A-Rod AL MVP

[3E8]

Pods got votes and Buehrle didn't? Hmm.

[Balta1701]

well thats where the real argument should be and i'm not throwing your opinion out the window, i just tend to value what someone does in close and late situations more than you do, and as far as Ortiz goes there isn't anyone else i'd want at the plate in the bottom of the ninth with two outs down by one.

 

also, as a Red Sox fan, watching him on a daily basis, he's my MVP as a Konerko is to White Sox fans.

Actually, while he may have had the best numbers offensively on the team, I think that you won't find any real consensus here at all as to who was our team's MVP.

 

Candidates:

Buehrle

Garland

Contreras

Konerko

Iguchi

Podsednik

A.J. Pierzynski

Don Cooper

 

Couple more could probably creep in there if you cared enough about defense or bullpen work too.

 

I think Konerko might have a real shot at an MVP award next year if he can avoid his characteristically slow start (last 4 months of the season his numbers were MVP-worthy, but he was hitting .220 at the end of April), but there's so many people who did so many different things for our team this year...that it's really hard to point at 1 single guy like you can with other teams.

[WHarris1]

I hope to hell Andruw gets the NL award.

[Rowand44]

If Ortiz had played the field odds are he would have finished right around the same in range factor and zone rating as Rodriguez did compared to opposing American League regular first baseman.

 

Ortiz got shafted, period, but I don't really care.

Arod is a pretty darn good 3rd baseman and range factor and zone rating won't convince me otherwise.

[Rowand44]

I hope to hell Andruw gets the NL award.

No you dont.

[redandwhite]

QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Nov 14, 2005 -> 08:00 PM)

Arod is a pretty darn good 3rd baseman and range factor and zone rating won't convince me otherwise.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

whatever turmoil is between us is from the Bill Mueller thread I created where I argued that range factor and zone rating didn't do Mueller justice defensively and you and the rest of my bashers were pretty cynical.

 

just saying.

[Rowand44]

whatever turmoil is between us is from the Bill Mueller thread I created where I argued that range factor and zone rating didn't do Mueller justice defensively and you and the rest of my bashers were pretty cynical.

 

just saying.

Huh? I've been a fan of Mueller, I think I might have actually asked you in that thread how good he was defensively, I'm pretty sure I've never argued that Mueller was a bad 3rd baseman.

[redandwhite]

QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Nov 14, 2005 -> 08:09 PM)

Huh?  I've been a fan of Mueller, I think I might have actually asked you in that thread how good he was defensively, I'm pretty sure I've never argued that Mueller was a bad 3rd baseman.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Not having this search function is really bothering me, my apologies.

[Punch and Judy Garland]

Yeah Pods shouldn't have gotten votes. Once he stopped running, he was pretty much below average for this team (the postseason notwithstanding). I would have believed more in Hafner but he had that slow start that kind of botehrs me. Plus, Victor Martinez and Sizemore were pretty comparable in their value in terms of turning that offense around. Hafner is an excellent MVP sleeper pick for next year

[Texsox]

A-Rod is the best player in the game, I'd start any team with him.

[whitesoxfan99]

A-Rod is the best player in the game, I'd start any team with him.

 

Pujols>>A-Rod

[witesoxfan]

I think Konerko might have a real shot at an MVP award next year if he can avoid his characteristically slow start (last 4 months of the season his numbers were MVP-worthy, but he was hitting .220 at the end of April), but there's so many people who did so many different things for our team this year...that it's really hard to point at 1 single guy like you can with other teams.

 

Konerko was hitting under .250 at the ASB - .249.

 

So to be at .283 by the end of the year, I'd say he turned it on. One of the best players offensively in the 2nd half. He very quietly put up a .280 40 100 .910 season offensively.

 

The postseason was a different story. He was screaming bloody f***ing murder there, and no one missed it, unless you flat out weren't watching.

[GoodAsGould]

A-Rod is the best player in the game, I'd start any team with him.

 

Well id take him if I was going to play him at SS.....

[Punch and Judy Garland]

Well id take him if I was going to play him at SS.....

 

Thats probably a good point. If pressed, I take Pujols over anyone. But A-Rod is obviously special although more so at SS. Third was always the better offensive position until we hit that stretch a few years ago with Tejada-Rodriguez-Nomar-Renteria-Jeter all at their peaks. Now with the emergence of David Wright, Cabrera moving to third, and Aramis Ramirez coming on-it seems that third is a loaded position. This is sort of a fantasy take on it though as both are important positions defensively and great luxuries to have a big bat at.

[Antonio Osuna]

The true test should not be stats, but this: Take A-Rod off the Yankees and take Ortiz off the Red Sox. Which team plays more worse as a result?

 

I say the Red Sox do. The Yankees are going to lose power without A-Rod, certainly, but I think that Ortiz is more essential to the Red Sox. And that's more closely related to value than mere stats. We have separate awards for stats; the batting crown, RBI crown, etc.

Edited November 15, 2005 by Antonio Osuna

[Punch and Judy Garland]

The true test should not be stats, but this: Take A-Rod off the Yankees and take Ortiz off the Red Sox. Which team plays more worse as a result?

 

I say the Red Sox do. The Yankees are going to lose power without A-Rod, certainly, but I think that Ortiz is more essential to the Red Sox. And that's more closely related to value than mere stats. We have separate awards for stats; the batting crown, RBI crown, etc.

 

THat may be true, but doesn't that argument indicate that Vladimir Guerrero is your AL MVP?

[Dam8610]

What's with the Indians getting love from the sportswriters? I mean Shapiro over Kenny for exec of the year, Lee 4th in Cy voting, Buehrle & Garland 5th & 6th respectively, and now Hafner 5th, Konerko 6th in AL MVP voting. Well, at least we beat them when and where it counted, and the one place where idiotic opinions don't matter.

[Texsox]

The true test should not be stats, but this: Take A-Rod off the Yankees and take Ortiz off the Red Sox. Which team plays more worse as a result?

 

I say the Red Sox do. The Yankees are going to lose power without A-Rod, certainly, but I think that Ortiz is more essential to the Red Sox. And that's more closely related to value than mere stats. We have separate awards for stats; the batting crown, RBI crown, etc.

 

Actually this is a league MVP. And the Yankees would have a harder problem without a 3rd baseman, the Red Sox could let the pitcher bat.

 

When you start playing that game, shouldn't you look at the quality of the backup? Doesn't that also follow which team would be worse? Gee if we take Ortiz off, who could DH, vs. who could play 3rd and bat. All that proves is A-Rod is surrounded by better talent.

[southsider2k5]

At the end of the day, its "Most Valuable Player", not "Best Player". If we want Best Player, we can just look at the stats.

 

I'd argue that Ortiz was more valuable to the Red Sox than A-Rod was to the Yankees. But I'm not about to waste digital breath defending a member of the AL team I hate the most.

 

If that was it, Travis Hafner and Paul Konerko should have been battling it out of the award instead of two guys who had 8 figure salary hitters protecting them. Hafner and Konerko were way more important to the Sox and Indians success than ARod and Ortiz were to the Red Sox success.

[Punch and Judy Garland]

Actually this is a league MVP. And the Yankees would have a harder problem without a 3rd baseman, the Red Sox could let the pitcher bat.

 

When you start playing that game, shouldn't you look at the quality of the backup? Doesn't that also follow which team would be worse?  Gee if we take Ortiz off, who could DH, vs. who could play 3rd and bat. All that proves is A-Rod is surrounded by better talent.

 

Who would have thought 50 years ago that something called VORP would be brought into the MVP discussion? Wow. Interesting point though.

[Milkman delivers]

The true test should not be stats, but this: Take A-Rod off the Yankees and take Ortiz off the Red Sox. Which team plays more worse as a result?

 

I say the Red Sox do. The Yankees are going to lose power without A-Rod, certainly, but I think that Ortiz is more essential to the Red Sox. And that's more closely related to value than mere stats. We have separate awards for stats; the batting crown, RBI crown, etc.

 

Well, then Ortiz shouldn't even be the MVP candidate from his team. Without Manny, Ortiz isn't nearly as good as he is now. They're gonna be hurting when they trade Ramirez this offseason.

[Punch and Judy Garland]

Short of Herschel Walker who was a star but not a superstar, I don't know that trading a superstar really has ever worked out. It certainly didn't with guys like Jabaar, the Big Unit (for Seattle), Schilling for Arizona. It's too early to say for A-rod (although those were special circumstances given the money). I can't imagine trading Ramirez will have a positive effect on the BoSox. His teammates actually like him unlike TO which makes this situation different

[RockRaines]

If Ortiz had played the field odds are he would have finished right around the same in range factor and zone rating as Rodriguez did compared to opposing American League regular first baseman.

 

Ortiz got shafted, period, but I don't really care.

Pfffffff!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

 

Wow, spit all over my screen.

 

So, lets get this straight, on offense, A-rod had better numbers right?

So...You think if Ortiz played the field then he would have won, because he would be about the same value in the field as A-rod?

 

Well, then A-rod would be more valuable because he would still be better offensively, right?

 

 

 

 

Now, lets stop smoking crack for a second. Ortiz only plays one side of the ball. He has no chance to help, or hurt his team when they are in the field. A-rod helps his team by being a good fielder at 3B and plays twice as much as Ortiz. If they had identical numbers on offense, which they dont, and A-rod helps out his team twice as much as Ortiz does, wouldnt he be more valuable?

[Balta1701]

Pfffffff!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Wow, spit all over my screen.

 

So, lets get this straight, on offense, A-rod had better numbers right?

So...You think if Ortiz played the field then he would have won, because he would be about the same value in the field as A-rod?

 

Well, then A-rod would be more valuable because he would still be better offensively, right?

 

Now, lets stop smoking crack for a second.  Ortiz only plays one side of the ball.  He has no chance to help, or hurt his team when they are in the field.  A-rod helps his team by being a good fielder at 3B and plays twice as much as Ortiz.  If they had identical numbers on offense, which they dont, and A-rod helps out his team twice as much as Ortiz does

 

Stark.

 

If you really look closely at what happened in the batter's box when the biggest games of the year were on the line, it becomes clear that that can't be why A-Rod won, either -- because that, too, was a Big Papi landslide.

 

Alex Rodriguez had 24 more at-bats with runners in scoring position than David Ortiz this season -- and still drove in 18 fewer runs. That ought to tell you something. But if it doesn't, we'll spell it out for you.

 

Ortiz hit 62 points higher than A-Rod did with runners in scoring position (.352 to .290) overall. And that's an awfully large gap in a race this close. But that's in all games, in all RBI situations. If you keep looking, you find that as the games got tighter, that gap just kept getting bigger.

 

In the late innings of close games, A-Rod hit .176 with men in scoring position; Ortiz batted .313. That's a humongous, 137-point difference. But why stop there?

 

Ortiz's OPS (on-base plus slugging) in those situations was 1.224 -- to A-Rod's .813. That's a 411-point chasm.

 

But hold on. We're still not done. If you keep breaking down their numbers in tight games, the case for Rodriguez only gets worse.

 

On the admittedly partisan, Red Sox-oriented Sons of Sam Horn site, frequent contributor Eric Van has laid out some truly startling evidence. He found that A-Rod was vastly more productive in the Yankees' blowout wins than he was in games where a hit either way was the difference between winning and losing.

 

In the 20 games each of their teams won by six or more runs, A-Rod hit .549, had an OPS of 1.793 and racked up 46 of his 130 RBI (35 percent). Ortiz, on the other hand, batted .277, had an OPS almost 800 points lower than A-Rod's (.999) and drove in only 33 runs (22 percent of his overall total).

 

But in close games (games that either went to extra innings or were decided by one or two runs in regulation), the numbers look a whole lot different.

 

In those games -- and each team played exactly 65 of them -- A-Rod batted only .243, had an OPS of .805 and drove in just 38 runs (29 percent). Ortiz, meanwhile, clearly tapped some mysterious force that made him even better in moments like that -- batting .321, running up an OPS of 1.116 and knocking in nearly a run a game (62 -- or 42 percent of his overall total).

 

Roll that info around your brain for a second. Think about what you make of it. All we know is that, when it came time to make our MVP pick at season's end, we had a tough time ignoring figures that staggering.

 

Not everyone agrees, apparently. And that's fine. They're allowed. That's what makes sports -- and sports fandom -- the compelling force it is in our lives.

It sure seemed at the time as if Ortiz was stomping up there and driving in the winning run about four nights a week. But these were stats that clearly proved it wasn't a figment of some highlight editor's imagination. David Ortiz really was the best clutch hitter in the sport -- lugging his team into the playoffs like a human tow truck., wouldnt he be more valuable?

[YASNY]

If that was it, Travis Hafner and Paul Konerko should have been battling it out of the award instead of two guys who had 8 figure salary hitters protecting them.  Hafner and Konerko were way more important to the Sox and Indians success than ARod and Ortiz were to the Red Sox success.

 

Those two are west of the Hudson. They don't count.