Ryan Braun - NL MVP

[BadgerBeer]

What a forking joke. The NL voters ought to be ashamed of themselves. Speaking as a BBWAA life member, there may be some microchip in the membership cards that's giving off harmful radiation.

Why should the voters feel ashamed?

 

[Versatile]

Voting breakdown is on the front page of the BBWAA website. And I'd sure like to know who gave Justin Upton a first-place vote.

Just Google "Arizona Republic Diamondbacks writer". I'll bet on that person.

Ryan Braun won the MVP because he has better teammates than Matt Kemp. They were equal in everything else.

Except that Matt Kemp was actually better than Ryan Braun aside from the whole teammates issue...

With that said, this shouldn't be causing any righteous indignation. Ryan Braun had a tremendous year and was, at worst, the No. 3 choice (and that suggests someone considers Clayton Kershaw, who won the NL pitching triple crown, more valuable).

 

[TheSportsPredictor]

Since Kemp was the league leader in several offensive categories, he could not by definition be "equal" to Braun or any other NL player in "everything else."

Braun led the NL in SLG and OBP, Kemp in runs, HR and RBI. Kemp had more steals (not by a lot), and struck out more (by a lot). Braun had a higher batting average. Kemp plays a premium defensive position adequately, Braun played a lesser defensive position superbly.

CORRECTION: Braun led in SLG and OPS. Kemp was .002 higher in OBP.

 

[Versatile]

Since Kemp was the league leader in several offensive categories, he could not by definition be "equal" to Braun or any other NL player in "everything else."

Braun led the NL in SLG and OBP, Kemp in runs, HR and RBI. Kemp had more steals (not by a lot), and struck out more (by a lot). Braun had a higher batting average. Kemp plays a premium defensive position adequately, Braun played a lesser defensive position superbly.

CORRECTION: Braun led in SLG and OPS. Kemp was .002 higher in OBP.

Kemp was only adequate in the field? I'm not sure where you're getting that. He probably didn't deserve the center-field gold glove (which he won), but he would have been second or third on my list and would have received an outfield gold glove vote from me had they not switched to the better system of specific positions.

Also, Miller Park is an established hitter's park while Dodger Stadium is an established pitcher's park. Again, Braun was a fine choice.

 

[IllMil]

Anyone who calls this a "forking joke," is a forking joke. Braun was a perfectly acceptable choice. His numbers were ridiculous and he came through with several HUGE at bats late in the season and postseason for Milwaukee. If the gap were tremendous, Kemp should have gotten it, but it's not like he was remarkably better than Braun. The deciding factor was that Braun played in meaningful games and was the difference in Milwaukee winning many of them.

 

[TheSportsPredictor]

Since Kemp was the league leader in several offensive categories, he could not by definition be "equal" to Braun or any other NL player in "everything else."

Braun led the NL in SLG and OBP, Kemp in runs, HR and RBI. Kemp had more steals (not by a lot), and struck out more (by a lot). Braun had a higher batting average. Kemp plays a premium defensive position adequately, Braun played a lesser defensive position superbly.

CORRECTION: Braun led in SLG and OPS. Kemp was .002 higher in OBP.

Kemp was only adequate in the field? I'm not sure where you're getting that. He probably didn't deserve the center-field gold glove (which he won), but he would have been second or third on my list and would have received an outfield gold glove vote from me had they not switched to the better system of specific positions.

Also, Miller Park is an established hitter's park while Dodger Stadium is an established pitcher's park. Again, Braun was a fine choice.

Six out of 10 in NL fielding percentage, 9th out of 10 in range factor, only three NL CFs made more errors, 5th in total chances. He was first in assists and second in zone rating. Very little says he is clearly better than all the other CFs in the NL.

 

[TheSportsPredictor]

Anyone who calls this a "forking joke," is a forking joke. Braun was a perfectly acceptable choice. His numbers were ridiculous and he came through with several HUGE at bats late in the season and postseason for Milwaukee. If the gap were tremendous, Kemp should have gotten it, but it's not like he was remarkably better than Braun. The deciding factor was that Braun played in meaningful games and was the difference in Milwaukee winning many of them.

So you're saying he had better teammates (because he played in meaningful games). Which is usually the deciding factor in these types of votes.

 

[IllMil]

I'm saying that the two were so close in most stats that you have to consider the circumstances in which Braun accumulated said stats. Braun won a lot of games for the Brewers with clutch at bats. Kemp was piling up numbers on a team 10 games out of first place. That's not his fault, but how do we know how he would have done in the same type of pressure situations? We don't. Braun seems to get better in big spots. Kemp hasn't been in any so we just don't know.

If he had hit .380 or 55 home runs it would be a different story.

 

[IllMil]

To clarify, either would have been a deserving choice. But to call Braun winning a "forking joke," is not fair.

 

[Guy_Incognito]

I would have voted Kemp, but by baseball award standards, this is not too bad.

 

[Michael_ Gee]

A joke remains a joke. Braun had a wonderful year, but this one shouldn't have been in doubt. Do I have to remind one and all of the most salient point -- all ball games are "meaningful." "Clutch" does not mean "game I paid attention to because a winning team was in it." Simple arithmetic says that if one subtracts roughly equivalent offensive performances from a 95 and an 80 win baseball team, the subtraction leaves the 80 win team far worse off than the 95 win team. MVP voting is conducted exactly backwards. The best player on a poor team is more "Valuable" as is traditionally defined by MVP selectors because the worse the team, the more its best player represents its only hope of winning.

 

[RickStain]

What a forking joke. The NL voters ought to be ashamed of themselves. Speaking as a BBWAA life member, there may be some microchip in the membership cards that's giving off harmful radiation.

Why should the voters feel ashamed?

Because they gave the MVP award to a player who was nowhere near the most valuable.