My final Awards Watch goes up on SI.com this afternoon, but that's how I think the writers would vote. I went with Cabrera and Hernandez above, the latter being the obvious choice, and one I think the writers will ultimately make, the former being much tougher, not because Cabrera's team didn't win, but because he doesn't do much other than hit. Thing is, he hit consistently all season at an MVP level, which neither Hamilton nor Cano, nor Bautista did.

Robbie -- he was much more valuable to the Yankees, in getting them to the playoffs, than Josh or Bautista were. I'm not saying his WAR or VORP was better, just that he's the reason the Yankees are in the playoffs. Even above CC. Robbie stepped up when A-Rod went down & Mark was scuffling & Derek had a down year. Of course, MVP means different things to different people.

Oh, and Felix.

I voted Cabrera but I agree that Robbie deserves it more. Gold glove fielding plus his contributions to the Yankees making the playoffs.

I think that either CC or King Felix are deserving winners.

Sandy Koufax used to win even when his team scored very few runs. Carlton was 27-7 with a last-place team. This Hernandez stuff is nonsense.

Carbrera's numbers were basically the same as Hamilton's, except he has 38 more AB. 38!. So if you consider both guys offensive stats the same, this would give Cabby a TINY advantage. However, Hammy plays an average CF... a premium postion. Now if Cabby had Teix's glove, and you were comparing an 'average' CFer to an outstanding 1Bman... well it gets closer.

But you are comparing an average CFer to an average (at best, and I beliew below average) 1Bman. So to me, thats a BIG edge for the CFer. Add to that Hammy did help his team reach the PS, and I think Hammy is an obvious choice over Cabby.

Now.... if you are heavy on premium position, the team making it to the PS, and how much a player made the PS possible, then Cano is right there with Hammy.

Cano's numbers are considerable higher then the Midget's MVP numbers... although LP was up against a weaker field.

I think if (like was done with Pedroia and Rizzuto) you figure that 2BMan and SSs offensense rarely compares to an OFer's/1Bman's, then Cano is the choice.

I'm conflicted, as I don't won't to vote like a homer... but I don't want to 'reverse discriminate' against Robbie either.

I do think that because of down years from ARod, Jeter and Teix, that Cano did more to single handedly get his team to the playoffs then anyone else. So in that respect, he's the true MVP.

And if you put heavy weight on position and defense, Beltre might not Win, but should be in the top 4.

It should be either Hammy or Cano. Cabby's should NOT get it, as his position and defense can't be compared to Hammy's or Canos.... and his numbers aren't much better then Hammy's.

Actually, a TIE between Cano and Hammy seems fair to me.

[4] Except those 2 played in an era of much less offense, so those 2 had numbers that didn't dwarf the field. A 2.27 ERA is sick.... and while there were 3 others that were close, King did it for 250 IP. We know what a horse CC is, yet King had 12 more IP then CC.

William had a post on his blog about how historically bad the M's were at scoring. The M's were just brutal on O.... I believe one of the 5 worst teams in the last 100 years!!!

I guess you have to decide, when looking at INDIVIDUAL awards, how much you will allow a player's team's performance to influence your decision.

I'd ask you this. If you could simply have the IP, ERA's and WHIP on any of this years Pitchers on the Yankees, who would you pick?

[5] Citing "38 ABs" is a little misleading. Using plate appearances, Cabrera (648) had 77 more PAs than Hamilton (571), which is a pretty significant amount.

That said, I agree with your larger point: I too would vote for Hamilton over Cabrera despite the time he missed.

However. looking at some of the advanced stats (like WAR), depending on which formula is, you could make a very strong case for Longoria (who also satisfies the "played for a winner" criterion that some invoke).

Sandy Koufax used to win even when his team scored very few runs. Carlton was 27-7 with a last-place team. This Hernandez stuff is nonsense.

The Carlton example came up during this discussion over on BBTF.

The Phillies actually scored around a league average number of runs during Carlton's starts that year, that is, more runs on average than they did for the other pitchers in the rotation.

The Mariners, well, the Mariners did not do the same for Felix.

[6] I need to update the post with the final weekend's data, but I think the Ms moved up to at least the 3rd most futile offense ever.

I think Felix is the clear CY Young win, and view Cano and Longoria as the top two candidates for MVP. I voted for Longoria because it was close and figured I'd check my Yankee bias.

[8] The Phillies averaged 3.83 runs per game for Carlton, while the Ms scored 3.07 for Felix. The NL average in 1972 was 3.91/game, while the AL average this year was 4.45 as of 9/30/10.

[10] Thanks! (I was too lazy to find the BBTF thread)

To revisit this if I may. Winning counts. Great pitchers pitch to the scoreboard.
When Notre Dame beat Stanford in the Rose Bowl, Rockne was asked about a deficit for his team in yardage gained. He said he would be concerned if the team with the most first downs was awarded the win. Absent that he didn't care.
That applies here!

[12] Of course that's a silly analogy. In football, strategies like the prevent defense can lead to a losing team having more yardage. In baseball, there is no such strategy because there is no clock.

It is perfectly legitimate to suggest that a pitcher might be more lax with a big lead, but when that pitcher never has a lead to begin with, you can't fault him for being unable to throw complete game shutouts. That is the case with Felix this season. I don't mind using wins to break a very close contest, but Felix seems to have enough of an edge that there is no reason to factor them into the equation.

The team with the most runs wins.
Robin Roberts hated to walk people. When ahead in a game he threw it over and thus gave up many solo homeruns.
13 and 12 is in no way good enough for any award in a game where they keep score. Someone has tried to change the way the game is viewed by using statistical analysis.
It may have its place but when wins are devalued it goes too far.

The team with the most runs wins.

Ah, yes, runs.

The very thing the Mariners were historically bad at plating.

Devaluing pitcher wins is a perfectly cromulent application of sabermetric principles and it's good to see how things have come since, say, 1987, when Nolan Ryan went 8-16, leading the league in ERA+ and strikeouts and finished 5th in the Cy Young voting.

Though, who knows, maybe it wasn't lousy run support, maybe the 300 game winner just forgot how to win that year ...

In 1964 Dean Chance was 20-9 with 11 shutouts and had 2.94 in run support. That is an award winner. Mickey Mantle used to call him "slim chance."
Some of you guy and girls must be very young if you're buying this Hernandez stuff.

Ya know, ya can't spell "omarcoming" with M-O-R-G-A-N...just speculating...

I don't know what that means but I am willing to learn. My 98 yr. old Mom once told me that the world didn't begin the day I was born.

Pity ol' Dean isn't eligible in Twenty-Ought Ten ... he'd be a sure bet to take Felix's Cy Young away from him ...

Sorry omarcoming, just having a little fun. Welcome to the Banter!

It's a reference to Joe Morgan, noted baseball traditionalist and vocal critic of Felix Hernandez for nto "winning" enough games to be the Cy.

[20] It's cognitive dissonance time here ... Morgan says 'NO' to Felix, McCarver says 'YES!'

[21] Really? McCarver..yikes...