Replacing Gold Gloves?

[HoustonGM]

http://espn.go.com/blog/sweetspot/po...ce-gold-gloves

[Alloutwar]

Yes please

I like the name, and a few of them are right or close to it...but god damn, some are so wrong it is a travesty

[rschusta24]

I like a lot of the points this guy brings up. I like the section where he talks about naming each positions award. Isn't that kind of how hockey goes about their awards? Naming them after players?

[Jeffy25]

i like it.

[free2131]

Re-name the SS award the Cal Ripken, Jr. award, and I'm sold.

[Jeffy25]

nevermind! free made me change my mind!


actually, i am cool with it, but i don't think you need to have named awards per position. Eventually you are going to have some amazing third basemen come along and they will debate about changing the award's to his.

I think you can name them whatever, but i wouldn't name them after players.

I like the ceremony, and the voting system, and awards for "best catch, etc"

[HoustonGM]

actually, i am cool with it, but i don't think you need to have named awards per position. Eventually you are going to have some amazing third basemen come along and they will debate about changing the award's to his.

There's no debate over the Cy Young award and he wasn't even the best pitcher ever when they decided to name the award after him.

[Jeffy25]

There's no debate over the Cy Young award and he wasn't even the best pitcher ever when they decided to name the award after him.

good point actually

[skudplayr]

MLB won't even expand instant replay thanks in part to tradition. They're not going to change the gold gloves.

[HoustonGM]

MLB won't even expand instant replay thanks in part to tradition. They're not going to change the gold gloves.

Yep. Unfortunately, it's a pipe dream.

However, minor nit pick, the MLB doesn't have to do anything. The BBWAA are their own entity and could award things for whatever they want. They don't need MLB approval.

[dps]

Yep. Unfortunately, it's a pipe dream.

However, minor nit pick, the MLB doesn't have to do anything. The BBWAA are their own entity and could award things for whatever they want. They don't need MLB approval.

I would be OK with the BBWAA taking over the awards and chaning the voting system along the lines discussed in the article, but I don't think that just setting up a different, competing award system is a great idea.

[HoustonGM]

I would be OK with the BBWAA taking over the awards and chaning the voting system along the lines discussed in the article, but I don't think that just setting up a different, competing award system is a great idea.

There's really no other way to go about it, if this were to actually happen.

[rschusta24]

I was just thinking about it. Most of us from what I have heard so far really can care less about the Golden Glove Awards, but it definately would be nice if we could have a reason to care about them, haha. I seriously wonder if in anyways things could change at any point to make the gold glove awards more significant.

[HoustonGM]

http://espn.go.com/blog/sweetspot/po...he-gold-gloves

A follow up. Needless to say, a voting system where every voter picks their top guy and whoever was picked the most wins is a pretty silly way of picking a winner. Also, limiting the managers and coaches by not allowing them to choose their own players puts a hamper on it. Of course, this is necessary to avoid favoritism...but...that just goes to show that it shouldn't be the managers voting for this award. They spend 162 games watching their players. They see other fielders...what...a max of 19 times, if they're in the same division? And whatever they see on TV? They aren't really equipped to evaluate leaguewide fielding.

I think The Fielding Bible awards have it right - a slotted ballot system and a group of voters from different areas - statistical analysts, scouts, the fans, etc.

[rschusta24]

http://espn.go.com/blog/sweetspot/po...he-gold-gloves

A follow up. Needless to say, a voting system where every voter picks their top guy and whoever was picked the most wins is a pretty silly way of picking a winner. Also, limiting the managers and coaches by not allowing them to choose their own players puts a hamper on it. Of course, this is necessary to avoid favoritism...but...that just goes to show that it shouldn't be the managers voting for this award. They spend 162 games watching their players. They see other fielders...what...a max of 19 times, if they're in the same division? And whatever they see on TV? They aren't really equipped to evaluate leaguewide fielding.

I think The Fielding Bible awards have it right - a slotted ballot system and a group of voters from different areas - statistical analysts, scouts, the fans, etc.

Great point on the managers. Even with no voted for their own players, they see a hell of a lot more players during the season than in other divisions. They have absolutely no time to go over other players fielding all the time.