|
|
|
|
Baseball Primer Newsblog— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand
Sunday, August 16, 2009
And look for Teixeira to keep flashing his bogus Montanezy olé catches to blind the voters!
Joe Mauer is a great player. His overall numbers are slightly better than Teixeira, especially when you look at OPS and OPS+. The fact that the Minnesota Twins are under .500 should disqualify him immediately.
The difference between the Red Sox and Yankees very well could be Teixeira. He is outstanding on both sides of the ball and a positive influence in the clubhouse. You already know my issues with UZR, so I won’t even get into his comparison to Miguel Cabrera and Justin Morneau defensively. The MVP should be a player that contributes to a winning team, not possess the best overall statistics. Mark Feinsand had a great point on twitter last night when he said that the “Hank Aaron award should be voted on by the writers as the hitting equivalent to the Cy Young and be separate from the MVP”. Give the best offensive player their own designation.
We still have six weeks left in the regular season and obviously things can change. Who knows, maybe the Yankees collapse and fall out of the pennant race? Unlikely, but anything is possible. During that same time maybe Minnesota makes a run and wins the AL Central behind Mauer. All I am saying is that there is no way, as of today, you can give this award to anyone but Teixeira. That is, if you look at the award correctly, which is what player is most valuable to his team, not the one that compiles the best numbers.
|
Bookmarks
You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.
Hot Topics
Newsblog: Matschulat: Did I Miss The "Paul Konerko Is So Overrated OMG" Bandwagon? (28 - 5:47am, May 26)Last: SnowboyNewsblog: T.R. Sullivan: Of Frank Robinson, Milt Pappas and Jim Palmer (9 - 5:29am, May 26)Last: bjhankeNewsblog: HP: Baseball is leaving the human factor behind (59 - 5:24am, May 26)Last: bjhankeNewsblog: Bud Selig -- No need for more MLB replay for now - ESPN (87 - 3:55am, May 26)Last: Athletic Supporter leads the nation in driftersNewsblog: OT: NBA Monthly Thread, May 2012 (1834 - 3:06am, May 26)Last: SpiveyNewsblog: Himrich’s Top Ten Target Field Foods (8 - 2:43am, May 26)Last: Long John McCaine Mutiny on the Bounty (scott)Newsblog: Boston.com: Curt Schilling’s 38 Studios lays off all staff (119 - 1:28am, May 26)Last: Swedish ChefNewsblog: Wilmoth: Nate McLouth Designated For Assignment (12 - 12:25am, May 26)Last: TriponHall of Merit: Most Meritorious Player: 1973 Discussion (15 - 12:13am, May 26)Last: DanGNewsblog: The Hall of Very Good: Former Cards Slugger Critical of "LaRussa's Regime" (4 - 11:26pm, May 25)Last: cardsfanboyNewsblog: CSN to host ‘Phillies at the Beach’ on Memorial Day (18 - 11:25pm, May 25)Last: Fielder's the first baseman, Felder is the fielderHall of Merit: Most Meritorious Player: 1972 Ballot (28 - 11:25pm, May 25)Last: lieiamSox Therapy: A Winning Ballclub? (20 - 11:24pm, May 25)Last: DanNewsblog: TBO: Nerdy Rays head north (17 - 10:07pm, May 25)Last: PreservedFishNewsblog: Dodgers want to host NHL's Winter Classic (22 - 9:38pm, May 25)Last: Cris E
|
|
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
Teixeira - .200/.367/.371
Mauer - .000/.000/.000
I love the hand waving. "Slightly better"? Since when is 61 points of OBP (.446-.385), 68 points of SLP (.630-.562), and 43 points of OPS+ (188-145) merely slightly better? Subtract those points from Tex and he's at .324/.494 ~102 OPS+. Are Tex's numbers merely slightly better than Paul Konerko's?
Which is like saying that if Renee Fleming is singing at the Nowheresville Opera Festival, she's not as good a singer as Sally Nobody at La Scala. This has never made any sense to me. The MVP should be the guy whom, with perfect hindsight, you'd have drafted #1 to start the previous season from scratch. If you argue that Teix's durability made him the better pick than Mauer, that's one thing. But if you admit you'd have drafted Mauer, then how can you argue that Teix was more valuable?
Look, nowhere in the MVP election criteria does it say the winner has to be from a division winner. And really, I find it hilarious that in the most dictionary sense of the word , "valuable", someone would choose Tex with New York Yankees all star cast around him more valuable than Mauer.
For goodness' sake, look at their IF.Punto ? Harris? Casilla? Its a ####### miracle they are even in contention.
I will go one step further. To quote Mark Feinsand, Twins were .500 w/out Mauer, under .500 with him. How is that an MVP? Don't you think Minny can lose without Mauer in the lineup just as well as with him?
I love Joe Mauer, don't get me wrong.
Think back to 1997 when Larry Walker got the MVP over Piazza - wasn't that equally unfair? Piazza leads him team to the playoffs, Walker gets an assist from the rarefied air and Piazza played at Dodger Stadium an pitchers park.
It should go to a player that helps his team win. Create a separate award for the best offensive player, silver slugger, whatever. MVP is not like the Cy Young, completely different and everyone here is treating it like the Cy Young.
If we take a broad view of winning teams - say NY, Boston, Tampa, Detroit, Chicago, Anaheim/LA, Texas, and Seattle then:
Teixera's up there. Has he played better than Cabrera? Longoria? Youkilis?
I mean, Longoria has more RBIs and plays 3B very well. Youkilis's position switching has been incredibly valuable to the Red Sox this year. Cabrera's putting up better numbers in a much tougher park for hitters. Cabrera's definitely not as good a fielder, but he starts out with a big edge on offense.
Aside from their position in the standings, you provided a perfect example of why Mauer should be the MVP. Unless you think position in the standings is everything.
Precisely. How does Mauer not help his team win? "Helping his team win" does not equal "being the best hitter on a pennant contender".
Edit: The Dodgers didn't go to the playoffs in 1997, so I fail to see anything in your example that points to Tex.
The Yankees could easily be in first place without Tex as well. So how is he valuable?
Do you honestly think Juan Miranda at 1B would have the same impact offensively and defensively than Teixeira? If Teixeira goes to Boston the Sox are in the Yankees position.
Look at his OPS the two times he has been in a pennant race, both over 1.000. Look at what he did in the playoffs last year, over 1.000.
The guy has been a winner and changes the dynamic around here wherever he has gone. That clearly is an MVP.
Mauer is a great player, and if Minny improves and makes a run at this, I will change my mind. As of today Teixeira is the MVP in my book not Mauer.
Talk to me in mid September and lets see how things shake out. If Mauer hits .400 and Minny wins the WC or Division, than you have to look at this a bit different.
On August 16th, Teixeira hands down, I can't see how anyone could pick anyone else?
And the Yankees are .900 in games with Mariano Rivera and just .433 in games without him so clearly he is the most valuable player ever. Or, you could just concede that your point is ridiculous and dependent upon teammates.
<Cough>Texas</Cough>... or wait, that was probably A-Rod's fault.
I'll go one step further and say that Minnesota would lose even better with out Mauer in the lineup.
Think back to 1997 when Larry Walker got the MVP over Piazza - wasn't that equally unfair? Piazza leads him team to the playoffs, Walker gets an assist from the rarefied air and Piazza played at Dodger Stadium an pitchers park.
So because that was a lousy decision, you have to follow the same pattern again?
It should go to a player that helps his team win. Create a separate award for the best offensive player, silver slugger, whatever. MVP is not like the Cy Young, completely different and everyone here is treating it like the Cy Young.
There is plenty of precedent in the history of the MVP vote to give it to guys having historically great seasons, even if their team is lousy. A-rod in 03 is a prime, recent, AL example of this. Mauer is having possibly the greatest offensive season as a catcher ever and is about to win his THIRD batting title as a catcher. This is not Grady Sizemore in 06 (just a standard great year on a bad team) we are talking about, this is a season for the ages. I can't see why anyone wouldn't want to recognize that in every way possible.
Thanks Mike Fransilvasesa!...:)
You're double counting his value there. And even then it's not enough to cause a 15-game swing in the standings.
Me too, where do I sign for my $160 mil?
Mauer is a great player, and if Minny improves and makes a run at this, I will change my mind. As of today Teixeira is the MVP in my book not Mauer.
you're new here, aren't you?
That fits perfectly!
Derek Jeter has been much more valuable than Teixeria to the Yankees this year, btw.
Gee, that's mighty white of you. You would consider giving the MVP to a .400 hitting catcher on a playoff team? You are probably the only person on the planet who would have to think about it.
Repeat, the Dodgers did not go to the playoffs in 1997. They finished 2 games out. The Rox 7 games out. Both were winning teams in the sense that both won more than they lost, but neither player "helped" his team go to the playoffs. By your logic, the 1997 MVP should have been Jeff Bagwell.
I think it's hilarious that you provide an example of the injustice of a big hitter playing a not difficult defensive position in a big hitters park winning the MVP over a better hitting catcher as a reason to award the MVP to Tex over Mauer.
Word. Mike, if you're still around, why give the award to Teixeria and not the HOF SS having a HOF season on the same team?
Why are you guys even bothering?
Because he showed up to talk about it.
No, but it might have been enough to have the Red Sox just barely in first place. I doubt it though, because I'm pretty sure that Juan Miranda was not going to be the Yankees' first baseman even if they didn't get Teixeira. I don't know what they would have done, but they'd have found someone. Maybe someone as bad as Adam LaRoche, but not someone coming off a so-so season at AAA at age 25.
They would have played Swisher at first and tracked down a right fielder. He might or might not have been any good, though.
And if Mauer hits .399 or Minny ends up 1 game out...tough turnbuckles, no MVP for youuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu!
It should go to a player that helps his team win
Actually the Twins are 43-44 (.494) this year when Mauer's started, 13-16 (.448) when he hasn't – unless their 0-4 record in games where he's a late-inning pinch-hitter is somehow extra-relevant.
But even at that, so what? There are 24 other players on the team playing well or badly and having a much larger aggregate impact on those games than any single player. (The same is true of every MVP candidate.)
You might be right. I do remember now that that looked like the most likely possibility. In any event, even if plan B hadn't worked out, plan C of taking on a salary dump guy at mid-season definitely would have worked.
He's new, Jeter's not, so he is more likely to be seen as a difference maker. And the other two are pitchers. They can't be MVPs. :)
So, you're saying if Mauer slumped say 10% from what he has done so far but the rest of the team picks up it's play enough to at least get close to the playoffs, that would improve his chances of winning MVP in your eyes? Yeah, that makes sense.
And he wasn't even any good until Alex Rodriguez turned up to protect him in the lineup!
Exactly. And the other side of the ledger, Tex would not have been replacing Juan Miranda's playing time on the Red Sox. He would be taking ABs away from some combination of Lowell, Ortiz, Youkilis, and (now) Martinez.Try playing this same game with Sabathia and you've got a better argument, I think.
Also, the relevant argument here is probably more like, what if you took Tex off the Yankees and swapped him with Mauer? Would Tex's winning powers have made them winners?
--------------
I've watched most of the games, and I'd call it very close. Jeter has the positional advantage and his defense has picked up a lot, but UZR aside, Tex is a downright artist at first base who's singlehandedly saved several wins with his glove alone. And with all due respect to El Capitain, Tex is a far more significant offensive force. Right now I'd agree with Mike and give it to Tex (or Mauer, in the absence of a "Best Player" award), but we've still got six weeks to go and it's hardly cut and dried.
Exactly. Rangers, Braves and Angels fans will always have those flags, I guess.
Morneau: 301/388/562; 154OPS+ 510PA
Teixeira:288/385/562; 145OPS+ 519PA
Of course, Mauer's #s are much better.
Mauer: 378/446/630 188OPS+ 401PA
1) Joe Mauer 5.92) Ben Zobrist 5.5
3) Evan Longoria 5.4
4) Derek Jeter 4.9
5) Marco Scutaro 4.6
6) Carl Crawford 4.5
7) Kevin Youkilis 4.3
8) Chone Figgins 4.3
9) Franklin Gutierrez 4.0
10) Mark Teixeira 3.9
Why should the 10th most valuable player be called the Most Valuable Player? He isn't the most valuable on his own team.
It should also be noted that Fangraphs doesn't credit catchers for defense, so Mauer doesn't have his excellent defense added on to his total.
Uh, Mauer is a plus defender at the opposite end of the defensive spectrum. So he's not just more valuable that Tex offensively but defensively as well. imho.
Yeah, I know. I just like it more when we talk about zombies or Pavement instead of swallowing the troll bait.
And hey, Marco Scutaro!
But that's not even the history of the award. Go back a little bit and you've got Ripken, Yount, Bell and Mattingly winning the award on teams that didn't go to the post season. Heck, even in the last fifteen years, when that's apparently been the recent focus of the award, A-rod managed to win it on a bad team. When a guy is head and shoulders above the competition (or leads the league in RBIs), the writer's have recognized that in the past, even if he's on a lousy team. I don't see why we should defer to a voting philosophy that is at most 10-15 years old and has no roots in the original intent of the award.
Right now I'd agree with Mike and give it to Tex (or Mauer, in the absence of a "Best Player" award), but we've still got six weeks to go and it's hardly cut and dried.
I still haven't seen any good reason to separate Teix from Youkilis or Cabrera. Detroit would legitimately be in second without Miggy and Youkilis has played three positions for his team while being the only consistent offensive threat the Sox have. And I would give it to Jeter over Teix without thinking twice about it.
I'm sorry Andy, but I will never be on board with the notion that the best player isn't the most valuable. I know that other people are, but I view that as their problem, not mine. I'm willing to concede that our metrics aren't perfect, and thus allow for some subjectivity when 2 or more players are close, and give tiebreakers to clutch performances and the like. But that doesn't extend to awarding a player extra credit or penalty for what his teammates do or don't do.
But this year, so far, Mauer and Tex, as shown in #37, aren't close to being tied.
I know was extremely unlikely but Marco Scut turo (as Joe Benigno once referred to him) breaking out as a stud (even if for a brief moment) is the kick in the balls to accompany the gut punch that is the 2009 New York Mets.
*runs*
Uh, Mauer is a plus defender at the opposite end of the defensive spectrum. So he's not just more valuable that Tex offensively but defensively as well. imho.
I'm not saying that Mauer shouldn't be the MVP at this point. What I am saying is that either the award should be renamed "Best Player" in order to remove the ambiguity, or there should be a separate award that explicitly states that a team's performance should not enter into consideration. The way it is now, Mauer might well get the nod anyway, due to being a catcher and his far superior numbers, but if he were a first baseball with numbers like Morneau's, he'd still be at a disadvantage due to the writers who would write him off as a member of an also-ran team.
And that's the nature of an award with a name like "most valuable." People here may think that they know what it means and can't see how anyone could possibly disagree with them, and other people are just as locked into their belief that "the Twins could have lost just as well without Mauer" as a justification for never voting for a player from an also-ran team. And unfortunately this argument isn't going to be settled by the editors of the Oxford English Dictionary.
I'm sure that argument will get plenty of support from Mr. Mauer.
I disagree. The ambiguity is what makes the award great in my mind. What is frustrating is when someone gets pigeonholed into one point of view or the other (either on the best player side or RBI guy from a playoff team side). Most years, I agree that you should probably give it to a guy going to playoffs and over the history of the award, that's how it's gone, with fairly frequent exceptions when guys have truly exceptional seasons (or lots of RBIs) on bad teams. Mauer's year this year certainly qualifies as notable enough to win the vote despite being on a lousy team.
Repoz's trolling, that is.
Joe Mauer is having a historic season. Three seventy five. From a catcher. Who also plays good defense and hits for power. You can't tell me with a straight face the Joe isn't having the best year. So we get the old argument about having to play for a winning team. Problem is, the award has not been consistently treated that way. And you need to explain why Tex should get special consideration for having Derek Jeter and A-Rod as teammates instead of Nick Punto and Joe Crede. And why Joe should be downgraded because his team didn't buy Sabathia and Burnett to front his rotation.
And hey, Marco Scutaro!
I didn't realize that Scutaro was a zombie. That might explain his season.
And, of course, he throws in a lousy April, and does not even start hitting until A-Rod comes back and provides him protection in the line up. Clearly A-Rod is the more valuable player, and should be MVP for both his work and Teixeira's work.
I disagree. The ambiguity is what makes the award great in my mind. What is frustrating is when someone gets pigeonholed into one point of view or the other (either on the best player side or RBI guy from a playoff team side). Most years, I agree that you should probably give it to a guy going to playoffs and over the history of the award, that's how it's gone, with fairly frequent exceptions when guys have truly exceptional seasons (or lots of RBIs) on bad teams. Mauer's year this year certainly qualifies as notable enough to win the vote despite being on a lousy team.
Well, since to be truthful, I don't really care one way or the other who gets the MVP as long as the Yanks win the World Series***, I'm perfectly happy with ambiguity and arguments. To me that's the major justification for these awards in the first place. But the way it is now, a lot of people are going to be very upset if Mauer does or doesn't get the MVP, and it's simply because the two sides have no common standards. And setting up a separate "Best Player" award, along the lines I suggested, would at least shut those people up for awhile, if that's a priority to begin with.
*** And I assume as a Yankee fan, you'd feel the same way. Hell, as long as the Yanks get those rings, they could give the MVP to Dice-K or Big Papi for all that I'd care.
Regardless of what you *think* the standards for MVP are, here are the actual standards for MVP:
Determining how much a player's performance was worth is a subjective thing, but how the team does is explicitly labeled as not necessary to be MVP.
Mauer vs Yankees: 345/424/690 with 3 HR's. And they lost all 7 of those games (because Mauer isn't valuable)!!!
Did he really say this? The Yankees are up 7 games because they have Tex, while the Sox have had to suffer with that bum Youkilis at first base?
If you wish to use that flawed logic, at least point out that the difference between BOS and NY is probably that NY has an MVP candidate at shortstop, while BOS has a bunch of bums.
But again, Jeter has been there forever, so all the credit goes to the new guy.
I agree. I also think that Mauer has helped his team win more games than Teixeira has helped his team. The difference is that Teixeira's teammates have helped his team win than Mauer's teammates.
If Teixeira goes to Boston the Sox are in the Yankees position.
Yes, and if Teixeira goes to Boston and Mauer goes to New York, the Yankees are still ahead of Boston.
I would bet the non-NY writers don't feel the same about Tex. But then who wins? Writers won't give it to Mauer on a sub .500 team or any of the players on 3rd place Tampa. Maybe Chi-Det has an actual pennant race and Miggy has some big late games and takes the award.
CONCUR
What definition of "valuable," exactly, doesn't mean best? The dictionary says:
Nobody ever argues that the award should go to the player who got paid the most, so the only defintion of value I can see if one about being better - most valuable being the best. It doesn't say "Of great importance, use, or service and plays in a top-10 media market."
If this is a career year from Jeter he has to be the record holder of "most career years packed into one career". 1998-2000 qualify, as does 2006. And by rate stats, the current season is a dead ringer for 2007, 2005, 2003, 2001.
So it's up to the individual. If you want to support Mark Teixiera, fine. But to write this "I can't see how anyone could pick anyone else?" well, you have demonstrated an extremely limited ability to understand other points of view.
Yankees 1B: .284/.386/.562, 31 HR, 86 RBI, 76 R
Red Sox 1B: .295/.393/.532, 23 HR, 80 RBI, 79 R
Anyone that thinks that the difference between those two levels of production is worth seven and a half games in the standings is clearly out of their mind.
Fair enough. I enjoy the argument most years, heck, I even enjoy the argument this year. But in this case I feel the argument being presented against Mauer doesn't really hold up against the history of how the award has been handed out over the course of it's history.
*** And I assume as a Yankee fan, you'd feel the same way. Hell, as long as the Yanks get those rings, they could give the MVP to Dice-K or Big Papi for all that I'd care.
Oh absolutely.
It's like the blackjack dealer who has to hit on a 15. Whether he turns over a 7, 8, 9, 10, or face card, he goes "TOO MANY!" instead of adding the numbers up. I have always joked that blackjack dealers only know 22 numbers: 1-21 and "too many."
What if Kevin Slowey and Scott Baker are 100% healthy all year. Does that make Mauer better? Obviously.
But I do like these discussions - I get to learn that Jeter is having a very good year (wait...don't we hate him?) and...wait...Figgins? Zobrist? Gutierrez? Scutaro? Nice.
2006 Ryan Howard 85-77, 2nd place (no playoffs)
2004 Barry Bonds 91-71, 2nd (no playoffs)
2003 Alex Rodriguez 71-91, last place
2001 Barry Bonds 90-72, 2nd (no playoffs)
1997 Larry Walker 83-79, 3rd place
1991 Cal Ripken 67-95, 6th place
1989 Robin Yount 81-81, 4th place
1987 Andre Dawson 76-85, last place
1986 Mike Schmidt 86-75, 2nd place
1974 Jeff Burroughs 84-76, 2nd place
Yeah, but Lowell, while putting up decent offensive numbers, has been absolutely terrible defensively. Ortiz has been terrible offensively most of the year. Youkilis would be playing 3B if the Red Sox had gotten Teixeira. Lowell might have been untradeable, and then would have been able to pick up some of the slack at DH. I'm not sure how things would have actually played out, but the difference between Teixeira and Ortiz with the bat, plus the difference between Youkilis and Lowell defensively at third, plus the loss to the Yankees in that they'd have gotten someone better than Juan Miranda, but not as good as Teixeira could all add up to 7 or 8 games.
So the MVP has to be a player who is much better than his teammates on a team that barely makes the playoffs. Or Justin Morneau.
I disconcur strongly. We already have an award for the best player - it's called the MVP.
It's not giving him credit for his defense, and the defensive ratings for Longoria/Zobrist may need some regression. Especially Zobrist, as he's never been a plus fielder before.
On the other hand, he's usually played mostly at shortstop, and this year, it's mostly been second base and the outfield.
Swisher was set to play first before Tex signed. Question is who would have played RF after Nady went down. Probably would have traded for somebody. If you slip into their AAA for a solution, I'd take Duncan before Miranda.
It really couldn't have. If Tex came in and completely replaced Ortiz in the lineup by pushing Lowell to DH, here's how it shakes out:
--He costs the team about 4 runs in defense at 1B.
--He saves the team 10 runs by replacing Lowell at 3B with Youk.
--He adds 40 runs in offense over Ortiz.
That's +4 1/2 wins for the Sox. But that scenario would never have happened. Ortiz would not have been replaced nearly that much. At most, the Sox would have been improved by 2 1/2 wins. I doubt the Yankees would have been hurt by more than that margin.
I think you're right that they'd have worked through Ortiz's problems. But if they hadn't, then I think the Yankees probably are about 3 games better with Teixeira than anyone else they could have gotten.
Or, you can change one of your own losses into a win.
Oh yes, please give me 2 awards that together won't mean one-tenth as much to me as the one (imperfect) one we now have. Perfect twit, indeed.
I assume you're speaking about Jeter's year defensively. Because he's had several years better than this offensively. In fact, He'a pretty close to his career average for .OPS.
No kidding. I swear, if Yankees fans were any more myopic, they would need Mr. Magoo glasses.
Honestly, could you imagine if Joe Mauer were playing the way he is now, but he was a New York Yankee instead of a Minnesota Twin? They would already be placing the order to the foundry to forge his plaque for Monument Park.
A-Rod won the MVP when he was on a terrible Rangers' team. So the supposed "disqualification" doesn't hold up based on previous MVPs.
Are you kidding? The MVP is PERFECT from baseball's point of view. The ambiguity, and divergent voting standards lead to endless debate and free press and interest in an essentially meaningless piece of hardware.
You don't see these heated debates about the NFL MVP.
1b defense may well be more valuable than some metrics show, but color me very skeptical. Teixeira is a hell of a player, and I can see why some Yankee fans/media are in love with him after years of Jason Giambi, Andy Phillips, Tony Clark, and Doug Minky at 1b. But this is another example of "New guy gets extra credit because team is winning and he brings skills they needed." Teixeira, in addition to being a fine hitter, brings glove work and durability--two things that the Yankees have lacked at 1b and elsewhere, which magnifies his already sizable contribution. But I see very little evidence that Joe Mauer is not the Most Valuable Player in the AL. The "best/valuable" thing is just semantics.
No offense, HW, but if Berra had been on the Senators and Campanella had been on the Pirates, I don't they get all those trophies in those days.
Well, I guess that settles that. If Mauer doesn't win, everyone here agrees to go on a shit strike until the writers all attend a SABR re-education camp.
At this point I hope Mauer wins, if only for the sake of apparent collective BTF sanity.
1b defense may well be more valuable than some metrics show, but color me very skeptical. Teixeira is a hell of a player, and I can see why some Yankee fans/media are in love with him after years of Jason Giambi, Andy Phillips, Tony Clark, and Doug Minky at 1b. But this is another example of "New guy gets extra credit because team is winning and he brings skills they needed." Teixeira, in addition to being a fine hitter, brings glove work and durability--two things that the Yankees has lacked at 1b and elsewhere, which magnifies his already sizable contribution. But I see very little evidence that Joe Mauer is not the Most Valuable Player in the AL. The "best/valuable" thing is just semantics.
Robin, your penultimate sentence doesn't negate my point about Tex's defense. The two can both be true. And you should skip work some afternoon and catch some Yankee games if you seriously doubt the artistry of Tex's defense.
He's very good over there. So is Kevin Youkilis, who's putting up much better offensive numbers.
The MVP ballot specifically defines value as the sum of a player's offense and defense. The MVP ballot also specifically outlines that you can vote for a player because of the player's work ethic and character.
What doesn't it say? That team quality is even relevant, let alone a disqualifying factor.
After the last two articles, we have no reached a hat trick of fail. We'll see if Mike can make a golden sombrero when he studies the relative value of a home run by exchanging text messages with Jason Tyner.
Every metric shows he is a good first baseman, and he sure looks like one. I have seen maybe 10 Yankee games this year. You said "singlehandedly saved several games" though. If that was just hyperbole, fine, but that is quite a claim, to say the least.
We don't need the dictionary. The ballot for the MVP Award defines value for the purposes of filling out the ballot.
From the ballot:
We don't have to read tea leaves. It's right there! If someone wants to tell me under which rule Mauer should be docked because Punto, Young, and most of the rotation suck, I'll be glad to listen.
The idea that justification for winning an individual award can be that Derek Jeter happens to be on the team instead of Nick Punto is absurd.
Mauer is the best player in the AL this season, case closed, imo...or at least it should be. This isn't rocket science, give the award to the best player in the game.
In 1954, Smokey Burgess hit .368 and got not one MVP vote. True, it was in only 392 PA, but still. The next year he hit .301/21/78 in 501 PA and still not a vote. But when Roy hit .269/22/97 in 533, he was 10th, and when Berra hit .276/15/62 as a half catcher/half outfielder in 404 in 1960 he was 15th.
The only year Smokey Burgess got an MVP vote was in 1960 when, coincidentally, his team won the pennant. It was probably no better than his 8th best year.
You are putting forth a position that represents giving out a personal award; giving out an award that is supposed to be based on the player's performance, based on the performance of his teammates. You are advocating a position that states that if Joe Mauer's teammates had been better, that he would be the MVP. That does not make sense, Mike. You cannot spin that in a way that it makes sense, for it is nonsense.
The MVP should be based on the performance of the player, and only based on the performance of the player. It is an individual award and should be based on individual achievements.
Oh, but:
RBI leaders
1) Morneau -- not a playoff team
2) Longo -- not a playoff team
3) Tex -- MVP!!
A robot could pick the MVP's the same way the voters do.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main