| 0 |
Subject: Alfonso Soriano - AL MVP?
Posted by: FloodCity Johnnies
- [1801722] Tue, Sep 17, 2002, 22:00
He's 5 for 5 tonight with homerun #39. Just one more to join the exclusive 40/40 club, and all this from a leadoff hitter. Will be topping over 100 RBIs too. There is no doubt in my mind that what this YOUNG man has accomplish is deserving of the American League's Most Valuable Player Award. AROD is definately a contender too but I feel that Alfonso accomplishments this season are more impressive.
Comments? |
| 1 | biliruben
Sustainer
ID: 59434124
Tue, Sep 17, 2002, 22:38
|
Bah. A pale shadow of Arod, unless you are talking fantasy MVP, where SBs are seriously considered.
|
| 2 | ksoze
Sustainer
ID: 50643419
Tue, Sep 17, 2002, 22:43
|
ARod is the best player in the league, period. That the players around him bring the team down shouldn't change the fact that he's just as valuable to the Rangers as he would be to a contender.
|
| 3 | Rogue's Strikers
ID: 6815172
Tue, Sep 17, 2002, 23:04
|
Offensively, I'm willing to concede that Soriano's 40 SB's put him close to Arod's numbers, but defensively, Arod has him beat. 8 errors to 22. Arod is just the more complete player right now.
|
| 4 | The Left Wings
ID: 1668298
Tue, Sep 17, 2002, 23:12
|
See, ARod hit all his homeruns batting either third or cleanup. Soriano hit most of his as a leadoff man. I think it's harder to hit homeruns when you're a leadoff man.
ARod does have some speed. But cleanup hitters normally don't steal as many bases as a leadoff man. So you can't blame him for stealing fewer bases.
I think Soriano is a bit more valuable than ARod. I mean, there are a bunch of sluggers out there, but it's hard to find someone who would almost always be at second or third base whenever your cleanup guy come on to bat.
|
| 5 | FloodCity Johnnies
ID: 268151723
Tue, Sep 17, 2002, 23:15
|
I think that when you are the highest paid player in the game, then his numbers are pretty well expected. No one ever expected this from Alphonso in his second full season. I feel that he was THE difference in the Yankees finishing ahead of Boston this year.
Good point RS on defensive stat difference, but I feel that most people look at the offensive impact the player had on his team. I have a hard time picking a MVP from a last place team.
|
| 6 | Rogue's Strikers
ID: 6815172
Tue, Sep 17, 2002, 23:16
|
Soriano's OBP: .329
Thats not exactly "almost always at second or third base"... There are plently of leadoff hitters who have a higher OBP. Soriano is just a slugger who bats 1st. Many around the league forsee him batting 3rd for years to come. (He's almost exaclty like Arod in a sense... stealing bases when he's younger, but moving on to being a slugger later.)
Arod's OBP: .390
Advantage: Arod, again. Soriano just isn't there yet IMHO. I think its safe to say though that he will be in the running for years to come.
|
| 7 | smallwhirled
Donor
ID: 17152614
Tue, Sep 17, 2002, 23:17
|
But will the stubborn journalists give ARod the votes being on a non-contender...I don't think they will.
|
| 8 | ksoze
Sustainer
ID: 50643419
Tue, Sep 17, 2002, 23:20
|
"Almost always be at second or third base whenever your cleanup guy come on to bat?" Soriano has a horrible OBP for a leadoff hitter, more then 50 points lower then ARod who walks almost twice as often. Soriano doesn't belong in the leadoff spot with an OBP of only .334.
|
| 9 | ksoze
Sustainer
ID: 50643419
Tue, Sep 17, 2002, 23:29
|
FloodCity,
I'm not sure I buy the "have a hard time picking a MVP from a last place team" argument because, like I said earlier, ARod is just as valuable to the Rangers as he would be to a contending team. The fact that his team sucks doesn't make him a weaker player. As for expectations, you don't give the MVP to a player who wasn't "expected" to produce as well as he has unless he's produced better then anyone else in the league. Soriano hasn't quite met ARod's production.
|
| 10 | Rogue's Strikers
ID: 6815172
Tue, Sep 17, 2002, 23:29
|
#5, thats what it all comes down to really. Do you give the MVP to:
1) The best player, period.
or
2) The best player on a winning team.
I feel that #2 is what most of the voters will do, even though #1 should be the real focus. They don't give out the Cy Young award to the most 'valuable' pitcher, they give it to the top pitcher. Even if he's 20-2 and on a crappy team. (Pedro won it with the Expos, and we all know how great the team was in the late 90's...) I feel that the MVP award deserves to go to the top player in the league. There's nothing Arod can do about his team's pitching. Should we deny all that he's done just because he's stuck with Dave Burba and Joaquin Benoit as starters? You can't just elminate all the players on bad teams from the voting... thats half the league right there, and thus the award loses its meaning.
Baseball is a team sport, and thats fine. We have Division winners, NL and AL CS champs, and finally the World Series to crown the top teams. Personal awards though, should go to a person, reguardless of the team he's on.
Which means, IMHO, that Arod is the league MVP this year. Soriano is close, but hasn't put it all together yet. Also, the MVP isn't about 'expectations' or 'how much he's being paid'. Yes, Soriano has done more than we've expected, and Arod is doing exactly what his outrageous salary demands that he do. But he's still doing it, and deserves to be recognized for it. Do we eliminate RJ from the Cy Young voting just because he's doing what we exected of him? Roy Oswalt is having a better year than many predicted. Should he get the Cy instead? Of course not... and neither should Soriano. (Or Tejada for that matter.) They've had great seasons... but Arod has been better offensively (tops them all in Runs, HR, RBI's and OBP), and has been by far the better defender. Simply put, he's the best of the best.
|
| 11 | quik_ag
ID: 577203014
Tue, Sep 17, 2002, 23:29
|
ah, but soriano leads the league in both stolen bases and doubles.. that's a whole lotta men in scoring position for jeter, williams, and giambi
|
| 12 | Dave R
Leader
ID: 12441623
Tue, Sep 17, 2002, 23:33
|
Soriano has had a wonderful year. He' gonna set all kinds records at the pace he's on. Would I like to see him get the MVP, of course, I'm a yankee fan.
But in my mind the MVP should be Tejada.
|
| 13 | YOUNGBUCK
ID: 331381323
Wed, Sep 18, 2002, 00:07
|
I just don't understand why they even consider giving the MVP to the best player on a winning team rather than the plainly the BEST player?
isn't that what the MVP stands for? Most Valuable Player!
thats just more of an advantage for the player on the better team to produce better stats than the player on the weaker team. It just makes arod that much better of a player. He can be that good with on such a horrible team.
what if A-rod was on the Yankees? he would easily have 175rbi's
|
| 14 | The Left Wings
ID: 1668298
Wed, Sep 18, 2002, 01:33
|
what if A-rod was on the Yankees? he would easily have 175rbi's
That's with Soriano standing at second base all his doubles.
This is just it... His OBP might be low, but how about all those who have a higher OBP? How many of them get to the second base as often? Also, he's 1 behind league lead with 193 base hits. That's pretty damn good for me.
However, Soriano strikes out too much and walks too little.
|
| 15 | RecycledSpinalFluid
ID: 1924582
Wed, Sep 18, 2002, 02:18
|
Is Soriano more valuable than Giambi? How about Bernie Williams? Jeter? How about David Wells? If you have to debate if the guys is even the MVP in his own lineup, then I say no.
As for ARod, how in the world is this guy "Valuable" to the Rangers (other than a stadium draw)? They suck with him, they'll suck without him. Again, I say no.
I think I agree with Dave R, it should go to Tejada or a dark horse like Garret Anderson (not likely to happen there though. Anahiem will get disrespected.)
|
| 16 | patjams
ID: 284122415
Wed, Sep 18, 2002, 02:26
|
Tejada has almost single handedly kept the A's in the hunt over the last month (see his 4 game winning hits in the bottom of the 9th). Soriano has been awesome, but so has Giambi so you'll get some argument that G deserves some votes too. The writers usually vote for the guy who was most valuable to his own team so at this point, I'd say that Tejada gets the majority of the votes. Arod is clearly the best player in the league, but his team is in last place and whether you agree with it or not, it counts a lot. (Especially when there are deserving guys from contenders.)
As for Arod having better numbers if he was a Yank, I'd have to say his numbers would probably decline due to the fact that the Yankees have premier guys that produce and would take away some of Arods production. If Soriano hits 40 homeruns he actually reduces the number of RBI chances for those guys behind him by being on base even less than 33% of the time.
It's a great debate, that's for sure.
|
| 17 | Matt S
Donor
ID: 22752811
Wed, Sep 18, 2002, 03:35
|
There's no way I'd give the MVP to Arod. MVP. Think about it. Valueable to what? What is Arod valueable to? A last place team. Why not make Aubrey Huff or Bobby Higginson MVP? If you can't lead a team to success with your production then you are not valueable at all.
I agree, Miguel Tejada or Garret Anderson for MVP. Soriano can make a case, but he has too much firepower behind him to even be declared MVP of the Yankees. If I had a vote, it would be for Tejada.
Matt S
|
| 18 | kev
ID: 11438306
Wed, Sep 18, 2002, 06:21
|
Another vote for Miggy T
|
| 19 | KrazyKoalaBears
Donor
ID: 266182910
Wed, Sep 18, 2002, 07:26
|
ARod has been valuable to his team, but the value is completely wasted. I always like to look at the question, "Where would the team be without _________?" Well, without ARod, TEX would still be in last place. So a big whoop-de-doo for ARod. Sure, they would likely have fewer wins, but either way, they're still in last place in the division, they're still below 0.500, and they're still out of playoff contention. In other words, the team is no better off, or worse off, with or without ARod in terms of things that really matter. I don't really consider Soriano to be the MVP because it's pretty hard to do so when there's also talk of Giambi as a potential MVP. Maybe if there was an award for MVT (Most Valuable Team), then it would go to NYY because they're lineup is just stacked with guys you could argue as being an MVP for any other team. Take Soriano out of the lineup and you have the Yanks from a few years ago, still going to the World Series. In other words, not much difference. Personally, when filling in the blank from the question above, I give it to Tejada. Instead of battling the Angels for first in the West, OAK would be battling SEA for the Wild Card, or worse, without Tejada. And if you look at the offensive stats, Tejada isn't that different from ARod (right side stats): AVG: .308 vs. .305
Hits: 191 vs. 180
2B: 29 vs. 25
HR: 31 vs. 55
RBI: 121 vs. 135
BB: 35 vs. 76
K: 79 vs. 112
SB: 6 vs. 9
OBP: .353 vs. .390
SLG: .504 vs. .634 I've bolded the stats where I believe one player has an advantage over the other (in all cases ARod over Tejada). You'll note that I didn't highlight BB and K because they essentially wash each other out. ARod get's more BB's, but he also gets more K's. So basically, we have ARod leading Tejada by 24 HRs, 37 points in OBP and 130 points in SLG, and that's about it besides an advantage in Fielding for ARod also. I just don't see those few numbers being a big enough advantage to overcome the fact that Tejada has helped positioned his team to go to the playoffs, while TEX is going to be staying home in October once again. I heard on SportsCenter a few days ago that something like only 5 (I could be wrong on the number, but it was definitely single digits) MVPs have come from a losing team. I think ARod is a great player, but I just have a really hard time saying that someone was the Most Valueable Player for a team that didn't even win a majority of their games and is a non-factor in the hunt for the playoffs, the most important part of the game.
|
| 20 | cancermoon
ID: 53248219
Wed, Sep 18, 2002, 07:33
|
well maybe next year when pitchers stop pitching to Soriano because they know he'll swing at anythign anyway, we'll see if he still can put up such great numbers. imagine what Arod would be doing if he was able to gain as little respect from the pitchers as Soriano gets, Arod would probably have 100 HR's if they pitched to him. Put Williams and Giambi behind Arod in the order and watch him rip.
|
| 21 | Dave R
Leader
ID: 269241611
Wed, Sep 18, 2002, 07:41
|
Cancermoon, that assessment is off base. With the Yankees lineup Soriano will still be pitched to.
For sure he is a free swinger and strikes out alot. But watching him daily he has one of the quickest bat I've ever seen, he's getting better every day at defense.
That being said, I don't believe he's the MVP this year, the Yankees are loaded with candidates.
Tejada has meant more to a winning team than anyone else.
|
| 22 | Ender
ID: 13443221
Wed, Sep 18, 2002, 08:24
|
I agree with KKB. I think the essential question is where would the team be without him?
It would be hard to make a case for anyone onthe Yankees being MVP. They won titles before Soriano. Their lineup is stacked. Where would they be without him? Can't say for sure, but I gotta believe they would still be in the playoffs.
I reiterate what KKB said about ARod. Where would the Rangers be without him? The same place they are right now: last place. I think that matters, a lot.
Where would the A's be without Tejada? Staying home. Where would the Angels be without Anderson? Staying home. I realize someone has to win the West, but the race would look much different without those 2 guys.
|
| 23 | Perm Dude
Leader
ID: 19652912
Wed, Sep 18, 2002, 09:19
|
The question is not value to the team, but value in the league. I don't agree that MVPs have to come from winning teams; that's an excuse to make the pool of contending players smaller, making it easier to pick a less deserving winner.
Soriano is quite good, and will get some votes. ARod has 16 more beamers and 7 more total bases, playing on a team in which they can pitch around him. Tejeda has a better average and 25 more rbis. Manny is hitting .344. There is no shortage of AL candidates.
That said, the last AL MVP winner that wasn't on a divisional winner was 12 years ago, when Cal Ripkin won in 1991 on the 6th place Orioles. It's not unheard of for players on losing teams to win, but there's certainly a voting bias toward only looking at players on not only winning teams, but eventual divisional winners.
pd
|
| 24 | ksoze
Sustainer
ID: 50643419
Wed, Sep 18, 2002, 10:20
|
Neyer's take on ARod's "valuable" status.
|
| 25 | sosa
ID: 587142816
Wed, Sep 18, 2002, 13:28
|
Krazykoalabears, you never cease to amaze. I remember when (long story short) you tried to convince me that Kurt Warner was less deserving of the NFL MVP award because Trent Green put up similar numbers when he filled in due to injury the previous year. My argument was that with Warner they were winning and with Green they weren't. Why is it that in an individual-oriented sport (baseball) you choose to focus on team success when looking at MVP, but in a team-oriented sport (football) you choose to look at the individual stats?
|
| 26 | The Left Wings
ID: 1668298
Wed, Sep 18, 2002, 13:29
|
So basically we're taking away all the teams that don't make the playoffs and those teams that clinched a playoff berth a month before the season ends. That leaves, what, 3 teams out of 14 (16 for NL) every season? Oh wait, it can't be the teams that lost the playoff race. So the MVP has to go to the guy who made the difference on the 4th and last team that clinched the playoff berth.
I don't think so. Every team has an MVP. It's its Most Valuable Player. Every player has a value, so there has to be one who's the best, regardless of his teams' performance. I mean, it's not ARod's fault that all the Rangers have for pitching is Kenny Rogers and the A's have the trio of Mulder, Zito, Hudson and several decent 4th and 5th starters. I don't think it's fair that it's take ARod 90 homeruns a season for the Rangers to make the playoffs in order to qualify for the MVP and meanwhile Tejada needed just 30-something because his team makes the playoffs.
|
| 27 | walk
Leader
ID: 338441813
Wed, Sep 18, 2002, 13:52
|
This argument is consistently the same, year in and decade out. A truly "who cares" kinda thing to me (IMHO...these individual awards, as if)...but we all grew up placing a great emphasis on them.
It all depends on how one defines "MVP." Post #13 by YOUNGBUCK is almost satirical in the way he asks: "isn't that what MVP stands for...?" Clearly, no one really agrees on what MVP stands for.
It seems we tend to define it based on numbers and the sportswriters based on some subjective combination of numbers and performance of the team for which the individual played.
Given that, I would vote for A-Rod, but bet that Soriano or Tejada win it. Since Soriano is on a NY team, and that he will likely be only the 4th 40-40 player in ML history, I would then bet he gets the award.
- walk
|
| 28 | KrazyKoalaBears
Donor
ID: 266182910
Wed, Sep 18, 2002, 14:34
|
sosa, glad to have made your day. You obviously never got my point about the Warner/Green debate -- the point being that the STL defense gave up far more points under Green than under Warner and that had Warner played with Green's defense and vice versa, their records would have been VERY different -- so I doubt you'll get my point on this issue either -- the point being that with all stats being relatively equal, how a player has positioned a team that otherwise wouldn't be in the playoff hunt in the hunt for the division title with a wild card berth practically wrapped up comes into play and must be taken into consideration. Sorry, but I just don't see ARod's stats being far and away better than Tejada's, so there has to be some other measuring stick that comes into play. MLB does not have an Art Ross Trophy -- outside of the batting title -- so looking at pure stats alone is a bit ridiculous with regards to the MVP award. IIRC, the Warner/Green debate arose in a debate about the MVP between Warner and Faulk. Both players helped position the team for the playoffs, so what argument is there with that regard? The only argument left is who helped the team more which then involves individual stats and situational based stats. If the argument were between Warner and Plummer (somehow), then yes, I think team record and playoff positioning would come into play because it is yet another measuring stick to use. Rather than blanketing my comments as if they are the be-all and end-all comments for every situation, please take them just as they are: comments about the specific debate and circumstances at hand.
|
| 29 | Rogue's Strikers
ID: 6815172
Wed, Sep 18, 2002, 14:37
|
Walk, agreed. The award tends to lose its meaning with me, since I'm not really sure in the end what exactly its supposed to mean. :)
We need a new award, period. Give it to the best player in the league each year. This year's winners:
New award: Arod
MVP award: Tejada or Soriano
Every other sport awards the player it feels is the best in the business. Only baseball would fail to give Arod a trophy, even though everyone around will agree that he's the best player in the AL.
|
| 30 | Whitey
Sustainer
ID: 47130129
Wed, Sep 18, 2002, 14:42
|
NAME AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI SB CS BB BA OBP SLG OPS
A. Soriano, NYY 649 122 198 48 2 39 96 40 12 19 .305 .334 .565 .899
A. Rodriguez, Tex 590 117 180 25 2 55 135 9 4 76 .305 .390 .634 1.024
|
| 31 | KrazyKoalaBears
Donor
ID: 266182910
Wed, Sep 18, 2002, 14:44
|
Maybe MLB should adopt an Art Ross trophy of sorts and give it the the player with the most HRs, or the best combined ranking of HR, RBI, and AVG, or something along those lines. Something that is a given, with no blurred edges as to how to determine the winner. The winner is the one with the most _____. If MLB did this, then the argument that "Pitchers have their award, so the MVP is for batters" would be null and then the MVP could actually go to the Most Valuable Player, not Batter.
|
| 32 | Whitey
Sustainer
ID: 47130129
Wed, Sep 18, 2002, 14:46
|
Soriano is superior in runs, hits, doubles and sb.
Arod is superior in HR, RBI, OBP and SLG
In my opinion, Arod is superior where it counts. Those are the essential categories when determining the productivity of a player.
If Arod played for a winning team he would be the runaway winner of the MVP. Just because the other players on his team are not as good as the Yankees or Athletics doesn't mean he is not as valuable to his team or the league.
|
| 33 | Whitey
Sustainer
ID: 47130129
Wed, Sep 18, 2002, 14:47
|
I forgot to mention how Arod is a much more sure-handeed fielder and has better plate discipline, but that is not really the point
|
| 34 | sosa
ID: 586431312
Wed, Sep 18, 2002, 16:08
|
<28> No I never did get that first point because personally I never thought it made sense. I don't get the hypothetical, they played with the same defense, the Rams, it's reflexive, you know, a=a. I get the second point just fine thank you. Don't get me wrong, I am on the side of those that say an MVP should come from a successful team, despite the fact that A-Rod is far and away the best player in the league. A 167 point difference in OPS over Tejada is quite significant by the way. But if I had an MVP ballot I wouldn't vote A-Rod any higher than 2nd. I believe voters must rank their top 10 choices, and I'd use most of those 10 for guys off of playoff teams.
The debate here at least in part is about the guidelines for what defines MVP, and that trandscends the boundaries of any one sport, no? I guess maybe it goes back to football and perhaps where we might actually disagree then is that I would say QB is clearly the most important position in that sport and generally the football MVP award will be geared towards a (winning) QB, and I'll leave it at that.
|
| 35 | KrazyKoalaBears
Donor
ID: 266182910
Wed, Sep 18, 2002, 16:36
|
sosa, then it just becomes a difference in opinions, which is fine. You think the QB is heads and tails above the rest of the football team, and I don't. I look at 2001 teams like MIN and see a great QB with a 25th ranked rushing game and see them at 5-11. I see Jake Plummer and a 27th ranked rushing game at 7-9. But obviously the reverse is true also. Take CIN, DAL, SEA, etc. The point is that I don't see one particular person on a football team as being the single most important in all cases. Sometimes it's the QB, sometimes it's the RB, and sometimes it's the LB (just ask BAL from 2000). To go into voting thinking that one particular position is already a front-runner for the award is what gets us in these situations in the first place. Why can't the MVP just be the Most Valuable Player? Personally, if that were the case, I give it to a pitcher this year (Zito, Martinez, Lowe being the front-runners) because pitching has been the foundation of the successful teams this year. Going back to my "Where would the team be without ______," I think pitchers fit the bill far more than hitters for this year. But that's my opinion. The problem is that very few people in the media, and in general, will look at it that way. the MVP award has become the MVB award, always going to hitters, no matter if there is a more deserving pitcher. All in all, it does go back to what defines an MVP. I just don't think that stats alone determine that, especially when comparing across different teams. If you are comparing players on the same team (Warner to Faulk), then obviously stats mean more, in my view of the guidelines of what determines an MVP. As to the a = a argument, that's very far from a reality. Essentially, what you're saying is that through the course of a season, a defense makes no changes to it's schemes and matchups and an opposing offense makes no changes either. We must be watching different NFL's if that's the case. If a = a, then explain NWE's defense/offense from last year: First 8 games: 23 PF/Gm FOR, 20 PA/Gm, 4-4 record Last 8 games: 23 PF/Gm FOR, 14 PA/Gm, 7-1 record So does a = a? I don't think so. The offense didn't change it's production (Think: Green instead of Warner), yet the defense lowered their PA/Gm and the team record got better (the exact opposite of what happened when Green took over STL). So it seems that a defense can change and it can affect a team's record.
|
| 36 | Dave R
Leader
ID: 12441623
Wed, Sep 18, 2002, 16:46
|
Here's my take on all this ( and remember I'm a Yankee fan )
where would NY be without the superb year by Soriano- probably still in 1st
where would texas be without the superb year by AROD- still in last place
where would the A's be without Tejada, good question.
I've been wrong before and probably will be again, all are haveing splendid seasons, but in my opinion the MVP should go to who's been most valuable to his team.
I think it's Tejada
|
| 37 | ChicagoTRS
Sustainer
ID: 58735170
Wed, Sep 18, 2002, 16:49
|
My vote Tejada #1, Soriano #2...
|
| 38 | sosa
ID: 587142816
Wed, Sep 18, 2002, 16:56
|
<35> The a=a comment was meant to refer to the 2000 Rams specifically, and we probably went over it before. It was not meant to be a universal NFL theory that would apply to the 2001 Patriots or anybody else necessarily. I really don't want to continue to clutter up a good baseball thread with this nonsense.
As for pitchers, sure I would give them some consideration for MVP, but like with A-Rod, I don't think I would ever list a pitcher first on my ballot if I had one.
|
| 39 | KrazyKoalaBears
Donor
ID: 266182910
Wed, Sep 18, 2002, 17:01
|
sosa, fair enough, but the stats I provided before showed that a != a with the STL defense, just like a != a for the NWE defense. As far as the MLB MVP, we just have differing views on how to vote for the award, just like all the people who have votes. If nothing else, it should be a close vote in the end because of debates like this.
|
| 40 | Huskiez
ID: 11842180
Wed, Sep 18, 2002, 17:36
|
I'm a huge Yankee fan (similar to Dave R) and as much as I hate to admit it, I think Tejada is more deserving than Soriano, even though Soriano will get 40/40.. every time Oakland needs a hit, Tejada has come through. I also feel that it should go to a playoff contending team, in which case the MVP has made some sort of meaningful impact (sorry, ARod)..
Just on a side note, where it gets interesting is in the NL MVP.. in my opinion, although Barry's numbers are a lot better (including that MLB record for .OBP and BBs), and I'm sure he'll win the MVP too, I don't know where the Dodgers would be without Shawn Green. I think his supporting cast is a lot worse, and somehow they are competing.. Barry has a former MVP (Kent), an all star (Santiago), and three other guys (Aurilia, Lofton, Sanders) all of whom are very good hitters, in his lineup. Green doesn't have that type of protection, IMHO. This is all assuming that this award goes to the batters (excluding Randy, Schilling, Gagne, etc.), which I think in general it should.
|
| 41 | The Left Wings
ID: 28851619
Wed, Sep 18, 2002, 17:43
|
That's just it, Dave R. You're giving the MVP award to the best player on the team that clinched the playoff spot last. Why can't the MVP play on a first place team or a last place team? Why can't a player on the Yankees be better than a player on the A's?
If you replace Tejada by ARod on the A's, I'm sure you'll give ARod the award. I don't think it's fair.
What I think is that the question for MVP should be "Which is the player you would rather have on your team?" It's like who you would pick with a first overall draft pick in a baseball pool, but only there are more things to consider. Based on this year's performance, I would pick Soriano over ARod because there are other sluggers around, but Soriano is such a superior leadoff man. A 40-40 man with 100 RBIs betting leadoff seems better than 60 homeruns and 150 RBIs if he can't steal as many bases and hit as many doubles. Afterall, what makes the difference in a game is usually the ability for the leadoff player to bat in those crappy players at the bottom of the order who happened to have a base hit, and Soriano does a pretty darn good job at that.
As of walk-off hits, Tejada just happened to be there to do the job. This is like save chances, if your team is constantly blowing other teams away or is constantly being blown away, you can't blame that team's MVP for not getting any chances to get the walk-off hits. So I don't think it's a fair comparison.
And heck, if Tejada didn't win those three games the last couple of weeks and got all the media attention, I doubt if he would even be considered for the award.
My vote: 1. Soriano, 2. ARod, 3. Tejada
|
| 42 | patjams
ID: 308531812
Wed, Sep 18, 2002, 18:22
|
TLW, the shortstop position is probably the most important position on the field defensively (aside from catcher). That is why, when you can get the kind of production you get with ARod, it makes him that much more valuable. A shortstop who produces like an outfielder is very valuable because you can focus on getting better defenders at the typical "slugger" positions. Regardless of what Soriano has done this year, ARod has proven that he can put the same numbers up year in and year out. If you were a GM and chose Soriano over ARod, you'd be out of a job before your next pick.
As far as the MVP, it's as much about a feeling as it is about the numbers. Tejada's ability to produce in clutch (bottom of the 9th and 2 outs)situations makes him more valuable than a guy who isn't doing it. Those 4 game winning hits were the sole reason the A's won the game. Regardless of the media coverage, the A's would be 4 games back and out of a division title shot (and maybe even the WC) had he not come through. Tejada has taken over where Giambi (who himself won an MVP in Oakland with similar production) left off and he has done it from a more grueling position. An argument can definitely be made for all 3 and 2 of them will be disappointed, but whoever gets it is certainly deserving.
|
| 43 | Rogue's Strikers
ID: 6815172
Wed, Sep 18, 2002, 19:03
|
And how many game-winning hits as Arod gotten? What if its more than Tejada?
Also, as Neyer pointed out in that article, Texas is last place in a 4 team division. (Which happens to be the best division in baseball.) Where would Texas be if they played in the AL Central instead? Third place, and thats not even considering the fact that they'd play alot more games against KC, Detroit and Cleveland than against Seattle, Oakland and Anaheim. So their record is a stat of circumstance, and doesn't really tell how good/bad the team is. (Just like a hitter's HR total doesn't tell the whole story of what kind of a hitter he is.) Given all that, is Arod really such a terrible choice now?
|
| 44 | cancermoon
ID: 53248219
Wed, Sep 18, 2002, 19:06
|
you got to remember that Arod is a very good base stealer, he is quick and he is very smart, if could take a 40/40 season any season he wants, but his manager doesn't want this, so he doesn't even attempt this. Saying Soriano or Tejada in the same breath as Arod is just ridiculous, Arod is on another planet as far as ability defencively and offensively.
It all depends on what "valuable " means, Vlauable for what, it just says MVP, it doesn't say "most valuable for winning a world series person", in that case Texas would have won a lot less games without Arod that Yankees would of without Soriano, so Arod was more valuable to improving the teams performance.
|
| 45 | FloodCity Johnnies
ID: 468401819
Wed, Sep 18, 2002, 19:40
|
I never thought that when I started this thread last night that it would go on and on. I have really enjoyed reading all the comments and heartfelt opinions. It's clear to me that there is no concensus on the AL MVP. Therefore, I conclude that it will be one of the tightest race in history. My prediction: 1. Soriano 2. Tejada 3. AROD
PS. My favorite player is AROD and I am not a Yankee fan. I'm originally from KC and lived there during the George Brett era if you know what I mean.
|
| 46 | patjams
ID: 308531812
Wed, Sep 18, 2002, 19:54
|
Rogue's, ARod may very well have more game winning hits (I can think of 1 or 2 in the last couple of months), but his hits aren't as important to a pennant race as Tejada's. I'm not saying it's right or wrong, but there is a feeling when a guy continues to come through in clutch situations that he deserves a little more consideration. It's no doubt that ARod is the most productive/best player, but Most Valuable doesn't mean best. Tejada has become the leader of the A's when they needed a leader and he did it by playing outstanding baseball. True, ARod plays outstanding baseball too, but what Tejada's done for the A's this year (1 year after losing their leader and best player) is incredible.
|
| 47 | The Left Wings
ID: 1668298
Wed, Sep 18, 2002, 20:30
|
Again, ARod doesn't get nearly as many chances as Tejada did. Remember, all the arguments that have been made for Tejada's clutch play is because his team has been winning or close to winning. ARod just doesn't get as many chances as Tejada did and he's getting screwed by that. I don't think it's fair.
In an AL draft, if I don't get ARod, I could go for Tejada, Jeter or Nomar for SS. But if I don't get Soriano, I'll have to settle with Boone, and the next best would be Durham. From the position scarcity point of view, Soriano has to be more valuable to a team than ARod and Tejada.
In my opinion, I won't even consider Tejada as an MVP candidate although I'm sure he's one of the best players.
Clutch hits is just not a fair comparison.
|
| 48 | steve houpt
ID: 32428300
Wed, Sep 18, 2002, 20:57
|
'Clutch hits'.
Over rated IMHO. No chance for a clutch hit (unless solo GW HR) unless someone got a clutch hit or walk ahead of you. Who got the clutch hits in April to make clutch hits in September mean anything. 162 game season. Make Tejada player of the month.
Oakland. How about clutch pitching? Maybe Zito is Oakland MVP.
My choice. Flip a coin. Can make case for either one.
1T. Giambi
1T. A-Rod
3. Soriano
------------------
I'd vote for Giambi though, because he got robbed last year.
One way I look at it (offensive stats - runs created) is what percentage does a player over a replacement player help a team towards perfect (162-0). A-Rod offensively has added slightly more wins to Texas than Giambi to the Yankees (IMHO), but without A-Rod (even with) Texas has a lot more room for improvement than the Yankees without Giambi.
Giambi's OBP and OPS may not be as flamboyant and as good for sportscenter as Soriano. No 40-40 spin. He was 'expected' to do what he has done. But my vote goes for Gimabi ahead of Soriano, and today ahead of A-Rod. But so close between A-Rod and Giambi, either one is deserving IMHO.
But Soriano and Tejada seem to have the media spin and support, so one of them will probably win. I'll watch sportscenter closely in the next two weeks and see who they are pushing. They won it for Suzuki last year. :)
|
| 49 | Tree
ID: 22758146
Wed, Sep 18, 2002, 20:59
|
did anyone mention that A-Rod (.989. with only 8 errors) is a better fielder than both Soriano (.967 with a whopping 22 errors, more than any other AL second baseman) and Tejada (.974 with 19 errors)
Tree
|
| 50 | Cuz
ID: 388371718
Wed, Sep 18, 2002, 21:02
|
This kind of discussion seems to go on every year with regards to what does "MVP" really mean. In terms of overall value to his team, I would have to think Tejada would be a favored choice, but in terms of best-overall player, I think that has to go to A-rod. Maybe MLB could solve this problem somewhat by having two seperate awards as previously suggested. The current MVP award, and as well as a 'Most Outstanding Player' award.
|
| 51 | Skidazl
Leader
ID: 5074248
Wed, Sep 18, 2002, 21:03
|
suzuki won it for himself last year...
Think about it, the m's the year before without Ichiro(and with Arod) won 91 games and won the wildcard....
Last year with ichiro, no arod, 116 wins...
well deserved if you ask me....
|
| 52 | Dave R
Leader
ID: 12441623
Wed, Sep 18, 2002, 21:09
|
Fielding percentage is very subjective and depends alot on the scoring of the official scorer, whos sometimes biased towards the home team in many cases, or conversly giving hits when an error should have been scored.
Soriano is still a little rough but makes most plays and has gotten quite adept at turning the DP. The fact that he has nearly 3 times as many errors than AROD but his fielding % is not that much less would lead on to think that he has had more chances, or possibly has better range and gets to more balls.
I'm no expert but I don't think defensive prowess factors in to much in the vote for MVP
|
| 53 | Rogue's Strikers
ID: 6815172
Wed, Sep 18, 2002, 21:14
|
You know, in the end it will probably go to Arod, since the 'best player' voters will vote Arod, while the 'most valuable to a winning team' voters will be split between several candidates. (Giambi, Soriano, Tejada, Anderson, Ramirez, etc.) If they can split the vote enough, Arod should bag it.
|
| 54 | Tree
ID: 22758146
Wed, Sep 18, 2002, 22:01
|
A-Rod has had 705 TC, and been involved with 105 DPs...Soriano has had LESS chances at 669, and turned considerably fewer DPs with 79.
we are talking about the MVP award..most valuable PLAYER, not most valuable HITTER, and thusly, every single aspect should count.
additionally, when it comes to baseball, the word subjective has to be thrown out. the entire sport at its most base (no pun intended) comes down to something subjective - balls and strikes.
Tree
|
| 55 | Mattinglyinthehall
ID: 1832399
Thu, Sep 19, 2002, 12:29
|
Skidazl 51
suzuki won it for himself last year...
Last year with ichiro, no arod, 116 wins...
You are saying the only difference between the '00 Ms and the '01 Ms was Ichiro? Ever hear of Brett Boone?
'00 McLemore .245ba 3hr 46rbi
'01 Boone: .331ba 37hr 141rbi
...I'd say that was something of a contribution, no?
Some other differences in between the 2000 and 2001 versions of the Mariners:
'00 Cameron: .267ba 19hr 78rbi 24sb
'01 Cameron: .267ba 25hr 110rbi 34sb
'00 Sele: 14-10 4.51
'01 Sele: 15-5 3.60
'00 Moyer: 13-10 5.49
'01 Moyer: 20-6 3.43
'00 Halama: 14-9 5.08
'01 Halama: 10-7 4.73
'00 Abbott: 9-7 4.22
'01 Abbott: 17-4 4.25
Ichiro certainly helped, but he was not responsible for all 25 of those extra wins. Giambi was robbed.
|
| 56 | Skidazl
Leader
ID: 5074248
Thu, Sep 19, 2002, 22:00
|
post #55, somehow I knew a Yankee fan would come and defend Giambi....
but would he have last year?
:-)
|
| 57 | Dave R
Leader
ID: 10035120
Thu, Sep 19, 2002, 23:07
|
I would have and believe Giambi deserves consideration this year as well.
As said previously I think Tejada is the most deserving of the MVP-- MOST VALUABLE PLAYER.
Soriano, Giambi, and AROD are have studly and splendid seasons.
Who's been most valuable to his team?
|
| 58 | Unemployed
Donor
ID: 53428912
Fri, Sep 20, 2002, 16:42
|
I don't think it matters who's the most important to their team. It's the American League MVP award not the MVP to a team award.
So Arod gets my vote, but I predict Soriano.
|
| 59 | smartone
Donor
ID: 29135714
Fri, Sep 20, 2002, 18:18
|
YES!
(I reply to the thread's header question)
|
| 60 | cancermoon
ID: 53248219
Fri, Sep 20, 2002, 18:59
|
I think everyone is picking the guy who has improved the most this year when they consider Soriano or Tejada. And yes the leagues most improved player award must go to one of them. But MVP, haha what a joke, All year Mulder, Hudson and Lidle pitched badly, the reason Oakland got their streak and therefore actually look like a winning team now is because those three pitches found some form, Tejada got a couple of clutch hits in there, but no more than any #3 or #4 hitter should have over that time. People over rate what Tejada has done simply because they didn't expect it, If ARod did exactly the same thing you wouldn't have even noticed it.
As for Soriano yes very good season, but it is easy to hit when the pitchers are forced to pitch to you because of who bats after you, and Base stealing is not that important, as Arod could easily steal 40 bases, he's an athelete, but it isn't his job and he doesn't even try.
|
| 61 | steve houpt
ID: 32428300
Fri, Sep 20, 2002, 20:49
|
Post 55 - I defend MITH and Giambi. ESPN was a driving factor in MVP for Suzuki last year. Giambi was robbed (just pick pocketed really). Thread is gone from last year, but in just about every other forum of baseball 'voters, sabrticians, etc, Giambi won the MVP.
And ESPN is one of the driving factors behind Tejada and Soriano this year IMHO. Makes good Sportscenter 'news' and talk during ESPN games. And the 'real voters' listen.
|
| 62 | 22 Rules
ID: 297191118
Mon, Sep 23, 2002, 09:09
|
Why is Tejada a better choice than Soriano for MVP?
I will get back to this. I will separate Cy Young from MVP (and focus on the MVP-players) as I think an award should go to pitchers and players separately. The truth, contrary to belief, is that an everyday player has LESS of an effect on total chances than a pitcher. Meaning an everyday player has a little less impact on his team over the course of a year than a pitcher. By a total chance I mean an AB confrontation or fielding play. In the National League the pitchers have a little more value in that they can get almost 100 AB's.
First, I want to make clear that ARod SHOULD be the MVP. But, common silly consensus is how much value could ARod bring to a last place team. The truth is Texas is not an awful team and why should ARod's performance be tarnished because the players around him aren't as good as Soriano's or Tejada's?
Everybody says that Alex Rodriguez is the best player in the American League, yet people on this thread and the media seem to be getting farther away from ARod being the MVP??? It is NOT ARods fault his team can't pitch. Well, maybe it is because his salary may stop the team from acquiring a pitcher, but since writers don't take salary into account...actually, I may be on
to something here. Think about it, the MVP would be someone who had an excellent year and is cheap! I have always said the way to win is to have cheap talented players so you could spend money on proven talent. If this is the case, Soriano is the MVP, because he makes very little.
Getting back to the mainstream argument (even though I like mine). Rodriguez should win the award for two main reasons:
One, every game played by Texas has an impact on attendance, concession, etc.. Imagine if Arod were not on Texas, they would not be able to be a slightly below average team. They would be awful and attendance would surely suffer.
Two, as stated previously, it is NOT logical to state that because ARod's teammates aren't as good as Soriano's or Tejada's that ARod is less valuable! Rob Neyer used an analysis on this which he wrote, "By that crazy "logic," one could easily argue that Vinny Castilla is more valuable than Edgardo Alfonzo, or Scott Hatteberg is more valuable than Mike Sweeney." The best and the easiest way to measure "value" is to simply ask, "Which player does the most things to help his team win?" If you ask that question,
you can't avoid the singular conclusion that Alex Rodriguez is the most valuable player in the American League."
Assuming Arod doesn't win the award, who should win?
A friend of mine talked about how "every time" he
turns to ESPN, Tejada is getting the game winning hit for Oakland. True, this has happened 3-4 times of late. But, when we let ESPN dictate what we see and here we are in trouble. I mean what about the clutch hits or walks from
the guys who were on base to score the winning run or the times a player didn't come through?
Many people say, "where would Oakland be without Tejada, he IS their offense." Well, they are winning the Yankees USED to win - with pitching.
Tejada is having a terrific year, but one could argue Chavez has been at least as productive as Tejada. Chavez has an OPS of .874 compared to
Tejada's .852. In these "late and close" situations Tejada has been "so impressive in", Tejada has an OPS of only .786 compared to Chavez' .873. Believe it or not, Tejada has actually produced less during these times...you wouldn't know it from ESPN, would you? This is not to take away from Tejada as this difference is not that great because most of his
lesser production in late and close situations has been less power because his average is about the same. Anyway, the argument that Giambi would take votes away from Soriano doesn't hold much water as Chavez should do the same (although he is rarely mentioned).
OK, let's get into Tejada and Soriano.
Soriano should do what has only been done 3 other times and this is 40-40. Ok, maybe not too big a deal. But, he also may add 50 doubles to
this equation. As far as I can tell, this has never been done.
Soriano OPS= .898
Tejada OPS= .852
(Numbers were taken last week)
Soriano also gets the added value of 17 extra bases via the SB (41 SB's minus 24 for doubling his CS). This adds another 26 points to Soriano's
OPS advantage or giving him an OPS of .924. This is 72 points higher than Tejada. To put this 72 point difference into perspective, this is
slightly greater than the disparity between Tejada and Jermaine Dye's .782 OPS. I
don't here anyone calling out Dye's name for MVP???
BTW, Soriano is hitting .348 in those late and close situations, although his OPS is lower because of less power as well (.831)
Now, defense has to be taken into account and both Soriano and Tejada play
decent/solid defense at key positions. How good is very hard to really quantify. Based on using stats and this is the one area where there is
enormous debate whether this is worth anything, here is what I found.
using ESPN's qualified SS's and 2nd baseman:
Tejada ranked 9th in fielding %, 7th in range factor, and 9th in zone rating. This appears to be middle of the road.
Soriano ranked 7th in fielding %, 6th in range factor, and 7th in zone rating. Same as above.
I really don't make much of these numbers so I am not using defense (accept position) to sway any thinking. (this is what knocks Giambi out)
Bottom line. If you won't vote for ARod to be the MVP (the correct choice) I don't see how you could choose Tejada over Soriano.
The final exclamation point to true value is that Soriano brings this production to his team at a VERY LOW salary. This should be one of the
main criteria, but is never looked at. Being very good and cheap allows your team to get another good player and this is truly the MVP.
Soriano is more deserving than Tejada!
Enjoy,
Steve
|
| 63 | Mattinglyinthehall
ID: 1832399
Mon, Sep 23, 2002, 09:20
|
I have no idea how they come up with range factor or zone rating, but anyone who watches Soriano play will say he is a below average defensive second baseman. I don't care what the numbers are. He's improved notably this season, especialy on grass, but 1/2 the balls hit toward him on turf eat him alive.
|
| 64 | 22 Rules
ID: 297191118
Mon, Sep 23, 2002, 11:16
|
Mattinglyinthehall,
Range factor and zone ratings are basically about how many actual plays(outs) a player makes or how many plays a player gets to within their zone.
I am not a big fan of these ratings as defense is one of the areas harder to judge on stats. However, if consistent patterns develop AND you think you see them with your naked eye, then they are probably correct. For example, Jeter is almost always making less plays than he should statistically and compared to the substitutes at SS when Jeter is not playing. Also, if you objectively look at Jeter, he has a lot of trouble going to his left and he is very slow on the turn of two.
You mentioned Soriano, however, I disagree with your scouting of him. While his glove is a little erratic, he has excellent range to get to balls and has the strongest arm of any 2nd baseman to throw guys out. He has improved his defense immensely and is very good now.
|
| Rate this thread: | If you wish, you may rate this thread on scale of 1-5. Ratings should indicate how valuable or interesting you believe this thread would be to other users of this forum. A '5' means that this thread is a 'must read'. A '1' means that this is a complete waste of time. If you have previously rated this thread, rating it again will delete your previous rating. If you do not want to rate this thread, but want to see how others have rated it, then click the button without entering a rating, or else click here. |
|
|
|
Post a reply to this message: (But first, how about checking out this sponsor?)
|
|