Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Blake Griffin Slam Dunks: NBA Jam Style

Subjectivity Objectified: The 2011 Bias-Neutral All-Stars (Part I)

East Coast bias. Big market arrogance. Flat-out homerism. Call it what you will—there's no question that fans' loyalties are a not-so-subtle factor when they fill out their All-Star ballots.

Two weeks ago, I attempted to quantify the impact of each team's fans' biases (methodology) by comparing the number of votes each franchise's players received (methodology for estimating unlisted players' totals) to how many they would have been expected to get in a world without bias or popularity according to my objective framework (methodology). As a reminder, the results were:

Bias_by_team_chart_medium

With this information at our disposal, the days of wondering how much fan loyalty tainted the results of the voting are over.

For each of the 72 American League All-Star candidates (NL to come next week) whose vote totals we know for sure, I recalculated his team's BIAS score without him (i.e., for David Ortiz I used only the other eight Red Sox) and divided it by how many votes he received to find his team-neutral vote total. So the formula is:

Team-neutral_votes_medium

The results are not the normative vote totals; while the formula removes team bias (though the exact numbers on that should be taken with a grain of salt), it does not take out individual over- or underratedness or popularity. By isolating homerism, we can better determine whether a player getting too many (or too few) votes is a function of himself or his employer.

Without further ado, here are the team-neutral 2011 AL All-Stars: (vote totals in thousands)

Star-divide

To me, the most striking thing about the results is that they aren't that different from the actual vote totals. Only seven players got a million extra votes due to bias alone (only four of those were Yankees), while only four lost that many because of their fans' apathy. There are some differences, to be sure, but the players with big swings seem like exceptions, not the norm.

First base is the most stable position in the Junior Circuit. Mark Teixeira took a big hit but still came out ahead of Miguel Cabrera, and Adrian Gonzalez maintained his comfortable lead. The only change is the Mitch Moreland-Paul Konerko-Adam Lind switcheroo.

Second base is also pretty consistent, but things start to get hairier as we move further along the infield. There's a new winner at shortstop as Asdrubal Cabrera unseats Derek Jeter, but the changes don't stop there—the third through sixth finishers are essentially flipped, but still finish within 40,000 votes of each other. It's a similar situation at the hot corner, with a new winner (Kevin Youkilis—it makes sense when you look at the numbers, but it's weird to think that Red Sox players got too few votes) and a new runner-up (Evan Longoria).

Joe Mauer's victory at catcher highlights the fact that overratedness is still alive and well in these numbers. Save for Michael Young's lesser total the DH totals aren't terribly interesting. There are a few interesting movers in the outfield (Torii Hunter and Jeff Francoeur?), and it's no surprise to see Jacoby Ellsbury beat Josh Hamilton out for a team-neutral spot.

The most interesting thing to note here is that not all of the changes were for the better. Just looking at the winners, Cabrera and Ellsbury were more deserving than Jeter and Hamilton, respectively, but third base (where Alex Rodriguez actually won) and catcher (Alex Avila) looked a lot better before we removed fan biases from the equation. Their selections, then, look like they were correct by way of incorrect—they deserved their spots on the All-Star squad, but apparently got them only because Detroit and New York fans voted the party (er, team) line.

Again, it's important to take all these numbers with a grain of salt. The BIAS scores are far from gospel, and while the equations may make logical sense, I make no claim about how they would hold up empirically if homerism really did somehow disappear from the voting process. But if you look at them with an open mind and build in a significant margin of error, I think these numbers tell us a lot about what impact blind loyalty had on the All-Star vote.

Comment 1 comment  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

I love this.

Keep ’em coming!

Blogger and Editor, Rational Pastime Blog. Twitter: @RationalPastime.

by J-Doug on Sep 13, 2011 6:45 PM EDT reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

We use numbers and stuff.
Community Guidelines
Why be a member?

Follow us on Facebook!

Follow us on Twitter!

SaberGraphics

Yahoo_full_count

MLB Daily Dish

Get the latest MLB Trade Rumors, Transactions, and News at MLB Daily Dish!


Managing Editor:

Jbopp-kc_small Justin Bopp

Columnists:

Adam_small adarowski

Dme_small Satchel Price

Closeup4_small J-Doug

Carlosicon_small Julian Levine

Billy_and_daddy_4th_of_july_small Bill Petti

Featuring:

Dayton_small Jeff Zimmerman

12475953_small Jacob Peterson

Recent_pic_pg_small Patrick Gordon

Btbpro_small Dave Gershman

Me_small Bryan Grosnick

229331_10150183361996591_674441590_6760167_6637860_n3_small Lewie Pollis

Img_3830_small David Fung

30472_1481067225243_1190689185_1381415_997334_n_small Glenn DuPaul

1mnvxku7_small joshuaworn

Set_small MattFilippi18

Photo0011_small Nathaniel Stoltz