Sports Illustrated senior writer Jon Heyman posted the following on his Twitter account shortly after it was announced that Tim Lincecum won the 2009 National League Cy Young:
i dont mean to pick on the voters. but how do 2 of them leave chris carpenter off the ballot entirely? #dumbsportswriters
Heyman felt that Chris Carpenter deserved to win the award and was directly calling out Baseball Prospectus writer Will Carroll and ESPN baseball analyst Keith Law. The most entertaining part about this was the #dumbsportswriters used to end the tweet. I’m not going to focus on Keith Law, a trained scout who has an MBA from Carnegie Mellon, in this post, as R.J. Anderson already covered that angle beautifully. Also, I don’t wish to rehash why wins are a poor statistic for judging pitcher effectiveness. We’re in the year 2009, and that should go without saying; the object of the game is for teams to win games, not pitchers, who are charged with preventing the opposing team from scoring as few runs as possible. Rather, I want to shed light on the fact that, when it comes to voting for postseason awards, Heyman shouldn’t be questioning the logic of any other writer based on his track record. I really didn’t want to call him out, but his classless one-man smear campaign against Law on Twitter makes him fair game.
First, let’s start with Heyman’s 2008 awards column. Here were his top five choices for National League Most Valuable Player.
1. Manny Ramirez
2. CC Sabathia
3. Ryan Howard
4. Brad Lidge
5. Albert Pujols
Heyman has frequently stated his preference to vote for players on contending teams when it comes to postseason awards. He certainly was guided by that mindset when choosing his ’08 N.L. MVP. His first four selections all played for playoff-bound teams, but only one of those players, Howard, ranked in the top 30 in the statistic Wins Above Replacement. Clearly, Heyman would never use a stat like WAR in his analysis, seemingly only going after players on contending clubs who have high RBI or win totals. He’s a walking-talking cliché in that regard, the traditional baseball writer who does exactly what is expected of them.
Ramirez and Sabathia were each dominant the stretch, helping their respective clubs reach the playoffs. Each player only spent a half season in the Senior Circuit, however, making them ridiculous choices. Howard led the league in home runs and RBIs, the traditional voters’ wet dream for an MVP choice. Although he finished second in the end, his place on that list is also laughable. The most ridiculous argument of them all, however, is his placing a relief pitcher, Lidge, so high. The Philadelphia Phillies closer had a dominant season, posting a 225 ERA+ in 72 appearances, but he only logged 69.1 innings. It’s absurd to think that a player who appeared in so few innings could be one of the four most valuable players in the league.
Interestingly, there were two Phillies in his top five. The most valuable—defining value as doing things that lead to wins—player on the club, however, finished ninth with Heyman. That would be star second baseman Chase Utley, a plus defender at the keystone who posted a line of .292/.380/.535 with a 135 OPS+. Utley finished second in the league with an incredible 8.1 WAR; his teammate on the right side of the Phillies’ infield, Howard, produced 3.3 WAR, taking a hit for his position and below-average defense.
Plus, Heyman somehow believed that Lidge’s 69.0 relief innings were more valuable than the 223.0 innings that Lincecum gave the San Francisco Giants, the 216.0 innings that Dan Haren threw for the Arizona Diamondbacks, and so on. It’s also asinine to think that Lidge was even the most valuable pitcher on his own team when Cole Hamels posted a 142 ERA+ in 227.1 innings.
The real kicker, though, is that Heyman placed Albert Pujols fifth on his ballot. Fifth. He felt that a relief pitcher was more valuable than the most productive position player in the game. Seriously, he went with Lidge over Pujols. If there were ever an egregious decision worth calling a writer out on, it would be that. Every voter interprets value in their own way, but if the interpretation leads to such a faulty conclusion, then said writer needs to go back to the drawing board.
Pujols slashed .357/.462/.654 with 37 homers and 117 RBIs while providing top-notch defense at first base; he was named the Fielding Bible winner at the position and was worth 8.5 runs above average. He also led the league with a whopping 190 OPS+, 50 points higher than Howard, an inferior defender. Overall, he registered an incredible 8.9 WAR, making the award a no-brainer, but somehow Heyman didn’t deem Pujols worthy of his vote.
The common denominators with most of the players Heyman selected for the award were players who played for contenders, produced high RBI totals and had signature moments in the second half (Ryan Braun, Carlos Delgado, ect…).
As poor as those selections were, Heyman found away to outdo himself when it came to the American League. Here are his top five.
1. Francisco Rodriguez
2. Carlos Quentin
3. Dustin Pedroia
4. Justin Morneau
5. Kevin Youkilis
Next to Rodriguez in the column, Heyman wrote: “An alltime great season with a record 62 saves.”
The funny thing is Rodriguez actually produced one of his worst performances in years. His saves record was the function of opportunity, as he also set the benchmark for most save chances. The Los Angeles Angels played in a number of close games due to their middling offense and outstanding run prevention efforts, leading to many easy save chances for Rodriguez. In reality, his K/9 and K/BB rates dropped to five-year lows, and he produced his highest FIP, eliminating factors beyond his control, since 2003. He certainly was an incredibly valuable reliever, producing 1.8 WAR, but naming him the MVP off of the 68.1 innings that he provided was so devoid of logic that it’s unintentionally comical. Pedroia, who led the circuit with 6.6 WAR, should have topped the list, but he was at least in the top five in the column. Two glaring omissions from his top 10, however, were outfielders Nick Markakis and Grady Sizemore, who rounded out the top three in WAR. Heyman thought that the defensively challenged Jermaine Dye was more valuable than that pair, putting him eighth most likely because the Chicago White Sox made the postseason unlike Markakis’ and Sizemore’s teams.
Also puzzling, Heyman ranked Morneau—as many writers do, again falling for the old RBI trick—ahead of the league batting champ, Joe Mauer. Mauer posted the exact same 134 OPS+ as Morneau from the more physically demanding position, catcher. Given traditionalists’ love of RBIs, especially from first baseman on playoff contenders, that’s understandable. But he also included another Twin on his list before Mauer, closer Joe Nathan. His reasoning behind that decision: “another great, underappreciated Twins star.” I, too, agree that Nathan is a fine reliever who gets overlooked on the national level, but it goes back to the innings issue. Plus, if there was any relief pitcher worthy of a vote in ’08, it was Mariano Rivera. Indeed, Rivera was considerably better than Nathan and Rodriguez, posting a 259 ERA+ in 70.2 innings pitched. WAR isn’t the end all, be all stat by any means, but ranked first among relievers with 3.1 WAR while Rodriguez ranked seventh.
I cannot speak on behalf of Heyman, but if I were to bet on it, I would say that he relied on one stat to base his top three relievers: saves.
Save totals for the three pitchers:
Rodriguez: 62
Nathan: 39
Rivera: 39
For a tie-breaker, Heyman went to ERA, where Nathan had a slight edge (1.33 to 1.40) over Rivera. Basing an award on basic stats, though, it’s interesting that he would overlook that K-Rod blew nine saves, Nathan six. Rivera, on the other hand, only coughed up one. Regardless, no closer deserved to be in the top 10. Heyman chose two, each of whom wasn’t as valuable as the great Rivera.
Heyman continued to baffle in his NL Cy Young ballot, leaving off Lincecum, Haren and Webb, the three most valuable pitchers in the league based on WAR. Here was his final three.
1. Johan Santana
2. Sabathia
3. Lidge
Santana was a defensible decision. While many of his peripherals continued to head south, the left-handed put up a fine performance in his first year with the New York Mets. He posted a 166 ERA+ and 3.51 FIP in 234.1 innings pitched, producing 4.8 WAR. However, leaving Lincecum, who logged 223.0 innings pitched and paced the league with 7.5 WAR, off in favor of a pitcher who pitched such a minimal amount of innings (Lidge) was ludicrous, perhaps certifiably insane. That perfect saves streak was too difficult for him to pass up, it seems, but at least he offered this as a consolation: “Though tough to leave out Webb and especially Lincecum (18-5, with a league-leading 265 strikeouts) in this year with at least five deserving candidates.”
Outside of choosing the seventh-best reliever third in the Cy Young, Heyman made the right picks. Cliff Lee and Roy Halladay made it that easy, though, as they were legitimately the best two pitchers in the league and happened to have the ERA and wins that Heyman covets.
This year, Heyman did a little bit better at picking the winners—Zack Greinke, Mauer and Pujols were no brainers in their respective categories—but some of his top 10 picks continued to baffle. He again put Utley ninth on his ballot, despite the fact the Phillies star finished second on the circuit in WAR. As well, he left the second-best hitter in the N.L., Prince Fielder, off the ballot completely, perhaps because the Milwaukee Brewers weren’t contenders. Sorry, Prince, your teammates weren’t talented enough to make the Heyman awards column. What is this amateur hour?
In the AL MVP, Heyman made the right choice with Mauer. Since he led the league in batting average, on-base percentage and slugging percentage as a catcher, though, he was kind of a gimme.
Then Heyman actually snubbed Derek Jeter, naming him sixth and behind teammate Mark Teixeira, who he had as the runner-up. Jeter at 35 had his best statistical season defensively and continued to provide outstanding offense for a shortstop, producing 7.4 WAR. He was the most valuable Yankee by far, but Teixeira had the RBIs that Heyman loves.
Bobby Abreu was picked seventh, seemingly because Mike Scioscia gave the quote about how he was Angels’ most valuable player and made for a good story. However, Abreu continued to play an abysmal right field, killing his value. As much of a boost as he provided to that offense—his OBP jolt was huge—he doesn’t objectively deserve to be considered for this award when factoring in all facets of the game. Plus, he had Sabathia and Justin Verlander eighth and ninth, respectively, ahead of Greinke, who led the league in WAR.
Above all else, Heyman’s most obvious mistake was ignoring Zorilla, Ben Zobrist. I can see not putting him in the top three, but not naming him altogether is criminal. The versatile Tampa Bay Rays infielder posted an excellent line of .297/.405/.543 and played fine defense at a handful of positions. Then again, I’m not sure that Heyman even knows who Ben Zobrist is. That would be the only reasonable argument for him not even giving Zobrist a mention.
Clearly, without going back to the Cy Young debate that ensued this, Heyman shouldn’t throw stones from a glass house. Some of his award selections the past two seasons were an embarrassment, far worse than a voter leaving Carpenter off their Cy Young ballot. Carroll and Law each based their selections on thorough research, taking being a member of the BBWAA seriously. That’s what the fans and players deserve. You can disagree with their outcomes, but they clearly put in time and effort into their decisions, and then offered their reasoning to the public. Heyman and many of his colleagues, on the other hand, only offer one-liners that tell us nothing. Take this sentence, for instance. “feisty, versatile player personifies team.” That was his explanation for his decision to name Kevin Youkilis the third-most valuable player in the league. In regards to the Cy Young, Law, agree with him or not, made it clear why he left Carpenter off, with objective analysis.
Heyman is a skilled reporter with excellent sources, but he falls well short when it comes to evaluating players. Where he gets off calling out someone as intelligent as Law for his picks is beyond me. And, if he actually wants to find a “dumb sportswriter” to tweet about, I suggest that he look in the mirror.
0 comments:
Post a Comment