Awards watch: Is Mookie Betts' MVP case inflated by Fenway?

ByDAVID SCHOENFIELD
September 22, 2016, 10:20 AM

— -- The latest MVP and Cy Young odds, courtesy of Dan Szymborski -- based on historical stats of previous winners -- have created some separation, with Mookie Betts pulling away in the American League MVP race and Rick Porcello and Jon Lester now the Cy Young favorites:

Lester is making a fantastic late charge, going 8-0 during his past 10 starts with a 1.05 ERA. He's second behind teammate Kyle Hendricks in ERA and tied with Max Scherzer in wins. I think the Cy Young races are probably a little closer than those numbers suggest, especially because wins aren't treated as the Holy Grail like they once were, and Scherzer leads Lester in strikeouts, innings and WHIP.

One issue that a reader brought up to me: Should Betts' home/road split factor into the MVP debate? Here are those numbers:

Fenway: .338/.364/.597, 17 HR, 66 RBIs

Road: .297/.356/.486, 14 HR, 42 RBIs

The argument is that if, for example, a Rockies player had home/road splits that severe we'd automatically discount him because of his Coors Field-inflated numbers. So couldn't the same be said of Betts, that his excellence is inflated by Fenway Park?

Betts, similar to Dustin Pedroia or Wade Boggs back when he was banging doubles off the Green Monster, clearly benefits from Fenway. As a pull hitter with power but not POWER, he hits some balls over and off the Monster that might be outs elsewhere. He seems to benefit most in doubles, of which he has hit 29 at Fenway and just 11 on the road. Of course, in general? all hitters have a home-field advantage, and MLB hitters collectively have a 24-point edge in OPS at home. But Betts still has a larger than normal split. Does that mean we should view him the way we might view somebody from the Rockies?

No. That's not the way park effects work. You don't just look at the split and call it a day. First of all, Fenway Park isn't Coors Field. In factoring offensive value for an individual player, you consider the run environment of the home park. From 2014-16, Baseball Reference estimates Coors Field increases runs scored by 17 percent and Fenway Park increases runs by 8 percent. In 2016, the figures are 19 percent for Coors and 7 percent for Fenway. (Different sites might have slightly different figures. The park factors at ESPN, which use a simple formula, have Coors at plus-40 percent and Fenway at plus-19 percent. Baseball-Reference's formula is much more complex.)

What this means is that a run created at Coors Field is slightly less valuable than a run in other parks, because there are more runs scored there. A run created at Fenway is less valuable than a run at Marlins Park. All this is factored into each player's offensive value, which is then factored into his overall WAR.?

Sure, Betts may not be as good in another home park, but we're only trying to figure out his value as a member of the 2016 Red Sox. And in terms of WAR, Betts has pulled away from Jose Altuve:

Trout: .318/.437/.559, 10.1 WAR
Betts: .318/.360/.542, 9.0 WAR
Altuve: .338/.396/.541, 7.5 WAR

If Betts doesn't win, it won't be because of Fenway. It will be because:

(A) Trout gets enough support from "the best player IS the most valuable" crowd.

(B) Voters will overlook, underestimate or view with skepticism his defensive metrics and the fact Betts leads the majors with 30 Defensive Runs Saved.

(C) Voters won't want to give the MVP Award to a player who isn't even the best hitter on his own team. (That's David Ortiz, in case you've spent the past five months on Mars.) It has happened before: See 2008, when Pedroia won the MVP despite having fewer RBIs and a lower OPS than teammate? Kevin Youkilis. Like Pedroia, Betts provides value in all facets of the game. The difference that year: Pedroia didn't have Mike Trout in his league.