al mvp race

Kirk Gibson never once even went to an All-Star game. He sure as hell should never have been an MVP.

 

I don't think he was the most deserving option in 1988, either, but I don't think failing to make the All-Star game in a given season should disqualify a player from being the MVP. Sometimes players get off to slow starts or miss some time and play at a loaded position, then dominate in the second half.

I remember listening to a relatively new talk radio host in Pittsburgh in the mid-90s. He went on this rant insisting that no pitcher could ever win the Cy Young Award after not making the All-Star team. Of course, in 1990, Doug Drabek had done exactly that as a member of the Pirates. Nice job by that guy not knowing his own market's recent sports history.

 

In other words, because Mauer doesn't hit in a lineup that will likely feature seven players who hit 20-plus home runs and for a team that committed $423.5 million in contracts to free agents this past offseason -- including staff anchors like CC Sabathia and A.J. Burnett -- he doesn't deserve to win the MVP. Got it.

From Jayson Stark today ...

He's hitting .373. His on-base percentage (.442) is ridiculous. He's leading the league in slugging (.622) by more than 40 points. And if the season ended today, he'd be only the fifth player since the 1930s with numbers that high in all three categories. (The others: Ted Williams, Stan Musial, Larry Walker and George Brett -- whoever they are.) Mauer (in case you hadn't noticed) is also a premier defensive player at a vital defensive position.

 

Gibson never played in an All-Star game. I'm not talking about just the season at hand.

The Mauer stuff on this thread is pure rot. What more do you want the guy to do?

 

I know that Gibson never made an All-Star game, but what he did in every other season of his career was irrelevant to the 1988 MVP decision. Or at least it should be.

 

If you want to insist that "valuable" means you have to play on a playoff team, then you must inevitably follow that logic to the point where the MVP must always be the best player on the team that makes the playoffs by the narrowest margin.

 

shockey's thoughts on this subject reek of big market/yankee fanboiness. This whole "everyone hates the Yankees" bullshit.

Not many (if any) national baseball writers mention Jeter among the top three players in the MVP race. And they all certainly have Mauer in the top three, if not No. 1.

You just can't reason with some people. Maybe Shockey should stick to starting personal threads about his family.

 

Since the MVP is the most prestigious individual award in baseball (for position players, anyway), I do wish it could be renamed to go to the Most Outstanding Player -- aka, the most prestigious individual player -- so as not to add this element of "how good are your teammates" to the equation.

Obviously, if you're that outstanding, your team probably shouldn't be in the cellar, so team success can still be a factor. Though maybe it wouldn't be the defining factor in so many people's minds.

But, we're kind of stuck with it now.

 

BuckW: I believe the phrase "Most Valuable" was selected back in ancient times quite deliberately to give the voters the most leeway possible. "Valuable" is an infinitely flexible term.
Given this deliberate chaos, it's a miracle most MVP votes are controversy free. Mauer will win in a walk this year, and no one outside the pages of the New York Post will consider this remotely debatable. That is the norm. The 1999 AL clusterfucks are the exception.

 

Joe Mauer sucks. Until he starts producing intangibles, he'll continue to suck.

 

Mauer's OPS+ is 183, second place is Miguel Cabrera, 151. Mauer's value is that he makes his team a .500 club instead of a .480 club?

Don't discount Jeter too much. 200 hits, 100 runs, 20 HRs, 25 SBs, .390+ OBP, all batting leadoff.
But the top 4 of the Yankees Jeter, Damon, Tex and ARod all are dependent on each other.

 

200 hits are dependent on no one.

20 homers aren't that many, but dependent on no one.

25 stolen bases are dependent on no one (although a few could be dependent on others).