Baseball Thread No. 17: Let's Get Dizzy, Mr. Dean

How could Delgado be behind those guys when he's been doing it for longer and his team's record is better down the stretch?

You could make a case for a lot of players, some stronger than others. But if a guy doesn't help his team get to October, he's got some ground to make up.

 

NO. I'm saying playing the entire season and coming through at the most important time, and finishing somewhere in the 40/120, and carrying the team almost alone for 2 months or so to a division title -- which Fat Albert WILL NOT COME CLOSE TO DOING -- is worth considering.

 

You also have to consider the quality of the players' numbers in the given time frame. As good as Delgado's numbers have been since June 17, Ramirez's production since becoming a Dodger has been even better.

Also, at the time of the deal for Ramirez, the Dodgers were three games under .500 and scuffling offensively since they lost Rafael Furcal May 5. Dismiss the guy if you like, but Furcal was arguably their best offensive weapon, he was off to a fantastic start and the Dodgers had won nine of 10 before back problems took him out of the lineup.

 

Part of which has to do with the division they play in. The Mets' record is only four games better than that of the Cardinals. If they finish that way, does four games count as close?

 

No becuase they are not in the same divison. Hell, the Brewers and Cards would be running away in the West.

 

So you're saying a player cannot be "Most Valuable" in a weak division? Nevermind what he's done to turn that team around and maybe lead that team into the players?

So which divisions can we chose MVPs from?

 

But the thing is, the Dodgers haven't been that much better in terms of W/L since Manny's arrival: 21-17 if Oz's numbers are correct. They've had a long losing streak. They were a .500 team before him and they've been a .500 team since he got there. They're just lucky to play in a division where .500 is good enough. Pujols, Delgado, Braun, Berkman, Howard and Aramis Ramirez all rank ahead of Manny.

 

Can't someone just rename this award so these inane semantics aren't dredged up year after year?

 

That's not my point. Looking at the actual records, the Mets are only four games better than the Cardinals.

We're playing with reality all over the baseball threads of late. We're comparing pitchers, but only from certain points of the season. We're looking at hitters, but only started hitting. You can always play with things like that.

Take the last 28 days, for example. Delgado has one more home run and four more RBI than Pujols in that time, but Pujols has a huge advantage in batting average (.435-.281), on-base percentage (.510-.358) and slugging (.882-.625). It's not like Delgado is the only MVP candidate finishing strong.

 

So, you completely ignored my point and just kept on with yours. Fair enough.

No, I don't think Ramirez should win the MVP just as I don't think Sabathia should win the Cy Young. He is just a useful example for illustrating the problem with over-emphasizing Delgado's play since June 17 and ignoring how crappy he was before that when evaluating MVP candidates.

 

I think you've all proven quite graphically that this is going to be the most difficult MVP vote in many years. I don't know how I would vote right now but, hopefully, that will clear itself up over the next four weeks.

When I first was given the privelege of voting -- which I no longer do, so don't get upset -- I was informed by veteran BBWAA members that value was the most important thing to evaluate. That's what makes the award unique -- and great, in my opinion. While Andre Dawson was clearly Player of the Year when he won, what was his value to his team, which is, after all, what it's supposed to reflect? I determined back then that candidates for my vote would only come from teams that at least contended. I was ridiculed by some for voting for Ozzie Smith that year but I still maintain I was correct in the true meaning of the award. Three different NL managers that year told me the Cardinals wouldn't have won without Ozzie's contributions.

Anyway, I keep that in mind every year the vote comes up and I feel for the voters this year. It will be controversial no matter how it turns out. But all the better for the arguments and discussions that follow the announcement.

 

The other side of the Delgado coin is Josh Hamilton in the AL.
At the break he had 21, 95, .310... since the break 10 HR, 29 RBI, .290.
And his team hasn't been close to centending all year.
Yet there are people here who say he has to be considered for the AL MVP.
Why?