Uh...wow? David Wright wasn't even close?

Congrats Jimmy! A little surprised Howard finished higher than Utley, and that Rowand didn't pull a few more 8th to 10th place votes.

David Wright not mentioned on 4 ballots? That is assuming that they didn't handwrite "Not David Wright" on the ballot.

Boasts his is the team to beat in it's division, then goes out and wins the MVP leading them to it. Regardless of whether he deserves the award, you have to recognize he had an impressive year.

Pujols ninth is a joke; there's a good argument to be made he deserves the award, and he's pretty clearly a top three guy. Oh well.

I don't think he makes the top 5 if he doesn't make that prediction. David Wright absent form 5 ballots is strange.

From the voting, it looks like everyone sent in their ballot after the Phillies won the division, but before the Rockies won the playoff game.

I'm not unhappy about this award. I know this is a lame justification, but Jimmy Rollins is a very likable player who had one of the best, if not the best seasons in the NL this year. Good for the good guy. David Wright, FWIW, was the Win Shares MVP:

2007 Wright D NYN 34
2007 Pujols A STL 32
2007 Cabrera M FLA 30
2007 Holliday M COL 30
2007 Ramirez H FLA 29
2007 Utley C PHI 28
2007 Rollins J PHI 28
2007 Fielder P MIL 28
2007 Maroth M STL -6

Well, the BBWAA had to have one silly vote this year.

Pujols ninth is a joke; there's a good argument to be made he deserves the award, and he's pretty clearly a top three guy. Oh well.

If he had a good hype man, he would've finished top 3.

2007 Wright D NYN 34

I'll bet none of those came in the last 10 days of the season!

"wahh wahhh a Met didn't win"

There - that oughtta save about 15-20 people from posting.

2006 - Ryan Howard
2007 - Jimmy Rollins

So . . . Chase Utley next year?

Howard over Chipper is amusing, but who cares about the lower places anyway.

Worst individual votes (can we find out who voted for who?):
David Wright, 8th or worse (on five ballots)
Chipper Jones, no vote (on 11 ballots)
Albert Pujols, no vote (on 13 ballots)
Jose Valverde, all votes (5 ballots, including one for 5th place)
Alfonso Soriano, 3rd (1)
Eric Byrnes, all votes (15)

it looks like everyone sent in their ballot after the Phillies won the division, but before the Rockies won the playoff game.

I'm pretty sure they were required to do this (well, they were required to submit their ballots before the Rockies-Padres playoff game). With a vote this close, it seems pretty possible that the voting deadline cost Holliday the award.

I'll bet none of those came in the last 10 days of the season!

You mean when he hit .409/.469/.455? Yeah, probably.

This is Lassus, broadcasting from under a bridge down near Bowling Green. I don't know if anyone can hear me, but if you can, we're all in grave danger. Pick up your valuables, grab your children, some bottled water, some food, some bandages and medical supplies, and get the hell out of here before Sam shows up. God be with you all.

Is Sam going to say that it's odd that Jose Reyes didn't get any votes?

I'm pretty sure they were required to do this (well, they were required to submit their ballots before the Rockies-Padres playoff game). With a vote this close, it seems pretty possible that the voting deadline cost Holliday the award.

If you RTFA you will see that "The voters on the NL Most Valuable Player Award committee filed ballots after the regular season, and most took the option of waiting until Rockies' one-game playoff win over the Padres."

2006 - Ryan Howard
2007 - Jimmy Rollins

So . . . Chase Utley next year?

It goes 3-6-9. Victorino's next.

This is Lassus, broadcasting from under a bridge down near Bowling Green. I don't know if anyone can hear me, but if you can, we're all in grave danger. Pick up your valuables, grab your children, some bottled water, some food, some bandages and medical supplies, and get the hell out of here before Sam shows up. God be with you all.

After the great Pujols/Howard massacre of 2006, I'm hunkered down already.

You mean when he hit .409/.469/.455? Yeah, probably.

He sure as #### threw that ball away. That one throw probably cost him a whole bunch of points.

Jeter got hosed at 24 too. It sucks amd I feel for Wright's fans.

That said, congrats J-Ro!

Carlos Marmol got a vote? Alfonso Soriano got a third place vote? Some people didn't vote for David Wright? Is any of that even legal?

A good year for the BBWAA. They nailed both Cy Youngs, both ROYs, and the AL MVP. Their most questionable choice was the NL MVP, which was somewhat reasonable.

"wahh wahhh a Met didn't win"

There - that oughtta save about 15-20 people from posting.

So it isn't going to stop the Mets fans from saying that Utley should have won?

Is Sam going to say that it's odd that Jose Reyes didn't get any votes?

He got a 6th, 2 7ths a 9th and a 10th.

http://www.baseballwriters.org/awards/2007/2007_NL_mvp.html

A good year for the BBWAA. They nailed both Cy Youngs, both ROYs, and the AL MVP. Their most questionable choice was the NL MVP, which was somewhat reasonable.

They didn't nail the NL ROY. I think they got it wrong, but, at best, they got it half right.

F*ck Rollins. He wasn’t even the most valuable player on his team. Ryan Howard hit 47 homers (second in the league) and drove in 136 runs (first in the league). Rollins, leading off in a dynamite lineup and in a bandbox of a home ballpark, only posted an on-base percentage of .344, which is less than such luminaries as Shawn Green, Randy Winn, Rod Barajas, and Edwin Encarnacion. True, Rollins hit the ball hard (for a shortstop) by hitting 30 home runs and slugging .531, and ran well by stealing 41 bases. This is not saying he wasn’t an excellent player. But a MVP resume it is not.

Let's play player A and player B for a second:

Rollins: .296/.344/.531, 30 HR, 139 Runs, 94 RBI, 41 SB
Player A: .276/.353/.525, 33 HR, 93 Runs, 112 RBI, 23 SB

Rollins wins MVP with 353 points. Player A gets six points. Player A plays the best centerfield in the league and won a Gold Glove. Of course, player A is Carlos Beltran. I don't think Beltran should have gotten MVP consideration - so why on earth did Rollins?

If you like slugging from players who play important defensive positions, check out the following: Ryan Braun, .634; Chipper Jones, .604; Chase Utley, .566; Hanley Ramirez, .562; Aramis Ramirez, .549; David Wright, .546.

Come on people. Holliday, Fielder, Wright, Howard, Utley, and Pujols were all better votes. This is a travesty. People will look back at this vote in twenty years and wonder "wtf?"

I don't think it's at all clear who the best player in the NL actually was. And if there's gonna be a bad vote, I'd at least rather it be a shortstop with a very well-rounded game than a George Bell/Juan Gonzalez type. So I'm ok with this.

I'll note two obvious points...

1. The Rollins-is-deserving argument depends a lot more on total contribution than on rate stats, which I think is a perfectly defensible way to look at the MVP.

2. If there's a possibility of a tie as of Game 162, they should push back the day to send in your ballot accordingly.

They definitely got the NL RoY wrong, Tulowitski should have won in a landslide if defense was considered at all.

I thought Wright was the clear MVP, with Pujols and Holliday also close.

If Magglio Ordonez is competing for the NL MVP, where does he finish in the voting?

If Jimmy Rollins is competing for the AL MVP, where does he finish in the voting?

thetailor - I guess defense really isn't that high on your consideration list? You are saying there's any amount of defense that can make up for a CF that basically hit as well as a SS? I don't get that at all. I think you are way off base here.

chemdoc, I actually thought the NL had much better MVP candiates than the AL this year, except for ARod. I had Granderson second in the AL. At least 5 NL players were better than him.

Come on people. Holliday, Fielder, Wright, Howard, Utley, and Pujols were all better votes. This is a travesty. People will look back at this vote in twenty years and wonder "wtf?"

In twenty years, they'll look back at 2007, in the heart of the 8 Mets division titles in 10 years, and say that about the whole season.

thetailor - I guess defense really isn't that high on your consideration list? You are saying there's any amount of defense that can make up for a CF that basically hit as well as a SS? I don't get that at all. I think you are way off base here.

This would be a stronger point if the CF in question wasn't Carlos Beltran.

If he'd played all year, I would've wanted Utley to win, but he missed a month. He wasn't 20% better when he did play than the other were.

Is Sam going to say that it's odd that Jose Reyes didn't get any votes?

Are you going to continue to be an ass?

Sorry, but Beltran isn't close to as valuable as Rollins defensively, I don't care how good he is out there.

I'm really surprised the two Detroit sportswriters didn't manage to sneak in a few votes for Curtis Granderson.

Did anyone read that article Posnanski wrote this week where he mentioned that the Zoilo Versailles MVP vote wasn't as bad as everyone thinks it is? I got a kick out of that.

Okay, I'm not quite as upset about the Rollins thing as I sound. I can see it. Its defensible. But its wrong. And saying things like... well at least its not a *horrible* MVP... really stops the discussion in a bad way.

I have absolutely no issue with this vote. Maybe I am wrong, but I have no issue rewarding a great story. Rollins' story was the best and he had an excellent year.

For the record, I don't think Rollins was a terrible selection, either. My point is that the entire season, in the midst of the Mets' 2006-2016 dynasty, will stick out like 1959 does for the Yankees.

Are you going to continue to be an ass?

yep - it's fun to see the responses from people who get all bent out of shape. Having the Phillies pass the Mets for the division was a joyous day. The pain that Met fan was feeling has probably started to dissipate. Therefore, they need a periodic booster shot. Rollins winning the MVP qualifies. I wear my 2007 NL East Champs T-shirt to work once a week, just to remind Dial that the Mets lost.

There have been far worse votes; this isn't the Andre Dawson MVP. Rollins led the league in Runs, and voters like that kind of thing (Jeter finished high in the AL MVP voting in 1998, when he had the Runs trophy, for instance). Rollins didn't deserve the MVP but he was certainly one of the 10 most valuable players in the NL, and he had an excellent season. If not for getting hurt, this was Utley's, and Wright had a legitimate claim, but there was no one obvious, runaway choice like there was in the AL this year.

If Rollins doesn't make that ****ing preseason statement, he never wins this award.

Well, what cay you do. Rollins had a good year, but I would have had him about 7th on my imaginary ballot. David Wright got hosed. Not the worst vote ever, but Rollins and Holliday had the good story arcs. Certainly a lo t better than last year's voting.

chemdoc, I actually thought the NL had much better MVP candiates than the AL this year, except for ARod. I had Granderson second in the AL. At least 5 NL players were better than him.

I think both of those positions are reasonable. I'm not sure I'd agree completely with you, but the arguments behind those positions are decent ones.

(Jeter finished high in the AL MVP voting in 1998, when he had the Runs trophy, for instance).

You say this as though Jeter wasn't one of the 5 or so best players in the AL that year.

I wear my 2007 NL East Champs T-shirt to work once a week, just to remind Dial that the Mets lost.

How do you fit it in, between all your Eagles, Phillies, 76ers and Flyers championship t-shirts? Do you have a rotation?

Bad choice, but not outrageously bad.

If Rollins doesn't make that ****ing preseason statement, he never wins this award.

But he did. And just because we can't quantify the effect it had on the Phillies doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

I agree this wasn't an awful choice. I preferred Wright, but the difference between them isn't that much. It's not like the Morneau pick, when he wouldn't have even been on my ballot.

Carlos Marmol got a vote? I find that fascinating!

This is the first I'd even heard of that statement (I guess I don't pay attention like I used to) and I spend 5 days in Clearwater at spring training, went to a few games, even got some pictures of Howard, Rollins and Victorino hanging out near the Tiki Bar in LF after a game.

I can't believe Brandon Webb is third among Diamondbacks. More than any other player on any good team this year, IMO, Webb was the difference between contention and nowheresville.

And I love the tenth place vote for Carlos Marmol. Rock on, setup man.

Speaking of Carlos Marmol, I know nobody really buys into the similarity scores at bbref, but his comparables through age 24 are pretty fugly:

Johnny Ruffin (989)
John Wetteland (984)
Jim Ray (983)
Dickie Noles (981)
Frank Gabler (980)
Bob Scanlan (980)
Jack Banta (980)
Ramon Monzant (979)
Diego Segui (978)
Ken Sanders (978

Oof.

Jimmy Rollins set the NL single-season record for total bases by a shortstop. That's pretty impressive.

Best Regards

John

The Rollins-is-deserving argument depends a lot more on total contribution than on rate stats, which I think is a perfectly defensible way to look at the MVP

But of course Rollins's total contribution includes 527 outs. More contribution at a low rate of OBP equals more negative contribution.

This award is somewhat like Ken Boyer's in 1964: no doubt that it was a fine season, and the MVP led the league in an important category for a team that had a great stretch run, but if the final standings had been slightly different, the award would have been very different. It underscores again that MVP does not equal the best individual player in the league. Often it doesn't, and that's OK -- I mean, there's nothing wrong with a Key Player on a First-Place Team award -- but people should point out when that player isn't also the best player.

in the midst of the Mets' 2006-2016 dynasty

2007 is in the midst of that date range? Did Jimmy Rollins win MVP in the midst of the 21st century?

Well, that's two consecutive MVP awards given to undeserving Phillies. Perhaps, one of these years, it may even go to the one guy on that team who could actually earn one, Chase Utley.

FWIW, Harris, in 2006 I thought it should have gone to Pujols, NOT a Met (Beltran being the leading Mets' candidate). So there was no crying over it not going to a Met.

This year, it's at least understandable under the usual grounds that the voters prefer a guy who plays for a team that makes the post-season, and the Mets screwed it up. But of course, even if the Mets had won two more games and held up the Phillies, the writers still would have given it to Rollins, so that is a limited defense of the whole thing.

Whatever. David Wright is the best player in the league, and the true MVP in 207. I don't really need the writers to agree with me in that view. Congrats to Rollins.

You say this as though Jeter wasn't one of the 5 or so best players in the AL that year.

It was a comment on the voting, not on the merits. In 1998, Jeter finished 3rd in MVP voting when he led the AL in Runs. In 1999, when Jeter clearly had a better year (and would've been a fine choice for MVP), he finished 6th in MVP voting when he was tied for 2nd in Runs. In 1999, Alomar led the AL in Runs (also having a terrific all-around season) and finished 3rd in the MVP vote. Voters like a player who leads the league in RBI, HR, AVG or RUNS. This is not exactly news. Leading the league in Runs carries the least weight of the four, but it can help a scrappy, top-of-the-order hitter like Rollins.

So it isn't going to stop the Mets fans from saying that Utley should have won?

As a Met fan, Utley would have been a much better choice than Rollins.

I dunno I kinda think any vote for Ryan Howard--much less a 5th overall--would pretty much define "worst" votes for this year.

I know Rollins used up a couple-three outs this year, but this is probably a better choice than 7 out of 10.

Jake Peavy 7th actually speaks well of the BBWAA. Oh, wait, it's the BBWAA. Dumb lucky. But seeing a pitcher treated fairly is cool.

Carlos Marmol? Seriously? Are you having a laugh?

2007 is in the midst of that date range? Did Jimmy Rollins win MVP in the midst of the 21st century?

Means during or at the same time as. So yes, 2007 is in the midst of 2006-2016. And yes, Rollins won in the midst of the 21st century.

But of course, even if the Mets had won two more games and held up the Phillies, the writers still would have given it to Rollins, so that is a limited defense of the whole thing.

I don't think this is true, Sam. Mets hold off the Phils, New York overcame the late challenge from their bullpen, saved by Wright's .462 BA. I think he would have taken home the award.

I thought then, and now, that only missing the playoffs would have denied him the award.

By Batting Runs above average, NOT a rate stat, takes into account baseruning:

Utley: 44
Rollins : 28
Howard: 38


Holliday: 49
Wright: 58
Chipper: 56
Prince: 49
Albert: 55

<edit: BRAA is not position adjusted>

>25. thetailor Posted: November 20, 2007 at 02:58 PM (#2621600)
F*ck Rollins.

Lemme see. Beltran, Ramirez, Ramirez, Chipper, Braun, Chase, Hanley and Wright all play important defensive positions.

Rollins? Wasn't he the DH? I forget.

But of course Rollins's total contribution includes 527 outs. More contribution at a low rate of OBP equals more negative contribution.

I was not aware that the Phillies had some other SS option who could give them better than a .344 OBP. Who was he?

There is no way that Rollins was providing a "negative contribution." What he was doing, was contributing less positive contribution per plate appearance than the other very best players in the entire league. Fine. But in the specific context of the MVP voting -- the most valuable player in the past 162 games -- I think it's perfectly reasonable to say he can make it up with playing time, much like Sabathia can be worse per inning than Beckett but still deserve the Cy more because he threw more innings. Did Rollins do so? I dunno. But it was probably pretty close.

But of course, even if the Mets had won two more games and held up the Phillies, the writers still would have given it to Rollins, so that is a limited defense of the whole thing.

I don't at all know that this is true. If the Mets make the playoffs, Wright becomes a completely different candidate in the writers' eyes, IMO. We'll never know, obviously. But, this Met fan both feels that Wright would have been more deserving than Rollins, and, knowing that no Met was ever gonna win given the way the voters think and the way that the Mets lost, is ok with it being Rollins.

#59

I agree with you.

If you're not going to vote for Wright or Utley, I don't have a problem with Rollins.

>Did anyone read that article Posnanski wrote this week where he mentioned that the Zoilo Versailles MVP vote wasn't as bad as everyone thinks it is? I got a kick out of that.

Not sure if you mean that this is wrong.

I was there. It wasn't as bad as everyone thinks. In fact, it was correct.

As a compromise, I propose that Rollins keep his MVP award, but that every MLB team retire the number 5 in honor of Wright.

I don't at all know that this is true. If the Mets make the playoffs, Wright becomes a completely different candidate in the writers' eyes, IMO.

Which is nuts, IMO.

Not saying Wright should have been MVP... but I think you'd be surprised how many people who apparently stopped paying attention sometime in September '06 think Wright is an overrated product of NY hype. I'm sure there are plenty of writers who never watch Mets games who think exactly that.

I told a number of people this past summer "I don't think you know just how good he's been."

If the Mets make the playoffs, Wright becomes a completely different candidate in the writers' eyes, IMO.

No, the script was written about the Mets and Wright's candidacy long before the outcome was known. He was doomed even if they'd held on; Rollins had gotten credit just for inspiring the Phillies' charge, and was going to win (or at least finish in the top two with Holliday) regardless of the actual result of the division race. Wright would have finished higher, no doubt -- leapfrogging Fielder -- but his ceiling was third.

They were 4 for 6 on the big awards.

I predicted they would get the NL MVP wrong, but not THIS wrong. I can't see Rollins as being above 5th or 6th. I figure Wright was the corect choice but good arguments could be made for Holliday or Pujols. This is out of nowhere.

This breaks Pujols' streak of 6 years finishing in the top 4. Damn.

Fielder and Howard are shockingly high - neither would have made my hypothetical ballot.

Was Rollins' runs scored per time reached base (52%) historically high? Yes, being leadoff helps as does having good hitters behind you, but others certainly have had those advantages over the years as well. I suspect you could make up a junk stat, say "Runs Scored divided by OBP" (Rolins 2007 = 404) where Jimmy's season is in the top X of all-time.

Is this legal?

It goes 3-6-9. Victorino's next.

No, it looks like Jayson Werth. Victorino surely is going to move to center.
Ryan Howard got votes? I'm floored, especially with the strikeout record.

This would be a stronger point if the CF in question wasn't Carlos Beltran.

Errr, why do people hate Beltran?

Sorry, but Beltran isn't close to as valuable as Rollins defensively, I don't care how good he is out there.

Are you saying that no CF can ever be worth as much as a decent SS? Or are you saying that Jimmy Rollins has some ineffable quality which makes him the best defensive player, regardless of results?

I don't think this was all that bad a vote (and it's mostly because of the preseason statement), but it's easy to come up with 5 players more valuable than Rollins this year under almost any metric.

OK, just checked. No one since 1900 playing a minimum of 100 games has had a higher ratio of runs to OBP than Rollins did this year. Previous high was Al Simmmons in 1932, 144 runs scored, .368 OBP. Alltime mark is Patsy Donovans' 1894 when he scored 145 runs on a .344 OBP.

FWIW.

So, how much a better baserunner was Rollins than normal, and how much was circumstance?

Fielder and Howard are shockingly high - neither would have made my hypothetical ballot.

Here was my BBTF ballot:

Wright
Pujols
Peavy
Utley
Cabrera
Ramirez
Holliday
Beltran
Rollins
Fielder

The Rockies had a good shot at three major postseason awards, and whiffed on all three of them, although Holliday did get the Silver Slugger as a sort of booby prize. After Tulowitzki lost the Gold Glove and the Rookie of the Year, though, I was completely unsurprised by Holliday's loss here -- in fact, I was surprised he came as close as he did. But he didn't deserve it nearly as much as Tulo deserved his two.

Rollins was probably on base via fielder's choice a lot more than usual because of his speed and the number of outs he made. I think you'd need to include that in an analysis that measured his baserunning.

So, how much a better baserunner was Rollins than normal, and how much was circumstance?

Bill James has him as the 2nd best baserunner in the NL, slightly behind Reyes.

How about the eye-searing green background on that baseballwriters.org page?

no way that Rollins was providing a "negative contribution." What he was doing, was contributing less positive contribution

More negative, less positive; Roma, Plum; Russet, Idaho:)

No, completely 100% different. But I appreciate the effort it took to wrench my remarks so far out of context that you could tie them to that.

I think Utley, had he not been injured, might well have won the MVP. Then again, had he not been injured, the Phils win the East by 6-7 games.

My top three finished 4th, 9th, and 8th.

I like Tulo as much as the next guy, but a third place vote?

Then again, had he not been injured, the Phils win the East by 6-7 games.

A little hyperbolic, perhaps? And besides, Iguchi had a wonderful month as Utley's replacement -- IMO, the Phillies hardly missed him.

Sam - Dial is still infuriated about Howard winning last year instead of Beltran. That's more a poke at him. As for Howard last year - hitting 58 HR with an avg >0.300 is going to get you an MVP regardless. I'm not a stat head or a sabr guy but how many people have hit >50 HR and batted >.300 and not won an MVP? If so did they lose to another person who achieved the same feat?

As for Rollins - I'm happy to see that he won it as I'm a Phillies fan. My FPV would have gone for Holliday. 2/3 of the triple crown (I think) and not like he won the batting title with a 314 avg. It wasn't Gwynnesque, but respectable.

Wright had a nice year. He's probably more likely to win it next year than is Rollins. My take on him is that he's kind of 'sterile'. Ask somebody from LA to give and adjective for David Wright and I bet they scratch their head. Just needs some more publicity for a little longer. He's an awesome all around player and I sure as hell wish he played 3B in philly instead of the circus we've had post Rolen (or post-Schmidt if you add in Rolen's reception in Philly). Wright will get his chances.

When I was first scrolling through BTF I thought the headline was saying that Jimmy Rollins got some votes today in the MVP election. I thought it was just a continuation of the Mags type shenanigan articles being written. Then I looked again and saw that Jimmy actually won the darn thing. Couldn't believe it. Never saw that coming.

Years from now I'm thinking the 2007 NL MVP elextion is going to be that blank spot in most peoples memory when trying to recall past MVP's. I'm also betting another SS suffers from the same problem.

I appreciate the effort it took to wrench my remarks

Not at all! I was talking about and for myself. I don't distinguish "more negative" from "less positive": it's a game, you're either out or safe, and one is bad and the other is good. If you want to frame the issue differently, that's quite OK.

Pujols had a relatively off-season for his career which hurt him.

I'm putting all you Mets in the filter except Sam.

You can't pull for a NY team and whine. It's against the rules.

Not at all!

Yes at all, because you didn't respond to my points that Rollins' offensive production is better than any "replacement player" under any reasonable definition of that term; that his production per at-bat can only be construed as "negative" if the term "positive" is limited to the handful of very best players in the entire league*; and that if you construe "value" as the raw total of value provided in the season, which is an exceedingly reasonable thing to do with respect to a Most Valuable Player award, then playing time can make up for differences in production per opportunity, as we saw with the '07 AL Cy Young. You ignored all of that in order to make your "cute"/condescending post, and then you did it again a second time to make another one.

* I assume I don't have to point out here that production <> OBP.

Congratulations to Rollins. Reminds me of Dick Groat winning in 1960 where being a feisty leader was the main talking point.

Rollins had a fine season to go with his scrappiness.

I am glad for Prince though 3rd place is too high. Clearly.

Rollins had a fine season to go with his scrappiness.

Don't you mean raw athleticsm?

You ignored all of that in order to make your "cute"/condescending post, and then you did it again a second time to make another one

Actually, I can do that almost indefinitely :-D

No, really, this is like, just chat on a Primer thread, I don't think it's a real serious philosophical dispute. I said in #55 that Rollins had a fine season, which is true. He also made a huge number of outs, and others had pointed out his mediocre OBP. I am sorry if I offended you.

hmm my comment about hitting 300 w/ 50 hrs winning an MVP was way off.

It appears most people to achieve that HAVE NOT won the MVP. Not what I would have expected.

# Hrs/Player/Yr/MVP finish
64 Sammy Sosa, Chicago (N.L.) 2001 0.328 2
58 Hank Greenberg, Detroit (A.L.) 1938 0.315 3
57 Luis Gonzalez. Arizona (N.L.) 2001 0.325 3
57 Alex Rodriguez, Texas (A.L.) 2002 0.300 2
54 Ralph Kiner, Pittsburgh (N.L.) 1949 0.310 4
52 Jim Thome, Cleveland (A.L.) 2002 0.304 7
51 Ralph Kiner, Pittsburgh (N.L.) 1947 0.313 6
51 John Mize, New York (N.L.) 1947 0.302 3
51 Willie Mays, New York (N.L.) 1955 0.319 4
50 Albert Belle, Cleveland (A.L.) 1995 0.317 2
50 Sammy Sosa, Chicago (N.L.) 2000 0.320 9

(Doesn't include the Babe Ruth seasons with no place finish when he didn't win MVP)

Don't you mean raw athleticsm?

Rollins is black, but he's also short.

<brains of sportswriters spontaneously explode>