MLB Discussion Thread - Page 841

Xiomera · 11-22-2011, 01:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Giantsfan1080

Ryan Braun won the NL MVP.

********. Shoulda been Kershaw. [please god, let them realize I'm kidding]

Jughead10 · 11-22-2011, 01:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xiomera

They pulled away at the end when the Indians and White Sox **** the bed. That is in no way a fair knock of Verlander's candidacy. JV won all of the games necessary against those teams when the race was close in late July and August.

They wouldn't have won the division without Verlander. Remember, Fister was only a Tiger for the last third of the season.

I'm not saying it's a reason to knock his candidacy, but you still win the division without him.

Jughead10 · 11-22-2011, 01:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xiomera

Cabrera only had MVP-type numbers for the last month and a half, basically when the division race was over. People were down on him for most of the year prior to that.

Verlander was his most dominant when there was a premium on the games.

Aren't the last month and a half the most important? Verlander went 9-0 in the last two months. Are those victories devalued because the race was over?

Xiomera · 11-22-2011, 01:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jughead10

I'm not saying it's a reason to knock his candidacy, but you still win the division without him.

As someone who followed them on a daily basis, I completely disagree. I will only concede that the division might have come down to the last week without him, but the Tigers pitching was miserable without him.

Xiomera · 11-22-2011, 01:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jughead10

Aren't the last month and a half the most important? Verlander went 9-0 in the last two months. Are those victories devalued because the race was over?

No, but if you're asking me who is more responsible for the Tigers' success (which is the purpose of a Verlander v. Miggy debate), it's the guy who did it all season and carried the team when the other aspects were not going well. It's the guy who did it when the outcome of the season was not yet clear.

Jughead10 · 11-22-2011, 01:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xiomera

No, but if you're asking me who is more responsible for the Tigers' success (which is the purpose of a Verlander v. Miggy debate), it's the guy who did it all season and carried the team when the other aspects were not going well. It's the guy who did it when the outcome of the season was not yet clear.

Cabrera did hit .320/.425/.555 up to August 15th.

Giantsfan1080 · 11-22-2011, 01:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jughead10

Cabrera did hit .320/.425/.555 up to August 15th.

It must have all been in garbage time, you know like A-Rod.

Jughead10 · 11-22-2011, 01:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Giantsfan1080

It must have all been in garbage time, you know like A-Rod.

And he probably didn't do it in games that Verlander pitched either.

Giantsfan1080 · 11-22-2011, 01:36 PM

The Mets signed Adam Loewen to a minor league deal. That just might be the high point of our offseason.

Xiomera · 11-22-2011, 01:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jughead10

Cabrera did hit .320/.425/.555 up to August 15th.

That's basically his career average (.317/.395/.555). Still not more valuable than Verlander.

Cabby led Bautista in a large number of categories, so anyone clamoring for Bautista is wearing blinders. Not only does he lack a statistical edge, he also played for a ****** team.

Giantsfan1080 · 11-22-2011, 01:58 PM

Major major changes in IFA/draft.

- This year every team will be allowed to spend 2.9 million on IFA, next year it will reflect a sliding scale based on record of the team the year prior with a max of 5 million. The best teams can trade for more money but only 50% of their total so if the Yankees are giving 1.8 million they can only add half of that via trade.

-Draft pool will be dictated by record. Better teams will get less money to spend

-loss of 1st round pick and 2nd round pick if you go 10/15% over your draft budget. Lose of 2 1st rounders if you go more than 15% over. Go 5% over and you get a 75% tax

- Small market teams will be given a lottery after the first round resulting in 6 picks and again after the second round.

D-Unit · 11-22-2011, 02:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Giantsfan1080

Major major changes in IFA/draft.

- This year every team will be allowed to spend 2.9 million on IFA, next year it will reflect a sliding scale based on record of the team the year prior with a max of 5 million. The best teams can trade for more money but only 50% of their total so if the Yankees are giving 1.8 million they can only add half of that via trade.

-Draft pool will be dictated by record. Better teams will get less money to spend

-loss of 1st round pick and 2nd round pick if you go 10/15% over your draft budget. Lose of 2 1st rounders if you go more than 15% over. Go 5% over and you get a 75% tax

- Small market teams will be given a lottery after the first round resulting in 6 picks and again after the second round.

Have they specifically identified who those are?

Hines · 11-22-2011, 02:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Giantsfan1080

The Mets signed Adam Loewen to a minor league deal. That just might be the high point of our offseason.

Oh yea? Well the Pirates signed Brandon Boggs AND Jake Fox to minor league deals. Beat that!

mqtirishfan · 11-22-2011, 02:19 PM

Kemp was robbed.

Jughead10 · 11-22-2011, 02:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by D-Unit

Have they specifically identified who those are?

Teams in the ten smallest markets and with the ten lowest revenues.

But I'm sure a lot of them overlap so it may only be 12-13 teams.

Jughead10 · 11-22-2011, 02:22 PM

"MLB rosters will expand to 26 for some doubleheaders, according to Mike DiGiovanna of the LA Times"

That is interesting.

Brodeur · 11-22-2011, 02:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xiomera

Verlander contributed the absolute greatest amount to his team among any player whose contribution actually meant something to the playoff race.

Take Verlander off Detroit and they're sunk. Ellsbury was one of MANY all-star players in the Red Sox lineup. Bautista was so valuable, apparently, his team finished 4th by a longshot in the East.

I don't see how your chosen argument makes sense.

Avila and Cabby both were legitimate top ten MVP candidates and I still think we would have won the ****** ass division without him. I don't care though, because MVP is the guy who was the absolute best player for their league for that year in baseball, and it was Bautista this year.

Hines · 11-22-2011, 02:36 PM

The new draft **** makes me a sad panda. Very sad panda.

Xiomera · 11-22-2011, 02:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brodeur

Avila and Cabby both were legitimate top ten MVP candidates and I still think we would have won the ****** ass division without him. I don't care though, because MVP is the guy who was the absolute best player for their league for that year in baseball, and it was Bautista this year.

Hypothetically, if a player hit 50 HR, 150 RBI and hit .330 on a team with a 62-100 record, you'd still say they're the most valuable?

**** off. Value means contention. Silver Slugger or the Hank Aaron award are for the likes of Bautista.

Jughead10 · 11-22-2011, 02:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xiomera

Hypothetically, if a player hit 50 HR, 150 RBI and hit .330 on a team with a 62-100 record, you'd still say they're the most valuable?

**** off. Value means contention. Silver Slugger or the Hank Aaron award are for the likes of Bautista.

Who is to say that team wouldn't be 42-120 without them.

Xiomera · 11-22-2011, 02:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jughead10

Who is to say that team wouldn't be 42-120 without them.

They might be, but it doesn't ******* matter. The entire goddamn season is garbage time in this case. It's easier to perform when it doesn't ******* matter and no one takes you seriously.

Every team should win 75 games. It's the value of the wins after that point that start mattering because then the team is actually worth a ****.

Jughead10 · 11-22-2011, 02:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xiomera

They might be, but it doesn't ******* matter. The entire goddamn season is garbage time in this case. It's easier to perform when it doesn't ******* matter and no one takes you seriously.

Then let's discount what Verlander did because the Central sucks.

DeepThreat · 11-22-2011, 02:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xiomera

Hypothetically, if a player hit 50 HR, 150 RBI and hit .330 on a team with a 62-100 record, you'd still say they're the most valuable?

**** off. Value means contention. Silver Slugger or the Hank Aaron award are for the likes of Bautista.

Value is who added the most to that team. It doesn't have a damn thing to do with how well the team did. That is a reflection of the team around your suggested player. Without him, his team probably has ten less wins. If no one else added more wins to his team, your player was the most valuable.

Xiomera · 11-22-2011, 02:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeepThreat

Value is who added the most to that team. It doesn't have a damn thing to do with how well the team did. That is a reflection of the team around your suggested player. Without him, his team probably has ten less wins. If no one else added more wins to his team, your player was the most valuable.

That's not how 98% of people conceive the award. Best hitter isn't the same as most valuable hitter.

Winning is valued. As in, allowing your fans to give a damn about your team.

Brodeur · 11-22-2011, 02:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeepThreat

Value is who added the most to that team. It doesn't have a damn thing to do with how well the team did. That is a reflection of the team around your suggested player. Without him, his team probably has ten less wins. If no one else added more wins to his team, your player was the most valuable.

Exactly this. This isn't the NBA, where LeBron is absolutely the best player but wouldn't win MVP because he doesn't add that many wins to the Heat.