But that doesn’t make it impressive. It is not impressive to stand with all day in the pocket and connect on a five yard hook pattern to Wes Welker who is being covered by either a linebacker, nickelback or a zone scheme. That is not impressive, it is expected.
Look how long Brady and Bellichick have been together. Do you really think less than half the starting quarterbacks in the league, given seven years, couldn’t have had the same success that Brady did? Having all day to throw? Great field position? A bail out deep threat option who is either the most dominant or second most dominant receiver ever?
Context. Context. Context. Livan Hernandez this year had a winning record with a 1.6 WHIP and ERA+ of 75. Joe Carter, batting .234/.284/.399, had 102 RBIs in 1997. Tom Brady’s whole career he owes to Bill Bellicheck.
by HRF on Aug 28, 2008 4:40 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
wow...
you guys are really into your football
I watch the packers whenever they’re on the national feed out on the west coast…but that’s about it:P
by PagsBrewCrew on Aug 28, 2008 6:56 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well that's a better argument...
But I still disagree. I don’t dispute that Brady owes a lot to Bellicheck. That’s not unusual for any great QB or any MVP. Favre owes a ton (including his 3 MVPs) to Holmgren, as demonstrated by his reduced effectiveness under the subsequent coaches (until 2007). But that doesn’t mean he didn’t deserve the MVPs in those years. The same applies to Brady.
You argue that the OLine was dominant, or near enough it didn’t matter, including their 4th in the league rating for pass protection, which would appear to undercut Brady’s MVP argument. Yet you also argue that Welker and others ran 5 yard routes against poor defenders, which is “not impressive.” I’m assuming you understand that a line has much less opportunity to give up a sack when the receivers are running those 5 yard routes, so your own point on the receivers (which is flawed in my opinion), undercuts your argument that Brady’s success is at least partially explained by the dominance of his o-line. Running an offense dependent on the short pass isn’t easy, particularly when you have only one real deep threat susceptible to an over/under coverage that could take him out of the game. And 3rd CBs or LB coverage doesn’t explain Welker’s success either. If it did, there would 3rd WRs all over the league doing what he does, and that just isn’t true. Welker had success in Miami doing something similar, which demonstrates in my opinion that he isn’t just a product of the system and that he’d had some success regardless of his QB. That makes Welker a significant part of the Pats success. Ditto for Moss, when he’s invested, which he clearly was last year. But Gaffney and Stallworth are just guys. There’s nothing special there at all, and Brady coaxed 1000yds and 80 or so catches out of them despite the fact that they were the 4th and 5th options on that offense. That’s not easy to do, particularly when, as you point out, the defense can sit on the short routes those players run.
Do I really think that less than half the starting QBs inthe league, given seven years, couldn’t have the same success that Brady did? Um, yes. And I think 80 years of football where no one ever came close to his numbers (including Brady himself playing the same system), demonstrates that pretty clearly.
Incidentally, Moss isn’t what he was when Culpepper was throwing bombs to him 10 years ago or so, and Brady’s twice the QB C-pepp ever was. But C-pepp’s collapse had far more to do with his blown knee ligaments and his decision to rush back from an injury that normally takes a year to heal, and the subsequent lack of coaching and opportunities his predictably poor play caused, than it did the loss of Moss. Moss made Culpepper look better than he was, no doubt. And I don’t doubt for a second that Brady doesn’t put up his numbers without Moss on the team (though he still puts up great ones, IMO), but that doesn’t mean anyone could be plugged in and win 18 games and put up the numbers Brady did. Not at all.
FDR can suck it. - Jeff Sackmann
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Aug 28, 2008 7:16 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
A disjointed response, my apologies:
“And 3rd CBs or LB coverage doesn’t explain Welker’s success either.”
Actually it does: http://www.footballoutsiders.com/2008/08/19/ramblings/dvoa-ratings/6458/
The best receiving seasons in the last twelve years are by and large from third string wideouts.
About the sacks: The quick passes help but their dominance in the run game has to at least show that they do more than hold their own in pass protection.
No one ran the system the Patriots ran last year WITH a deep threat like Randy Moss. Rushing 4 and putting 2 on Moss leaves five guys for four or five options and that’s always going to be a benefit to the offense and always going to result in if not a mismatch than an advantageous matchup.
When Culpepper was STILL in Minnesota after Moss was gone look at the fall off. Look at McNabb’s career before T.O. A great receiver who demands double teams has far, far, far more of an impact than most would admit to.
Gaffney and Stallworth are all former number ones and both have elite athleticism. Their success is a testament to Bellicheck, his coaching staff and the system more than it is Brady.
We’ll just have to agree to disagree on the seven years of experience in an offense that is basically: check this short guy. Then this short guy. Then this short guy. Then see if Moss is wide open. Then see if the backout leak is open. If not throw away or give Moss a jump ball.
The numbers are gaudy, yes. But they should’ve been gaudy. I haven’t a doubt half the starting quarterbacks in the league p-ut in Brady’s career could’ve done the same and that swapping him out only for last year would’ve only resulted in negligible difference—enough to only lose one more game, two at the absolute most and still advancing to the super bowl.
by HRF on Aug 29, 2008 12:32 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agree to disagree I guess.
I just don’t accept the notion that numbers no one has come close to matching in approaching 100yrs of football could have been put up by 15 other guys in the league right now.
FDR can suck it. - Jeff Sackmann
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Aug 29, 2008 7:06 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I assume in your formula
TB is bases from Hits, aka the numerator of the traditional SLG formula?
Otherwise you’re saying that a walk is basically 2 singles, which is kinda the reverse of reality (unless doing a cost-benefit analysis saying that players are more likely to get out by going for a hit where they could have just fouled off a few more pitches and ended up taking a walk for little risk).
by PagsBrewCrew on Aug 25, 2008 7:10 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Walks don't count in TB
BCB's "very own marginally deserving all-star!"
by battlekow on Aug 25, 2008 7:23 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
errr...ok
kinda counterintuitive as it leads to a runner on base;)
silly legacy acronyms.
by PagsBrewCrew on Aug 25, 2008 7:44 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
note: the preceeding illustrates why I'm only slightly more baseball-literate than my wife
She thinks it counts as a hit any time a player makes contact.
Either that or she thinks it’s a hit if they put it into the field of play, as I think she understands the distinction between a foul and a normal ball-in-play.
I don’t know how she thinks foul-outs and strike-out-on-foul-tips should tally into the whole thing or if that would just result in brain-meltage.
by PagsBrewCrew on Aug 25, 2008 7:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I have a feeling
that the NL MVP will come down to which ever player of Pujols, Braun, and Utley/Burrell has the best final month and how the playoff race shakes out. Pulojs definitely has the best numbers, and if the Cards stay close, he could get it because the rest of their team is so bad.
If Braunie gets really hot again and “leads” the Crew into the playoffs (esp. if we take down the Cubs), he could win. If one of the Phillies “leads” his team to the NL East crown, he could win.
It just seems that when counting stats are close, the voters often use the playoff chase as a deciding factor.
by Oakland Brewer Fan on Aug 25, 2008 7:50 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
IMO the only way braun wins it
If the Brewers win the Central, with Braun going on a tear the last month. Additionally in the last series vs the Cubs Braun hits a dramatic HR.. otherwise I see Pujols getting it.
The designated hitter rule is like letting someone else take Wilt Chamberlain's free throws.
by Kyguy922 on Aug 25, 2008 9:42 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Interesting stat in Braun's favor.
He leads the entire major league in extra base hits.
Wait, what?
by NoahJ on Aug 25, 2008 9:16 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
MVP methodology
1. Make a list of all active previous winners and other players you’ve put on your ballot in your voting career.
2. Cross out players on teams that didn’t make the playoffs.
3. Cross out all players hitting below .300 unless they have 200+ hits or 40+ home runs.
4. Add in any players who have never appeared on your MVP ballots if they are on playoff teams and did at least one of the following: hit .315 or above, had 200+ hits, or had at least 50 SB+HR.
5. List all the players you have on your list in order of batting average from highest to lowest.
6. In another column, sort all the players in terms of hits, from most to fewest.
7. In a final column, sort all players in terms of combined home runs and stolen bases, most to fewest.
8. In each column, assign the top player a value of one. The next player is given a two, and so on.
9. Combine the three scores for each player, subtract points for some guys if they’re a pleasure to talk to in the clubhouse (or add some points if you don’t like them). Go with your gut. Sort from lowest to highest. You now have your ballot!*
10. Write an article about how excruciatingly tough it was to fill out this year’s ballot.
*In case of tie, flip coin and add paragraph to article explaining how hard it was to decide between the tied players.
Obscure baseball records and more at my blog, Recondite Baseball.
by TheJay on Aug 25, 2008 11:02 PM CDT reply actions 3 recs
Did John Kruk or Joe Morgan send this to you….
Very nice
by Saberilliterate on Aug 26, 2008 7:35 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not to bring up the whole pitchers winning the MVP debate, but...
just think where we would be without CC. He has absolutely carried us since he arrived.
"You guys know me. I take a long time to analyze things."
- Ned Yost
by SunglassesAtNight on Aug 25, 2008 11:38 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
It’s Pujols. And then Hanley Ramirez.
For me to even consider Braun, not only would the Brewers have to come back and win the Central but his final line would have to be around .315/.360/.650. So, short of him going on a massive tear and hitting 16 bombs from now until the last game it’s Pujols.
by HRF on Aug 26, 2008 4:21 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
For MVP
I always ask, what player’s absence would result in the biggest freefall in the standings for his team. The Cubs are too well-rounded to have the MVP, unfortunately, which makes them (thusfar) the best team in the NL. As good as Braun has been, the Brewers also have too much talent to make him most valuable player - heck, just look at our record while he was nursing his ailing back.
I haven’t been following non-Brewer teams closely enough to hazard a guess, though with the Cardinals still hanging around, I’m guessing Pujols has a lot to do with it. The Marlins, too, seem to be better than I thought, so I might look there too.
"I will agree that the attitude [at BCB] is ridiculous and they have done so much to instigate animosity and then block us from responding. Real mature!"
by roguejim on Aug 26, 2008 7:56 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
That is a good way of putting what I was trying to say above.
"Get up, get up, get outta' here, GONE!!!"
by BrewerLover on Aug 26, 2008 10:56 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
By that methodology,
who is your MVP, Ronnie Belliard?
by Braunstalker on Aug 26, 2008 4:39 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
NL Central Standings
| W | L | PCT | GB | STRK | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
St. Louis
|
91 | 71 | .561 | 0 | Lost 6 |
|
Chicago
|
83 | 78 | .515 | 7.5 | Lost 1 |
|
Milwaukee
|
80 | 82 | .493 | 11 | Won 3 |
|
Cincinnati
|
78 | 84 | .481 | 13 | Won 2 |
|
Houston
|
74 | 88 | .456 | 17 | Lost 3 |
|
Pittsburgh
|
62 | 99 | .385 | 28.5 | Lost 2 |
(updated 11.22.2009 at 10:31 AM CST)
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recent FanShots
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
