American League MVP

[Guest]

Totally taken out to stay on topic.

 

I think Scott Podsednik did a lot less than Bob Wickman did for his team, especially seeing the number of votes that Scott got.

[Guest Leelee]

We need more pics of A-Rod.

[The Czech Republic 0]

The voting criteria never says the player has to be on a playoff team, or a playoff contender.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Who cares?!? A-Rod had a great 2003 in Dallas, but what good did it do anybody? And with his departure, the club was able to better allocate its resources and put a winner on the field. I don't think he deserved it. He was an albatross for the Rangers.

[Failed Bridge 0]

I don't feel like quoting Al's giant post, but its not the award for the best player in the league, its the one most valuable to their team.

 

If you took both Ortiz and A-Rod off of their respective teams and put in a random bottom of the rung player then you would clearly see that Ortiz did more for the Red Sox than A-Rod did for the Yankees.

 

A-Rod was the best player in the league this year, but the Yankees could have survived better without him than the Red Sox without Ortiz. The Yankees ship would have been sunk however without Mo Rivera.

[The Czech Republic 0]

If you take Ortiz out of the lineup, you're essentially taking Manny out as well, aren't you?

 

Oh well. at least Jeter didn't win

[Guest Leelee]

Czech, please be nice to A-Rod.

[MikeJordan23 0]

A-Rod wasn't even the MVP of the Yankees. Ortiz got screwed, since the Red Sox wouldn't have come close to the playoffs without him.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Why is it that people buy this logic for Ortiz, and not for Rodriguez? Without A-Rod, who would the Yankees have played at third instead? Russ Johnson? The Yankees had more hitting threats outside of A-Rod? The Red Sox led the league in runs scored, so they were not exactly lacking themselves. The Yankees' best bench bat was Rey Sanchez. Think about that for a moment.

 

In truth, none of this is really relevant to the issue. Coming up with arguments like what the team would be like without a certain player really clouds what should be a clear argument, and places more emphasis on teammates than on the player themselves. The purpose of the MVP is to identify the best player in the league. Anything else is either someone reading WAY too far into a literal translation of the word valuable itself, or (more commonly) is looking for ways to prop up their candidate when statistics have failed.

 

Hitting. Alex Rodriguez had a higher batting average, higher On Base Percentage, and higher slugging percentage. Moreover, A-Rod did this while playing his home games in Yankee Stadium, a considerably harder park to hit in than did David Ortiz.

 

Defense. Alex Rodriguez played 161 games at third base, and three at shortstop. Ortiz played ten games at first base. While at third base, Rodriguez helped his team win by turning balls in play into outs. This is not an argument that Ortiz had it easier by not playing defense. The point is that defense itself adds value to a ballclub.

 

Baserunning. Ortiz had one steal. Rodriguez had 21 steals in 27 tries. Also, Rodriguez grounded into eight double plays compared to 13 for Ortiz.

 

So you have a candidate who loses out on the three major categories. How do we close the gap. Clutch hitting of course! Ortiz had lots of clutch hits, since we all watch Sportscenter. One often repeated fact is that Ortiz had 20 home runs that either tied the game or put his team ahead. They never mention A-Rod's performance. He had a paltry 19 such home runs. But here is what really surprised me. Ortiz, Mr. Clutch, had nine intentional walks. A-Rod, the guy who's not clutch, had eight intentional walks. Ortiz gets pitches to hit in crucial situations because Manny Ramirez bats behind him.

 

I just don't see where Ortiz's clutch performance gives him the edge over everything else. People love to use clutch to prop up their candidates for lack of better evidence. It's not working here. Ortiz is a fine hitter, and a worthy number two. He's not A-Rod.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

I agree with almost everything here. The one thing is, that stat about homeruns to put his team ahead or tie, is NOT why people think Ortiz is clutch. Those hits could come in the 2nd inning. It's the fact that he gets big hits in late innings far more then anyone in recent memory. And his big hits in the post season last year.

[Bored 0]

This is all a prelim debate to tommorrow when Andruw Jones beats out Derrek Lee and Albert Pujols for the N.L. MVP then the real fun (or headache) begins.

[EVIL~! alkeiper 0]

I don't feel like quoting Al's giant post, but its not the award for the best player in the league, its the one most valuable to their team.

 

Is there a difference? Like I said, when people come up with a definition of valuable, they tend to stretch it to match the qualities of their favored candidate.

 

If you took both Ortiz and A-Rod off of their respective teams and put in a random bottom of the rung player then you would clearly see that Ortiz did more for the Red Sox than A-Rod did for the Yankees.

 

Would I? By what measure? If you take David Ortiz out of the Red Sox' lineup, you can replace him with the best hitter in the organization. That could be either Kevin Youkilis (.278/.400/.405) or Roberto Petagine (.281/.361/.438). Hell of a problem when your replacement has a higher OBP. If you were to take A-Rod out of the Yankees' lineup, you have to replace him with a quality hitter who can also play third base. The Yankees had two players compile more than ten innings at third besides A-Rod, being Mark Bellhorn and Russ Johnson. Johnson hit .222 and Bellhorn hit .118 for the Yankees.

 

A-Rod was the best player in the league this year, but the Yankees could have survived better without him than the Red Sox without Ortiz. The Yankees ship would have been sunk however without Mo Rivera.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

All that is opinion and you have yet to produce a fact in support of it. The Yankees and Red Sox had extremely similar clubs this season, with great offenses but poor pitching. One had an elite closer, one had a black hole. Both won 95 games. An elite closer is worth at most a handful of wins. Rivera blew four saves this year. The most blown saves in the league was eight. So that's a difference of four blown saves between Rivera and the worst closer in the league. And of course, that does not take into account that if the game is merely tied, your team can still win.

 

It's all perception. The Red Sox could've utilized an adept hitter in Ortiz's absense. The Yankees could win plenty of games with an average closer. There are no FACTS to support any of these assumptions you have stated. And again, none of them are truly relevant to the MVP award. What difference should it make what a player's TEAMMATES do? We have awards for team performance. They're called championships.

 

Let's break out of the middle ages and pretend we have relatively sophisticated methods for measuring value that don't involve making stuff up as we go along.

[Boon 0]

My trouble here is the word "Value".

 

A-Rod's accomplishments / $25 million

vs.

Ortiz's accomplishments / $5 million

 

Getting about 5x more bang for your buck with Ortiz. But whatever, I'm not gonna lose any sleep over it.

 

Ortiz won the popular vote, but A-Rod won the electoral vote! It's not fair!

[Bored 0]

How much a player makes is irrelevent to the MVP and I think it is what people's major problem with Rodriguez is the money he makes which is rather silly.

[Slayer 0]

As long there's disagreement about the true meaning of the award (valuable team-player vs. best player in league), the statistical arguments are practically moot

[EVIL~! alkeiper 0]

And of course, by that logic the MVP would clearly be Brian Roberts and his $390,000 salary.

[Fökai 0]

I fully expect Rodriguez to hit 271 home runs next season.

 

Don't test him - he'll do it.

[EVIL~! alkeiper 0]

As long there's disagreement about the true meaning of the award (valuable team-player vs. best player in league), the statistical arguments are practically moot

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Please explain to me how a player can be the best player without being most valuable to his team.

[Guest Leelee]

As long there's disagreement about the true meaning of the award (valuable team-player vs. best player in league), the statistical arguments are practically moot

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Please explain to me how a player can be the best player without being most valuable to his team.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I don't know, but Jeter does it every year, it seems. Heck, he pulls it off by not even being the best player at his position, on his team.

[Brett Favre 0]

As a guy who watched nearly every game, Jeter was really unclutch for the most part of the year (pretty clutch in the playoffs though). There were quite a few games where he was the last out; A-Rod on the other hand was consistent the whole year.

[mike546 0]

Jeter made the last out of a game 9 times when he came to bat with the tieing run on base. But Jeter singled in the 9th inning of game 5, and A-Rod grounded into a double play, and thats the only thing anyones going to remember.

[Brett Favre 0]

Jeter probably wouldn't have gotten that single, hadn't it been for A-Rod's clutch ass homer against the Indians, which helped stop a big skid (Giambi hit the next, but you get the point).

[mike546 0]

It's not like Jeter didn't have ANY clutch hits, so you can't really say that.

[Brett Favre 0]

This year was a down year for Jeter in the clutch hit department during the year.

[mike546 0]

But he made up for that in really one of his best years. His walk total sky rocketed, he didn't strike out as much, and his OBP I think was a career high.

[Brett Favre 0]

Nah, he had that year in 1998 where he went crazy. But yeah he had a good year, i'm just saying that he wasn't "super clutch".

[Vern Gagne 0]

This is all a prelim debate to tommorrow when Andruw Jones beats out Derrek Lee and Albert Pujols for the N.L. MVP then the real fun (or headache) begins.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

No shot that happens.

[Precious Roy 0]

A-Rod was the best player in the league this year, but the Yankees could have survived better without him than the Red Sox without Ortiz.

 

This argument is SO DUMB! Do you people even think about this shit before you put it out here? I know AL touched on this, but WHY would the Yankees have been better off than the Red Sox in that situation? It doesn't make any sense. With Tony Womack or Russ Davis playing 3B (they didn't even pick up Bellhorn until late in the year, and he was so productive that the RED SOX cut the guy)? A-Rod was in there basically every single day playing good defense, hit his ass off, ran the bases, moved all over the lineup.....basically, if you think the Yankees could just patch that hole and make up for that production you're an idiot.

 

The SOX had the more complete lineup top to bottom, and they had the better bench. In just 2 more potential ABs they had a better team BA, better OPS (OBP + SLG), more runs, more hits, more total bases, more doubles, more triples. Take Ortiz and A-Rod off the teams...that doesn't change. The only thing the Yankees did better was hit home runs.

 

 

Congrats to A-Rod, HE DESERVED IT!

[Guest Leelee]

Heck yes, A-Rod deserved it!

 

And he's such a team player. He shouldn't even have to lower himself to playing 3B. But, he put aside his ego for Mr. Potato Head's. What a man! :kiss:

[Slayer 0]

Something I didn't even think about until I read the Ewing Theory article I posted in another sports thread.

 

Two (not one, two) franchises improved when this man left them. If that's not the exact opposite of MVP, I don't know what is.

 

I'm sure Al will respond with "But, but his OBP!! And his PLS! And his XVC! What about those?!" but, as I've tried to tell him before, not every argument is about stats

[mike546 0]

Of course A-Rod leaving was the reason for Texiera and Blalock become all stars, and Fransisco Cordero becoming an elite closer. And of course him leaving also was the reason Juan Gone and Palmero both left, making room for Kevin Mench, Deluchi, and Lance Nix.

 

What power he has!

[Brett Favre 0]

They got so much better, that they ended up sucking ass this year. Look at both the Mariners and Rangers now.

[Slayer 0]

They got so much better, that they ended up sucking ass this year. Look at both the Mariners and Rangers now.

The Mariners had better season records for the three years post-Rodriguez than they did for his prime time with them ('96-'00), and even though the Rangers were sub-.500 this year they still had a better record than during his three years there.