the 2013 NL awards need their own thread

screw you, miggy/trout

hitters (rookies)
pitchers (rookies)

current hitter leaders in war: carlos gomez, david wright (out 3-5 weeks with a hammy), andrew mccutchen, joey votto, carlos gonzalez, paul goldschmidt, yadier molina (15-day dl)

current pitcher leaders in war: matt harvey, adam wainwright, clayton kershaw

rookies: puig vs. jose fernandez, maybe a little shelby miller. too bad segura had 18 too many at-bats last year

comeback: uh, cuddyer maybe? he wasn't hurt, tho

in more traditional stats, goldschmidt (2nd in hr, 1st in rbi, hitting .301, doesn't play in colorado) and kershaw (1st in era, 2nd in k, 2nd in ip) might seem to be leading? i dunno.

it is pretty impressive how high andrelton simmons is despite his .288 obp

maybe liriano for comeback, if he continues pitching well/reaches qualifying innings

My vote today would be Kershaw and McCutcheon. But Kershaw and Harvey are so close.

Opponents are batting .182 against Clayton Kershaw this year. That's the lowest qualified mark since Pedro in 2000.

btw, as has been bandied about in the last 2 weeks, Harvey is 143rd (last) in MLB in quality of opposition hitters faced.

If you enjoy deriding narrative, you'll love the categories:

http://espn.go.com/blog/sweetspot/post/_/id/38857/ignore-win-total-kershaw-is-mvp-candidate

the dodgers have lost something like 2 of their last 11, and both were kershaw starts. hes like 3rd to last in run support.

Having a great ERA out of sync with your W-L record isn't all that unusual on mediocre and poor teams, much rarer on division winners. (I know the Dodgers aren't there yet.) Kershaw's year reminds me a bit of Dave Stieb's bizarre 1985, where the Jays won the division, he led the league with a 2.48 ERA, and he ended up 14-13. Looking at his game log, he a) got only one cheap win (5 earned runs in 5.1 innings against Seattle), but b) had 14 quality starts that he either lost or got a no-decision. They just didn't score when he pitched, which was compounded by the fact that he gave up an unusually high number of unearned runs (16) that year.

Kershaw clearly having a better season than Harvey at this point.

My unscientific analysis of MVP voting patterns indicates that McCutchen should will win MVP. Cy Young should go to Kershaw but I could see Wainwright sneaking away with it if everything else stays equal and he ends up with 3-4 more wins.

I guess AL Cy Young is the easiest call. (Looking at this from the voters' perspective.) Felix has the best WAR, but it's reasonably close; I don't think he can pull off another 2010, when he had everything covered except W-L. Scherzer's ERA is pretty good, his H/9 is better, Felix has a slight edge in K/BB. Felix will draw some first-place votes, though, I'm sure. My new mania is going through game logs:

Scherzer (3 cheap wins, no tough losses): 17-1 ---> 14-4
Felix (1 cheap win, 1 tough loss): 12-5 --> 12-5

Felix has been fantastic in his eight no-decisions, though: seven quality starts (high quality--only one or two runs), 56 IP, 2.41 ERA. Scherzer's been good, too, though not as good: 5 no-decisions, four quality starts, 36 IP, 3.00 ERA.

Should do Sale, too:

No cheap wins, 7 tough losses: 7-11 --> 14-4
Three no-decisions: 3 quality starts, 22.1 IP, 2.82 ERA

Goldschmidt, WPA, and MVP:

http://espn.go.com/blog/sweetspot/post/_/id/39095/paul-goldschmidt-is-awesome

If Arizona doesn't play in October, it seems like McCutchen's award -- one caveat being that a first baseman w/ big HR & RBI numbers is exactly the kinda player the MVP has over-rewarded. (Not that Goldy would be a bad choice, certainly not a botch like Morneau or Howard, but I don't see many voters factoring in WPA just yet.)

If Scherzer goes 20-2 and Felix struggles in September like he did last year then it'll be Scherzer in a landslide. It's far from settled.

This is an NL thread though, and the Cy is definitely Kershaw's to lose.

also Mets are shutting down Harvey in mid-Sept.

hate WPA tbh

I think it's like W-L or RBI or anything else--if you provide context, it has its uses. (Schoenfield himself calls it a "bit of a junk stat" right in the piece.) Where I thought it was silly was two years ago, when the Baseball Reference guy pointed out right after Pujols' three-HR World Series game that it was least impressive superhuman display ever. (Yes, I know--he was trying to give Pujols' game context. Maybe he just needed to wait 24 hours.)

Goldy whiffed in the 14th tonight and left the winning run on 2nd for Hill to drive in. #teamplayer

Paul Goldschmidt will probably get the Silver Slugger award at 1b in the NL. He's definitely the best power hitter in the NL this year and probably the best overall.

it's always awesome to see a 1b that steals bases too.

I thought McCutchen more or less had MVP locked up, but I'm starting to wonder if Kershaw might overtake him, pitcher-bias and all.

a pity Miami is gonna shut down Fernandez soon; right now he deserves the ROY over Puig. (Don't know how much "spark" he has tho.)

I'd vote for Fernandez too--his season is shaping up to be historic, and, as great as he's been, Puig will still have only played about a 60% of a full season.

Having said that, if you can't entertain the thought that Puig may have brought something to the Dodgers that can't be quantified by somebody over at Fangraphs, I don't know what to say.

i'm sure you'll come up with something

"gut feelings" have given ROYs to Marlin greats like Chris Coghlan and Dontrelle Willis

Is questionable award voting a good analogy for Puig’s possible effect on the Dodgers? (What was the gut feeling that led to Chris Coghlan winning ROY?)

I’m not at all saying Puig single-handedly turned the Dodgers around. Ramirez has been huge, and Greinke hadn’t pitched much until after Puig was brought up. (I checked Kershaw and Ryu, and, just using ERA as a convenient shorthand--sorry--they pitched about the same before and after Puig’s promotion.) And if Puig had been just as colourful and hit .220, who cares? But he did perform spectacularly from the start, a team floundering around did take off, and I don’t think it’s that much of a stretch to think there might be a connection beyond what can be measured. And it doesn't make him ROY over Fernandez.

puig's been great but when his bar was hottest (june) the dodgers went 13-11 in games in which he appeared. so they really picked up steam when his bat started to cool a bit.

I'm just having some fun with the needle, clem. With JF stopping at 150 IP, Puig could end up a deserving winner after all.

It's an interesting question, though. I was trying to think of some rookie sensations on the magnitude of Puig, and who came up partway into the season, and all I could come up with was Trout (team gets better) and Fidrych (team gets worse).

I made note of how the Dodgers took a while to get going after Puig's arrival over on the Puig thread (where I guess this is better located)--6-10 immediately after he arrives. On the other hand, he's hitting much better in wins than losses:

Wins -- 217 PA, 11 HR, .353/.424/.621
Losses -- 79 PA, 1 HR, .329/.354/.395

But that might just be tautological.

also the dodgers never lose so the losses comprise 79 plate appearances

These things start to take on a life of their own; I could see this happening.

http://mlb.si.com/2013/08/23/clayton-kershaw-dodgers-mvp-cy-young/?sct=hp_wr_a3&eref=sihp

It was also be the next logical step in the psychological barriers that have been breaking down. 1)Greinke/Lincecum/Hernandez win Cys with moderate/low win totals; 2) Verlander becomes first starting pitcher in a while to win MVP; 3) Kershaw wins MVP with moderate win total.

I imagine McCutchen would win if the vote were today, and it's not like he's not having a fantastic second half himself. I hope they both close strong, and we'll see what happens.

adam wainwright's cy young candidacy just took several hits

as did king felix's

Kershaw could move his ERA below 1.70 tonight--no one's been that low since Maddux in '95. (Pedro's prime years more amazing in context.)

ERA+ not loving this year quite as much though, but still very impressive.

yeah pitching in the NL and in dodger stadium probably hurts him a little there

i mean he's still miles ahead of the second guy, but like clemenza said it's not like he's doing it in the AL at the peak of the steroid years. any year over 200 is an all-timer though

Coors Field reality check...To paraphrase a line from Ball Four, this park sure can fluff up your ERA.

(Clayton did have an excellent day with the bat, though.)

destroy: "in the conversation"

http://www.baseballnation.com/2013/9/2/4684696/craig-kimbrel-braves-closer-cy-young-award-candidate-clayton-kershaw

btw Jhoulys Chacin is 2nd in NL pitcher WAR. You know, after "supposedly" adjusting for Coors.

Chacin is 5th by Fangraph's reckoning, and not even really close to Harvey or Kershaw, either. did fangraphs or b-r adjust their formula this year? it seems like they're farther apart this year than they normally are.

I thought they were supposed to "reconcile"?

they reconciled how they define "replacement level" but still calculate some stuff differently (defense and one or two other things).

yeah the difference is more pronounced for pitchers because fangraphs leans more heavily on FIP, iirc

btw does anyone want to explain the discrepancy between cc's 2.0 fwar and -0.1 bwar

― mookieproof, Saturday, August 31, 2013 3:43 PM (3 days ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

His BB/9 and K/9 are almost the same as in 2009 and 2010. HR/9 is the highest of his career, not sure if that's due to bad luck or not, but it's still not enough to account for the increase in hits and runs he's giving up. So by FIP, he's not as far off from his career norms as his ERA would suggest, and has been hurt by bad luck, which explains the 2.0 WAR.

destroy: "in the conversation"

― Miss Arlington twirls for the Coal Heavers (Dr Morbius),

With this big division lead, the Braves booth has spent the last six weeks or so flailing around for shit to talk about, as though they need motivational boosts and clips on the bulletin board about other teams dissing them and getting all "wait'll October, we'll have our revenge." It's irritating as fuck. Joe Simpson has let his anti-stat bias out to run freely, and Chip Caray spent a portion of yesterday's marathon talking trash about ESPN commentators who think the Dodgers have the NL pennant tied up. Of course he didn't name names, so who knows if any of it actually happened outside his imagination?

Just for fun, I took a look at the difference between fWAR and rWAR for all pitchers. here are the biggest discrepancies:

Pitchers doing a lot better according to Fangraphs

Name	        Fangraphs WAR	BR WAR		Fangraphs - BR
Wade Davis	1.5		-2.3		3.8
John Lackey	3.1		-0.3		3.4
Edwin Jackson	1.9		-1.2		3.1
C.J. Wilson	3.0		0.1		2.9
Edinson Volquez	0.5		-2.4		2.9
CC Sabathia	2.0		-0.5		2.5
Tim Lincecum	1.7		-0.6		2.3
Justin Grimm	0.6		-1.6		2.2
Wily Peralta	1.0		-1.2		2.2
B. McCarthy	1.3		-0.8		2.1
Shaun Marcum	1.2		-0.9		2.1
Josh Johnson	0.5		-1.5		2.0

Pitchers doing a lot better according to Baseball Reference

Name	        Fangraphs WAR	BR WAR		BR - Fangraphs														
John Hellweg	-0.2		3.2		3.4														
Caleb Thielbar	0.6		2.8		2.2														
Chris Tillman	1.5		3.5		2.0														
Joe Kelly	0.2		2.2		2.0														
Rex Brothers	1.1		3.1		2.0														
Hisashi Iwakuma	3.5		5.4		1.9														
Jarred Cosart	0.7		2.6		1.9														
J. Broxton	-0.4		1.5		1.9														
Huston Street	-1.0		0.8		1.8														
Kyle Lohse	1.3		3.1		1.8														
Chris Sale	4.4		6.2		1.8														
Jhoulys Chacin	4.2		5.9		1.7														
Alex Cobb	1.3		3.0		1.7														
Edward Mujica	0.6		2.3		1.7														

wade davis' agent is going to spend a lot of time this offseason trying to convince everyone that fangraph's formula is much more accurate

personally i find fWAR is closer to how i feel pitchers have performed

even as a Mets diehard I find it suspect that Harvey still has a fWAR lead over Kershaw when he's thrown 31 fewer innings.

Interesting. Can you give me some guidance, Morbius, as to when it's okay to express skepticism, when it's not okay to express skepticism, and when it's not even okay to use adverbs indicating a general skepticism that may not even reflect your own feelings? I want to get this right.

I just want to understand your skepticism further!

I'm going on, I know. I just found it really odd to see you seize on my use of "supposedly" in a series of posts where I made it clear I was not only okay with Helton in the HOF, but that I'd be inclined to put him in myself. Seems to me your exasperation would be better directed at the two or three people who flat out said that he shouldn't go into the HOF. Because if you're saying that, there's no "supposedly" about it--you clearly believe WAR is not correcting enough for Coors. There'd be no other reason for not putting Helton in.

I getcha

fie on you, Helton skeptics

(again, if Bagwell's not in, who cares)

even as a Mets diehard I find it suspect that Harvey still has a fWAR lead over Kershaw when he's thrown 31 fewer innings.

― Miss Arlington twirls for the Coal Heavers (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, September 3, 2013 1:57 PM (5 hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

park effects matter, and even NY is a better hitting environment than LA right? kershaw deserves some skepticism for his ERA for as long as he's there (tho he's obviously one of the best pitchers alive) just like jhoulys should get some love. a 3.08 ERA in coors is pretty incredible. i had no idea this guy was having such a good year. no idea how he's been so good at preventing HRs or if that'll keep up.

but it really comes down to if you prefer ERA or FIP. FIP just likes harvey that much more. +park effects.

Harvey had v favorable 'quality of opposition' numbers

i have no idea where Citi Field stands now in park effects, they'll need 3 years to measure the newer dimensions.

wouldn't be surprised if something like that was added into WAR, but i'm also not sure how much of a difference it makes.

speaking of fWAR for pitchers....

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/on-context-or-evaluating-hitters-and-pitchers-differently/

btw Neyer has declared awards season over

http://www.baseballnation.com/2013/9/6/4700612/mvp-race-cy-young-mlb-awards-american-national-league

on those Rockies pitchers:

http://www.baseballnation.com/2013/9/9/4711910/jorge-de-la-rosa-clayton-kershaw-cy-young-award

Jose Fernandez's last start tonight. If he pitches lights-out again, the Cy Young might have ended up a real contest given another three or four more starts. Right now, Fernandez has a) the ninth-lowest SA allowed since 1950 (Gibson in '68 #1), and b) the 11th-lowest OPS allowed since '50.

Not bad: 12-6, 2.19, 5.79 H/9, 3.22 K/BB, ERA+ around 175. With the Vida Blue/Dwight Gooden-type season a thing of the past for 20/21-year olds, that may be the benchmark for a long while. He should win ROY unanimously, but I'm sure he won't.

i'm sure a subset of writers is horrified by his 'antics' tonight, but puig is probably the only alternative

I just heard he had the second-best 20yo pitching season. We need a table.

(Pitching was easier when Vida Blue did it. Also, he was 21/22 in his mosnster first full season.)

1.8 times easier? (312/172.2...)

Not exactly what you wanted, but here's a table for rookie pitchers regardless of age:

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1770244-where-jose-fernandezs-remarkable-rookie-season-ranks-all-time

(No one before '67?)

As someone points out in the comments, Fidrych for sure should be on that table.

I'm sure part of reason for omission is SOs there.

Gap between bWAR (9.6) and fWAR (4.8) is crazy for Fidrych.

so can I boil down the diffs btwn the WARs as one more heavily weighing what "should have happened"?

morbs didn't you read my dave cameron link last week, it was really very good. (in short, yes, though i'm not sure i agree with him 100%)

reading more than 50 words about WAR, my eyes glaze over.

Morbius's interpretation is pretty much what I've started to internalize: that when there's a sizable difference, it's because Fangraphs' metrics are more speculative. That's why I lean more towards the measurements on Baseball Reference (besides the fact that I'm lazy and everything's more organized there). I think "what should have happened" is really valuable for projecting future performance; for measuring what has already happened, to me, the speculative stuff is less meaningful.

Would (with someone like Fidrych) splitting the difference help? Or do you people feel that one of them is right?

the difference is "somewhere in the middle" as the cliche goes, but splitting the difference would be pretty arbitrary. i'd pick one or the other for the time being

Re Fidrych: the one thing I don't like about WAR (either version) is that you don't get credit for things like big hair, ability to converse with the baseball, all-around Grateful Dead vibe, etc.

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/respecting-andrew-mccutchen

sort of hate the convention of listing WAR values with a + sign. the metric is called wins ABOVE replacement; the sign is unnecessary if it's positive

Final WAR (Baseball Reference):

Kershaw -- 8.5
Gomez -- 8.4
McCutchen -- 8.3
Lee -- 7.6
Goldschmidt -- 7.1

Close enough that McCutchen for sure, I would think.

BP staff:

1.Andrew McCutchen, Pirates, 31, 287 (26)
2.Paul Goldschmidt, Diamondbacks, 20, 129 (1)
3.Clayton Kershaw, Dodgers, 13, 93 (2)
4.Matt Carpenter, Cardinals, 15, 92 (1)
5.Joey Votto, Reds, 5, 30 (1)
6.Carlos Gomez, Brewers, 4, 20

impressed by Lee's numbers

I'm just impressed by CArlos Gomez, he's just a great all around ball player. He alone cost the Reds two wins with bringing back those two homers in Milwaukee. Brewer fans are going to be talking about those plays for a long time.

Matt Carpenter really impresses me too, that guy can just flat out hit. He's got a bit of Wade Boggs in his style and more power than you think. He seemed to do ok at 2b the games I saw, but never really saw a good overall assessment of his glove work. I got a feeling he was at least decent in the field.