Despite Gerrit Cole putting together one of the greatest pitching performances of the last decade, he was defeated in the BBWAA award voting system by a numerically inferior pitcher. Should the BBWAA do away with their awards to avoid being repeatedly embarrassed by a small group of journalists who are unable to use basic resources such as Fangraphs? I am interested in all opinions!

Depends on what you deem as "numerically inferior". The only place I see Cole as having been superior would be in FIP. For what its worth, if I had a vote I would have voted Verlander also.

Edited November 14, 20197 yr by sweetmusicviola16

 

Depends on what you deem as "numerically inferior". The only place I see Cole as having been superior would be in FIP. For what its worth, if I had a vote I would have voted Verlander also.

Also, K/9, WAR, ERA, xFIP... Verlander led in wins and innings pitched, barely in both categories.

Anyway, Cole will be richly rewarded despite his lack of the award. Falvey should have traded Gordon to the Pirates when he had the chance.

 

Also, K/9, WAR, ERA, xFIP... Verlander led in wins and innings pitched, barely in both categories.

Verlander won WAR. ERA and Era + were both close. K/9 was not a landslide either. Only FIP was a sizable edge to Cole.

 

Verlander won WAR. ERA and Era + were both close. K/9 was not a landslide either. Only FIP was a sizable edge to Cole.

Not according to Fangraphs, which is the most reliable source for sabermetric stats that are available to the public.

Not according to Fangraphs, which is the most reliable source for sabermetric stats that are available to the public.

That's fWAR (Fangraphs WAR), which is based on FIP. I would expect whoever leads in FIP would lead in fWAR.

 

Verlander led in RA9, so he has the edge in bWAR (B-Ref WAR).

 

Cole has a slight edge in ERA but allowed more unearned runs, in fewer innings.

 

They both had a heck of a season.

FIP's use is as a predictive stat. It's not simply fielding independent, despite its name - it's independent of a lot of what makes baseball baseball. I use it when considering future performance. When considering major season-end awards, I like analytics that dwell on what actually happened.

When I was younger, the awards bothered me more. But as I've grown older, I really don't get the concern. The BBWAA should give away awards if they want to do so. I don't care. Verlander and Cole both had a great year. So did Santana in 05. Not having an award doesn't change that. There is so much to stress about, I wouldn't waste time with who wins an award from a group. 

Baseball America just named Verlander their 2019 MLB Player of the Year.

 

 

Brian Kenny from MLB Network gives a slight edge to Verlander while acknowledging that it should be very close. The below is really good.

 

https://twitter.com/MLBNetwork/status/1192921234142572544 

 

And, not sure where it fits in the realm of importance, but here was my "vote."

 

 

 

 

You have to approach awards by who gives them. Why is the opinion of baseball writers so high? Like over in that movie biz. Who are these foreign writers that give away the lame Golden Globes which generates millions for viewing on television so they can party with celebrities. The Oscars are an industry award, still a far cry from fan favorites, as the pros in different divisions vote for works depending on budget and marketing to the members of this limited group. Hey, they have yet to totally figure out All-Star voting. Is it dor the season past, or do you slip in because you have a great first half...and how do small market teams fight the large market teams. Baseball America has their own awards. Who reads Baseball America...really. Ever look at their circulation figures?