2018 BBWAA award finalists announced

UNB Bruins Fan

Registered User
Mar 11, 2008
14,051
1,619
Fredericton, NB
What about team success? Andujar was a big reason why the Yankees won 100 games and even a healthy Ohtani doesn't get the Angels past Oakland in the WC standings

I’ve never heard of team success playing any kind of role in the RoY award. Perhaps I’m wrong, but it’s always just been who has had the best season.
 
Last edited:

Terry Yake

Registered User
Aug 5, 2013
26,945
15,445
AL ROY could have very well gone both ways

ohtani and andujar were both deserving
 

BigBadBruins7708

Registered User
Dec 11, 2017
13,765
18,694
Las Vegas
The amount of innings ohtani pitched at an elite level, plus better at the plate, plus Andujar playing a horrible third base more than make up for the PA difference.

Really surprised how people don't see that. Actually no I am not.

Andujar had better numbers hitting.

I don't think anyone should get an award playing in only 104 games.

You wouldn't give someone the Hart for only 40 games
 

Static

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Feb 28, 2006
47,501
33,716
SoCal
Andujar had better numbers hitting.

I don't think anyone should get an award playing in only 104 games.

You wouldn't give someone the Hart for only 40 games
No, Andujar didn't have better numbers hitting. If you're talking counting stats then this isn't even a discussion because you're in the wrong decade.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bob Richards

Static

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Feb 28, 2006
47,501
33,716
SoCal
It’s what voting writers do in hockey, McDavid didn’t get Hart Trophy because his teammates are general ****ups. Also lost his ROY because of injury, I’m glad baseball voters are smarter.

But as a Yankee fan I’m totally ok with Ohtani. Special player.
Yep. If that's what the award is, and if so that's fine, then there should be a better outline of what people are actually voting for.

There is a clear divide between people voting for the best indvidual player and those voting for the players who made the biggest contributions on the best teams. Those two criteria aren't close to being the same.
 

SSF

Registered User
Oct 5, 2017
1,279
277
man, the writers have nailed it thus far.
hard to say much else.
 

darko

Registered User
Feb 16, 2009
70,269
7,797
man, the writers have nailed it thus far.
hard to say much else.

I would've given it to Cole and Verlander before Snell but Snell had a great year. They nailed the rest.
 

BigBadBruins7708

Registered User
Dec 11, 2017
13,765
18,694
Las Vegas
I would've given it to Cole and Verlander before Snell but Snell had a great year. They nailed the rest.

sorry, i dont see it.

short of being a "but innings pitched!" stalwart there's no argument for Verlander over Snell.

Snell beats him by a good amount in ERA, ERA+ and WAR
 

Filthy Dangles

Registered User*
Oct 23, 2014
28,671
40,324
sorry, i dont see it.

short of being a "but innings pitched!" stalwart there's no argument for Verlander over Snell.

Snell beats him by a good amount in ERA, ERA+ and WAR

There's actually a pretty decent argument. Verlander had a higher SO Rate, lower walk rate, better WHIP over 34 more innings or 102 more outs.

Snell had an 88% strand rate and .241 BABIP so im gonna say the results he got in terms of ERA this year won't be sustainable. That doesn't take away from his great season but he definitely got more luck and good fortune than most pitchers this year
 

darko

Registered User
Feb 16, 2009
70,269
7,797
sorry, i dont see it.

short of being a "but innings pitched!" stalwart there's no argument for Verlander over Snell.

Snell beats him by a good amount in ERA, ERA+ and WAR

30-odd innings is a lot. That's probably 5 starts.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad