Worst MVP Winners (according to SweetSpot's David Schoenfield)

There was a general thread on bad awards here:

A thread for talking about really interesting/stupid/incomprehensible award voting results (MVP, CY, RoY, etc.) from the past

With only name from the past decade, I assume Schoenfield thinks the voting has gotten better.

"only one name"

Sorry--here's the permalink for Schoenfield's column.

http://espn.go.com/blog/sweetspot/post/_/id/29340/the-list-worst-mvp-winners

With only name from the past decade, I assume Schoenfield thinks the voting has gotten better.

Voting has gotten better, the 70's and 80's had a screwy result every other year (besides the ones in the poll). But 1996 is the all-time worst.

It's not anywhere near the worst on the list, but the one that most personally irked me at the time was Vaughn over Belle in '95. (I see a typo in the poll choices...will not cause major confusion.)

Leaving aside pitchers, because that opens up a separate issue, these are the 5.0+ gaps between the MVP winner and the WAR winner:

Cochrane (-6.4, Gehrig)
DiMaggio (-5.1, Williams)
Berra (-5.0, Mantle)
Garvey (-5.2, Schmidt)
Stargell (-5.8, Winfield)
Baylor (-5.1, Lynn)
Hernandez (-5.2, Ripken)
Gonzalez (-6.0, Griffey)

Eckersley finished 5.0+ behind Clemens and Mussina, but not behind any position players. So the worst choice by that measure is Cochrane, followed by Gonzalez.

When I was 13, I was very upset that Garvey beat out Lou Brock--I probably hardly even noticed the new guy at third base. In '87, even though I was a rabid Jays fan, I knew the award should have gone to Trammell.

loved Stargell, but '79 was a pretty sentimental choice

Most sentimental ever, I'm sure. (The fall I started university--paid almost no attention.) You can bypass that one in a way, though, since at least there was a legitimate co-winner. One thing that jumps out when you go through the list and calculate WAR differentials is that gaps of 4.0+ almost always involve not just a Hall of Famer on the losing end, but often an inner-circle guy. At a certain level of achievement, great players get taken for granted--I guess that's self-evident. The list of 5.0+ names above has Fred Lynn and seven first-ballot guys (assuming as much for Griffey).

It's always a joke when a closer wins MVP, I'd vote for one of those guys on basic principle. But gonzalez was a horrible choice in his two seasons too. And bell. And Dawson (soz dre)

I'm kind of surprised you don't have the 1942 award when Joe Gordon got the award over Ted Williams who hit for the triple crown, that is a pretty famous one.

Not my list, Schoenfield's. He seemed to have at least one eye on WAR when he drew it up, according to which '42 wasn't that noticeably bad a choice (Gordon--7.8, Williams--10.2).

I'm going to be a homer and vote for '92.

1) I didn't give it much thought at the time, but MVP for 80 innings--even 80 high-leveraged innings--really is kind of silly. (Besides which, it wasn't such a fact of life then as to how replaceable even a good closer was.)

2) It's Eckersley; Jays fans hate Eckersley.

3) The MVP should have gone to Alomar. Clemens and Mussina led the league in WAR, but I don't think it makes sense to give the award to a pitcher on a second-division team when there are clearly qualified candidates from contending teams. Among positional players, it was Puckett at 6.8, Thomas at 6.7, Alomar at 6.4. That's close enough that I feel okay going with the second baseman on the division-winning team. Joe Carter (2.2) finished third--nostalgia aside, obviously silly.

'96 is really embarrassing, but at least it's kinda understandable (winner barely one, Griffey/A-Rod split votes.) '92 is retrospectively awful (in fairness pre-WAR I'm not sure how easy it was to quantify relief pitcher value.)

Automatic thread bump. This poll is closing tomorrow.

Automatic thread bump. This poll's results are now in.

Same topic, just to put tonight in perspective

http://mlb.sbnation.com/2012/11/15/3649984/al-most-valuable-player-mvp-miguel-cabrera-mike-trout

Griffey, on the other hand, hit .303/.392/.628 in a pitcher's park, while playing tremendous defense in center

Kingdome was a bandbox I thought.

Actually looking at B-Rs park effects it's pretty neutral.

Tied into today's grid: '79 was terrible in terms of their being so many excellent candidates. Baylor (DH, 3.7 WAR) beat:

Fred Lynn, 8.9 WAR - 39 HR, .333/.423/.637
George Brett, 8.6 WAR - 212 hits, .329/.376/.563
Darrell Porter, 7.6 WAR - 112 RBI, 121 walks, 157 games catching
Buddy Bell, 6.9 WAR - 200 hits, 101 RBI, GG
Willie Wilson, 6.3 WAR - 83 SB, .315

second place was Ken Singleton, followed by Fred Lynn. WAR-wise Baylor was below other guys like Sixto Lezcano, Roy Smalley, and Steve Kemp. An array of stars.

it's been awhile since there was an outright bad MVP pick. in 2006 Morneau wasn't good, and Ryan Howard wasn't great. MVP voters really loved Howard though, he had five top 10 MVP finished in the next five seasons w/a collective bWAR of 10.2 (and a dWAR of -8.7)

I don't think you'll ever again see one as dubious as Morneau and the rest. (I realize, by the way, that in '79 a) Baylor's 130 RBI were considered crucial, b) the Angels won their division that year, and c) Baylor was a respected team leader. So I get why he won in the eyes of 1979.)