It's almost enough to make you want to root for Arizona.

No, it's not.

Seriously though, the Dodgers have gone 27-21 since trading for Manny, good for the 5th best record in the NL over that period and a 91 win pace.

You can’t see it, can you? It’s there. It’s that invisible, impossible-to-define-or-determine number that represents the intangible. That invisible number that changes the culture of a team inside a clubhouse and spreads itself over an entire city. It’s that number that helps makes major league baseball better and so interesting. Look at the All-Stars Ryan Howard has on his roster; look at the superstars Carlos Delgado has on the Mets; true, Pujols has carried the Cards, but they are in fourth place and the unwritten rule in sports is that the MVP award usually goes to a player on a playoff contender. But Manny Ramirez, in two months, resurrected one of the most important and storied franchises in baseball.

I just wanted you to read it again. 27-21!

See, they may think the Dodgers are winning over that period because of Manny -- what they don't know is that August 1 was also the day I stopped wearing underwear. How'd'ya like them intangibles?

Stop, you're turning Rob Base on.

But Manny Ramirez, in two months, resurrected one of the most important and storied franchises in baseball.

Even if you buy the rest of the argument, what does this have to do with anything? In addition of getting extra (all?) points for being on a contender, do players now get extra points for being on one of those "important" teams?

And it seems like it would have been more impressive if he would have resurrected the Pirates or the Nationals...

I actually feel a little sympathy for Manny, because his full season stats would have been more than enough to win the AL MVP had he stayed with the Red Sox, and would have placed him second behind Pujols in the NL had he played the whole year with the Dodgers. All in all, he's been one of the top five position players in the majors this season, but because of the league switch he may not even get a top ten finish to show for it. It's Mark McGwire 1997 all over again. Sad...

To add on to my last post, Manny's hitting .331/.429/.600 with 36 homers and 117 rbi's. In the American League, that would put him 1st in average, homeruns, slugging, and OPS; 2nd in on base percentage and total bases, and 4th in rbi's. And oh yeah, the Red Sox are making the playoffs. Is there any doubt this season would have won Manny his first MVP?

In the NL, those numbers would have "only" placed him 3rd in average, rbi's, on base percentage, total bases, hits, and OPS; 2nd in slugging, and 4th in homers. While these numbers still aren't as good as Pujols', the Dodgers are making the playoffs, so there's a really good chance Manny would have taken home the trophy in this league as well.

Isn't Manny Ramirez exciting? Doesn't he give us a reason NOT to talk about the Angels, but rather - the Dodgers, an epic franchise with one of the most important and storied histories in all of baseball?

Except he didn't do it in the American League

I think that's sort of the point.

he didn't do it in the American League.

And that's why he's MVP!!

</sportswriter logic>

You can’t see it, can you? It’s there. It’s that invisible, impossible-to-define-or-determine number that represents the intangible. That invisible number that changes the culture of a team inside a clubhouse and spreads itself over an entire city. It’s that number that helps makes major league baseball better and so interesting.

He's got an OPS+ of 217 as a Dodger. He's hitting .399/.493/.751 with 49 RBIs in 48 games. That's not intangible. He's made the Dodgers better because he's batting like Steroid Barry Bonds as a Dodger! Why does there have to be anything more to it than that?

That said, if we're going to give the NL MVP to a player who came to the league midseason from a 2007 ALCS participant, I'd probably be inclined to vote for the big guy up in Cheese Country. Of course, if we're going to take the NL MVP vote seriously, then I would vote for the guy who's batting .348/.453/.631 in 142 NL games so far to lead his team to probably at least 5-10 more wins than most people were expecting out of them.

Kevin's right(geez, did I really say that?) Manny obviously wasn't producing with the Sox at the rate he is now, hence the trade. The speculation is silly. I like Manny and I'm happy to see him rake for anyone else outside of AL east opponents. It'll be interesting what type of deal he ends up with next year.

Don't feel bad for Manny--he got exactly what he wanted.

I wonder how many of the guys who are touting Manny as an MVP candidate were also talking about what a cancer he was when he was traded. I would look it up, but I don't care what these morons think.

I'm beginning to think the Yanks will sign him for 4/80 or something. His year is well beyond what I would have expected but I'm guessing he's benefiting from the new league.

Well of course he's benefiting, Darren. He was an established Major League hitter, and now he gets to ply his wares in the Minors.

Has any generated MLE's yet for the National League?

Srul, check out SOSH sometime. Eric M. Van has calculated that 80 wins in the AL equals 90 wins in the NL. The league difference by his reckoning is about 10 games.

There you go. Now all he needs is for the NL to adopt the DH, and he is set to keep playing for another 6 years.

Just imagine how good Jason Bay and Xavier Nady would be if they had a chance to play in the NL!

My position, stated in the most extreme way to make a point, is that if Albert Pujols has the best season of any player in MLB for 161 days with St. Louis, and is then traded to Kansas City for the last game of the season (which is after the waiver trade deadline, but nevermind), he should be the AL MVP. After all, we're not interested in Pujols' value to the league, or even to his own team. What we're after is the best player (as measured by "strength of offense and defense"). Pujols is the best player, he plays in the American League, therefore he's the AL MVP.

I thought Carlos Beltran should have gotten some down-ballot NL MVP support the year he was traded to Houston, but as I recall he didn't get any NL MVP votes. He did pick up a few votes for AL MVP, for which I thought he should have been ineligible.

(Also, Beltran had more Win Shares in his Houston stint than he did with KC. That is, he was actually more valuable to the National League than he was to the AL, even though I don't think that matters.)

So, if I believed Manny has had a better season than Pujols or Berkman, he'd be my NL MVP.

That doesn't make sense to me, TE. The guy wins the league MVP award. He should be the guy who was most valuable in that league. If you want to go by what team he was valuable to, then it should be the team to which he provided the most value.

That doesn't make sense to me, TE. The guy wins the league MVP award. He should be the guy who was most valuable in that league. If you want to go by what team he was valuable to, then it should be the team to which he provided the most value.

I said on the Sabathia thread that I would consider him for NL Cy Young if he a) pitched demonstrably better in the NL during his time there than anyone else in that league (which he has) and b) pitched better than anyone else in the NL over the course of the season, including his time in the AL (which he hasn't).

When MLB bastardized the game with interleague play, it destroyed a lot of the distinction between the two leagues (and maybe introduced the question of why we need two awards anymore). But it does raise questions such as whether CC's starts against NL teams should figure into his NL Cy Young case? The end result, for me, is that if a guy wins the AL Cy Young for half a season there or the NL MVP for four months of work, so be it.

And none of this changes the fact that Albert is the obvious MVP in the NL.

Just imagine how good Jason Bay and Xavier Nady would be if they had a chance to play in the NL!

I hope Carlos Quentin gets a chance to play in the NL sometime, just so we can see what he's capable of. Josh Hamilton, too.

Kevin(#10) and Hugh(#14) - But you guys are the ones doing the speculation...It's just as ridiculous to assume that Manny would have continued to hit .299/.398/.529 had he stayed with the Sox as it is to assume he'd have hit .399/.493/.751 for the entire season had he begun the year with the Dodgers. There's no reason to project what COULD have happened when we have a full seasons worth of stats that demonstrate what actually DID happen.

By the way, is Manny the best hitter of the MVP era to never win the award? Without bothering to look it up, the only other guys I can think of who may give him a run are Mel Ott and Mark McGwire. I understand that voters don't generally care about defense or positional adjustments so all around players like Biggio or Alomar often get screwed, but I find it pretty unlikely that a guy who puts up Manny's triple crown numbers year after year for perennially contending teams has never came away with the prize.

But you guys are the ones doing the speculation

Maybe a little bit, however our sample size is bigger. Those numbers he put up whilst with the Sox are over a larger part of the season then the numbers with the Dodgers. So logic does suggest that the Red Sox numbers would lend itself to the more consistent behaviour.

Anyway, I don't think he should even be considered for the MVP. Pujols or Berkman should win it.

BTW, you are correct in pointing out how remarkable it is that a guy that good for that long on consistent playoff teams could never win the MVP...its extraordinary when you really think about it. I reckon its because we just expect him to be brilliant every year; oh and that A-rod guy has been pretty good over a similar time frame.

Tuque Snider is the new Gagne_55

Oh? Ok, I barely post anymore here anyway. You can be the new me I guess.

the unwritten rule in sports is that the MVP award usually goes to a player on a playoff contender

What exactly is the distinction between playoff contender and non-contender. The Cardinals were officially eliminated from the Playoffs last night with less than a week left in the season. So they were playing "meaningful" games through most of September. It seems like Pujols followed the "unwritten" rule.

A Pujols >> E Banks

By the way, is Manny the best hitter of the MVP era to never win the award? Without bothering to look it up, the only other guys I can think of who may give him a run are Mel Ott and Mark McGwire. I understand that voters don't generally care about defense or positional adjustments so all around players like Biggio or Alomar often get screwed, but I find it pretty unlikely that a guy who puts up Manny's triple crown numbers year after year for perennially contending teams has never came away with the prize.

Jim Thome's been just as good as Manny, and has gotten much less MVP support.

I hope Carlos Quentin gets a chance to play in the NL sometime, just so we can see what he's capable of.

Quentin did play in the NL but we can't read too much into those numbers. He had to face former AL superstar Barry Zito.

Yet another dumb article by a SBS (Sportswriter Being Sportswriter).

Jim Thome's been just as good as Manny, and has gotten much less MVP support.

I did a double take at this, but they're not too far apart. Manny's got a higher average, Thome's got more walks, but their rate stats are close (.406/.561 to .411/.593).

I thought there would be a big advantage for Manny in the durability department, but aside from Thome's '05, he's cleared 140 games every year but three. Manny has five seasons less than 140 (but none as low as Thome's 59 in '05).

Both had 137-game seasons for Cleveland in 1995 but that was pretty much a full season.

Honestly, I don't get the complete hate for this line of thinking. As a fellow stathead (somewhat), I would still probably give Manny my third place MVP vote if I had one. He's been pretty damn close to superhuman since coming to the Dodgers, and is almost singlehandedly willing them into the playoffs. Still not as good as the two guys who almost singlehandedly willed their respective teams into contention for the entire year (Pujols and Berkman), but there's a pretty decent argument that Manny has had more value to his team than just about anyone else.

Is there any doubt this season would have won Manny his first MVP?

What about when you account for his -81 fielding runs?

Jim Thome's been just as good as Manny, and has gotten much less MVP support.

They are quite similar, but Manny's OPS+ is 155 while Thome's is 148, in essentially the same PA (8994 to 8999). Unless other factors change the picture, that's enough difference for me to give a clear, if small, advantage to the dreadlocked one.

Thome's defensive advantage for his 3B games might be offset by his DH games, and Manny's defense has been thoroughly (if not conclusively) covered here. Let's just say that neither added much with the glove.

Manny had 8 top-10 MVP votes, highest at 3rd, while Thome had 4 with 4th place his best, but I think Manny has overall played on better teams, which might explain that discrepancy. Still, I've never heard laments for either because they didn't win in some particular year (and I hope not to hear any this year).

#35 - I didn't mention defense because the MVP voters rarely do (c'mon, Ryan Howard won just two years ago and is a leading candidate again this season!). I actually don't think think there's ever been a season where Manny SHOULD have won the MVP; I just think it's a little surprising that he never did.

#36 - Exactly. Thome has been close, but Manny's pretty clearly better, albeit only a little bit. And he's two years younger too, so I expect him to widen the gap even more before he calls it quits.

#37 - Kevin, why do you think Manny's Sox numbers this season are what we should have reasonably expected him to do based solely on the fact that "That's what he hit last year." Last season was an off year for Manny. The worst full season of his career, in fact. He just didn't look right until the playoffs. But his total numbers for this season are right on par with what he's done EVERY OTHER FULL SEASON OF HIS CAREER. It doesn't seem reasonable at all to me to assume that 2007 is his true level of ability and that 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, and 2008 are all outliers. Yes, I realize that he's 36 and that any season could be the one where he finally starts to drop off for good, but it's not this year (and apparently it's not last year, either).

So who did win the MVP the year Manny had 165 RBI for a division-winning team?

(Gotta go look this up)... OK, Ivan Rodriguez. And Pedro was second in the vote, with Manny coming in third. And for those of you who thought that RBI + division winner ought to mean the MVP, there's always another surprise.

#36 - Exactly. Thome has been close, but Manny's pretty clearly better, albeit only a little bit. And he's two years younger too, so I expect him to widen the gap even more before he calls it quits.

But we're talking MVP. Thome's best seasons are clearly better than Manny's. Manny has nothing like Thome's 2002, and considering playing time, Thome's 2001 is probably better than manny's best season as well.

Top 2 OPS+ and PA

Thome - 197 613, 170 644

manny - 186 532, 184 518

speaking of MVP... Ryan Howard just made his 18th error of the year, this one leading to four unearned runs. I wonder if the clutch-RBI-luvvers will take away as much credit for this ill-timed blunder as they give him for his fine second half.

But we're talking MVP. Thome's best seasons are clearly better than Manny's. Manny has nothing like Thome's 2002, and considering playing time, Thome's 2001 is probably better than manny's best season as well.

#40 - Sure, but again, I've already said that Manny never deserved the MVP in any particular season. But neither did Thome. Considering position and defense, I'd have rather had A-Rod in both 2001 and 2002. And Giambi was better in 2001 as well.

Whoa! What'd I do wrong? Why is my response in quotations as well?

Honestly, I don't get the complete hate for this line of thinking. As a fellow stathead (somewhat), I would still probably give Manny my third place MVP vote if I had one. He's been pretty damn close to superhuman since coming to the Dodgers, and is almost singlehandedly willing them into the playoffs. Still not as good as the two guys who almost singlehandedly willed their respective teams into contention for the entire year (Pujols and Berkman), but there's a pretty decent argument that Manny has had more value to his team than just about anyone else.

David Wright gonna slap you some.

Whoa! What'd I do wrong? Why is my response in quotations as well?

Whoa! It's like some crazy barber shop mirror thing!