Today we reveal the Baseball Prospectus staff choices for the major player awards (MVP, Cy Young, Rookie of the Year, and Manager of the Year) in the American and National Leagues. Each staff member's choices may be found later in the article. Here, we present a wisdom-of-the-crowds summary of the results.

For the MVP voting, we've slightly amended the traditional points system in place that has been used elsewhere, dropping fourth- and fifth-place votes to make it 10-7-5 for the MVP Award, and the regular 5-3-1 for the Cy Young, Rookie of the Year, and Manager of the Year Awards (that's 5 points for a first-place vote, 3 points for a second-place vote, etc.). Next to each of these selections we've listed the total number of ballots, followed by the total number of points, and then the number of first-place votes in parentheses, if any were received.

American League


  1. Mike Trout, Angels, 32, 314 (30)
  2. Miguel Cabrera, Tigers, 32, 228 (2)
  3. Josh Donaldson, Athletics, 18, 92
  4. Chris Davis, Orioles, 10, 50
  5. (T5) Robinson Cano, Yankees, 2, 10
  6. (T5) Evan Longoria, Rays, 2, 10

Cy Young

  1. Max Scherzer, Tigers, 32, 146 (27)
  2. Yu Darvish, Rangers, 16, 48 (3)
  3. (T3) Felix Hernandez, Mariners, 11, 31 (2)
  4. (T3) Chris Sale, White Sox, 17, 31
  5. Anibal Sanchez, Tigers, 12, 24
  6. Hisashi Iwakuma, Mariners, 5, 5
  7. James Shields, Royals, 1, 3
  8. (T8) Justin Verlander, Tigers, 1, 1
  9. (T8) Koji Uehara, Red Sox, 1, 1

Rookie of the Year

  1. Wil Myers, Rays, 33, 159 (30)
  2. Chris Archer, Rays, 18, 52 (3)
  3. Jose Iglesias, Tigers, 23, 45
  4. Dan Straily, Athletics, 10, 16
  5. David Lough, Royals, 4, 10
  6. Sonny Gray, Athletics, 3, 5
  7. (T7) Danny Farquhar, Mariners, 2, 4
  8. (T7) Martin Perez, Rangers, 4, 4
  9. Brad Miller, Mariners, 3, 3
  10. Nick Franklin, 1, 1

Manager of the Year

  1. John Farrell, Red Sox, 22, 84 (12)
  2. Terry Francona, Indians, 22, 68 (6)
  3. Bob Melvin, Athletics, 21, 57 (6)
  4. Joe Girardi, Yankees, 8, 20 (2)
  5. Joe Maddon, Rays, 9, 19 (1)
  6. Jim Leyland, Tigers, 1, 1
  7. Ned Yost, Royals, 1, 1

National League


  1. Andrew McCutchen, Pirates, 32, 297 (27)
  2. Paul Goldschmidt, Diamondbacks, 21, 136 (1)
  3. Clayton Kershaw, Dodgers, 13, 93 (2)
  4. Matt Carpenter, Cardinals, 15, 92 (1)
  5. Joey Votto, Reds, 6, 35 (1)
  6. Carlos Gomez, Brewers, 4, 20
  7. Yadier Molina, Cardinals, 2, 14
  8. Allen Craig, Cardinals, 1, 7
  9. (T9) Shin-Soo Choo, Reds, 1, 5
  10. (T9) Yasiel Puig, Dodgers, 1, 5

Cy Young

  1. Clayton Kershaw, Dodgers, 32, 158 (31)
  2. Adam Wainwright, Cardinals, 22, 52
  3. Matt Harvey, Mets, 20, 34 (1)
  4. Jose Fernandez, Marlins, 14, 32
  5. Cliff Lee, Phillies, 7, 11
  6. Mat Latos, Reds, 1, 1

Rookie of the Year

  1. Jose Fernandez, Marlins, 32, 148 (26)
  2. Yasiel Puig, Dodgers, 26, 108 (6)
  3. (T3) Hyun-jin Ryu, Dodgers, 11, 11
  4. (T3) Julio Teheran, Braves, 11, 11
  5. Shelby Miller, Cardinals, 4, 4
  6. (T6) Gerrit Cole, Pirates, 2, 2
  7. (T6) A.J. Pollock, Diamondbacks, 2, 2
  8. (T8) Nolan Arenado, Rockies, 1, 1
  9. (T8) Jedd Gyorko, Padres, 1, 1

Manager of the Year

  1. Clint Hurdle, Pirates, 25, 105 (19)
  2. Don Mattingly, Dodgers, 22, 64 (5)
  3. Mike Matheny, Cardinals, 19, 45 (2)
  4. Fredi Gonzalez, Braves, 14, 34 (2)
  5. (T5) Dusty Baker, Reds, 1, 1
  6. (T5) Terry Collins, Mets, 1, 1
  7. (T5) Mike Redmond, Marlins, 1, 1

For individual ballots, see the spreadsheet embedded below:

Thank you for reading

This is a free article. If you enjoyed it, consider subscribing to Baseball Prospectus. Subscriptions support ongoing public baseball research and analysis in an increasingly proprietary environment.

Subscribe now
You need to be logged in to comment. Login or Subscribe
N.L. ROY has to be Puig.
You nailed them all
No one voted for Freddie Freeman??
I think Freeman would have been worth down-ballot recognition in the MVP vote, but couldn't justify putting him in my top three. Paul Goldschmidt had a better offensive year and is at least as proficient defensively.
Baseball Reference has Carlos Gomez ranked # 1 in WAR, ahead of McCutcheon.

So how can all these statheads possibly let Gomez drop out of the top five in the NL MVP voting?

Many of you are talking the talk but not walking the walk...
Gomez only leads McCutchen by .1 bWAR. It's not that they don't walk the walk, it's that they are smart enough to know that .1 is not a significant difference in an extremely complex calculation. Plus McCutchen has been a much better offensive performer.
He is just saying how can he be left out of the top 5, not saying he should be #1.
I had Gomez #3 but in general, there were a bunch of guys all clustered around that same range of WAR(P). Can't say I really fault any of the names above Gomez.
Like Russell, I had Gomez 3rd, but looking at the choices ahead of him, it's hard to really get too worked up about this for me.
Seems odd that several ballots did not contain any votes for Hurdle for NL manager of the year. They found 3 other skippers who did a better job. Did those voters expect the Bucs to win 105 this year?
For what it's worth, four people (myself included) did not submit any ballots for manager of the year. Hurdle appeared on 24 out of 27 ballots.
I think the Pirates manager that got them back into the playoffs, whoever that ended up being, was bound to end up MOY for the NL that season.
I know it goes against the grain somewhat to vote for a closer for cy young. But, you could argue Greg Holland deserved some recognition as well.
Please. Trout didn't deserve the MVP last year, and he won't win it this year. Both years, the Angels didn't even come close to the playoffs, while Detroit made it both times.

Miguel Cabrera's 2013 year is more impressive considering he's been hurt the last couple of months, and he still led the league in hitting for the third straight year.
Fascinating to see how you folks see these races, but it does pose the question: is BP going to do the Internet Baseball Awards again this year, so the rest of us can have our own say? I haven't seen anything about the IBAs yet.

Incidentally, if you do run the IBAs, you might include "Entire Cardinals pitching staff" as a choice for the NL RotY vote. How do this year's Cards rank historically among value contributed by rookie pitchers? If you measure by depth rather than by contribution of the one top guy (although Miller still had a great year), I can't think of any others recently that come close.
I looked this up just now - Cardinals rank 9th in PWARP, post-1950. The Athletics last year (who had 14 rookie pitchers) lead. They're pretty recent!
Apologies, 11th. Here's a list.

2012 OAK 14 907.67 340 3.37 9.11
2006 FLO 13 830 370 4.01 8.97
1984 NYN 7 694.33 272 3.53 7.62
1975 SFN 7 623.67 232 3.35 7.49
1955 CLE 4 279.67 88 2.83 7.3
1959 SLN 13 643.33 334 4.67 7.18
2003 ARI 10 608.67 258 3.81 7.06
1957 PHI 5 514.33 203 3.55 7.03
1993 PIT 12 635.67 307 4.35 6.47
2006 LAN 7 373.67 155 3.73 6.41
2013 SLN 13 554 195 3.17 6.4
Wow. I knew Oakland had a pile of excellent young arms last year, but I didn't know so many had rookie status. I'm impressed.

Some of the teams on this list are examples of why I inserted that "depth" qualifier. For example, a large fraction of the value of the 1955 Indians rookie pitchers was concentrated in the tragic form of Herb Score, that year's Rookie of the Year and one of the great, sad "What Might Have Been" baseball stories. Essentially the whole value of the 1957 Phillies rookie pitchers was in Jack Sanford, who won the RotY (at age 28), and Turk Farrell. Similarly the 1975 Giants (Montefusco) and so on. Spreading the value widely across the newcomers, as the Cardinals did this year and Oakland did last, appears to be rare.
I think I recall hearing that at one (brief) point late last season, the A's five-man rotation was entirely composed of rookies.
Yes! We definitely are doing the Greg Spira Internet Baseball Awards. Info coming in the next few days.
No ROY votes for Yan Gomes (tops in AL rookie WARP)?
Gomes actually doesn't have rookie eligibility. He was on the Toronto roster too long last year. I looked.
He is not eligible due to service time accrued in 2012.
Didn't stop me from voting for him! Then, it did stop me from voting for him!
Dissapointed to see no sign of Tony Cingriani in the NL ROY list. Not expecting him to win anything in a year with a guy like Fernandez. But he did strike out more guys per 9 ;)
Um, from the first paragraph, "predictions" or choices? Heh.
Oops, poor synonym choice. It's fixed above. Thanks.
BP writers like to think of themselves as smarter than everyone else. Trout was a foregone conclusion despite the fact Cabrera improved on every metric over a Triple Crown year.

Without the injury, Cabrera would have had back-to-back Triple Crowns, but that just small potatoes for the BP geniuses here.

I'll put all my faith that WAR has the proper weighting of defense into the metric that something that was nearly unprecedented in baseball.

And that's putting aside any notion of valuable for a team that didn't play a meaningful game since May.
Why the need to insult people just because you don't agree with them. I've never understood that need. If you take an objective look at the issue, I think you'd have to agree that both Trout & Cabrera are worthy. Which one you choose is a matter of preference - do you go for the all-around player or the big hitter. No insults necessary.
Put someone down? You got to be kidding. Just look at what happened to the comments of whatevergong82.

Negative rating of -12 just for suggesting that Cabrera was the MVP last year as well as this year.

Just who is included in this part of groupthink? And just who is putting down any dissenting opinion?
Thank you. I've haven't been on here since my post, because I've been watching the playoffs, just like the Angels have, since their season was over before they were even eliminated.

WAR and all the new stuff is nice and all, and I respect it, otherwise I wouldn't have renewed my subscription to this Publication, but the main thing is, Trout's team didn't make the Playoff either year he's been up in the Majors.

You need more than what he brings to the game in order to win a Playoff berth, to say nothing of a Championship.
I am a big believer in Miguel Cabrera, but you are simply wrong.

While Cabrera's injuries did allow Chris Davis to pass him in RBIs, any objective observer would agree that Davis had the home run title locked down a long time before Cabrera performance began to be impacted.

There was no Triple Crown in the cards this year.
I'm surprised to see this kind of comment on BP. The triple crown stats are a lousy measure of a player's performance. It picks 3 arbitrary stats that were chosen back before we knew better. AVG weighs all hits as equal and ignores walks. HRs aren't the only kind of XBH. RBIs are a team stat based on who hits in front of the batter combined with luck. It also assumes that hitting with RISP is a skill, which it is not. Hitting is hitting. Don't let the media fool you. Here are what the triple crown ignores: BB, K, doubles, triples, OBP, SLG, base running, and defense.

Face it: the Triple Crown is small potatoes. To be fair, Cabrera did improve his OBP and SLG over last year, but Trout got better too, and Cabrera is still a lousy base runner who may be the worst defensive 3rd baseman in the game. The Triple Crown, rare as it is, has been done before. What Trout did has NEVER been done before. It is completely unprecedented. It just doesn't have a fancy name.

Team performance is irrelevant to an individual award, but in terms of "meaningful games", they're all meaningful, especially if you're still on a rookie deal. Poor play gets Trout sent down, which hurts his pay. Trout is playing for a monster extension or future free agent deal. It can literally be a +$200 million difference in future earnings. How's that for meaningful?

How can it be ignored that Cabrera was willing to move from his comfort zone so that Fielder could be added to the team?

Anyone who discounts Cabrera's contributions for doing that reveals an extraordinarily arrow vision that they are using to evaluate his contribution to the team.

His "value added" to the team by moving to third needs to be calculated as an extra bonus, rather than a subtraction, in any discussion of "most valuable."
Cabrera moving to third didn't allow them to add Fielder. Being willing to pay Fielder the most money is what allowed the Tigers to sign him. The Tigers management failure to do their jobs and have Fielder DH instead of playing first opened up 1,200 PA's over the past two seasons to Delmon Young and Victor Martinez, which netted them basically replacement level performance from a premium offensive position. That is the "value", or rather lack of value, added by Cabrera moving to third.
You can't change history, Ross. The fact remains that Cabrera was asked by his team to move to 3B before the Tigers decided to sign Fielder, and he agreed to do so.

That you also wish to debate (and discount) Cabrera's value while playing 3B by discussing the value of other players who that allowed into the lineup confirms my contention that WAR is affected by who ones teammates are. Just as RBIs and pitcher's wins are.

Which gives me great pleasure when people mock (rightly so)the traditional stats which are heavily influenced by teammates, but twist and turn in every direction to try and mask that WAR is also influenced by ones teammates.

It would be nice to have an objective statistic that settles all arguments, but we are not there yet.

WAR is certainly useful as a blunt instrument, but it's not a purely objective tool. Far from it.

For how many years are you going to subjectively bump Cabrera because he wanted to play 3B?
Also, are you sure that he went so reluctantly? Is it not possible that he saw 3B as a more glamorous position, in much the same way that Derek Jeter did not want to leave SS in favor of Alex Rodriguez, because SS is cooler than 3B?
Your two premises contradict each other. How can you declare that Cabrera "wanted to play 3b" followed by "he went so reluctantly?"

Please make up your mind.

As for me, I will ask you nicely not to put any words in my mouth, as I have no idea whether he "wanted to" or was "reluctant to."

All I know is that his team asked him to, and he so he did.

I plan to give Cabrera "subjective" credit for that forever, because being a team player is a whole lot "cooler" than just about anything else.

Besides, he still can hit a little bit, too.
So I just don't get it, how can 30 of 32 vote for Trout over Cabrera? How is this even possible. This year even more than last Cabrera is deserving of MVP over Trout. He leads Trout in every offensive category except Walks and SB's. Also despite what some say Trout is not the defensive player he is made out to be...someday maybe he'll even throw out a runner. That is part of defense. Not only that but one team is in the playoffs and the other has not played a meaningful game since May. I understand making the playoffs is not necessarily a requirement for the MVP but neither is fictitious defensive WAR numbers or WAR at all for that matter. WAR is not a stat it is a subjective number and it is silly that it is used to measure a players worth to a team. Trout is a really good player but once again he is not the MVP and he shouldn't be handed it because people are guilty they didn't vote for him last year.
You forgot that when Bourjos couldn't play, Trout got to stand in centerfield instead of left.

That alone increased Trout's WAR dramatically. Bourjos' injury alone may have added about two points to Trout's WAR for the year.

And since Cabrera agreed to move to third so that Fielder could be his teammate, his WAR probably got knocked down around two points.

The best part is that all of that positional WAR can easily be calculated before the first pitch of the game is ever even thrown. The actual stats achieved during games only serve to tweak DWAR around the margins.

Isn't that super convenient?

Simply add up thir DWAR based upon where they stand, and you'll see thatv2+2=4, making Trout the runaway leader in WAR over Cabrera. And we will claim with a straight face that it was all a totally "objective" calculation.

So, see, WAR can be just like real estate. It's all about location, location, location!

(And if all else fails, everyone can repeat, "Base running counts, too, you know?")

Okay, I'll admit that I simplified it some to make the point, if the rest of you will acknowledge that WAR can be tremendously affected by who ones teammates are.

WAR is very much dependent upon those teammates, in the same sense that RBIs and pitcher's wins stats are. Which, of course, are mocked for that very reason.
You are wrong. Moving from first back to third actually increased Cabrera's WAR, as first base has a large negative adjustment while third base is essentially neutral. Trout did benefit the same way, but his benefit was less than Cabrera's since first has a larger negative adjustment. Put them both where they belong and the gap is LARGER. But please keep spouting off on things you don't understand.
Ross, it is fine to disagree, but please try not to be so disagreeable when you do.

If it is true that playing 3B boosts Cabrera's DWAR, why isn't it boosted this year? It is the same as when he played at 1B.

Perhaps because it is more difficult to play 3B, so naturally, he won't be as successful making plays? Cabrera sacrificed his defensive numbers by moving to a less comfortable position because his team asked him to do so.

I must admit that I am puzzled to figure out what you mean by "Put them both where they belong." Because it seems that "where they belong" is not objective, and is entirely dependent upon two things:
A). Who their teammates are, and
B). The decisions the manager makes regarding how to deploy his players.

Both of which affect ones DWAR, while both are also outside the control of the individual player.

My point exactly. So thank you for embellishing that for me!
I'll second everything here.

The analytical community prides themselves on their attempts to quantitate fielding. From the early efforts of some guy sitting in the stands to charting hits to the more dispassionate regression of putouts and assists, the efforts are to be praised for trying to advance the merits of good fielding.

But efforts are not to be confused with providing the right answer. The analytical community has wrapped its self around WAR as if it the end-statistic. That would be impossible until the fielding metrics are indeed correct.

Frankly I find it hard to understand how Trout could standout in any fielding metric when playing next to an even better CF in Bourjous. Just who gets credit for all those FBs in LCF?

WAR is accepted by way more people than those that actually understand the mathematics behind it. Kind of like ESPN's QBR?

Obviously 30 of 32 BP writers have chosen to put there faith in that metric above everything else. That I believe is the result of a collective desire to validate their belief that they have the 'golden number' to define baseball performance.

I'm assuming that you know that Peter Bourjos played in 55 games all season. Also, it's entirely possible to have more than one competent outfielder in any team. Maybe, for example, they shade Bourjos towards right when he's playing alongside Trout. In that case, Trout may catch every ball and more that would normally be the left fielder's responsibility. Or maybe he catches more balls down the line as he can shade a little to the left playing beside an elite CF. You really don't have anything to suggest that WAR is significantly wrong on Trout's defence.
If you examine my comment, you will see that I did not disparage Trout's defense. In fact, I made no comment about it at all.

Nor I comment that playing next to Bourjos improved his numbers, as you did.

In fact, I wrote "The best part is that all of that positional WAR can easily be calculated before the first pitch of the game is ever even thrown."

The boost Trout gets to his WAR comes just from standing in center field, thanks to the fact the Bourjos was hurt. If Bourjos would have been able to play every game so that Trout stayed in left, Trout's DWAR would have been less.

In fact, your suggestion that Trout might catch more balls along the foul line because with Bourjos playing CF he can shade over that way, strengthens the case that DWAR is influenced by who ones teammates are, and is not a purely objective statistic.

His dWAR isn't decided strictly by where he plays; he gets a positional adjustment. Just standing in the position doesn't raise your dWAR. You need to actually make the plays, which are more difficult in CF than LF. I don't think you quite understand how BIS calculates their metric.
Copied directly from Baseball Reference, the quote below shows that standing in CF instead of LF for 150 games equals 10 runs towards WAR, before one even begins to calculate such things as "good play" and "bad play" values..

Ten runs = one win = $5 million of salary.

How is that for understanding?

"When one quantifies these differences and also looks at the changes in fielding performance when players move to different positions we can estimate the average differences between positions.

Current values (per 1350 (150*9) innings played) are:

C: +10 runs
SS: +7.5 runs
2B: +3 runs
CF: +2.5 runs
3b: +2 runs
RF: -7.5 runs
LF: -7.5 runs
1B: -10 runs
DH: -15 runs
P: see Pitcher Positional Adjustment"
Earlier you said Trout gained 2 wins just by moving from left to center and now you're showing that it's about 1 win. Earlier you said Cabrera lost 2 wins by moving from first to third and now you're showing that he got a bigger boost in positional adjustment than Trout. Of course you also stated that Cabrera's dWAR is the same at third as at first because his worse performance at a harder positioned canceled out the positional adjustment. If that's the case why do you ignore the fact that Trout's numbers are worse in center than in left?