Beat Writer: "Joe Ribbi proves he's the MVP with another clutch home run. Where would Team...

Beat Writer: "Joe Ribbi proves he's the MVP with another clutch home run. Where would Team Win-All-The-Time be without him?"

Sabermetric Blogger: "Look at this ridiculous article about Ribbi being the MVP. What a moron. Deosn't Beat Writer know that Sam Shortstop is the one getting on base all the time?"

Beat Writer: "I'm at the games, I travel with the team, I talk to the guys in the clubhouse, and we all agree - it's Joe Ribbi. Sometimes, you just have to realize there's more to the game than numbers."

Sabermetric Blogger: "When does this fool retire? If I had a subscription to the paper, I would cancel!"

The rest of the article is also spot on.

over 2 years ago Sokojoe 17 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

I really agree with this article.

Snark has its place and I’m a huge fan of it but the repeated, cliched fjm rehases can grow tiresome for me. In the end, the fact that Marty Noble hates stats but invented his own stat which is actually useless (RBI/PA) doesn’t really matter. People like Noble have their viewpoints and we have ours, spending time mocking their viewpoints is better spent discussing ours. I’m not saying good counter-points to others viewpoints shouldn’t be brought up or really that I feel like the AA community needs to change, just thought it was a good read and will get off my soapbox, apologies all around.

by Sokojoe on Aug 19, 2009 10:03 AM EDT reply actions

The problem with FJM style takedowns

is that nobody can do them like FJM could. Snark is awesome when done right.

I agree that getting outraged at some guys thinking Teixeira is the MVP and then mocking said writers is practicably useless, but there has to be at least some antagonism toward that viewpoint or else its a bunch of people preaching to their own choirs.

by dtro on Aug 19, 2009 10:18 AM EDT up reply actions

Agreed

I think preaching to their own choirs is fine, but there’s a problem when your choir starts messing with mine. In this case, sports writers can write whatever they feel like, but if it puts pressure on organizations to make dumb moves, that’s no longer fine.

I don’t think we should necessarily be up in arms about who’s declared MVP, but that has an impact on how players are viewed by the public.

As such, ridicule is a well established way to deflate the arguments of “experts”.

by mnbv on Aug 19, 2009 10:35 AM EDT up reply actions

Like I said, I think snark and ridicule has its place

What I grow tired of is more the repeated phrases and jokes that bring no real “meat” to the discourse.

by Sokojoe on Aug 19, 2009 10:49 AM EDT up reply actions

"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw

by squid92 on Aug 19, 2009 11:59 AM EDT up reply actions

Ehh

The problem is that he’s wrong. Baseball is not vague. The object of the game is well defined: score more runs than your opponent in a 9 inning game. If you accept that the MVP goes to a position player and Cy Young to a pitcher, then the most valuable player is the one who gives the most run value in terms of how many runs he produces for your team and prevents the opposition from scoring.

Now there is a lot of room for disagreement. There is a case to be made that a player for a contender should get more consideration. But Giving the award to a guy like Jimmy Rollins or voting Ryan Howard in 2008 is stupid and the people who do it should be called out for it.

Also, it has consequences. The more Benignos and bullshit peddlers there are the more likely our organization hires Minayas and bullshit consumers and puts out a 2009-style bullshit product.

If I were a Rays fan, though, I would love it if the sports world stayed as ignorant as it is forever so that I would get every advantage.

Nothing can get by him; especially in a small room: Mike Francessa

by GenJackRipper on Aug 19, 2009 10:29 AM EDT reply actions

While I agree that most MSM and fans are ignorant,

I would say most teams are not ignorant.

The Cy Young is officially for the best pitcher, therefore, I hate when the writers get it wrong. But the MVP I just don’t really care about. It’s an award given out by writers based on the writers criteria, complaining about it, to me, is like complaining about the employee of the month at my local McDowell’s. It’s Cleo’s award and he’s using whatever BS guidelines he wants. That’s just my opinion

by Sokojoe on Aug 19, 2009 10:43 AM EDT up reply actions

the MVP just seems antiquated

That the BBWAA holds a monopoly on voting rights, that is. And thus, it’s stupid.

by jasondg on Aug 19, 2009 11:06 AM EDT up reply actions

+1 for Coming to America reference.

by twon8 on Aug 19, 2009 11:12 AM EDT up reply actions

You'd disagree if you were a Twins fan

;)

King of the bling come to lay down the evidence//Not George Bush, L-Millz be da president

by Sam Page on Aug 19, 2009 12:28 PM EDT reply actions

Well I'm sure most of us here were pissed

when Rollins got it over Wright in 2007 simply because the Mets pitching sucked at the end of the year.

Of course, Mauer is looking at getting jobbed out of at least his 2nd deserved one.

by dtro on Aug 19, 2009 1:13 PM EDT up reply actions

Probably 3rd.

"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw

by squid92 on Aug 19, 2009 1:58 PM EDT up reply actions

Touche.

by Sokojoe on Aug 19, 2009 1:35 PM EDT up reply actions

I don't pay attention to how the HELL Did you figure that out? Stats!

I’m sorry youngsters but I don’t even know what some abrevs. even mean. I also don’t pay much attention to stats that I need a scientific calculator to figure out. I look at the pitcher’s ERA his bb/kk’s and so forth, or a batter’s BA,OBP and slugging and if I can, I watch them play. UZR,sabremetrics and what not,sorry kids I guess I don’t get it. There is just so much that stats can show. I mean does UZR take into account a weak pitching staff? With the Mets pitching I’m sure all fielding positions look like crap on the UZR!LOL Just ruminating over the way we look at things now versus when I was a kid going to my 1st big league game to watch the Angels beat the Indians,it was at Chavez Ravine as the Angels didn’t have their own stadium then.

by jimmontg on Aug 21, 2009 8:31 AM EDT reply actions

Yes. UZR does take into account a weak pitching staff. It's based on the type of ball put into play, such as GB, LD, FB, etc.

And seriously, how old/lazy are you that you think it requires too much effort to look at things that are a little complicated? If they work and are descriptive, which they are, it’s a little insulting to refer to people as “kids” just because they use complicated measurements.

"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw

by squid92 on Aug 21, 2009 11:39 AM EDT up reply actions

Oh, Grandpa

"He's definitely mixing it into his repertoire. That's French for 'repertoire' " - Keith Hernandez

by Catsmeat Potter-Pirbright on Aug 21, 2009 1:22 PM EDT up reply actions

Late to see this one, and no one will probably see this comment

but I disagree with Cameron. I care about who wins the MVP Award because, like it or not, it has an impact on who makes the Hall of Fame. That is something I certainly care about. It annoys me to no end seeing Hall of Fame cases made by sportswriters based on past, flawed MVP voting. I see no problem with calling out idiot sportswriters when they vote Albert Pujols 7th in the MVP voting. It’s possible to have meaningful discourse while simultaneously pointing out shoddy writing/voting by others.

by James Kannengieser on Aug 23, 2009 11:13 PM EDT reply actions