What's that? You think that's ridiculous? You think David Ortiz, Travis Hafner, Jermaine Dye, Jim Thome, Johan Santana, Jason Giambi, Alex Rodriguez, Manny Ramirez, Frank Thomas and countless others are all far more worthy of the MVP award? You know what... you're absolutely right.
Then why is Derek Jeter being mentioned in every debate about the AL MVP?
Like Guillen, Jeter has a high batting average (.345), a great OBP (.416), a moderate amount of homers (13), good amount of stolen bases (31), and plays shortstop for a first place team (current record of 91-59).
Listen, I'm not saying Guillen is just as good as Jeter. Every year, including this one, Jeter has proven himself as the superior player. But when you actually take an objective look at what each player has done this season, is there really much of a difference? A difference significant enough to justify one player being a MVP front runner and another going completely unnoticed? I mean, does anyone outside of Detroit even realize Carlos Guillen exists?
"I'm a person, too!!!"This is the sad state of player awards in MLB. They're based almost completely on hype, popularity, and career achievement. The significance of the Gold Glove died in 1999, when Rafael Palmeiro won it despite playing just 28 games at first base (playing his other 135 as a designated hitter). The MVP became meaningless when Ichiro won it in 2001, with his .381 OBP and 8 HRs. Read those stats again. Three-eighty-one. Eight. If you want to be the MVP and you only hit 8 homers, you better hit like .500 and steal 120 bases. And manage the team. Otherwise, with those type of numbers, no player should ever even be considered for the MVP. And don't even get me started on Mark Redman being an All-Star.
So again, I address the issue of the post. Can there be any legitimate reason why Derek Jeter must be mentioned in any discussion of the AL MVP, while at the same time an argument for Carlos Guillen can be tossed aside as so obviously flawed? Is .033 batting average points really that important? The answer, as it appears to me, is no.
5 comments:
I agree with your discussion of Jeter. You can talk about "leadership" and "intangibles" and "crazy plays," but he's not having an MVP season. And on the Yankees, can any one player really be the MVP? They'd be pretty good without one (or three) of their hitters.
However, I disagree with your comment about Ichiro. I think you can play outstanding defense, be near the top in steals and get on base a ton and be an MVP if your team is good and full of guys who have low averages and decent power. Seattle would be a billion times worse w/o Ichiro.
However that gold glove business is a sham. There ought to be a minimum requirement of 100 games played at a position. Edmonds ain't gonna win a gold glove this year b/c he was hurt. I have no problem with that. That being said, if Alber wins the 1B gold glove (as he should), all is well.
ok, i probably exaggerated about ichiro. if you get 242 hits you should be considered.
but still, if you look at what giambi did the same season, i just can't see how ichiro should win.
giambi
47 doubles
38 homers
2 steals, 0 times caught
.342 avg
.477 obp
played 1B poorly for 102-win team.
ichiro
34 doubles
8 homers
56 steals, 14 times caught
.350 avg
.381 obp
played RF great for 116-win team.
i'm willing to concede ichiro is an immensely better defender. however, i really think that's all he's got on giambi. just look at the on-base rates - .381 v. .477. That's enormous. that's as big a difference between this year's OBP of albert pujols and that of guys like david bell and jacque jones.
ok, here's the part where you're really going to hate me. i've read several reports where, in order for a player to help his team, he has to steal at least 75% of the bases he attempts to steal (i'll put the url for one such report at the end). in 2001, ichiro stole 56 bases and was caught 14 times. that's 70 attempts overall. 75% of 70 is 52.5. So the amount of bases that he stole that actually helped his team was 3.5. compare this to giambi's 2 steals and 0 times caught. so, using the 75% rule, giambi was actually just as helpful as ichiro in the steals department.
ok, now that you officially hate me, i'll conclude. i negated ichiro’s steals, which leaves defense and maybe the 102 vs 116 in team wins. I just don't think those things alone can make up for 30 homers and almost .100 on-base percent points.
http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=2607
So wait, you're lobbying FOR Giambi?
Perhaps my argument that the Yankees didn't rely as much on Giambi as the Mariners did on Ichiro is valid here. It's the Most VALUABLE Player, and as an attorney-in-training I feel obliged to break down the meaning of the terms. Most obviously means most (as opposed to least). Player means it can't be a coach or bullpen catcher, it has to be a player. Therefore, the "discrete issue" is "valuable". The Yanks could do without Giambi whereas the Mariners NEED Ichiro.
Plus Giambi doesn't play half the game (a.k.a. defense) most of the time.
I came up with a project for you. Chris Duncan is getting absolutely no meniton for the Rookie of the Year and everyone says it's because of the great class of rookies. Here is your mission:
1) Come up with your personal all-rookie team (both leagues on one team).
2) Find a website with only rookie stats so I can make my own all-rookie team.
You're right. The Yankees didn't need Giambi. But I think the Athletics - you know, the team he actally played for in 2001 - very much needed him. ;-)
Look at the supporting casts of each team. In '01, Ichiro had help via good-to-great years from Bret Boone, Edgar Martinez, John Olerud and Mike Cameron. And while Giambi had good years out of Chavez and Tejada, Giambi was actually the only Athletic to have both an OBP above .340 and more than 13 HRs. The four Mariners I just mentioned all had at least both those numbers.
Also, Giambi actually started 134 games at first, and only 17 at DH. Although you could have meant "doesn't play" to mean he sucked at first, I wasn't sure.
Finally, the pitching staffs of each team were almost identical. Seattle's team ERA was 3.59, Oakland's was 3.54.
I'm getting this info from...
http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/OAK/2001.shtml
http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/SEA/2001.shtml
And I'd just like to say that I love that we're debating an MVP vote five years after the fact. Seriously, I love this stuff. We should randomly pick years and leagues and debate who should win what.
I'll try and put up an all-rookie team by the weekend.
I don't think the endless MVP debate will work because you've obviously out-researched me (especially since i forgot that Giambi wasn't always with the Yanks). But yeah, awards are always good to discuss.
btw...
NL Cy Young: Chris Carpenter
NL MVP: Albert Pujols
NL Comback player: Scott Rolen
NL Rookie of the Year: Chris Duncan
I'm not biased, am I?
Post a Comment