How is kershaw mvp?

Yankeeknickfan · Post #1 » by **Yankeeknickfan** » Fri Nov 14, 2014 8:40 pm

I understand him winning cy young but mvp. really? After that terrible playoff performance he doesn't deserve the mvp award.

Post #2 » by **Ralnor** » Sat Nov 15, 2014 12:16 am

His playoff performance should not have anything to do with it.

And if we go by that logic then Panda or Bumgarner should be the NL MVP and Cain should be the MVP for the AL for their off the charts playoff performances.

But it is MVP of the regular season.

El Turco · Post #3 » by **El Turco** » Sat Nov 15, 2014 10:02 am

mlb needed throw a bone to new rich owners, get the sting out of perpetual post season mediocrity

UN-Owen · Post #4 » by **UN-Owen** » Sat Nov 15, 2014 10:29 pm

Yankeeknickfan wrote:I understand him winning cy young but mvp. really? After that terrible playoff performance he doesn't deserve the mvp award.

I believe voting for the awards is done before the playoffs even begin

TheKingofSting · Post #5 » by **TheKingofSting** » Tue Nov 18, 2014 3:25 am

Because he is a bad man!

Higga · Post #6 » by **Higga** » Tue Nov 18, 2014 3:53 pm

Because there was nobody else deserving.

Neddy · Post #7 » by **Neddy** » Sat Nov 22, 2014 10:52 pm

for the season of 2014 MLB, tell me one player in the national league who posted better fWAR value than Kershaw. Now then, name me any player from both leagues who posted better rWAR than Kershaw.

and for what exact purpose and reasons do WS MVP, ALCS MVP, NLCS MVP awards serve?

history · Post #8 » by **history** » Fri Dec 19, 2014 10:31 am

Awards should include playoff performance. Who cares about regular season, anyway.

Neddy · Post #9 » by **Neddy** » Sat Dec 20, 2014 1:32 am

history wrote:Awards should include playoff performance. Who cares about regular season, anyway.

then tell me, why do we have playoff awards at all?

history · Post #10 » by **history** » Sat Dec 20, 2014 9:21 am

Neddy wrote:
history wrote:Awards should include playoff performance. Who cares about regular season, anyway.

then tell me, why do we have playoff awards at all?

Because they didn't consider making it one award and instead started giving playoff ones separately.

Neddy · Post #11 » by **Neddy** » Sat Dec 20, 2014 9:44 pm

history wrote:
Neddy wrote:
history wrote:Awards should include playoff performance. Who cares about regular season, anyway.

then tell me, why do we have playoff awards at all?

Because they didn't consider making it one award and instead started giving playoff ones separately.

then why not just do away with series awards including WS? since your criteria for the regular awards must include playoff performances? no WS MVP, no NL/AL CS MVPS, no NLDS/ALDS MVPs. what is the point of having them when one award should cover them all?

history · Post #12 » by **history** » Sun Dec 21, 2014 6:28 pm

Neddy wrote:
history wrote:
Neddy wrote:

then tell me, why do we have playoff awards at all?

Because they didn't consider making it one award and instead started giving playoff ones separately.

then why not just do away with series awards including WS? since your criteria for the regular awards must include playoff performances? no WS MVP, no NL/AL CS MVPS, no NLDS/ALDS MVPs. what is the point of having them when one award should cover them all?

Agree. Just have one award. It would make the awards have more meaning. Wow Sammy Sosa won an mvp, who cares he never took a team to a ws.

Oh, and Kershaw is one of the worst starters in playoff history. He is more like the LVP than the MVP. And that's coming from a Dodger fan. Give the MVP to bumgarner.

Neddy · Post #13 » by **Neddy** » Sun Dec 21, 2014 10:32 pm

history wrote:
Neddy wrote:
history wrote:
Because they didn't consider making it one award and instead started giving playoff ones separately.

then why not just do away with series awards including WS? since your criteria for the regular awards must include playoff performances? no WS MVP, no NL/AL CS MVPS, no NLDS/ALDS MVPs. what is the point of having them when one award should cover them all?

Agree. Just have one award. It would make the awards have more meaning. Wow Sammy Sosa won an mvp, who cares he never took a team to a ws.

Oh, and Kershaw is one of the worst starters in playoff history. He is more like the LVP than the MVP. And that's coming from a Dodger fan. Give the MVP to bumgarner.

except, what you are forgetting (if in fact if you are even a dodger fan) is that

#1, it is hard to overcome an idiot manager. Don Mattingly is the worst manager i have seen in dodger blue since... forever. I had the good fortune of growing up watching Tommy do his thing, and was alive for a couple of our last WS. I always thought the worst manager i have seen in dodger blue was Grady Little, but no Donnie makes Grady look like Walter Alston in comparison. i have in fact never seen another manager who can mismanage his bullpen and yet still retain his job since... Joe Torre with the Yanks.

#2. playoffs are a very small sample. if you understood statistics, you would know it is very hard to determine an actual value of the findings. otherwise we wouldn't have a legion of uneducated anti-global warming, anti-fluoride, anti-vaccination movement we see today and baseball is no exception. sample size needs to be considered when anything is tangibly measured.

just consider this. If Don Mattingly would have pulled Kershaw after his stellar start and appropriately taken him out after giving up back to back singles after a dominating performance leading up to that point, in game 1 against the Cards this year, the scenario would have been very different and despite my personal loathing, Ned Colletti may still have his job and Kershaw would be getting a comparison to Sandy Koufax.

speaking of Sandy, he was considered a bonus baby bust until a half a dozen years after donning the dodger blue. Kershaw has yet to reach the age when Sandy got it together and how many Cy Youngs this young man already have?

this is not even close in comparison.

but if you want to abolish playoff awards and go with a single MVP, you do have a case. lets see if you can convince anyone else outside two of us here tho.

PS- it is never wise to argue about winning a championship to evaluate a single player's ability. baseball is a team sport, this is not boxing or UFC. do you consider Tony Gywnn anything less than a HOF player because he never won the WS? Tony ties Honus Wagner in NL batting titles with 8. even the great Honus could not win until he had a much better team around in 1909. it took him 10 years to get there and a failed attempt in 1903. individual player's accomplishment cannot be judged on a championship numbers in a team sport analysis, otherwise Robert Horry is as good as Michael Jordan and far better than Charles Barkley or Donimique Wilkins. is Kevin Faulk better than Barry Sanders? or Dan Marino worse than Trent Dilfer?

this argument of championship to define greatness in team sports is a moot point and has been for a very long time.

history · Post #14 » by **history** » Sun Dec 21, 2014 11:56 pm

Neddy wrote:lets see if you can convince anyone else outside two of us here tho.

I gave up fixing MLB a long time ago. It's an extremely flawed league(s) with obnoxious rules and traditions. It's no surprise it's becoming irrelevant in America.

Neddy wrote:PS- it is never wise to argue about winning a championship to evaluate a single player's ability.

True, but WS success doesn't hurt, especially when they're putting up numbers like Bumgarner. And I"m a huge Dodger fan, can't stand the Giants.

Neddy · Post #15 » by **Neddy** » Mon Dec 22, 2014 12:54 am

history wrote:I gave up fixing MLB a long time ago. It's an extremely flawed league(s) with obnoxious rules and traditions. It's no surprise it's becoming irrelevant in America.

not really, it is not even close to being corrupt to NBA and players enjoy a long life expectancy after retirement unlike NFL. baseball may be losing a slight edge in popularity but it is the most popular sport in many latin America and many Asian countries. we are more relevant around the world than the gladiator games called American Football.

history wrote:True, but WS success doesn't hurt, especially when they're putting up numbers like Bumgarner. And I"m a huge Dodger fan, can't stand the Giants.

there are plenty of guys who came through in the playoffs who never lived up to their following contracts. Carlos Beltran comes to mind. just because one pitcher had a stellar playoff run, and the other looked terrible in what, 3 game sample? does not mean a damn thing statistically, and given enough chance and hopefully with better management from the "manager" Kershaw will come through in a hurry.

look, Sandy Koufax in his first six seasons posted worse than 4.00 ERA, just below that mark in FIP, worse than average by a mile in WHIP, and gave up more than 5 walks per 9 innings for all 6 seasons. then it clicked for him. Kershaw is already the most dominating pitcher of all time up until his age level. he will figure it out for the playoffs. it is only a matter of time and frankly a result of a small sample size and a terrible management.

TheKingofSting · Post #16 » by **TheKingofSting** » Mon Dec 22, 2014 12:58 am

Because he was the best player in the game.

trwi7 · Post #17 » by **trwi7** » Sun Jan 4, 2015 5:35 am

Yankeeknickfan wrote:I understand him winning cy young but mvp. really? After that terrible playoff performance he doesn't deserve the mvp award.

Voters submit their ballots before the playoffs start.

mawbsta · Post #18 » by **mawbsta** » Thu Jan 15, 2015 6:11 am

history wrote:there are plenty of guys who came through in the playoffs who never lived up to their following contracts. Carlos Beltran comes to mind.

Wait... Carlos Beltran, the 8-time all-star, 3 time gold glove, two time silver slugger and one of 8-players in the history of baseball to hit 300hr and 300sb is your example of a player who never lived up to his contract?