CubKilla Posted November 17, 2003 Share Posted November 17, 2003 YAY! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitesoxfan99 Posted November 17, 2003 Share Posted November 17, 2003 Heres a link. ESPN Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrandoFan Posted November 17, 2003 Share Posted November 17, 2003 A-Rod, Delgado and Boone were 1-2-3 best AL players in 2003 anf the voting justly reflected that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted November 17, 2003 Share Posted November 17, 2003 Nice to see a guy get a big contract and keep playing well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iguana Posted November 17, 2003 Share Posted November 17, 2003 Nice to see a guy get a big contract and keep playing well. big??? big is Mt. everest. he got a huge contract! lol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cwsox Posted November 17, 2003 Share Posted November 17, 2003 I fail to understand how a player on a last team team can be MVP. So where would Texas have finished without ARod? More last than last? Was he player of the year? Perhaps. MVP? No. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxFanForever Posted November 17, 2003 Share Posted November 17, 2003 How can you be considered MVP when you are on a last place team? They could get last place without him Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitesoxfan99 Posted November 17, 2003 Share Posted November 17, 2003 I fail to understand how a player on a last team team can be MVP. So where would Texas have finished without ARod? More last than last? Was he player of the year? Perhaps. MVP? No. I agree, you shouldn't have to be on a first place team but your team should at least be competitive. Plus, at $25 million just how valuable is AROD to a team. Now I know that the MVP is about on the field play but lets be honest, money is a big part of the game these days. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxFanForever Posted November 17, 2003 Share Posted November 17, 2003 Great minds think alike CW Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cwsox Posted November 17, 2003 Share Posted November 17, 2003 Great minds think alike CW Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Queen Prawn Posted November 17, 2003 Share Posted November 17, 2003 How can you be considered MVP when you are on a last place team? They could get last place without him I was just thinking the same damned thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrandoFan Posted November 17, 2003 Share Posted November 17, 2003 I fail to understand how a player on a last team team can be MVP. So where would Texas have finished without ARod? More last than last? Was he player of the year? Perhaps. MVP? No. -- How can you be considered MVP when you are on a last place team? They could get last place without him That reminds me of one of the ESPN radio dude Tommy Williams saying that a .250 hitter from a 1st place team was more deserving of MVP than Andre Dawson in '87 because, get this, "Cubs would've finished last with or without Andre Dawson". At the time I time I thought it was one of the dumbest statements I have EVER heard. I still do. Why should A-Rod be penalized for Rangers GM's inability to put together a pitching staff? "Team record" should ONLY come into play when all other factors are EQUAL. MVP = most valuable player to a HYPOTHETICAL team, NOT to an actual team . And if you switch Delgado, Boone and A-Rod around, A-Rod's team would be marginally better off. Bonds deserves NL MVP even if his Ginats lost 130 games. He is the BEST player anf that's what MVP should stand for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxFanForever Posted November 17, 2003 Share Posted November 17, 2003 Nobody put a gun to Tom Hicks head and told him he had to pay A-Rod 250 million either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Hudler Posted November 17, 2003 Share Posted November 17, 2003 The MVP can be interpreted in different ways. Some people consider the award one for the best player. Others think in terms of value. Generally the MVP comes from a winning team and I have no argument with that. But sometimes the best player isn't on a winning team and if you look at the history of the award, you will most often find that the best player was indeed on a winner. With no real specifics or definition of the award, I don't have a problem with him winning it. There was no real clear cut choice and I think it can be easily argued that he was the best player this year. I also don't think how much money he makes should come into play with an award at all. I know the game is different than it once was, but to me that is about business. The award is about performance. I have no problem with it and say congrats to ARod. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Hudler Posted November 17, 2003 Share Posted November 17, 2003 Did I just agree with Brando??? Maybe I should re-think this..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrandoFan Posted November 17, 2003 Share Posted November 17, 2003 The MVP can be interpreted in different ways. Some people consider the award one for the best player. Others think in terms of value Value to team = subjective, hard-to-prove BS Value = Toronto having a couple more wins (and fans) if A-Rod played for them. What is Posada doing in the 3rd place anyway? Boone is a better defensive player, better baserunner and better hitter while playing in Safeco. What a joke. I have no problem with a 975 OPS player from a winning team winning the award over a 1000 OPS player from a losing tea. None. But the Andre Dawson arguement? Nonsense. I also don't care about past history of the award- writers like most people are SHEEP, and the award itself is all about popularity. Yawn. Finally, the guy is right- salary SHOULD be factored into value, no getting around the fact that A-Rod 25 Mill eally hurt the Rangers. However, as far as actual awards go, performance should by far be the biggest determining criterion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted November 17, 2003 Share Posted November 17, 2003 In this case I think Arod deserved it. If there was another near qualified candidate alongside him that helped lead his team to the playoffs, then I'd go with that player. In this instance I think Arod was the superior player and therefor he deserved the award. For example in 98 I thought Sosa deserved the award over BigMac because Sosa helped carry his team to the post-season, while Mark didn't. Sosa also had more RBI's and a better avg if I recall. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitesoxfan99 Posted November 17, 2003 Share Posted November 17, 2003 Finally, the guy is right- salary SHOULD be factored into value, no getting around the fact that A-Rod 25 Mill eally hurt the Rangers. However, as far as actual awards go, performance should by far be the biggest determining criterion. Thank you, I wasn't saying that A-Rod making $25 mil automatically eliminates his contention but the award is the Most VALUBLE Player, and his making that much money subtracts from his value. How people want to vote for the award is very subjective and they should probably just go ahead and make it the most outstanding player award. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phiaps6 Posted November 17, 2003 Share Posted November 17, 2003 there is no way a player should win an MVP on a team with a losing record. A-Rod was the best player in baseball this year but not the most valuable to his team. A-rod should win every player of the year award but not the MVP. Where would Boston have been without the heroics of David Ortiz down the stretch. He had so many clutch hits down the stretch that put boston in the playoffs. There is even a great case for shannon stewart. when he joined the twins they took off. The MVP award is for the players that are most valuable to his team. How can you be valuable to a team that finishes in last place? :finger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sox4lifeinPA Posted November 17, 2003 Share Posted November 17, 2003 value n. -Monetary or material worth: What's the arguement about? at 25 mil per year, A-rod is always the most VALUABLE player... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrandoFan Posted November 17, 2003 Share Posted November 17, 2003 there is no way a player should win an MVP on a team with a losing record. A-Rod was the best player in baseball this year but not the most valuable to his team. A-rod should win every player of the year award but not the MVP. Where would Boston have been without the heroics of David Ortiz down the stretch. He had so many clutch hits down the stretch that put boston in the playoffs. There is even a great case for shannon stewart. when he joined the twins they took off. The MVP award is for the players that are most valuable to his team. How can you be valuable to a team that finishes in last place? :finger Shannon Stewart over A-Rod? Are you f***ing crazy?! What's next? Eric Byrnes and Todd Walker? If anything A-Rod was MORE valuable to his team than Ortiz was to Boston. If A-Rod was playing for Boston (moving Nomar to 3B) in Ortiz's place, Boston not only would've run away with the Wild Card, but probably could have overtaken the Yankess. For example in 98 I thought Sosa deserved the award over BigMac because Sosa helped carry his team to the post-season, while Mark didn't. Sosa also had more RBI's and a better avg if I recall. Agreed. Back then, Sammy was actually a good baserunner and defensive RF. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elrockinMT Posted November 17, 2003 Share Posted November 17, 2003 I fail to understand how a player on a last team team can be MVP. So where would Texas have finished without ARod? More last than last? Was he player of the year? Perhaps. MVP? No. An excellent point. My question is this: If the Rangers didn't have Alex Rodriguez then how much lower in the AL West could they have finished? A-Rod is a great player, but it just goes to show that spending huge dollars on a player will not guarantee a winner, let alone a pennant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spiff Posted November 18, 2003 Share Posted November 18, 2003 a-rod deserved it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxFanForever Posted November 18, 2003 Share Posted November 18, 2003 I think Jayson Stark puts it perfectly... http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/stor...yson&id=1664163 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted November 18, 2003 Share Posted November 18, 2003 I can see an argument being made for any and all of ARod, Stewart, Ortiz, Posada, Boone, Delgado, etc. It all depends on your personal criteria for what MVP should actually mean. And when it comes down to it, that is what is being debated here more so than the individual players. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.