All Forums > SimLeague Baseball > MLB > Cabrera won MVP
11/20/2013 10:32 PM
Posted by burnsy483 on 11/20/2013 10:23:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 11/20/2013 10:16:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 11/20/2013 10:11:00 PM (view original):
Has the most important, or valuable, player on the team always been the one with the best stats?
The most valuable player has always been the best player.
Haha

Very convincing! Great insight.
Well, it's not really the same thing. For example I play on a mens league team now that just wrapped up a season. Our SS/P is clearly the best player on the team. He played professionally in his early 20's, plays solid short, and threw 6 complete games. He's a great hitter but over 16 games his stats aren't as good as our first baseman who slugged .900 and hit 11 home runs. I'd say the SS/P was more valuable despite inferior offensive stats.
11/21/2013 1:14 AM
Posted by bad_luck on 11/20/2013 5:07:00 PM (view original):
Posted by burnsy483 on 11/20/2013 5:03:00 PM (view original):
And how valuable would those 10 wins have been to the Angels?  And to the Rangers? ....TO THE TEAM

Worth and value can mean the same thing in certain circumstances.  But they are 2 different words for a reason.
They're ******* synomyms. They mean the same thing.
not neccasarily.  say my car is worth $10,000.  Its extremely valuable to me because its my only means of transporation to get to me job which supports my family.  That same car worth $10,000 would not be very valuable to a multi millionaire who has many means of transportation.  Its still worth $10,000 but it has less value to the multi millionaire than it does to me. 
Value and worth are not always the same thing.
11/21/2013 8:24 AM
Posted by burnsy483 on 11/20/2013 10:26:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 11/20/2013 9:44:00 PM (view original):
Posted by burnsy483 on 11/20/2013 8:37:00 PM (view original):
FWIW, this is why I'm not grabbing a pitcher above all else. You named a bunch of aces. There's only 1 3b and 1 CF that did what Miggy and Trout did this year.
Did you watch the WS?   You can walk those ***** if you want.
I believe the playoffs are largely a crapshoot. People like to say "the best pitching staff wins" but I don't really think that's as true as people make it out to be.
My point is I can neutralize the value of a hitter at my discretion.    Why STL threw Ortiz a strike after 5-6 AB is beyond me.    Miggy/Trout get hot, Miggy/Trout doesn't see another pitch.    I guess there's value in a walk but you better have somebody behind them that can hit. 
11/21/2013 9:12 AM
Ortiz got walked intentionally because literally everything he hit was hit hard, even outs, and nobody else on that team was hitting.  
11/21/2013 9:28 AM
So couldn't I apply that to anyone and take them out of the game by walking them?    How much value do they lose when they only get walks?
11/21/2013 9:33 AM
Honestly? Unless you're stupid hot like Papi was (everything is a screaming liner), the intentional walk hurts the pitcher more than it helps. If you pitch to a batter, he's going to get out more often than not.
11/21/2013 9:37 AM
Honestly.   I guess this is also the point where teammates affect value.    Runner on 2nd, two out.    Guy hitting screamers everywhere at the plate.  Guy on deck couldn't hit the water if he fell out a boat.    Take your base, sir. 
11/21/2013 9:45 AM
Even a great hitter gets in base less than half the time. Intentionally walking him turns that into 100%.

But, like you said, the playoffs are a crapshoot. The best team, let alone the team with the best rotation, doesn't always win the World Series.
11/21/2013 10:03 AM
Well, the guy hitting screaming liners with a guy on 2nd is scary.  I'd take a walk in that situation over a 50-50 chance of a hit, for instance.
11/21/2013 10:12 AM
Looks like there was an IBB of about .21 every game.    So teams don't mind doing it.   That certainly doesn't include the non-intentional intentional walk where the pitcher throws pitches that won't garner a swing by anyone with a decent eye. 

Crapshoot or no, pitchers control the game.   If we don't want to pitch to Mike Trout, Mike Trout sees nothing to hit.    Can't do that with a Clayton Kershaw.  You have to bat against him. 

Although, back to your original question, I'm not sure Trout gets the most money on a 1 year deal.   I think a pitcher would.   Several of them.   Turn it into a 5-6 year deal and I think you're right.   Long term deals to everyone, but moreso pitchers, have proven to be risky.    If I had to give 5/150 to someone, it's not a pitcher.   Or a 33 y/o firstbaseman. 
11/21/2013 10:15 AM
Posted by burnsy483 on 11/21/2013 10:03:00 AM (view original):
Well, the guy hitting screaming liners with a guy on 2nd is scary.  I'd take a walk in that situation over a 50-50 chance of a hit, for instance.
Plus, you're not walking him 100% of the time.  You're not going to intentionally walk him with a five run lead, bases empty, and two outs in the 7th.

You're only walking him in certain situations during the game, where the downside of a screaming liner into the gap is markedly worse than a walk.
11/21/2013 10:25 AM
I DO think teams use the intentional walk wayyyy too much.  The guy is probably going to get out, so why allow him on base?  But in situations where Papi is crushing the ball, guys on base, and nobody behind him could do anything, I get walking him.
11/21/2013 10:30 AM
Posted by MikeT23 on 11/21/2013 10:12:00 AM (view original):
Looks like there was an IBB of about .21 every game.    So teams don't mind doing it.   That certainly doesn't include the non-intentional intentional walk where the pitcher throws pitches that won't garner a swing by anyone with a decent eye. 

Crapshoot or no, pitchers control the game.   If we don't want to pitch to Mike Trout, Mike Trout sees nothing to hit.    Can't do that with a Clayton Kershaw.  You have to bat against him. 

Although, back to your original question, I'm not sure Trout gets the most money on a 1 year deal.   I think a pitcher would.   Several of them.   Turn it into a 5-6 year deal and I think you're right.   Long term deals to everyone, but moreso pitchers, have proven to be risky.    If I had to give 5/150 to someone, it's not a pitcher.   Or a 33 y/o firstbaseman. 
You're probably right. Take away the long term risk and a guy like Kershaw will get a huge one year deal. On the other hand, pitcher performance seems, at least anecdotally, to have more if a variance from year to year, so there is less certainty than with a hitter.

Also, the Red Sox showed that you can win a series without a stud starting pitcher. Lester is at least a level below Kershaw, Scherzer, and Wainwright.
11/21/2013 10:32 AM
Most times, it's less about what the guy at the plate might do as opposed to what the guy on deck is likely to do.

I'd probably use it more in the 8th to set up favorable match-ups in the 9th.   Why should I let the #5 hitter beat me when I can face 7-9 in the 9th?  Assuming, of course, we get out the 6 hitter.
11/21/2013 10:35 AM
Posted by bad_luck on 11/21/2013 10:31:00 AM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 11/21/2013 10:12:00 AM (view original):
Looks like there was an IBB of about .21 every game.    So teams don't mind doing it.   That certainly doesn't include the non-intentional intentional walk where the pitcher throws pitches that won't garner a swing by anyone with a decent eye. 

Crapshoot or no, pitchers control the game.   If we don't want to pitch to Mike Trout, Mike Trout sees nothing to hit.    Can't do that with a Clayton Kershaw.  You have to bat against him. 

Although, back to your original question, I'm not sure Trout gets the most money on a 1 year deal.   I think a pitcher would.   Several of them.   Turn it into a 5-6 year deal and I think you're right.   Long term deals to everyone, but moreso pitchers, have proven to be risky.    If I had to give 5/150 to someone, it's not a pitcher.   Or a 33 y/o firstbaseman. 
You're probably right. Take away the long term risk and a guy like Kershaw will get a huge one year deal. On the other hand, pitcher performance seems, at least anecdotally, to have more if a variance from year to year, so there is less certainty than with a hitter.

Also, the Red Sox showed that you can win a series without a stud starting pitcher. Lester is at least a level below Kershaw, Scherzer, and Wainwright.
Boston's bullpen was lights out.   Not saying I throw a bigger contract at a RP over a great hitter but it's still pitching.     Plus STL looked like they would have struggled against a High School #2 thru the playoffs.
of 35
All Forums > SimLeague Baseball > MLB > Cabrera won MVP

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999- WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.