PDA

View Full Version : Morneau wins AL MVP



Highlifeman21
11-21-2006, 02:04 PM
.321 AVG
34 HR
130 RBI

Discuss

BRM
11-21-2006, 02:08 PM
Surprising. I thought Jeter was a lock this year the way the sports media was hyping him.

M2
11-21-2006, 02:12 PM
Stunning. Morneau wasn't even the best player on his own team. The writers might as well call the RBI award.

oneupper
11-21-2006, 02:17 PM
I always gave a bit more consideration for a guy in a "glove" position who had a big offensive year (C, MI, CF, even 3B).

Jeter at SS with a .900 OPS beats Morneau at IB with a .934 OPS.
Mauer with a .936 OPS at Catcher...beats them both.

Highlifeman21
11-21-2006, 02:20 PM
Stunning. Morneau wasn't even the best player on his own team. The writers might as well call the RBi award.

I was just thinking the same thing.

As I was reading my text message from mlb.com, I was thinking "I didn't know that's how you spell Mauer...."

Edskin
11-21-2006, 02:37 PM
Anyone else find the timing of the MVP announcements silly? My honest reaction on Nov. 21st--- who cares? I've never understood the logic there.

WMR
11-21-2006, 02:39 PM
Wow can't believe the NYC media hype machine lost out.

RedsManRick
11-21-2006, 02:40 PM
Mauer = Jeter > Morneau

Johnny Footstool
11-21-2006, 02:44 PM
Maybe the writers just wanted to vote for "that guy from Minnesota...can't remember his name, but his initials are J.M. or something."

RedsBaron
11-21-2006, 03:59 PM
Stunning. Morneau wasn't even the best player on his own team. The writers might as well call the RBi award.

Yep. This year reminds me a little of 1987, when the writers went for the RBI guys over everyone else.

M2
11-21-2006, 04:09 PM
Yep. This year reminds me a little of 1987, when the writers went for the RBI guys over everyone else.

Excellent parallel. Jeter's been Trammelled ... or Strawberried ... or Rainesed.

Steve Bedrosian won the Cy Young that year too. Something was definitely in the water.

RFS62
11-21-2006, 04:21 PM
Maybe the writers just wanted to vote for "that guy from Minnesota...can't remember his name, but his initials are J.M. or something."


Yep. Rhymes with Jack Bauer.

Chip R
11-21-2006, 04:29 PM
I wonder if this wasn't a little backlash from the writers in regards to Jeter not exactly standing behind ARod during the latter's trials and tribulations. Beating out a guy like Jeter for MVP should require numbers above and beyond his if you play in the Twin Cities.

GriffeyFan
11-21-2006, 06:31 PM
I wonder if this wasn't a little backlash from the writers in regards to Jeter not exactly standing behind ARod during the latter's trials and tribulations. Beating out a guy like Jeter for MVP should require numbers above and beyond his if you play in the Twin Cities.

Why should his numbers have to be above and beyond a guy like Jeter just because he plays in the Twin Cities? What city you play in should not have anything to do with it.

Patrick Bateman
11-21-2006, 06:38 PM
Why should his numbers have to be above and beyond a guy like Jeter just because he plays in the Twin Cities? What city you play in should not have anything to do with it.

Jeter is simply going to get more publicity than a player for the Twins. Nature of the beast.

RedsBaron
11-21-2006, 06:44 PM
2006 AL Win Share leaders:
Jeter-33
Mauer-31
Ortiz-29
Ramirez-29
Morneau-27

For some reason, writers have been worshipping before the golden RBI idol for as long as there have been MVP awards.

RedsBaron
11-21-2006, 06:48 PM
I wonder if this wasn't a little backlash from the writers in regards to Jeter not exactly standing behind ARod during the latter's trials and tribulations. Beating out a guy like Jeter for MVP should require numbers above and beyond his if you play in the Twin Cities.

One argument against Jeter being named AL MVP that I thought had some validity was his apparent failure of leadership in the A-Rod matter. It sure looked as if Jeter left A-Rod out to dry. Jeter would have shown leadership if he had publicly supported A-Rod, which might have resulted in A-Rod being a more productive player, which would have in turn improved the Yankees chances of winning the World Series, instead of flaming out in the first round.

Highlifeman21
11-21-2006, 06:51 PM
2006 AL Win Share leaders:
Jeter-33
Mauer-31
Ortiz-29
Ramirez-29
Morneau-27

For some reason, writers have been worshipping before the golden RBI idol for as long as there have been MVP awards.

At least we have a pattern for the 2006 MVPs.... they both weren't close to leading their respective leagues in Win Shares.

I guess that stat is now rendered useless by BBWAA. Time to start the "RBIs are good!" campaign....

Chip R
11-21-2006, 06:57 PM
Jeter is simply going to get more publicity than a player for the Twins. Nature of the beast.


Exactly. Jeter is Mr. Yankee, and is considered by a lot of people to be one of the best players in the game. He is Mr. Clutch and the captain of the Yankees. He is automatically going to get more attention just by the fact he is who he is and he plays where he plays than someone who plays for the Twins. So one would think that Morneau would have had to put up killer numbers to beat out Jeter. But he didn't and that leads me to believe that some writers may have believed that Jeter could have nipped this whole ARod thing in the bud by publically telling everyone to leave ARod alone. He didn't do that and some writers may have felt that if Jeter was the leader everyone thought he was, he wouldn't have let this become such a distraction.

RFS62
11-21-2006, 06:58 PM
One argument against Jeter being named AL MVP that I thought had some validity was his apparent failure of leadership in the A-Rod matter. It sure looked as if Jeter left A-Rod out to dry. Jeter would have shown leadership if he had publicly supported A-Rod, which might have resulted in A-Rod being a more productive player, which would have in turn improved the Yankees chances of winning the World Series, instead of flaming out in the first round.



I've heard that argument several times on XM the past few weeks

RedsBaron
11-21-2006, 08:14 PM
I've heard that argument several times on XM the past few weeks

I guess I'm going to have to get XM.

edabbs44
11-21-2006, 08:34 PM
2006 AL Win Share leaders:
Jeter-33
Mauer-31
Ortiz-29
Ramirez-29
Morneau-27

For some reason, writers have been worshipping before the golden RBI idol for as long as there have been MVP awards.

No offense to anyone on here, but are we advocating not watching the games for now on and determining MVPs on Win Shares alone? I think it is funny how I've been told all my life that Jeter's value can't be measured since he has all of these magic intangibles. Now every article today is saying how Jeter should have won b/c of Win Shares. Any other year if Jeter finished behind someone in Win Shares it wouldn't have mattered b/c his value couldn't be measured. If my research is correct, Albert Belle led the AL in WS in 1998, yet he was 8th in MVP voting to DJ's 3rd. That year, I'm sure Yankee fans everywhere claimed it was the intangibles that pushed Jeter to the top. It just cracks me up.

Let me ask you this...do the Twins make the playoffs w/o Morneau? How about the NYY w/o Jeter? Who's team has a better chance w/o them? I think the biggest thing going against Jeter is the all-star team he plays on. That's why I still don't think ARod deserved it last year.

PS: I would have voted for Johan.

Highlifeman21
11-21-2006, 08:51 PM
No offense to anyone on here, but are we advocating not watching the games for now on and determining MVPs on Win Shares alone? I think it is funny how I've been told all my life that Jeter's value can't be measured since he has all of these magic intangibles. Now every article today is saying how Jeter should have won b/c of Win Shares. Any other year if Jeter finished behind someone in Win Shares it wouldn't have mattered b/c his value couldn't be measured. If my research is correct, Albert Belle led the AL in WS in 1998, yet he was 8th in MVP voting to DJ's 3rd. That year, I'm sure Yankee fans everywhere claimed it was the intangibles that pushed Jeter to the top. It just cracks me up.

Let me ask you this...do the Twins make the playoffs w/o Morneau? How about the NYY w/o Jeter? Who's team has a better chance w/o them? I think the biggest thing going against Jeter is the all-star team he plays on. That's why I still don't think ARod deserved it last year.

PS: I would have voted for Johan.

Twins w/o Morneau, I'm not sure.
Yankees w/o Jeter, yes.
Yankees have a better chance w/o Jeter.

My question is, do the Twins have such great results from their pitching staff w/o Mauer? He led his team offensively, and almost the AL in Win Shares.

Santana was just one piece of the Minnesota puzzle, and he only got the ball every 5th day. Mauer was an everyday player, and I think had more impact on and for the Twins.

edabbs44
11-21-2006, 09:08 PM
Twins w/o Morneau, I'm not sure.
Yankees w/o Jeter, yes.
Yankees have a better chance w/o Jeter.

My question is, do the Twins have such great results from their pitching staff w/o Mauer? He led his team offensively, and almost the AL in Win Shares.

Santana was just one piece of the Minnesota puzzle, and he only got the ball every 5th day. Mauer was an everyday player, and I think had more impact on and for the Twins.

Completely agree. I was talking with a guy at work yesterday and I said either Mauer or Morneau. Today, I thought Johan.

cincinnati chili
11-21-2006, 10:00 PM
Have we found out which city's beat writers put Jeter SIXTH on his ballot?

I'm shocked by this. It's not an awful decision, as the Twins surge did correspond with his breaking out. But it's surprising.

vaticanplum
11-21-2006, 10:04 PM
No offense to anyone on here, but are we advocating not watching the games for now on and determining MVPs on Win Shares alone? I think it is funny how I've been told all my life that Jeter's value can't be measured since he has all of these magic intangibles. Now every article today is saying how Jeter should have won b/c of Win Shares. Any other year if Jeter finished behind someone in Win Shares it wouldn't have mattered b/c his value couldn't be measured. If my research is correct, Albert Belle led the AL in WS in 1998, yet he was 8th in MVP voting to DJ's 3rd. That year, I'm sure Yankee fans everywhere claimed it was the intangibles that pushed Jeter to the top. It just cracks me up.

I swear to God, the only people I ever hear this stuff from is people who hate the Yankees.

Any genuine Yankees fan who really knows the team and knows baseball can give a very measured analysis of Jeter's strengths and weaknesses, both the ones that show up in the numbers and the ones that don't. And they can do this fairly while still loving him for what he means to the team. You may well have never heard such an analysis because of your approach in talking about the Yankees, which makes fans feel compelled to defend them, no doubt irrationally sometimes.

As I see it, MVP is a conglomerate of two things: numbers and worth to the team. Jeter's third place finish in the voting in 98, for example was probably due in large part to the quality of that team and his role in it, even if his numbers aren't quite as high. It's not all one thing or the other the way your post implies it is; it's not that simplistic.

Jeter was fully deserving of the MVP this year on both counts. And this is honestly the first year I've ever felt he deserved it. Almost every Yankee fan I know -- and most non-Yankees fans, for that matter -- agrees with me. You can talk about the irrational Yankees fans all you want to, but what you're saying doesn't really have much to do with baseball or with Jeter or with the MVP award (which he has never won, so he's obviously not quite as overrated as you seem to believe, not in anything beyond lip service anyway and irrelevant media anyway). It's just an attack on fans. And attacks on fans are a pure waste of time, IMHO.

vaticanplum
11-21-2006, 10:06 PM
Have we found out which city's beat writers put Jeter SIXTH on his ballot?

It was Joe Cowley of the Chicago Sun-Times. He was interviewed on Mike and the Mad Dog today, you can listen to it here:

http://www.wfan.com/pages/119297.php?contentType=34&contentId=1510

kheidg-
11-21-2006, 10:19 PM
I like Morneau for MVP - he carried the Twins offensively throughout most of the second half of the season while Mauer was on the bench/DH'ing once every third game.

Jeter always deserves to be considered for MVP but I think he had less of a role in the Yankees success than Morneau did for the Twins.

vaticanplum
11-21-2006, 10:22 PM
I like Morneau for MVP - he carried the Twins offensively throughout most of the second half of the season while Mauer was on the bench/DH'ing once every third game.

Jeter always deserves to be considered for MVP but I think he had less of a role in the Yankees success than Morneau did for the Twins.

I think Morneau is a fine choice, actually. It's why I have such a problem with these awards in general: you can maaaaaybe measure a player's worth to a team, but how can you compare that across many teams?

I've got maybe four guys in my head whom I think could have walked with this award, no questions asked. Though I do believe that putting any of them outside of the top 4 (like Jeter in sixth) is definitely a stretch.

edabbs44
11-21-2006, 10:26 PM
I swear to God, the only people I ever hear this stuff from is people who hate the Yankees.

Any genuine Yankees fan who really knows the team and knows baseball can give a very measured analysis of Jeter's strengths and weaknesses, both the ones that show up in the numbers and the ones that don't. And they can do this fairly while still loving him for what he means to the team. You may well have never heard such an analysis because of your approach in talking about the Yankees, which makes fans feel compelled to defend them, no doubt irrationally sometimes.

As I see it, MVP is a conglomerate of two things: numbers and worth to the team. Jeter's third place finish in the voting in 98, for example was probably due in large part to the quality of that team and his role in it, even if his numbers aren't quite as high. It's not all one thing or the other the way your post implies it is; it's not that simplistic.

Jeter was fully deserving of the MVP this year on both counts. And this is honestly the first year I've ever felt he deserved it. Almost every Yankee fan I know -- and most non-Yankees fans, for that matter -- agrees with me. You can talk about the irrational Yankees fans all you want to, but what you're saying doesn't really have much to do with baseball or with Jeter or with the MVP award (which he has never won, so he's obviously not quite as overrated as you seem to believe, not in anything beyond lip service anyway and irrelevant media anyway). It's just an attack on fans. And attacks on fans are a pure waste of time, IMHO.

Vatican: I think you are misunderstanding my logic here. Or maybe I wasn't clear. Or maybe you do understand and just disagree.

True, I am from the NY area and have a bitter distain for the Yankees. But that is for another day.

My post was pointing out the irony about Jeter this year, one of his best statistical years ever. And no doubt, he had a fantastic season. Making it even better he was on my fantasy team, helping to back-to-back championships.:D

The irony is that, for years, the NY fans and media have professed DJ's presence on the field, his immeasurable value to the team and his willing of the Yankees to win. Cool, I have no doubt that he has been of great value to the team over the years and especially this year.

But now Jeter has the stats to back up his case for MVP. And now the argument by most (not only on here, but many sites) is that he led the league in Win Shares. Again, no doubt he had a phenomenal season. But isn't this kind of a double standard? If this was 1998, what do you think the response from NYY fans would be if I told them that Belle led the league in WS and should be the MVP? I think I would have been told that Jeter's value couldn't be measured by any statistic.

Now...the case for Morneau:

April 2006: .208/.274/.416
May 2006: .274/.333/.505

May 30 : Twins are 23-28, 11.5 games out

June 2006: .364/.400/.737

June 30: Twins are 43-35, 11 games out

July 2006: .410/.430/.700

July 31: Twins are 61-43, 8.5 games out

He probably won the MVP during those 2 months. They go 38-15 over June and July. True they didn't gain much ground b/c of the Tigers, but they might have been 20 games out if Morneau wasn't a monster those months.

Just my opinion. I don't think Jeter would have been the wrong choice. But I don't think Morneau is the wrong one either.

vaticanplum
11-21-2006, 10:36 PM
edabbs: I actually re-read your post after I posted mine and almost deleted my own. I do see your point. I think the last line in your first paragraph just set me off and stayed with me.

We seem to be fairly in agreement about the whole thing (except that in general I think these awards are kind of stupid). The truth is that these awards can be attributed to stats OR intangibles or anything in between, because they're subjective, and anyone who votes on them can argue either way and any fan trying to make his own personal case for any given player can do the same. It's valid, but it's also why I'm skeptical of them.

I am very overtired lately and I have noticed myself getting cranky around here. My apologies. I'll lend you my life-size Jeter cardboard cutout for a while to make it up to you.

edabbs44
11-21-2006, 10:41 PM
edabbs: I actually re-read your post after I posted mine and almost deleted my own. I do see your point. I think the last line in your first paragraph just set me off and stayed with me.

We seem to be fairly in agreement about the whole thing (except that in general I think these awards are kind of stupid). The truth is that these awards can be attributed to stats OR intangibles or anything in between, because they're subjective, and anyone who votes on them can argue either way and any fan trying to make his own personal case for any given player can do the same. It's valid, but it's also why I'm skeptical of them.

I am very overtired lately and I have noticed myself getting cranky around here. My apologies. I'll lend you my life-size Jeter cardboard cutout for a while to make it up to you.

Um.....no thanks. Your apology is more than enough.:)

cincinnati chili
11-21-2006, 10:54 PM
It was Joe Cowley of the Chicago Sun-Times. He was interviewed on Mike and the Mad Dog today, you can listen to it here:

http://www.wfan.com/pages/119297.php?contentType=34&contentId=1510

Thanks. It sounds like Cowley went with the old, "even if Jeter was out, the Yanks still make the playoffs" argument.

Really, really dumb.

edabbs44
11-21-2006, 11:06 PM
Thanks. It sounds like Cowley went with the old, "even if Jeter was out, the Yanks still make the playoffs" argument.

Really, really dumb.

I give Cowley credit...though he is crazy to put Jeter 6th. Mike and The Mad Dog just berate their guests if they aren't signing in concert with them.

Highlifeman21
11-21-2006, 11:08 PM
Thanks. It sounds like Cowley went with the old, "even if Jeter was out, the Yanks still make the playoffs" argument.

Really, really dumb.

Even if Jeter was out, the Yanks still would have made the playoffs.

Jeter still had one heck of a season, but IMO Mauer had a slightly better one. I'm very surprised Morneau got the award.

I wonder if someone for the Yankees PR machine gets fired over this.

mth123
11-21-2006, 11:17 PM
Even if Jeter was out, the Yanks still would have made the playoffs.

Jeter still had one heck of a season, but IMO Mauer had a slightly better one. I'm very surprised Morneau got the award.

I wonder if someone for the Yankees PR machine gets fired over this.

How can that logic apply to Jeter and not Morneau when he had two teamates also contend for the award. I could agrue tha Jeter made the Yanks go and Morneau was part of a great group since Mauer and Santana were on the same team. I think the logic there is wrong. I haven't studied the situation but I'd probably go with Jeter, Mauer or Jermaine Dye.

cincinnati chili
11-21-2006, 11:39 PM
Even if Jeter was out, the Yanks still would have made the playoffs.



The '27 Yankees would have made the playoffs without Babe Ruth.

The '27 Yankees would have made the playoffs without Lou Gehrig.

So let's put them 5th and 6th on our MVP ballots for that year.

Patrick Bateman
11-21-2006, 11:48 PM
The '27 Yankees would have made the playoffs without Babe Ruth.

The '27 Yankees would have made the playoffs without Lou Gehrig.

So let's put them 5th and 6th on our MVP ballots for that year.

I think the main problem is the definition of the award. It's not called the "Best Player Award" it's best player in the most suitable circumstances.

Howard and Morneau had the counting stats, and did well down the stretch. That's what voters look for, unfortunately.

For the most part these awards are a farce. Rarely do the best players get the awards.

So maybe Jeter was the best player (and he basically was, probably about even with Mauer), but maybe Morneau was more key in the Twins play-off run. Mauer would still be the better choice, but didn't have the stats look for.

For the award to really mean anything of value, it needs the correct definition.

cincinnati chili
11-22-2006, 12:06 AM
I have less of an issue with Morneau winning it than Jeter getting a 6th place vote.

Highlifeman21
11-22-2006, 12:17 AM
How can that logic apply to Jeter and not Morneau when he had two teamates also contend for the award. I could agrue tha Jeter made the Yanks go and Morneau was part of a great group since Mauer and Santana were on the same team. I think the logic there is wrong. I haven't studied the situation but I'd probably go with Jeter, Mauer or Jermaine Dye.

I don't think the Twins go without the collaborative effort(s) of Mauer and Santana. I'm almost convinced they might have gone w/o Morneau. I'm definitely convinced the Yankees go w/o Jeter.

I think Mauer and Santana were definitely more important to the Twins' success than Morneau.

Highlifeman21
11-22-2006, 12:24 AM
The '27 Yankees would have made the playoffs without Babe Ruth.

The '27 Yankees would have made the playoffs without Lou Gehrig.

So let's put them 5th and 6th on our MVP ballots for that year.

Babe Ruth '27

1927 New York Yankees 151 540 158 192 29 8 60 164 417 137 89 7 6 .476 .772 .356

Lou Gehrig '27

1927 New York Yankees 155 584 149 218 52 18 47 175 447 109 84 10 8 .460 .765 .373

Maybe take one of them out of the lineup, they make the playoffs. Take both of them out of the lineup, and no way, they miss it.

You have these two seasons on the same team, and I know votes are getting taken from each other, which is why I'm actually surprised Morneau won the MVP over Mauer. I wonder how many Mauer votes went to Santana.

Jeter didn't have a teammate that stole MVP votes from him, yet he had a better overall team around him, IMO.

I have no problem with the writer voting Jeter 6th in the MVP ballot. He could have left him off completely, which would have gotten your panties more in a twist.

cincinnati chili
11-22-2006, 12:45 AM
I have no problem with the writer voting Jeter 6th in the MVP ballot. He could have left him off completely, which would have gotten your panties more in a twist.

A writer did that to A-Rod once, when he clearly had the best season in the AL. Writers used to do that to Ted Williams (the ones who didn't like him personally).

My panties would be fine, assuming I'm wearing any. That doesn't make it right.

There are simply too many kooky theories about how to pick MVPs. For years they've penalized players on bad teams. Now, some of you are saying they should be penalized for being on good teams. You're basically using the economics term "marginal value" to denote "value."

And I'll let you historians argue this, but I think it's highly debatable that the Yankees would have lost the pennant without Ruth and Gehrig. If those two guys were replaced with average players at their position, I think they would have probably still won it. It was called murderers row for a reason. The Yanks won by 19 games in a 154 game season and outscored the next best team. The Yanks scored 376 more runs than they allowed. The A's scored 115 more runs than they allowed. That's 261 runs. Ruth and Gehrig did NOT account for that many runs above an average player. Sorry.

RedsBaron
11-22-2006, 07:44 AM
In 1927 Ruth had 45 Win Shares and Gehrig had 44 Win Shares. One Win Share represents roughly 1/3 of a win, so Ruth and Gehrig's combined total of 89 Win Shares would represent about 29.67 wins. The Yankees finished 19 games ahead of the A's in 1927, with a 110-44 record to Philadelphia's 91-63.
If the 1927 Yankees had not had Ruth and Gehrig, they would have played somebody in rightfield and at firstbase, and those somebodies would have had some Win Shares. How many? I don't know, but their regular shortstop, Koenig, had 15 Win Shares; their regular catcher, Collins, had 12 Win Shares; and their regular thirdbaseman, Dugan, had 6 Win Shares. I'd guess that the replacements for Ruth and Gehrig would have done no better than 10 to 15 Win Shares each. If the replacements totaled 25 combined Win Shares, this would mean the 1927 Yankees lost a net of 64 Win Shares, or about 21 wins, as a result of not having Babe and the Iron Horse. A loss of 21 wins would have put the Yankees behind the A's.
I'd guess the Yankees would actually have done even worse than that without Ruth and Gehrig. The one bad season Ruth had between 1920 and 1932 was 1925, and even though Bob Meusel lead the AL in HRs and RBI, without a big year from Ruth the Yankees went 69-85 and finished 7th. I'd guess the psychological effect upon the other Yankees of not having Ruth and Gehrig would have been huge.

RedsBaron
11-22-2006, 07:49 AM
No offense to anyone on here, but are we advocating not watching the games for now on and determining MVPs on Win Shares alone?

I am certainly not advocating determining who is named MVP solely upon Win Shares or any other single statistical method of ranking players. There is a long list of Win Share leaders who were not named MVP, and in many of those seasons I would have voted someone other than the Win Share leader as MVP. My objection is to the writers habit of determining the MVP based solely upon who leads the league in RBI.

edabbs44
11-22-2006, 08:31 AM
I am certainly not advocating determining who is named MVP solely upon Win Shares or any other single statistical method of ranking players. There is a long list of Win Share leaders who were not named MVP, and in many of those seasons I would have voted someone other than the Win Share leader as MVP. My objection is to the writers habit of determining the MVP based solely upon who leads the league in RBI.

I don't think it is solely who leads in RBI, but in this case it is relevant.

RISP:
Jeter, in 155 ABs: .382/.482/.581 with 83 RBI
Morneau, in 167 ABs: .323/.401/.575 with 94 RBI

Runners on:
Jeter, in 268 ABs: .366/.456/.522 with 90 RBI
Morneau, in 264 ABs: .318/.382/.598 with 115 RBI

The reason why I think this is relevant is b/c they have a very similar number of ABs in each situation even though Morneau hits lower in the order. Now I don't think RBI should be the determining factor in MVP voting, but in a comparison of JM vs DJ this season, I think this is somewhat relevant. So they both, for all intents and purposes, had the same opportunities for knocking in runs.

Not for nothing, but those are pretty impressive numbers on both sides. Wow.

blumj
11-22-2006, 09:19 AM
It's because they have so many arbitrary "rules" for who's NOT supposed to win the MVP that they twist themselves up in knots trying to find someone who doesn't break any of them. The MVP has to rack up the HRs and RBI(no Jeter or Mauer), but he can't be a DH(no Ortiz, Thomas, or Hafner) or on a team that doesn't make the playoffs(No Dye or Vlad). So, it almost has to be Morneau by default, because he's the only reasonably adequate candidate who doesn't "break" any of their pre-established rules. And you wind up with a very unsatisfying, compromise MVP.

edabbs44
11-22-2006, 10:05 AM
It's because they have so many arbitrary "rules" for who's NOT supposed to win the MVP that they twist themselves up in knots trying to find someone who doesn't break any of them. The MVP has to rack up the HRs and RBI(no Jeter or Mauer), but he can't be a DH(no Ortiz, Thomas, or Hafner) or on a team that doesn't make the playoffs(No Dye or Vlad). So, it almost has to be Morneau by default, because he's the only reasonably adequate candidate who doesn't "break" any of their pre-established rules. And you wind up with a very unsatisfying, compromise MVP.

Excellent insight. Just make it an "outstanding player award".

GriffeyFan
11-22-2006, 10:47 AM
Jeter is simply going to get more publicity than a player for the Twins. Nature of the beast.

I understand that, but that doesn't mean someone else's #'s have to be way better than Jeter's just to beat him in a MVP race.

I love it (and I'm referring to mostly experts) how all these people are crying their eyes out that their beloved media created superstar didn't win MVP.

RedsManRick
11-22-2006, 10:52 AM
Excellent insight. Just make it an "outstanding player award".

I agree, the use of the word valuable completely screws up what should be a simple award. In my opinion, they should create a "best position player" aware (or just promote the Hank Aaron award) and keep the MVP as is. That way, you would have position players graded separately from pitchers and completely on their merits aside from "value" and then you have the MVP which could easily be awarded to any player.

westofyou
11-24-2006, 10:39 AM
http://www.yesnetwork.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20061122&content_id=1413900&oid=36019&vkey=5


HE DUMBEST MVP VOTE IN THE HISTORY OF CIVILIZATION, INCLUDING THE INFAMOUS 112 CE ROMAN EASTERN CHARIOT LEAGUE VOTE AND THE 1,000,276 CE "LAST MVP BEFORE THE SUN GOES NOVA SO LET'S GET THE !!#@$# OUT OF HERE VOTE"

You're going to be reading about this everywhere, so let's keep this brief. Not only did the writers vote for the wrong player, they voted for the wrong Twin. That sounds like an episode of the Patty Duke Show, so let's be more specific: Derek Jeter was the Most Valuable Player in the American League. Joe Mauer, the first catcher in the history of the American League to win a batting title, was the most valuable Twin.

Think about which player on the Twins was more replaceable. Your DH-like first baseman hit quite well, but there are a lot of first basemen who hit quite well. Maybe you can't get one who hits as well on short notice, but you can get 80 percent of it. The Yankees and the Tigers went to the postseason without good production from their first basemen at all — in part because they received off-setting production from their shortstops. Now, if you want to find a catcher who's 80 percent as good as Joe Mauer, good luck. There aren't many of those guys.

In defending their votes, writers will often try to pass off an argument based on the player's negation. "Where would the Twins have been without Justin Morneau?" This formulation is about as logical as Casey Stengel saying that you need a catcher because without one you'll have lots of passed balls. Without Morneau, the Twins would have had some other first baseman. That hypothetical hitter probably wouldn't have hit as well, but Morneau's season was run of the mill, as very good seasons go, neither historic nor unique, so it's possible that the Twins could have gotten something close. The average major league first baseman hit about .282/.358/.482 this year. Morneau hit .321/.375/.559. He was above average, but not spectacularly so.

Mauer's season was historic and unique. No American League catcher was within a country mile of him. Jorge Posada had an excellent season and was perhaps 30 or 40 percent less productive. Overall, major league catchers batted .268/.328/.413. Mauer hit 347/.429/.507.

Jeter's season is also in the historic ballpark. Few shortstops, including Jeter himself, have hit as well as he did in 2006. The only other year in his inventory that's as good was 1999. Major league shortstops batted .274/.330/.408 to Jeter's .343/.417/.483. Big difference. Jeter's offensive 1999 was probably in the top 10 shortstop seasons ever. The writers missed it. His 2006 wasn't nearly as good — it merely ranks in the top 30 or 40. That's where Mauer's season ranks in the history of catching as well. Without being rigidly scientific about it, Morneau's 2006 offensive season is probably about the 200th best in the history of first basemen.

The shocking thing here isn't that Jeter lost — the writers make mistakes almost every year. It's that the guy they selected wasn't even the best player on his own team. That takes a special degree of ignorance.

ARE THE WRITERS COMPETING TO SHOW THEY CARE MORE ABOUT A-ROD THAN JETER DOES?
Some might speculate that Jeter's failure to win the award relates to his abandonment of Alex Rodriguez, but the answer is far simpler than the deep-thinking members of our press corps ruminating on the Captain's putting self before team. What determined the award is what has always determined it: RBIs. Jeter had 97. Morneau had 130. Nothing else matters.

Of 65 American League position player MVPs since 1932 (the AL voters admitted the possibility of repeat winners at this time, meaning they voted for the player they perceived to be best, as opposed to the best that hadn't yet won), 27 have led the league in RBIs. Another 11 have finished second. Here's an easier way to look at it:


RBI RANKINGS AL MVPs WHO
1st 27 Jimmie Foxx (x3), Hank Greenberg (x2), Joe DiMaggio,
Ted Williams, Al Rosen, Mickey Mantle, Jackie Jensen, Roger Maris (x2),
Brooks Robinson, Frank Robinson, Carl Yastrzemski, Harmon Killebrew,
Dick Allen, Reggie Jackson, Jeff Burroughs, Jim Rice, Don Baylor,
Don Mattingly, George Bell, Jose Canseco, Mo Vaughn,
Ken Griffey Jr., Juan Gonzalez
2nd 11 Lou Gehrig, Joe DiMaggio, Ted Williams, Yogi Berra (x2),
Thurman Munson, George Brett, Juan Gonzalez, Frank Thomas,
Alex Rodriguez, Justin Morneau
3rd 6 Joe DiMaggio, Boog Powell, Fred Lynn, Frank Thomas,
Miguel Tejada, Alex Rodriguez
4th 5 Joe Gordon, Robin Yount, Cal Ripken, Jason Giambi,
Vladimir Guerrero
6th 1 Mickey Mantle
7th 1 Robin Yount
8th 3 Lou Boudreu, Yogi Berra, Elston Howard
9th 1 Cal Ripken
12th 1 Rod Carew
14th 2 Zoilo Versalles, Ivan Rodriguez
15th 1 Mickey Mantle
16th 1 Charlie Gehringer
22nd 1 Nellie Fox
26th 1 Mickey Cochrane
31th 1 Phil Rizzuto
45th 1 Rickey Henderson
48th 1 Ichiro Suzuki


We'll take the National Leaguers separately, since they've had a discrete group of voters. Of 69 NL MVPs since 1929, when Rogers Hornsby became the first repeat winner:


RBI RANKINGS NL MVPs WHO
1st 27 Chuck Klein, Joe Medwick, Dolph Camilli, Stan Musial,
Hank Sauer, Roy Campanella, Hank Aaron, Ernie Banks (x2), Ken Boyer,
Orlando Cepeda, Willie McCovey, Johnny Bench (x2), Joe Torre,
George Foster, Mike Schmidt (x3), Dale Murphy (x2), Andre Dawson,
Kevin Mitchell, Barry Bonds, Jeff Bagwell, Sammy Sosa, Ryan Howard
2nd 7 Frank McCormick, Jackie Robinson, Frank Robinson,
Roberto Clemente, Joe Morgan, Dave Parker, Albert Pujols
3rd 7 Rogers Hornsby, Stan Musial, Roy Campanella (x2),
Willie Mays, Steve Garvey, Ken Caminit, Larry Walker
4th 5 Bob Elliot, Barry Bonds (x3), Jeff Kent
5th 2 Stan Musial, Keith Hernandez
6th 2 Willie Mays, Barry Bonds
7th 1 Ernie Lombardi
8th 2 Phil Cavaretta, Roy Campanella
9th 1 Gabby Hartnett
11th 1 Joe Morgan
13th 1 Frankie Frisch
15th 1 Ryne Sandberg
16th 2 Willie McGee, Kirk Gibson
17th 4 Willie Stargell, Terry Pendleton, Chipper Jones, Barry Bonds
24th 1 Barry Bonds
28th 1 Marty Marion
33rd 1 Dick Groat
36th 1 Pete Rose
37th 1 Barry Larkin
52nd 1 Maury Wills

Whenever the writers are in doubt, they reach for the ol' RBI leaders. Mourneau was No. 2 and Jeter was No. 22. Mauer was No. 35, so he didn't get any consideration at all. That's all that mattered.

The big exceptions are if a leadoff man has an extraordinarily great year with lots of stolen bases and is perceived to be a "catalyst," or if the dominant offensive player is a big, slow, defensively challenged slugger like Harmon Killebrew or Cecil Fielder. In that case the award often goes to a pitcher. In all, there are no hard and fast rules. For each voter, the MVP seems to need to tell a story about what that player's season accomplished.

Most often, RBIs serve as the ideal props for that story, but sometimes other narratives trump them. Arguably, every player to win an MVP while finishing out of the top 10 in RBIs represents a triumph of storytelling. Nellie Fox's defense, Maury Wills' speed, or Pete Rose's grit said more to the voters than did Jackie Jensen's, Tommy Davis's, or Willie Stargell's RBIs.

SINGLED OUT FOR SPECIAL MENTION
Joe Cowley (not the ex-Yank, thanks) of the Chicago Sun Times, listed Jeter sixth behind Morneau, Jermaine Dye, Johan Santana, Frank Thomas, and David Ortiz. He also left Mauer off his ballot and threw a 10th-place vote at A.J. Pierzynski. Special guy. Danny Knobler, representing the Booth Newspapers of Detroit, listed Jeter fourth behind Morneau, Thomas, and Joe Mauer.

Susan Slusser of the San Francisco Chronicle and Joe Roderick of the Contra Costa Times listed Jeter first and Thomas second. Thomas had a great season, but he doesn't play defense and he's the slowest player in the bigs not named Molina. You need a home run to score him from any base. Jason Giambi could lap him. The new "Bill James Handbook" has a section on baserunning. Know how many times Frank Thomas went from first to third on a single last year? Try never. He had 23 chances. Giambi made it four times in as many chances.

Sorry, but a statue can't be an MVP candidate unless he hits like Babe Ruth. Thomas didn't even hit like Thomas.

OLD DOGS LEARN NEW TRICKS/NEW DOGS LEARN OLD MISTAKES
For once it's not the Yankees making a drunken kamikaze splash into free agent waters. Dave Collins. Gary Ward. Andy Hawkins. Tony Womack. Carl Pavano. Jaret Wright. This year it's the other teams making multi-millionaires of mediocrities and locking up middle-aged players until they're senior citizens. The Yankees are showing restraint while everyone else is throwing dollars around as if they were confetti. Truly the world has been turned upside down.

Over the last several days a number of free-agent deals have been consummated (with the market rapidly emptying, is it possible the general managers will have naught to do in Orlando but make trades and ride Splash Mountain?), many of them lacking in restraint. The Reds under Wayne Krivsky made some outlandish deals last year and continue to make them, locking up Mike Stanton for birthdays 40 and 41 (hey, maybe the fans will come out to see him break the games pitched record) and the punchless Alex González (.246/.299/.392 career), apparently a necessity after giving away Felipe López. The Dodgers' five-year deal with Juan Pierre will cripple them for the next half-decade; Pierre doesn't actually do a whole lot that's valuable at any batting average under .330. Alfonso Soriano's eight-year deal will have better results for the Cubs — for a while.

It's encouraging that the Yankees did not sign Soriano just to sign him — having no place to put a player hasn't stopped them in the past — and that in a thin market they're keeping their wallets holstered. The Yankees apparently won't have a Thanksgiving surprise this year and it's a good thing.

The big signings may yet be coming, with multiple insurance policies on the starting rotation. Still, this looks to be a transitional year, with some of the youngsters getting a chance at the fifth and perhaps fourth spot in the rotation. Coming from this team, that's a Thanksgiving surprise in and of itself. [/QUOTE]

edabbs44
11-24-2006, 11:16 AM
Jeter's season is also in the historic ballpark. Few shortstops, including Jeter himself, have hit as well as he did in 2006.

That's my favorite quote of a pretty crazy article.

Wagner, Ripken, ARod, Banks, Larkin, Tejada, Nomar and Yount can all lay claim to at least one season (or in some cases, a multitude of seasons) as being better than Jeter's 2006 campaign.


Susan Slusser of the San Francisco Chronicle and Joe Roderick of the Contra Costa Times listed Jeter first and Thomas second. Thomas had a great season, but he doesn't play defense and he's the slowest player in the bigs not named Molina. You need a home run to score him from any base. Jason Giambi could lap him. The new "Bill James Handbook" has a section on baserunning. Know how many times Frank Thomas went from first to third on a single last year? Try never. He had 23 chances. Giambi made it four times in as many chances.

Sorry, but a statue can't be an MVP candidate unless he hits like Babe Ruth. Thomas didn't even hit like Thomas.

That one is a classic also. Didn't Giambi win a few years back? In 2003, the NY press pushed for Posada to get MVP. He wasn't a speedster or gold glover by any stretch.

westofyou
11-24-2006, 11:26 AM
Wagner, Ripken, ARod, Banks, Larkin, Tejada, Nomar and Yount can all lay claim to at least one season (or in some cases, a multitude of seasons) as being better than Jeter's 2006 campaign.


No doubt


SEASON
MODERN (1900-)
SS

RUNS CREATED/GAME YEAR DIFF PLAYER LEAGUE
1 Arky Vaughan 1935 8.59 13.80 5.20
2 Honus Wagner 1904 7.23 11.64 4.40
3 Honus Wagner 1905 6.56 11.32 4.76
4 Honus Wagner 1907 6.40 10.58 4.17
5 Honus Wagner 1908 6.18 9.90 3.72
6 Honus Wagner 1906 5.62 9.89 4.27
7 Honus Wagner 1903 5.46 10.77 5.31
8 Nomar Garciaparra 2000 5.25 10.75 5.51
9 Honus Wagner 1901 5.13 10.26 5.13
10 Nomar Garciaparra 1999 4.72 10.13 5.40
11 Lou Boudreau 1948 4.61 9.80 5.19
12 Alex Rodriguez 1996 4.53 10.08 5.55
13 Honus Wagner 1909 4.51 8.52 4.01
14 Arky Vaughan 1934 4.41 9.64 5.22
15 Honus Wagner 1902 4.39 8.81 4.42
16 Alex Rodriguez 2000 4.38 9.89 5.51
17 Alex Rodriguez 2001 4.24 9.27 5.04
18 Derek Jeter 1999 4.24 9.64 5.40
19 Arky Vaughan 1936 4.18 9.36 5.19
20 Luke Appling 1936 4.11 10.43 6.32
21 Rico Petrocelli 1969 4.10 8.53 4.43
22 Alex Rodriguez 2002 4.03 8.94 4.91
23 Alan Trammell 1987 4.01 8.96 4.95
24 Honus Wagner 1911 3.87 8.67 4.79
25 Alex Rodriguez 2003 3.73 8.74 5.01
26 Joe Sewell 1923 3.47 8.71 5.24
27 Robin Yount 1982 3.42 7.97 4.54
28 Arky Vaughan 1938 3.42 8.29 4.86
29 Cecil Travis 1941 3.36 8.69 5.33
30 Rogers Hornsby 1917 3.31 7.19 3.87
31 Barry Larkin 1996 3.31 8.37 5.06
32 Barry Larkin 1995 3.21 8.27 5.06
33 Cal Ripken 1991 3.18 7.66 4.48
34 Ernie Banks 1958 3.05 7.96 4.91
35 John Valentin 1995 3.05 8.23 5.19
36 Luke Appling 1943 3.01 7.16 4.15
37 Derek Jeter 2006 2.97 8.20 5.23
38 Barry Larkin 1991 2.95 7.34 4.39
39 Joe Cronin 1938 2.89 8.97 6.07
40 Eddie Joost 1949 2.88 8.07 5.19

Always Red
11-24-2006, 11:38 AM
The '27 Yankees would have made the playoffs without Babe Ruth.

The '27 Yankees would have made the playoffs without Lou Gehrig.

So let's put them 5th and 6th on our MVP ballots for that year.

actually, that did happen quite often, at least to Ruth.

Gehrig did win the MVP in 1927, back when the MVP's were awarded by the league, and not by the sports writers.

It wasn't until 1931 that the BWA began to award the MVP, and Ruth was never once a winner during this time. One could argue that his best years were behind him, of course.

This gives a good explanation of how Ruth was snubbed:http://www.baseballlibrary.com/baseballlibrary/submit/White_Paul3.stm

Ruth did win one MVP, in 1923, when the league awarded it. He finished 5th in 1931, and 6th in 1932, and other than those times, NEVER FINISHED IN THE TOP TEN!

sounds like a major league snub to me, pun intended!

IslandRed
11-24-2006, 11:40 AM
At least that article identified one thing that had crossed my mind: Mauer, not Morneau, is the best Twins position player.

Furthermore, if Mauer and Jeter both had spectacular offensive seasons and both man key defensive positions, shouldn't Mauer get the nod for actually being really good at defense? Outside of star-struck NY writers and the clueless masses who vote for the Gold Glove, I don't know of anyone who thinks Mauer and Jeter are defensive equals.

blumj
11-24-2006, 12:13 PM
That's my favorite quote of a pretty crazy article.

Wagner, Ripken, ARod, Banks, Larkin, Tejada, Nomar and Yount can all lay claim to at least one season (or in some cases, a multitude of seasons) as being better than Jeter's 2006 campaign.


That one is a classic also. Didn't Giambi win a few years back? In 2003, the NY press pushed for Posada to get MVP. He wasn't a speedster or gold glover by any stretch.
I guess now that every year, they have to make up a new arbitrary rule, just to make the process as convoluted as they possibly can. This year, we wind up with Morneau the compromise candidate because the MVP "has to" have loads of HR's and RBIs, can't be a DH, and has to be on a playoff team while performing well in the clutch late in the season. Next year, they'll have to add "can't be slow", making the choosing of the compromise candidate who doesn't break any of their arbitrary rules even more convoluted.