End of season MVP Discussion

[neely crenshaw]

fist no one does it alone. jones has been the man for the entire season(so has lee)

francoer has come on and hit 300 with 14 hrs but only in 70 games before that he had kelly johnson hitting 240 with 9 jacks in 90 games.

chipper hit .296 but missed 53 games.

giles led the team with a .291 average!(chipper didn't qualify)

rf between brian jordan and langerhans hit 250 with 11 homers!

laroche between first and third hit 259 20 and 78

franco at 72 years old hit 275 9 and 42

estrada missed 57 games and hit 261 with 4hrs

furcal hit 284 with 12.

yes furcal and giles had decent top of the line up years but certainly they did not carry the team. helped yes. but sub 300 averages do not win pennents. with chipper out so much, andruw jones had to drive in guys. who else could? i'm sure his average was lower because if he took walks, who would hit anyone in?

when chipper was out and before francoeur came up, you had laroche hitting forth? or langerhans or franco?

every player on that team (save for chipper) had better stats because of jones. wouldn't gut a fastball to anyone on that roster and pitch around jones?

their top pitcher won 14 games. so no one on that staff dominated. they had decent pitching but it certainly wasn't the reason they won.

with that line up and staff if jones does not have an awesome year or if he got hurt..they would have finished last.

compare our cubbies postiton by position and the only place they have the better player is in centerfield and shortstop. we have a better starting staff. we have a better closer.

[ManEatingTarp]

I see two ways to vote.

Pure numbers. - Slight edge to Lee over Pujols

Best numbers for a playoff team. - Pujols over Jones (not even close)

 

Lee had an amazing year, but I think Pujols wins the MVP. Jones shouldn't even be considered.

[Tim]

fist no one does it alone. jones has been the man for the entire season(so has lee)

francoer has come on and hit 300 with 14 hrs but only in 70 games before that he had kelly johnson hitting 240 with 9 jacks in 90 games.

chipper hit .296 but missed 53 games.

giles led the team with a .291 average!(chipper didn't qualify)

rf between brian jordan and langerhans hit 250 with 11 homers!

laroche between first and third hit 259 20 and 78

franco at 72 years old hit 275 9 and 42

estrada missed 57 games and hit 261 with 4hrs

furcal hit 284 with 12.

yes furcal and giles had decent top of the line up years but certainly they did not carry the team. helped yes, but sub 300 averages do not win pennents. with chipper out so much, andruw jones had to drive in guys. who else could? i'm sure his average was lower because if he took walks, who would hit anyone in?

when chipper was out and before francoeur came up, you had laroche hitting forth? or langerhans or franco?

every player on that team (save for chipper) had better stats because of jones. wouldn't gut a fastball to anyone on that roster and pitch around jones?

their top pitcher won 14 games. so no one on that staff dominated. they had decent pitching but it certainly wasn't the reason they won.

with that line up and staff if jones does not have an awesome year or if he got hurt..they would have finished last.

compare our cubbies postiton by position and the only place they have the better player is in centerfield and shortstop. we have a better starting staff. we have a better closer.

So, sub-.300 averages don't win pennants, yet you want Andruw to win the MVP? If a .300 average is important in winning pennants, shouldn't you, by definition, be voting for Pujols or Lee over Andruw?

 

Or are you just saying whatever comes to mind to justify your choice without any real consistency of logic?

[Tim]

I see two ways to vote.

Pure numbers. - Slight edge to Lee over Pujols

Best numbers for a playoff team. - Pujols over Jones (not even close)

 

Lee had an amazing year, but I think Pujols wins the MVP. Jones shouldn't even be considered.

How about "Best numbers for a playoff team while considering positional scarcity and defensive value"?

[imb]

I see two ways to vote.

Pure numbers. - Slight edge to Lee over Pujols

Best numbers for a playoff team. - Pujols over Jones (not even close)

 

Lee had an amazing year, but I think Pujols wins the MVP. Jones shouldn't even be considered.

How about "Best numbers for a playoff team while considering positional scarcity and defensive value"?

 

So, Furcal then?

[Catman61]

i'm sure his average was lower because if he took walks, who would hit anyone in?

 

2005 avg .263 career avg .267

 

2005 BB 64 last 5 years 71-53-83-56-59

 

furcal hit 284 with 12.

yes furcal and giles had decent top of the line up years but certainly they did not carry the team. helped yes. but sub 300 averages do not win pennents. with chipper out so much

Furcal started the year absolutely atrocious and was carrying a .220 avg about the time Chipper hit the DL in June, at which point Furcal proceeded to hit .325 for the rest of the season including hitting .390 for July. Giles had a poor May and poor Sep but hit .323 in April, .302 in June, .319 in July and .324 in Aug

 

francoer has come on and hit 300 with 14 hrs but only in 70 games

Except that ignores that Francouer SCORCHED ML pitching when he first game up hitting .413 with a 1.326 OPS for July then Chipper returned late July after the ASB hitting .302 with a .983 OPS since then.

 

their top pitcher won 14 games. so no one on that staff dominated. they had decent pitching but it certainly wasn't the reason they won.

Except that in June (Chipper went down and Andruw "carried" the team) Smoltz, Ramirez and Sosa went a combined 11-2 with a 2.90 ERA. Sosa went 10-3 with a 2.62 ERA in 20 starts (13-3 overall 2.55 ERA), he didn't make his 1st start until mid June. The Braves had the 5th best overall ERA in the NL and 3rd best starters ERA in the NL.

[Exile on Waveland]

I agree. Jones doesn't deserve to be anywhere in the discussion, but Pujols' numbers are close enough to Lee's that the difference in team winning percentage would swing my vote.

 

I do hate to say it, though. I'm also sure quite a few will disagree with me, but it's not the silver slugger award, it's the MVP.

 

What did Pujols do to help his team win that Lee did not? Lee was not only the better hitter, he was the much better defender.

 

Again, Lee was better this year, but it's not most outstanding player. It probably should be, but, I'm sorry, it's not.

 

If Lee was much better than Pujols, then, by all means, give it to him. Or if the Cubs were a good team that just didn't make the playoffs, then give it to him. It's happenstance, yes, but winning counts. I'm not giving "valuable" points for helping a team finish close to .500.

[vaball]

It's worth mentioning that Pujols leads Lee in Runs Scored and Stolen Bases by 9 and 1 respectively. He also played in 3 more games.

 

I think their post all-star break numbers are worth considering:

 

Avg

1. Pujols .321

2. Lee .291

 

OBP

1. Pujols .440

2. Lee .384

 

SLG

1. Pujols .635

2. Lee .589

 

OPS

1. Pujols 1.075

2. Lee .973

[imb]

Gee, I dont know, I think their entire season numbers may be more important, dont you think?

[vaball]

Gee, I dont know, I think their entire season numbers may be more important, dont you think?

 

Fine, use the entire season. With the exception of slugging Lee and Pujols' numbers are for all practical purposes the same, so give it to the guy who's team made the playoffs. Lee was unbelievable in the first half of the season, and just good in the second half. For half the season Lee did not play like an MVP.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Gee, I dont know, I think their entire season numbers may be more important, dont you think?

 

Fine, use the entire season. With the exception of slugging Lee and Pujols' numbers are for all practical purposes the same, so give it to the guy who's team made the playoffs. Lee was unbelievable in the first half of the season, and just good in the second half. For half the season Lee did not play like an MVP.

 

Wow.

 

Lee for the season outperformed Pujols in just about every metric, including more all-encompassing ones like VORP, or RC, or RCAA, or BPA, or EqA. That's all there really is to it.

[vaball]

Gee, I dont know, I think their entire season numbers may be more important, dont you think?

 

Fine, use the entire season. With the exception of slugging Lee and Pujols' numbers are for all practical purposes the same, so give it to the guy who's team made the playoffs. Lee was unbelievable in the first half of the season, and just good in the second half. For half the season Lee did not play like an MVP.

 

Wow.

 

Lee for the season outperformed Pujols in just about every metric, including more all-encompassing ones like VORP, or RC, or RCAA, or BPA, or EqA. That's all there really is to it.

 

And none of it counted for squat.

[sethuel1]

Gee, I dont know, I think their entire season numbers may be more important, dont you think?

 

Fine, use the entire season. With the exception of slugging Lee and Pujols' numbers are for all practical purposes the same, so give it to the guy who's team made the playoffs. Lee was unbelievable in the first half of the season, and just good in the second half. For half the season Lee did not play like an MVP.

 

Wow.

 

Lee for the season outperformed Pujols in just about every metric, including more all-encompassing ones like VORP, or RC, or RCAA, or BPA, or EqA. That's all there really is to it.

 

And none of it counted for squat.

 

Well, now I'm convinced.

[imb]

I'm not going to begrudge anyone who votes for Pujols, he had an awesome year, and no one should throw a fit if he wins, to say that Lee was less valuable because his team didnt make the playoffs officially nominates you for "i dont know too much" status. It's not Lee's fault that everyone on our team is garbage. If Lee hit .400, with 75HR and 200RBI's, but our team didnt make the playoffs, would he still not deserve the MVP?

[Chris]

And none of it counted for squat.

 

wow, just wow.

[DivineBovine]

There is no way Pujols doesn't win the MVP.

 

We can massage the stats all we want or debate what "MVP" means, but the fact is that Pujols was pretty close to Lee. And given the teams respective performances, there is no way he doesn't win.

 

If the Cubs pulled off a WC berth, then Lee wins. Even if they had a winning record, it might be closer.

 

But I predict Pujols wins handily.

[CardsFanInChiTown]

I'm not going to begrudge anyone who votes for Pujols, he had an awesome year, and no one should throw a fit if he wins, to say that Lee was less valuable because his team didnt make the playoffs officially nominates you for "i dont know too much" status. It's not Lee's fault that everyone on our team is garbage. If Lee hit .400, with 75HR and 200RBI's, but our team didnt make the playoffs, would he still not deserve the MVP?

 

I think most people believe (and I agree) when the stats are close a team's performance should be taken in account. If DLee hit .400, with 75HR and 200RBI's he would win by a landslide. Stats should be given the most weight, however it's not the only thing.

 

edit: grammar probs

Edited October 4, 2005 by CardsFanInChiTown

[vaball]

I'm not going to begrudge anyone who votes for Pujols, he had an awesome year, and no one should throw a fit if he wins, to say that Lee was less valuable because his team didnt make the playoffs officially nominates you for "i dont know too much" status. It's not Lee's fault that everyone on our team is garbage. If Lee hit .400, with 75HR and 200RBI's, but our team didnt make the playoffs, would he still not deserve the MVP?

 

He would but that's not the case here. Instead we are talking about two players with very similar numbers. The goal of any team is to make the playoffs. What good is finishing over .500 if a team is still third in it's division? Lee contributed a slightly better performance than Pujols, but Pujols' performance has been more valuable. A player on a non-playoff team should only win the MVP if his season has been far and away better than anyone's on a playoff team. That's just my opinion. Give Lee the Hank Aaron award.

[gus_dog]

A player on a non-playoff team should only win the MVP if his season has been far and away better than anyone's on a playoff team. That's just my opinion.

 

Like, say, Andre Dawson in 1987?

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

Once again, a performance's value is intrinsic. It isn't dependent upon how well the value was capitalized by those around him.

 

Is the value of a Monet diminished because an art collector keeps it hidden in an attic? No. It still is just as valuable even if that value isn't utilized.

[Geech]

It was close, but Lee was unquestionably the better player this year. The only way Pujols actually deserves it this year is if you get creative when you define value.

 

Here's something some of you may not quite grasp: According to equivalent average, OPS, VORP, and probably many other metrics, Lee was the best offensive player in baseball. Not just better than Pujols, but the best in the game. It's amazing that any rational person can conclude that Pujols was somehow more valuable as a ballplayer.

[CardsFanInChiTown]

A player on a non-playoff team should only win the MVP if his season has been far and away better than anyone's on a playoff team. That's just my opinion.

 

Like, say, Andre Dawson in 1987?

 

That was one of the worst MVP selections ever.

[CardsFanInChiTown]

Here's something some of you may not quite grasp: According to equivalent average, OPS, VORP, and probably many other metrics, Lee was the best offensive player in baseball. Not just better than Pujols, but the best in the game. It's amazing that any rational person can conclude that Pujols was somehow more valuable as a ballplayer.

 

I think we get DLee had a better stats year. It just depends how the baseballl writers define what an MVP is. Honestly, I see both sides of the coin on this one, it's a tough call.

[Geech]

There really aren't that many applicable definitions of value, though.

[K-Town]

Once again, a performance's value is intrinsic. It isn't dependent upon how well the value was capitalized by those around him.

 

Is the value of a Monet diminished because an art collector keeps it hidden in an attic? No. It still is just as valuable even if that value isn't utilized.

 

I'm not sure it's that simple.

 

If you have two portraits of Abe Lincoln (exact duplicates), and one of them is documented to have been in my attic, while the other has been documented to have been hanging in the halls of the White House, then most people would pay more for the one from the White House, don't you think? Wouldn't that make it "more valuable"?