here's what's in store for ichiro...

I have no idea how I can disagree sooooo much with someone about politics and completely agree with that same person when it comes to sports arguments. Mark McGwire, if you stick to sports you will be my favorite poster. The politics is where you slip up

 

Not as the be-all and end-all. There's much more to a player than that.

 

But who would have won if Votto and Pujols had a staredown?!?</crossthread>

 

It's not the be all end all but it is quite significant. What would be your criteria in voting?

 

Ichiro's a no-doubt HOFer; I'd take Pujols, too, based on his having done it more often; 10 seasons exactly like Felix had last year should make a pitcher a lock for the HOF.

 

Now I've gotten too far into this to quit, I suppose, but here goes. First off, yes, I think Pujols "might" have been more valuable. That is to me the biggest thing that has been lost in the sabermetric revolution, the word "might," the shade of gray in all of this. But:

--Pujols hit five more home runs than Votto, with a somewhat better ratio (one per 16.7 PAs to one per 17.5).
--Their doubles per AB were dead even and their totals were close (Pujols 39, Votto 36).
--Votto plays his home games in a much more hitter-friendly park. As close as their numbers were, I can make a reasonable inference that Pujols might have won ever so slightly if their roles were reversed.
--Intentional walks: Pujols 38, Votto 8. You tell me who is considered the better and more valuable player by the league.

Honestly, I thought it was a coin flip last year, but the more I look at it the more I think Pujols should have won it. That's where my vote would have gone, anyway. However, it is within the range of opinion and that is where we differ, that I don't consider you wrong or not a "functioning human with an intact cerebral cortex" because you would vote for Votto.

You are taking the vote as confirmation of the correct answer. That is the real silliness here. Was Karl Malone a better or more valuable player than Michael Jordan in 1997? Or did the voters just decide to freshen it up a bit?For further historical reference, I will bold the winner of the 2000 National League MVP Award.

Barry Bonds .306/.440/.688 49 106
Jeff Kent .334/.424/.596 33 125

To wind this back to what started the whole thing, I don't think these numbers in and of themselves establish whether Votto or Pujols was "better" or "more valuable," just as I don't think the numbers establish whether Ichiro has had a better career than Jeter.

 

My questions:

1. If Pujols had five more homers and three more doubles, why was his slugging percentage lower? What are you leaving out?
2. Is the park factor difference between new Busch and Citizen's Bank great enough to flip the difference? (OPS_ might suggest that it is, in fact. But that's a contrived stat.)
3. Intentional walks are a non-starter. They're more about who is hitting behind the player in question than anything else. Barry Bonds is the only player I have ever seen get walked out of sheer fear.
4. You do realize that the point I made was that everyone with a brain thinks, analyzes, forms opinions and believes those opinions to be correct, do you not? I wasn't calling you or anyone else brainless.
5. A lot has changed since 2000, wouldn't you agree? It was more recently than that that Johan Santana lost the Cy Young to Bartolo Colon on the basis of win total. That wouldn't happen if the vote happened tomorrow, as evidenced by... Felix Hernandez easily winning the AL Cy Young last season. Which brings me to...
6. I think you're wrong. I think some people probably did want to give it to someone else, and some voted on the playoff garbage. But I think every year those awards get decided more by an objective look at the numbers. And I think that's a very good thing.

I'll even stipulate that the one vote for Pujols might have been based on the park-factor argument you're making. I, personally, am not sold on the ability to quantify and even up for home parks, but I am glad to see you out ahead of the curve.

 

1. Votto had a higher rate of singles; also Pujols had 52 more PAs/42 more ABs, which is why I looked at the rate. But, want to know how close this was? Votto had two triples and Pujols had one. If those numbers are reversed, Pujols beats him in SLG. I guess that's the advantage of being 26 instead of however old Pujols is.

2. I don't know the stat either, but since OPS+ factors in ballpark, I agree there must be a decent-sized difference.

3. IBBs are a measure of who's hitting behind you, but all hitting is that. Don't you think Pujols would have benefited from Rolen and Bruce protecting him instead of the Cardinals' rotating cast of characters?

4. You were saying I didn't have a functioning brain because I didn't believe there is a definitive answer to "who was better in 2010, Joey Votto or Albert Pujols?" Or, for that matter, "who has had the better career, Ichiro or Derek Jeter?" I don't happen to believe these numbers have nearly the power you grant them.

5. Sure, a lot has changed since 2000. On the other hand, Jimmy Rollins won the MVP award in 2007 despite an OPS that was 150 points lower than Matt Holliday's. These numbers are being used, but not to the level you suggest.

6. Agree to disagree.

 

You dismiss what you call "the playoff garbage," but if the Cardinals win the division and the Reds stay home, I don't believe that 31 of 32 for Votto holds. I'd guess that Pujols edges him out. Not saying that's right or wrong, but don't believe it can be easily dismissed. I'm not convinced the slash Triple Crown was some sort of deciding factor. Both players are clearly two of the best hitters in the game, and the word "valuable" in the award often means the writers look to team results as the decider.

 

Pujols scored more runs despite getting on base at a slighter lower clip, so no, not really, on the lineup thing.

I think we mainly have a disagreement in terms. And/or approach. But, to be clear, I ddn't say you were brainless -- nor do I think that.

As to the last two, we'll just agree to disagree, I think. We both know it's moving that way, and we can't quantify how much.

And, hey, maybe in the near future some sabr-dork somewhere will crack how to precisely quantify the difference betwen a hitter's park and a really good hitter's park, and we can come back to it.

 

I stopped reading after that last line.

Votto's 2010 home/road splits

Home: 74 G (73 GS) 18 HR, 56 RBI, .297 AVG, .394 OBP, .556 SLG
Away: 76 G (73 GS) 19, 57, .349, .452, .613

Great American Ball Park hitter factor for 2010 -- 98 (100 or more is hitter friendly)

Silly me, I thought the reason why Votto won the MVP was that the Reds won the NL Central.

 

Interesting Votto stats ... ESPN.com ballpark factor says in 2010, Cincinnati was 1.007 and St. Louis was .937.

http://espn.go.com/mlb/stats/parkfactor/_/year/2010

Pujols hit 25 of his 42 HRs on the road.