Around the Horn: November 19, 2012 – Awards

(1) Buster Posey the runaway winner of the NL MVP Award.

(2) Why did Miguel Cabrera dominate Mike Trout in AL MVP voting?

(3) Why did R.A. Dickey dominate in NL Cy Young Voting?

(4) David Price defeated Justin Verlander and Jered Weaver for the AL Cy Young.

(5) Bryce Harper narrowly edged Wade Miley for NL ROY.

(6) Mike Trout the 8th unanimous winner for AL ROY.

(7) Oddities in voting. Who are some of these voters?

BBWAA – Award Info.

By Ray Flowers

The History of the MVP and Cy Young Awards

Every year Major League Baseball rewards players for their excellence, and two awards top the list -the MVP and Cy Young awards (for this year’s voting see http://bbwaa.com). Everyone knows about the awards, and continually debates whether or not the appropriate players were chosen for the awards. However, I’d posit that the vast majority of people know little about the history of the awards. Today, I’ll help to rectify that oversite (the information is gathered from Total Baseball, 7th edition, pp.192-194 for the MVP portion of the paper, and pp.205-206 for the Cy Young segment).

MVP HISTORY

Originally the MVP award was presented by Hugh Chalmers, president of the Chalmers Motor Company, to the player with the highest batting average in major league baseball (this occurred in 1910). However, after the Ty Cobb/Nap Lajoie fiasco of 1910 in which the St Louis Browns allowed Lajoie to go 8-for-8 in a double header with seven of the hits coming on bunts because they detested Cobb so much, it was determined that in 1911 the MVP award, and the car that went with it, would go to the one player in each league who was the “…most important and useful player to his club.” This was the way the award was presented until 1914 when World War I began (the war obviously caused people to turn their attention towards other avenues). In addition to the battle across the Atlantic, Chalmers had signed only a five year deal with baseball to present the award and the accompanying car which ran out after the 1914 season, so the award basically just disappeared.

In 1922, the American League established a new set of rules and procedures and decided to reinstate the award after neither league awarded a trophy from 1915 to 1921 (the National League eventually followed suit, though it waited until 1924 to reinstate its award). However, a few quirks in the rules of the time deserve mention.

First, the original rules prohibited teammates from both receiving votes in the same season. Second, players who also managed ball clubs were disqualified from being chosen. Third, in the most blatantly stupid idea of the history of the award, once a player won the award he was ruled ineligible forever meaning that players like Babe Ruth and Lou Gehrig were only eligible to win the award once (in Ruth’s historic 1927 season when he hit his record 60 HR, as well as batting .356, with 160 RBI and 158 runs scored, he was ineligible because he had won the award in 1923). So disenchanted were those in the know with the whole process involved with the award, that on May 6, 1929, the AL award ceased to exist with the 1928 winner being the last given (the NL again followed suit, but only after awarding a winner for the 1929 season).

In 1930, The Sporting News – yes the same one you still read today – presented its own “unofficial” winners. Following this turn of events, the BBWAA (Baseball Writers Association of America) determined at its meeting on Dec. 11, 1930, to appoint two separate committees, one for each league, to select the MVP winner each year. This meant that the modern day MVP award officially began in 1931, and though the awards voting process has changed through the years in subtle ways, (such as including more writers in the voting and changing the way the points awarded are tabulated) the award has basically been carried on since that point with little change.

Unanimous MVP Winners:

Ty Cobb (1911)

Babe Ruth (1923)

Hank Greenberg (1935)

Carl Hubbell (1936)

Al Rosen (1953)

Mickey Mantle (1956)

Frank Robinson (1966)

Orlando Cepeda (1967)

Denny McLain (1968)

Reggie Jackson (1973)

Mike Schmidt (1980)

Jose Canseco (1988)

Frank Thomas (1993)

Jeff Bagwell (1994)

Ken Caminiti (1996)

Ken Griffey Jr. (1997)

Barry Bonds (2002)

Albert Pujols (2009)

There have been 18 unanimous MVP award winners  in the history of the award.

CY YOUNG HISTORY

In 1956 Ford Frick, the Commissioner of baseball, determined that pitchers were not receiving their due in MVP voting, so he proposed creating a new award that would be given solely to pitchers. Cy Young, the winningest pitcher of all-time, had died less than a year earlier so it only seemed natural to name the pitchers’ MVP award after him (the vote to place his name on the trophy only passed by a 14 to 12 margin though). Who voted? One writer from each city with a team was selected for the honor of casting a vote. More difficult was the decision pertaining to how many Cy Young Awards would be awarded yearly. Frick was greatly opposed to the idea of multiple winners so from 1956-1966 there was but one joint Cy Young award for both leagues. In 1967, after Frick died, William Eckert took over as the Commissioner and ceded to the wishes of the writers and fans an authorized the commission of two awards, one for each league. There have been minor changes to the voting process since the date of its inception (mainly adding more writers to the voting body), but it is in essence the same award that has been given since the split, to one per league, in 1967.

Unanimous Cy Young Winners:

Sandy Koufax (1963, 65-66)

Bob Gibson (1968)

Denny McLain (1968)***

Steve Carlton (1972)

Ron Guidry (1978)

Rick Sutcliffe (1984)

Dwight Gooden (1985)

Roger Clemens (1986, 98)

Orel Hershiser (1988)

Greg Maddux (1994-95)

Pedro Martinez (1999-2000)

Randy Johnson (2002)

Johan Santana (2004, 2006)

Jake Peavy (2007)

Roy Halladay (2010)

Justin Verlander (2011)

***McLain is the only player ever to unanimously win both the MVP and Cy Young awards.

There have been 22 unanimous Cy Young winners handed out over the years.

By Ray Flowers

Three's Company

I’m going to hit on three topics today. First, I’ll discuss the move of Manny to the White Sox. I’ll then break down why I think there are two full fledged aces with the Phillies though many only see one (Roy Halladay). Finally, I’ll play a little game of “Who am I?’ with you to see if you can guess which pitcher I’m talking about.

Manny to Be Manny in Chi-Town

Manny Ramirez is an amazing hitter. In fact, he is likely one of the 10 best right-handed hitters that the game has ever seen. Just look at how he stacks up historically amongst righties (minimum 3,000 plate appearances).

4th with 1,120 extra bass hits
8th with 554 home runs
6th with 1,828 RBI
8th with a .411 OBP
5th with a 1.000 OPS

Those are some mighty impressive numbers indeed. He’s also been pretty darn effective this season as well, albeit in limited work because he just can’t see to get, and then stay, healthy. Still, he is hitting .311 – just two points below his career rate – while his .405 OBP is six a points down. Mere mortals would be enthralled if the back of their baseball card had a season with an .915 OPS, but for Manny that is a disappointing total considering that his OPS has been under .949 only one time since 1995. The guy can still hit, and he should offer the White Sox a tremendous boost as a middle of the order thumper – provided his calf is healthy. If you are in an AL-only league dump whatever remaining FAAB dollars you have to acquire the aloof yet stupendous gifted slugger in his return to the AL.

Cole Hamels is Pitching Very Well

Has anyone noticed just how well Hamels is hurling of late? I kind of doubt it because all anyone seems to see is that pathetic 8-10 win-loss record. Much like Felix Hernandez who is a mere 10-10, Hamels has actually pitched very well this season, particularly as the summer has dragged on. Here is what you should know but may have overlooked.

On the year Hamels has a 3.31 ERA which is better than Francisco Liriano (3.41), Ryan Dempster (3.42) and Yovani Gallardo (3.50) to name a few.

On the year Hamels has a 1.20 WHIP which is better than Zack Greinke (1.21), CC Sabathia (1.23) and David Price (1.26) to name a few.

On the year Hamels has 176 strikeouts which are more than any lefty in baseball not named Clayton Kershaw (180) or Jon Lester (176).

Moreover, Hamels has pitched wonderfully the past month an a half since the All-Star break. Here are his numbers over his nine starts.

2.47 ERA, 0.95 WHIP, 10.01 K/9, 6.27 K/BB

If you pitch like that over the course of a season they call you the Cy Young Award winner, so how in the world is he just 1-3 in that time? Man that Phillies offense has been a letdown this season.

Who Am I?

I’m a really good pitcher, but no one seems to notice. Here are some facts to help make clear just how good I’ve been this year.

I own a 3.39 ERA over 162 innings. It’s not really odd that I’m posting such a strong number. After all I have a career mark of 3.62.

I currently have a WHIP of 1.19. Again, it’s not at all surprising to me considering that my career mark is the same – 1.19.

I currently have a 3.28 K/BB mark that is 20th best in baseball.

Any idea who I might be?

No, I’m not Francisco Liriano, Ryan Dempster or Johnny Cueto. I’m also not Cole Hamels, Roy Oswalt or CC Sabathia. Who am I?

I pitch for the Dodgers.

I’ve been in the United States for three years.

My name is Hiroki Kuroda.

Will someone please show me some respect?

Arigatou
(Thank you in Japanese)

By Ray Flowers

What is His Legacy?

I was recently asked by a friend what I thought of Pedro Martinez. Why did his career end so abruptly? Did I think he had a chance to be an effective pitcher this season if he signed with someone? And finally, what is his place amongst the greats of the game? Here are my thoughts on each matter.

(1) Why has his career basically ended so abruptly?
I actually don’t think it ended abruptly at all. Basically what has happened is that guys like Randy Johnson and John Smoltz have spoiled us into thinking that every top-flight pitcher can pitch effectively into their 40′s. The truth is, they cannot. Pedro might have “lost it” compared to the two guys we just mentioned, but he won 15 games with a 2.82 ERA as a 33 year old, and that certainly isn’t a bad effort at all. Pedro then started to suffer from shoulder issues, hardly a surprise for a guy who stands 5’11″ and weighs about 175 lbs and threw a 95 mph fastball for years. The fact of the matter is that his body just wore out, a rather normal occurrence for a man who has tossed nearly 2,800-innings in his big league career.

(2) Can he be effective this season?
I don’t see why he couldn’t be a better hurler than a ton of arms currently employed by major league clubs, even at age 37, as long as he is healthy. Certainly he won’t be able to recapture his past glory, but I don’t see why he couldn’t be an effective reliever, that is if his body could stand the transformation from throwing every five days as a starter. Pedro was always a “pitcher” who threw hard and not a hard thrower who tried to pitch. He might not be able to hit even 90 on the gun anymore, but I bet he could still pitch his way to some outs.

(3) What is his legacy?
This was the portion of the question that had me most intrigued. Let’s take a look at Pedro in a handful of categories and see how he stacks up against the all-time greats.

Wins and Loses
Pedro has 214 victories, tied for 86th all-time. Given that he has lost only 99 games, that leaves him with a superlative .684 winning percentage which just so happens to be the seventh best mark in baseball history. If remove pre-1900 hurlers he moves up to fourth on the all-time list. He may not have the volume of wins that others have, but it’s obvious that he was nearly as effective as any man who ever climbed the hill.

ERA
Pedro’s overall ERA of 2.91 is the 61st best mark in the history of baseball for a man who has tossed at least 2,000-innings. While that is impressive, it certainly doesn’t speak to just how dominating that Pedro was in his career. I touched on an idea called “normalization” in an earlier piece entitled Some People Never Learn. You can read more about the idea there, but the basic idea is this – raw numbers mean nothing until they are placed in context. When Pedro pitched there was a ton more offense in the game then when Cy Young was on the hill, so comparing their raw ERA’s to one another wouldn’t really tell you much of anything. The only way to know how effective a player is would be to compare him to his contemporaries who played the game under the same conditions that he did. To that end – Pedro has posted a 2.91 ERA in his career. When we adjust for his competition by comparing his ERA to the league average during his career (4.45), and adjust for the parks he pitched in, we come up with an ERA+ of 154. What this means is that Pedro was 54% better than a league average pitcher during his career which just so happens to be the best mark in baseball history amongst starting pitchers. Cy Young who had a raw ERA of 2.63 in his career comes in with an ERA+ mark of 138, good enough for 18th all-time.

WHIP
Since he began his career in 1992 Pedro is the only pitcher in baseball who has thrown at least 1,500-innings who allowed less than 10 base runners per nine innings at 9.90 (Greg Maddux is second at 10.08). Moreover, Pedro’s raw WHIP of 1.05 is the third best mark of any hurler, post-1900, who has thrown at least 1,250-innings in the history of the game.

Strikeouts
Pedro is tied with Bob Gibson for 13th all-time in strikeouts with 3,117 in his career (Smoltz is 101 behind). If we move to the ratio category of K/9, Pedro’s career mark of 10.08 is the second best in baseball history for hurlers who have tossed 1,500-innings trailing only the 10.62 mark of the Big Unit, Randy Johnson.

I don’t know if Pedro will come back this season, but I can tell you this without reservation – you may not know it, heck you may not want to admit it, but I think a plausible argument can be made that Pedro Martinez was one of the 10 greatest starting pitchers who ever lived, period. Care to disagree?

By Ray Flowers

Some People Never Learn

I thought we were past this. I thought after all the analysis we’ve been spewing over the past five years that the mainstream media has finally gotten “it.” I guess we’re not done yet.

I recently was flipping through the pages of my Sporting News Magazine when I came across an article in which they asked a bunch of baseball people to rate who the best players in the game are (Albert Pujols came out on top). While I might disagree with some of the order of their choices, that isn’t germane to my concern here. My concern is that people in the mainstream media, and remember these are the people that vote for the Hall of Fame folks, just don’t understand how the game, and the measurement used to speak to the game, work.

What do I mean. Simply put nothing means anything without context. Think I’m crazy? Here is a series of numbers. Can you tell me what they mean with no supporting context?

13, 60, 73, 511 and 911

My shoe size.
The single season home run record set by Babe Ruth in 1927.
The new single season home run record set by Barry Bonds in 2001.
The career victory total of Cy Young.
The famous model number for Porsche’s.

The point is without some sort of context, the numbers mean nothing at all.

So when I read the Sporting News breakdowns I wasn’t shocked, though I was dismayed, to realize that people that are supposed to be “in the know” still, well, don’t know.

Here is an example. The article talks about how Josh Hamilton hit 32 home runs and had 130 RBI in his first full season in Texas while Juan Gonzalez had only 27 HR and 102 RBI. That would lead you to think that Hamilton is a much better player wouldn’t it?. However, let’s use some context. Hamilton was 27 years old last season while Gonzo was just 21 in his first full season. Oh, and in case you were wondering, by the time Gonzalez was 27 he had four seasons of 40 home runs and 100-RBI.

Another example? There is a note that Victor Martinez has more RBI at the age of 30 than fellow catcher Carlton Fisk. The context that is left out here is that Fisk had 468 RBI through his 30 year old season, but that he then went on to record 866 RBI over the remainder of his career that lasted until he was 45 years of age. Do you honestly think that V-Mart has another 1,700+ games in him as did Fisk? Martinez better keep whacking that ball around the yard at a prodigious pace if wants to surpass the 1,300+ RBI that Fisk had in his career, and let me tell you something – it ain’t gonna happen (Martinez would have to average 85 RBI for the next 10 years to catch him).

And here might be the topper. The article actually says, and I quote, that Carlos Zambrano’s winning percentage of .615 “…is the same as Sandy Koufax when he was 28.” Seriously? Besides the fact that wins and loses are a putrid way to measure the success or failure of a hurler, there is also the context that by every conceivable measure known to mankind shows that Koufax was a vastly superior pitcher to Zambrano making any comparison between the two fallacious. Here are some examples.

In his 29 and 30 year old season’s Koufax went 53-17, to push his winning percentage up to .655 in his career. In addition, he also posted a 1.88 ERA, 0.92 WHIP, 9.55 K/9 and a 4.72 K/BB ratio in those two seasons, numbers Zambrano has never even sniffed in his career. Oh yeah, Koufax also tossed 659 innings in those two seasons, or more than the 619 that Zambrano has tossed in his last three seasons!

But even this isn’t fair because it isn’t putting Koufax’s performance in the context of the era in which he pitched. I mean really, how do you compare a guy who tossed 330-innings in a season to a guy who throws 200? How do you compare a guy who posted an ERA of 2.76 in his career, to a guy who owns a 3.50 mark like Zambrano? Context my friends. By comparing each pitcher to their contemporaries we find that Koufax produced an ERA that was 31% better than the league average when he pitched, whereas Zambrano, pitching in a more “offensive era” has been 27% better than the league average. What this shows is that their performance, when compared to era in which they pitched, were actually similar despite the fact that Zambrano’s raw ERA is three-quarters of a run higher. The answer to all of this comparison business is context.

So next time you read one of these historical articles comparing players, make sure you do something that most of the writers never do – put whatever you are studying under the microscope, sprinkle in some context, and come up with an “answer” that is likely more accurate than that of the man or woman who is being paid to write the piece.

By Ray Flowers