THE BEST-OVERALL ACTIVE TEAM - by position - First Base

[sportscardtheory]

Honorable Mentions; Kevin Youkilis, Justin Morneau, Todd Helton, Carlos Pena, Michael Morse, Chris Davis

Lets assemble the best-overall active team by voting on who the best overall is at each position. Now up, first base. I'll do the next position after we get 50+ votes, then the next and so on.

VOTE FOR YOUR TOP-TWO

C - YADIER MOLINA
1B - JOEY VOTTO
2B -
SS -
3B -
LF -
CF -
RF -
DH -
SP -
SP -
SP -
SP -
RP -

THE GREATEST PLAYERS OF ALL-TIME TEAM

 

[matfanofold]

Obviously Pujols has been the best for the past decade, but if I were building a team right now I'd take Votto. So they are my 2 with Votto being my 'right now' guy.

 

[shayscards79]

Votto and Pujols

 

[hive17]

I WANT to vote for Pujols in a classic sense, but I chose to look at this as a competative team going forward, and Votto screams All Star for the next decade; Pujols 2.0 so to speak.

 

[sportscardtheory]

Bump for votes.

 

[sportscardtheory]

Looking for 50+ votes to move on.

 

[sheetskout]

I can't believe that more people aren't including Gonzalez.

 

[Topnotchsy]

I can't believe that more people aren't including Gonzalez.

Assuming a person feels like they have to include Pujols, it comes down to whether you think Gonzalez is better than Votto. Right now Votto is on pace to have a season that is arguably better than any Pujols ever had (looking at OPS+) while Gonzalez has struggled this season. While Gonzalez has played at a high level longer than Votto, Votto also already has an MVP award, so it is not just this season...

 

[markakis8]

I'm wondering how skewed the voting is since we are aloud to vote for two people. I'm wondering if you made people choose only one player, if Pujols would have come out ahead. Doesn't that mean something?

Obviously most people voted for Pujols AND Votto...but how many voted for Votto and xxxxx....and also, how many would've voted for Pujols over Votto?

I know I would have.

 

[Topnotchsy]

I'm wondering how skewed the voting is since we are aloud to vote for two people. I'm wondering if you made people choose only one player, if Pujols would have come out ahead. Doesn't that mean something?

Obviously most people voted for Pujols AND Votto...but how many voted for Votto and xxxxx....and also, how many would've voted for Pujols over Votto?

I know I would have.

One of the challenges of any voting system is that there unless you have just 2 people going head to head, there is a chance it will be unfair.

Imagine 5 people, each with a single vote and imagine for a second there are only 4 choices, Votto, Pujols, Gonzalez and Fielder and in order of preference they favor:

Voter 1: Pujols, Votto, Fielder, Gonzalez
Voter 2: Fielder, Votto, Pujols, Gonzalez
Voter 3: Gonzalez, Votto, Fielder, Pujols
Voter 4: Pujols, Votto, Gonzalez, Fielder
Voter 5: Votto, Gonzalez, Fielder, Pujols

If we allowed each person only a single vote, Pujols would win with 2 - 1st place votes. And yet, if you look closely you realize that 3 people preferred Votto over Pujols.

Voter 1: Pujols, Votto, Fielder, Gonzalez
Voter 2: Fielder, Votto, Pujols, Gonzalez
Voter 3: Gonzalez, Votto, Fielder, Pujols
Voter 4: Pujols, Votto, Gonzalez, Fielder
Voter 5: Votto, Gonzalez, Fielder, Pujols

It seems really strange the pick Pujols, when if there had been a head-to-head between him and Votto, Votto would have won. (Why should the fact that Gonzalez and Fielder were in the running make a difference, since neither of them won anyways.)

I believe that Kenneth Arrow won a Nobel Prize for his "Impossibility Theorem" that basically proved that it's impossible (amongst other things) to make a perfect voting system beyond a simple head-to-head match. In every possible format, there's always a chance that something illogical will play out like the above. (William Poundstone has a book called "Gaming the Vote" on the subject.)

 

[sportscardtheory]

This is the closest vote ever in these threads. Just wanted to bump one last time to see if more votes change anything.