National League MVP -- Final Answer?

Thanks. I figured you could handle that one better.

 

You're comparing a SS and a 1B on a level playing field - a bad idea. Plus, Morneau was not good down the stretch. It's like when people here a month ago were saying that Reyes was the MVP long after he had stopped playing like one (but before it became so obvious how badly he was playing). Morneau had a great stretch over the summer (IIRC), and in people's minds he became the default MVP candidate, and the players' actual peformance down the stretch did nothing to change the voters' minds. Inertia is powerful.

Look at those Morneau numbers again. How extraordinary are they for a 1B. Don't we have a few of them who do that or close to it in any given season? What about Jeter's for a SS or Mauer's for a C or Santana's for an SP?

 

This year, exactly one 1B put up comparable numbers to Morneau's last year -- Ryan Howard. And if he hadn't hit .260, he'd have just won his second MVP in a row.

The other guy to put up similar numbers in recent years is Pujols, but I don't see how that makes an argument against Morneau.

.320, 34,130 seasons aren't as common as it would seem. A lot of people can put up two of those numbers, but not all three.

 

If you can't compare two players from different positions from a numbers standpoint, how are we supposed to compare them? Intangibles?

Morneau was better than Jeter last year. Take Morneau out of the Twins' lineup and Jeter out of the Yankees', and which one hurts more? I thought last year was an easy call. Just like this year -- in the American League, that is.

 

No. Compare the gap between Jeter & his SS peers vs. that of Morneau vs. his 1B peers. You think the drop-off from Jeter to Cairo would have hurt the Yankees less than the drop off from Morneau to whoever would have filled in for him, or even a 1B off the street (last year, could have been Pena)? I disagree.

 

Oh great..isn't that one of those made up stats that. VORP or some shit like that?

How about comparing what they actually did on the field?

 

Doesn't it need some kind of context? Forget the stats, do it with your own understanding. Getting the exact same numbers from a C, SS or 2B is far, far more valuable than getting them from a !B or RF, do you dispute that?

 

I think it is one factor to consider, not the only one. That is a better argument than getting into who would have replaced each guy if they had gotten hurt.

But Morneau is a better defensive first baseman than Jeter is a shortstop (yeah, I know some will scream on that. Just my opinion), which is a slight edge back to Morneau. And Morneau had less help in Minnesota offensively than Jeter did in New York.

I'm not saying it was a no-brainer. But to say it was a joke is wrong.

 

I would say it's not. The offensive production is more valuable from a B- SS than from a B+ 1B.

 

If the production was even, I would agree. Or if they were in similar situations, I would agree. But Morneau was more productive on a team that needed more from him than the Yankees needed from Jeter. Honestly, think it could have gone either way. I don't think chosing Morneau can be fairly considered a joke, though.

 

I'm not quoting you, but am responding.

Mauer & Santana were both significantly more valuable to that team than Morneau. I don't remember it, but I think his stats were basically accumulated in 2 summer months & he was average the rest of the year, including September. Santana & Mauer gave the team an advantage over every other team that was enormous. No one else was getting nearly that production behind the plate, no one else had a virtually automatic stopper every 5 days. They also had a power hitting 1B who was somewhat better than everyone else's power hitting 1B.

 

I think you are taking position a little too much into account over production there. I wouldn't have argued with Santana, either.