I don't think there's much doubt that Alex Rodriguez was the best player in the AL this year. As such this thread is about him and whether you think he deserves the MVP or not and if you think he'll win or not. For the sake of arguement his stats:
Alex Rodriguez: 57 HR (1st), 142 RBI (1), .300 BA (19), .392 OBP (8), .623 SLG (3), 1.015 OPS (4)
Other Candidates:
Miguel Tejada: 34 HR (7), 131 RBI (3), .308 BA (9), .354 OBP (30), .508 SLG (17), .861 OPS (17)
Jason Giambi: 41 HR (4), 122 RBI (5), .314 BA (6), .435 OBP (3), .598 SLG (4), 1.034 OPS (3)
There are others, but they played for non-contenders and if you think that A-Rod doesn't deserve it for that, then obviously they don't deserve it either.
immortal_zeus
11-08-02, 02:27 PM
Originally posted by Mordred
I don't think there's much doubt that Alex Rodriguez was the best player in the AL this year.
Bingo. ;)
http://www.ameritech.net/users/dvdtalk/rome.gif
Ranger02
11-08-02, 02:35 PM
Originally posted by Mordred
Alex Rodriguez: 57 HR (1st), 142 RBI (1), .300 BA (19), .392 OBP (8), .623 SLG (3), 1.015 OPS (4)
If those numbers plus playing a tough defensive spot and playing it well doesn't get you MVP, every writer that voted against him should never be allowed to vote again.
Mordred
11-08-02, 02:58 PM
So not more than one person thinks that you have to be on a winning team to win the award? Kinda surprising.
I do think A-Rod hurt his chances somewhat with the way the Rangers finished the season. After taking 4 straight from Seattle he slumped bad and the Rangers got smacked around by the A's and Angels. His batting average dropped like 10 points and he had to get some hits the last day just to stay at .300. Thats bound to leave a bad taste in some of the voters minds.
Mordred
Moefuscious
11-08-02, 02:59 PM
I agree. But most of the time the MVP comes from a decent or winning team. My vote would go to A-Rod but it will be interesting to see just how close it is.
Funny...somebody's name is missing. Hmmmmm?
AVG= .207
HR= 3
RBI= 29
Games= 90
*Survey says...........Tony Clark!!!! :)
mnguye10
11-09-02, 03:49 PM
Funny... I wonder how many people thought that Bonds didn't deserve World Series MVP but think that A-Rod deserves regular season MVP?
If A-Rod deserves the MVP, then Bonds deserved the World Series MVP in my opinion. Should MVP be about who played the best during the series/season? Or should it be about who was the most valuable player to a winning team?
Quake1028
11-09-02, 04:27 PM
If Bonds can't win the WS MVP, there is no way in hell ARod wins this MVP. I think A-Rod should probably get it, but then again I though Bonds deserved it also.
Da Thrilla
11-09-02, 06:00 PM
No respect for Torii Hunter as even a choice...:( :thmbsdwn:
twikoff
11-09-02, 07:19 PM
Originally posted by Da Thrilla
No respect for Torii Hunter as even a choice...:( :thmbsdwn:
hunter had decent numbers this year..
but not on par with these guys
DVDHO
11-10-02, 07:25 AM
He may or may not deserve it but you know that he had way more chances to see great pitches since he was on a last place team,if A-rod was in first place through out the season his numbers would not have been that good since alot of teams would have pitched around him ala Barry Bonds,so if he does win it last place helped him get it,im not saying he wouldnt have got it in first place but his #'s wouldnt have been as good with way more walks.
Mordred
11-10-02, 06:26 PM
Originally posted by Quake1028
If Bonds can't win the WS MVP, there is no way in hell ARod wins this MVP. I think A-Rod should probably get it, but then again I though Bonds deserved it also. My only thought about WS MVP is that while Bonds probably should have been considered more, his play in the field didn't exactly help him.
Mordred
Mordred
11-10-02, 06:31 PM
Originally posted by Da Thrilla
No respect for Torii Hunter as even a choice...:( :thmbsdwn: Hunter will probably get some votes, I just wasn't thinking about him when I started the thread. While solid, his numbers weren't exactly spectacular:
He was amazing in the field but not top 10 in any of those categories (though he was 9th with 23 steals). I don't think he deserves much consideration.
Mordred
Ralph Wiggum
11-10-02, 09:20 PM
I definitely think Tejada deserves to be the MVP as I'm in the camp that thinks you pretty much have to be on a competitive team to be the most valuable player.
I do think it is possible to have one of those singularly amazing seasons (like Bonds has had the last couple of years) and deserve an MVP even if your team went 0-162. For that to happen the numbers would have to be much, much better than everyone else's. It has to be an amazing season.
With all that in mind I do not think that A-Rod qualifies. He had the best year in the A.L. on a sub-par team. His numbers aren't enough of an improvement over Tejada's to warrant the award IMO.
It's about time for MLB to invent a Most Outstanding Player award.
wildcatlh
11-10-02, 09:34 PM
For MVP, it has to be Tejada.
For a player on a last place team to win the MVP, he has to be markedly better than anyone else in the league (Andre Dawson, 1987). Not the case here.
Vampyr
11-10-02, 10:45 PM
I voted A-Rod won't win but should be MVP.
It has always been my opinion that as long as there is one award it should go to the best player. However, I would like to see an MVP Award (going to a player who had the biggest impact on the outcome of the standings) and a Best Player Award (going to a player with the best stats).
I would also hope that one player would be allowed to win both awards if he meets both criteria.
My biggest question is what to name the awards? I certainly believe that Babe Ruth should have one of them named after him. I'm thinking the "Best Player Award".
As for the "MVP Award", I'd like to see it named after someone like Willie Mays, Ty Cobb or Lou Gehrig. I wouldn't name it after Barry Bonds (after he retires) just because I dislike him deeply, added to the fact that he doesn't respect the fans. He's a great player with absolutely no class IMHO (Like father like son in his case)
El Scorcho
11-11-02, 12:26 AM
I fail to see how someone can bet he most "Outstanding" and not be most "Valuable". To me, they're one in the same.
mnguye10
11-11-02, 01:49 AM
Originally posted by El Scorcho
I fail to see how someone can bet he most "Outstanding" and not be most "Valuable". To me, they're one in the same.
If A-Rod was really valuable, his team would've been a winner. How valuable is someone to a team that finished in last place?
mnguye10
11-11-02, 01:55 AM
Originally posted by Vampyr
As for the "MVP Award", I'd like to see it named after someone like Willie Mays, Ty Cobb or Lou Gehrig. I wouldn't name it after Barry Bonds (after he retires) just because I dislike him deeply, added to the fact that he doesn't respect the fans. He's a great player with absolutely no class IMHO (Like father like son in his case)
Ty Cobb once stayed awake all night with a gun on his lap because he was afraid his teammates were going to retaliate against him for knocking out one of his teammates earlier during a game. He also was involved in many, many fights with other players from other teams, including Babe Ruth.
He was also a racist, and there are reports of him attacking blacks on the streets. He once climbed 12 rows into the stands to attack a fan who was heckling him.
Why you would rather name an MVP award after Ty Cobb instead of Barry Bonds because Bonds doesn't sign autographs is beyond me.
El Scorcho
11-11-02, 02:46 AM
Originally posted by mnguye10
If A-Rod was really valuable, his team would've been a winner. How valuable is someone to a team that finished in last place?
9 players can be in a lineup at any given time. Teams routinely use 35+ players per season, sometimes many more.
To hold one guy back (and to a point, accountable) because the rest of his teammates let him down is, in a matter of words, stupid.
Vampyr
11-11-02, 02:51 AM
Originally posted by mnguye10
Ty Cobb once stayed awake all night with a gun on his lap because he was afraid his teammates were going to retaliate against him for knocking out one of his teammates earlier during a game. He also was involved in many, many fights with other players from other teams, including Babe Ruth.
He was also a racist, and there are reports of him attacking blacks on the streets. He once climbed 12 rows into the stands to attack a fan who was heckling him.
Why you would rather name an MVP award after Ty Cobb instead of Barry Bonds because Bonds doesn't sign autographs is beyond me.
I agree with you about Cobb....He was an awful person. In my opinion he has meant more to baseball than Bonds (But that's another story).
I'd have no problem replacing his name on the list with Williams or Stan the Man.
As far as Bonds is concerned.......I still think he's garbage and wouldn't cheer him on no matter what team he played for. Also, as I said earlier ~ His father was a nasty ballplayer too.
El Scorcho
11-11-02, 02:55 AM
Furthermore, the "no MVPs on bad teams" argument implies that you can hypothetically take Alex Rodriguez, carbon copy him and his exact performance/statistics for the year, place him on the Anaheim Angels, and suddenly the carbon copy is much more valuable than the original Alex? To me this just seems like a crash course in faulty logic 101.
criptik28
11-11-02, 04:55 AM
Originally posted by Mordred
There are others, but they played for non-contenders and if you think that A-Rod doesn't deserve it for that, then obviously they don't deserve it either.
This is faulty logic. If you're not including players from other non-contending teams, then you can't include A-Rod as well.
Anyway, just for argument's sake, no one's considering Alfonso Soriano?
Won't get it, shouldn't get it. Sorry, but he picked that team to play for. It is like what others before me have said. How valuable can a player be on a last place team? Is he a great player, you bet. Most valuable in the AL? Nope.
Mordred
11-11-02, 10:41 AM
Originally posted by criptik28
This is faulty logic. If you're not including players from other non-contending teams, then you can't include A-Rod as well.
Anyway, just for argument's sake, no one's considering Alfonso Soriano?
39 HR, 102 RBI, 51 2B, 41 SB, .300 BA, .332 OBP, .547 SLG I was actually going to include Soriano, and then I looked at Giambi's numbers and he pretty much blew Soriano away in every category except steals.
Mordred
Mordred
11-11-02, 11:01 AM
Originally posted by mnguye10
If A-Rod was really valuable, his team would've been a winner. How valuable is someone to a team that finished in last place? True the Rangers finished in last place. They did finish 11th out of 14 in the AL, but would not have been in the seller in any other AL division. 3 teams in the NL were worse and Pittsburgh was slightly better but played one less game. Of course if you'd stopped the season with 15 games left the Rangers would have looked a lot better... they slumped hard playing Anaheim and Oakland to close out the year, and A-Rod didn't help his case in those games either.
Secondly for those saying that if A-Rod were that valuable the Rangers wouldn't have finished in last I have to ask if you expect the guy to pitch? Despite finishing in last the Rangers weren't a bad team offensively or even that bad in starting pitching. Some nice numbers for you:
The Rangers used 27(!!!) pitchers this year. Rangers relief pitching had 66 save opportunities. They blew 33 of them. Thats a phenomenal rate. Pretend like the Rangers had even an average relief staff like say the White Sox (who finished .500) who converted 35 of 46 saves opportunities for a 76% rate. That adds 17 wins to the Rangers and they would have finished 89-73. A pretty respectable season. Of course that still would have left them last in the division. Outisde of the AL West only the Yankees and Minnesota finished better than the 3rd place Mariners!
Yes the Rangers were bad this year. Yes, it was because of their relief pitching and a never ending search for a few competent starters. I still don't think you can say A-Rod wasn't the MVP. Remove him from the Rangers and they start looking like Tampa Bay or Detroit.
Mordred
mnguye10
11-11-02, 11:10 AM
I guess my next argument would be that Tejada got his stats in critical situations during a pennant race, where as A-Rod may have won games, but they weren't as important. Having a carbon copy of A-Rod on the Angels would have made him MVP, yes, because he was producing his stats while his team was "in" games, instead of while they were losing.
If A-Rod hits homeruns while his team is down 10-1 because of his team's poor pitching staff, no its not his fault, but I don't believe that his homerun is as valuable as Tejada's homerun that could be a game winning RBI in a more critical situation for his team.
I guess I see value as more than just statistics... I see some sort of team-leading factor. Tejada was well known to step up and be a sort of "leader by example" on the field with the A's who had lost their leader in Giambi the year before. For a young team that needed to overcome a huge loss in their superstar, he provided more than just stats.
jpolce
11-11-02, 12:32 PM
i think soriano has a better chance then giambi. i know giambi has better numbers but as said before its not about numbers all the time. their numbers are close and the only think soriano lacks in is walks and rbi's mainly because he is a lead off hitter. leadoff hitters usually bat with less runners on base on avg and usually are in scoring position for guys like giambi to bat them in. also lead off hitters see very few balls, last thing you want to do is put the first batter in a game on base. this is why i would vote for soriano, plus he basically had a 40/40 season, and for a second baseman this is incredible. he is the most valuable 2nd baseman in the league, but i think he will come in the top 3 for mvp votes
here are some of his stats:
had 39 hrs, stole a league-high 41 bases, making him the first second baseman to go 30-30, finishing one homer shy of joining the exclusive 40-40 club. Soriano hit .300 and drove in 102 runs, 99 of them from the leadoff spot. He ranked first in the AL in hits (209), runs (128), extra-base hits (92) and multi-hit games (69). he also had 381 total bases(2nd in league)
Mordred
11-11-02, 01:20 PM
I think you may be right about Soriano getting votes over Giambi... he got a lot more press this year. However I think Giambi is more deserving than Soriano.
Soriano had a terrible OBP and proved time and again that he would swing at anything not thrown behind or at him. He couldn't draw a walk to save his life and it wasn't because he was batting leadoff and not getting the pitches. His 23 walks ranked 115th in the AL and his OBP was 48th.
I think the guy is a wonderful player and will probably win an MVP or two in a few years, I just don't think he was the best player on the Yankees, let alone the AL.
Buy: