End of season MVP Discussion

[Andy]

Pujols is more valuable b/c he has better teammates?

 

Quite a crappy and invalid concept.

 

So far, Pujols deseves the MVP b/c Jocketty is a better GM than Hendry, despite Lee having the better year.

 

Sorry, bias doesn't sell with me.

 

There's not much value in finishing 4th. That's not a biased opinion. It's what most of America believes, and probably what the majority of sports writers will determine. Maybe the majority of people are wrong, and you're right. It's not out of the question. "Value" is ambiguous, though. It's not necessarily black & white.

 

And I'm not sure that Pujols had better teammates around him (other than the pitching). He spent much of the season with people like So Taguchi and Yadier Molina hitting behind him. I'm sure he would have preferred the protection of Aramis Ramirez, and might have benefitted from it.

Yeah, I'm sure having Jim Edmonds really hurt Pujols' numbers. :roll:

 

That said, I don't have any problem with any of the top three MVP candidates winning it, because they all have their own legitimate claims to the award. But if you're going to pick Pujols as MVP, don't use the BS 'he didn't REALLY have better teammates' argument.

 

Because if the Cubs had had Chris Carpenter as their number 1 starter instead of Kerry Wood, Jim Edmonds in center instead of Corey Patterson and David Eckstein at short instead of two months of Nomar and four of Neifi Perez, then the Cubs would have won 100 games and Derrek Lee would be undisputably the MVP. Those three differences alone make up for Aramis v. the Cards' 3B shuffle and Burnitz v. J-Rod, which were really the only two positions at which the Cubs were noticeably better than the Cardinals this season.

[UK1679666180]

Pujols is more valuable b/c he has better teammates?

 

Quite a crappy and invalid concept.

 

So far, Pujols deseves the MVP b/c Jocketty is a better GM than Hendry, despite Lee having the better year.

 

Sorry, bias doesn't sell with me.

 

There's not much value in finishing 4th. That's not a biased opinion. It's what most of America believes, and probably what the majority of sports writers will determine. Maybe the majority of people are wrong, and you're right. It's not out of the question. "Value" is ambiguous, though. It's not necessarily black & white.

 

And I'm not sure that Pujols had better teammates around him (other than the pitching). He spent much of the season with people like So Taguchi and Yadier Molina hitting behind him. I'm sure he would have preferred the protection of Aramis Ramirez, and might have benefitted from it.

 

The Cubs finished 4th not Lee, you know those other 24 players who had an impact in that. I am amazed at your inability to not separate the two concepts.

 

Did Ernie Banks, Billy Williams, Ron Santo, etc. have any value throughout their careers?

 

There's a boatload of value of what did Lee for the Cubs this year, it is moronic to think otherwise.

 

Value is black & white, when the other factors besides production are non-existant. What did Pujols do to make his better beyond his production on the field? What did Lee do to make his team worse on the field despite his production?

 

Here we go again with these damn hypotheticals... I don't know how Pujols would've done if Walker would've stayed healthy behind Pujols or if LaRussa put Edmonds there.

 

How would Lee have done if he had decent hitters hitting in front of him instead of Perez? Who the hell knows, who the hell cares.

 

I do know that Lee was the best player and also the most productive in 2005. Now, if you want to factor the 24 other players as well as the coaching staff (unless you think Larussa=Baker), go right ahead, you'll be wrong.

 

The writers would be wrong if they gave the MVP to anyone other than Lee, I don't care if 1,000 of them voted for Pujols and I was the only one voting for Lee.

[Catman61]

Imagine this. It's spring 2004 and you, the GM of Team A, are in the unfortunate situation of having no-one better than player X at first base. And player X is useless. In fact, he's the very definition of a replacement player: you need to replace him. Now, fortunately, one week before the season starts, two better options become available, player Y and player Z, and they're both desperately eager to sign with Team A, who they've both supported since childhood. Also, more fortunate still, Aladdin has granted you three wishes. He tells you that A) Player Y will give your team 12.3 more wins than player X in 2004, B) that Player Z will be worth 10.7 more wins than player X in 2004, and C) that he will personally pay for whichever player you choose, so money's not an issue. So, do you sign Player Y or Z?

 

For those of you that said "Player Z please", now imagine that Aladdin is so angry with you for giving such a stupid answer that he's retracted his promise to pay for the players unless you change your mind. Player Y costs $7.66m for 2004. Player Z costs $11.05m. Sticking with Player Z?

 

"I would like to win 1.6 less games and pay $3.39m more".

 

That's what a vote for Albert Pujols over Derrek Lee boils down to.

 

Seems to me that Pujols SIGNIFCANTLY outperformed Lee in 2004 and he didn't cost 11.05M either

[Diffusion]

How would Lee have done if he had decent hitters hitting in front of him instead of Perez? Who the hell knows, who the hell cares.

 

Well, I can tell you that had Lee and Pujols swapped teams this year, and their performances had been exactly unchanged, the Cardinals would have won 1.6 more games, and the Cubs would have won 1.6 less games. Oh, and the Cards would have had a payroll $3.39m lower, the Cubs one $3.39m higher.

 

But this really doesn't matter, apparently, because wins are valueless, money grows on trees, and Albert Pujols is a really fun name (Poo-holes, hehehehe), so he's obviously the most valuable, like, duh!

[Diffusion]

Imagine this. It's spring 2004 and you, the GM of Team A, are in the unfortunate situation of having no-one better than player X at first base. And player X is useless. In fact, he's the very definition of a replacement player: you need to replace him. Now, fortunately, one week before the season starts, two better options become available, player Y and player Z, and they're both desperately eager to sign with Team A, who they've both supported since childhood. Also, more fortunate still, Aladdin has granted you three wishes. He tells you that A) Player Y will give your team 12.3 more wins than player X in 2004, B) that Player Z will be worth 10.7 more wins than player X in 2004, and C) that he will personally pay for whichever player you choose, so money's not an issue. So, do you sign Player Y or Z?

 

For those of you that said "Player Z please", now imagine that Aladdin is so angry with you for giving such a stupid answer that he's retracted his promise to pay for the players unless you change your mind. Player Y costs $7.66m for 2004. Player Z costs $11.05m. Sticking with Player Z?

 

"I would like to win 1.6 less games and pay $3.39m more".

 

That's what a vote for Albert Pujols over Derrek Lee boils down to.

 

Seems to me that Pujols SIGNIFCANTLY outperformed Lee in 2004 and he didn't cost 11.05M either

 

Gah.

 

I normally get over writing the year wrong after about a week of January.

[indifferent]

Bump again, no one gives this any credence?

 

To me, voting for a player whose team doesn't get to the playoffs for MVP is like voting for a pitcher for the MVP.

 

I would do it, but only if there aren't any other compelling candidates or if they are far and away the best choice.

 

From ESPN's Stark's MVP analysis:

 

"I know that teams like the Cardinals rarely produce MVPs. But they produced one this year -- a fellow named Albert Pujols."

 

Good team's candidates have just as much trouble getting elected as those with a weaker supporting cast for the opposite reason and the reason that's being argued to support Jones' case.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

Pujols is more valuable b/c he has better teammates?

 

Quite a crappy and invalid concept.

 

So far, Pujols deseves the MVP b/c Jocketty is a better GM than Hendry, despite Lee having the better year.

 

Sorry, bias doesn't sell with me.

 

There's not much value in finishing 4th. That's not a biased opinion. It's what most of America believes, and probably what the majority of sports writers will determine. Maybe the majority of people are wrong, and you're right. It's not out of the question. "Value" is ambiguous, though. It's not necessarily black & white.

 

And I'm not sure that Pujols had better teammates around him (other than the pitching). He spent much of the season with people like So Taguchi and Yadier Molina hitting behind him. I'm sure he would have preferred the protection of Aramis Ramirez, and might have benefitted from it.

 

So your saying sum of all Cardinals - Pujols < sum of all Cubs - Lee, and that Pujols alone is accountable for the difference in wins between the Cubs and Cardinals ?!?!?

 

Unless you can say that, then team wins mean nothing in the discussion of MVP.

 

The fact that you have a pitcher in Cy Young race indicates that Pujols had more help than Lee in accumulating team wins. The worth of the supporting cast does not nothing to increase or decrease the value of an individual performance. We're not giving out the MVT (Most Valueable Team) it's the MVP, because it focuses on the worth of the individual performance.

[ManEatingTarp]

Good Lord people.

 

They're both deserving of the award.

[ManEatingTarp]

We're not giving out the MVT (Most Valueable Team) it's the MVP, because it focuses on the worth of the individual performance.

 

Actually I think that's the Player of the Year award.

The MVP should go to the best player that propelled their team to the playoffs imo.

That said, I'm taking nothing away from Lee. He should get the POY.

[Diffusion]

Bump again, no one gives this any credence?

 

To me, voting for a player whose team doesn't get to the playoffs for MVP is like voting for a pitcher for the MVP.

 

I would do it, but only if there aren't any other compelling candidates or if they are far and away the best choice.

 

Well I personally believe that there should be one award for pitchers, and one for every-day players, and that there should be no overlap, and the way I'd vote reflects that belief, in that for "Player" I read "Everyday Player". I also believe that the "Most Valuable" should mean most valuable, the everyday player that contributes more to his team than any other everyday player contributes to any other team, and in the case of the Cy Young, I read "Most Valuable Pitcher". And, again, how I'd vote reflects my belief, screw the Baseball Writers and their terminology.

 

So, for me...

 

MVP = the everyday player that contributes more to their team than any other everyday player contributes to any other team

 

Cy Young = the pitcher that contributes more to their team than any other pitcher contributes to any other team

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

We're not giving out the MVT (Most Valueable Team) it's the MVP, because it focuses on the worth of the individual performance.

 

Actually I think that's the Player of the Year award.

The MVP should go to the best player that propelled their team to the playoffs imo.

That said, I'm taking nothing away from Lee. He should get the POY.

 

The give it to Jones. He's no where near the player as Lee and Pujols, but the Braves didn't have Chris Carpenter to shut down the opposition every fifth day along with a very healthy rotation.

 

I still don't see this as a team award. It's an individual accomplishment, and Lee did more than any other player to help his team win. Just because his team mates couldn't make up the gap between their talents and the other teams they were chasing does NOTHING to dimish the value Lee brought to the team.

[UK1679666180]

MVP = the everyday player that contributes more to their team than any other everyday player contributes to any other team

 

Cy Young = the pitcher that contributes more to their team than any other pitcher contributes to any other team

 

Exactly.

[K-Town]

Some of you take this more seriously than I do. I've said several times that I can understand a case for Lee. "Value" is ambiguous........ always has been. Everybody except for Cubs fans can see a case for Pujols over Lee, and that will be proven when the award is announced. That makes the rest of the world wrong, and you guys right.

 

I'm not just plugging Pujols for the sake of plugging him (whoever the clever fellow was that called me Pujols mother should take note). I didn't think he deserved it last year, or the year before, because Bonds was far superior, and his team was a playoff contender. That's not the case this year.

 

There are awards that Lee deserves. The MVP isn't one of them, in my opinion.

[Diffusion]

We're not giving out the MVT (Most Valueable Team) it's the MVP, because it focuses on the worth of the individual performance.

 

Actually I think that's the Player of the Year award.

The MVP should go to the best player that propelled their team to the playoffs imo.

That said, I'm taking nothing away from Lee. He should get the POY.

 

But who remembers who the "Player of the Year" was in any given year? That alone tells you the relative worth of that award. It pales in comparison to the MVP. Is that the treatment that the best player in the league in any given year should get? Essentially forgotten because a lesser performing player had a happier set of circumstances beyond his control and took the big one, the MVP?

[K-Town]

MVP = the everyday player that contributes more to their team than any other everyday player contributes to any other team

 

Cy Young = the pitcher that contributes more to their team than any other pitcher contributes to any other team

 

Exactly.

 

Never has been true, and probably never will be. It's an arbitrary thing. That's why it's voted on, rather than just punching the numbers into a computer. Someday, that might change. It hasn't yet.

[UK1679666180]

Everybody except for Cubs fans can see a case for Pujols over Lee, and that will be proven when the award is announced.

 

Or everybody that looks at which player contributed more.

 

That makes the rest of the world wrong, and you guys right.

 

As usual, yes.

[K-Town]

We're not giving out the MVT (Most Valueable Team) it's the MVP, because it focuses on the worth of the individual performance.

 

Actually I think that's the Player of the Year award.

The MVP should go to the best player that propelled their team to the playoffs imo.

That said, I'm taking nothing away from Lee. He should get the POY.

 

But who remembers who the "Player of the Year" was in any given year? That alone tells you the relative worth of that award. It pales in comparison to the MVP. Is that the treatment that the best player in the league in any given year should get? Essentially forgotten because a lesser performing player had a happier set of circumstances beyond his control and took the big one, the MVP?

 

That's the whole point. Nobody cares if you were the best player on a 4th place team. That's a shame for Lee, but it's true.

[UK1679666180]

MVP = the everyday player that contributes more to their team than any other everyday player contributes to any other team

 

Cy Young = the pitcher that contributes more to their team than any other pitcher contributes to any other team

 

Exactly.

 

Never has been true, and probably never will be. It's an arbitrary thing. That's why it's voted on, rather than just punching the numbers into a computer. Someday, that might change. It hasn't yet.

 

It should be done thru a computer and not some sportswriter who is voting on a team he either sees 6 times or 162 times a year as a beat writer. It makes it much easier for a sportswriter to look at the standings rather than looking deeper into the numbers.

 

That's why the voting system is crap and it would be wrong if they didn't give it to Lee.

[ManEatingTarp]

The MVP should go to the best player that propelled their team to the playoffs imo.

 

The give it to Jones. He's no where near the player as Lee and Pujols, but the Braves didn't have Chris Carpenter to shut down the opposition every fifth day along with a very healthy rotation.

 

My point is that Pujols and Lee were SO close in stats that the only thing that seperates them is the fact that the Cards are in the playoffs and the Cubs are not. The interesting thing would be if Pujols wasn't in the picture. Lee or Jones?

[K-Town]

Everybody except for Cubs fans can see a case for Pujols over Lee, and that will be proven when the award is announced.

 

Or everybody that looks at which player contributed more.

 

That makes the rest of the world wrong, and you guys right.

 

As usual, yes.

 

 

I think that everybody else just looks at "value" as being something different. I'm not sure any of us are right or wrong...... thank goodness we're all different, though.

 

You're all a sharp group, I won't deny that.

 

Like I said, I can see a case for Lee, and won't feel "cheated" if he wins.

[Diffusion]

We're not giving out the MVT (Most Valueable Team) it's the MVP, because it focuses on the worth of the individual performance.

 

Actually I think that's the Player of the Year award.

The MVP should go to the best player that propelled their team to the playoffs imo.

That said, I'm taking nothing away from Lee. He should get the POY.

 

But who remembers who the "Player of the Year" was in any given year? That alone tells you the relative worth of that award. It pales in comparison to the MVP. Is that the treatment that the best player in the league in any given year should get? Essentially forgotten because a lesser performing player had a happier set of circumstances beyond his control and took the big one, the MVP?

 

That's the whole point. Nobody cares if you were the best player on a 4th place team. That's a shame for Lee, but it's true.

 

Not just the best player on a 4th placed team, but the best player in the entire league. In the entire league, the best player. In league entire, player best. Best league entire player. Best entire player league. Derrek Lee. 2005 (apparently he wasn't this good in 2004). Jeez, it not complicated, even me understand, me not even Yank. Best player in entire league.

 

What does the fact that the best player in the entire league played on a 4th placed team say? It says that the teammates of this best player must have been pretty rubbish. Beyond that it says absolutely nothing. Besides that he's the best player. In the entire league.

[K-Town]

MVP = the everyday player that contributes more to their team than any other everyday player contributes to any other team

 

Cy Young = the pitcher that contributes more to their team than any other pitcher contributes to any other team

 

Exactly.

 

Never has been true, and probably never will be. It's an arbitrary thing. That's why it's voted on, rather than just punching the numbers into a computer. Someday, that might change. It hasn't yet.

 

It should be done thru a computer and not some sportswriter who is voting on a team he either sees 6 times or 162 times a year as a beat writer. It makes it much easier for a sportswriter to look at the standings rather than looking deeper into the numbers.

 

That's why the voting system is crap and it would be wrong if they didn't give it to Lee.

 

That's fine. I think that calling balls & strikes by computer would be a higher priority, though. And instant replay. And some sort of formula to determine strength of schedule in case of a close Wild Card race....... just to be sure that the best teams get in.

 

All of those things should be a priority over computerizing the MVP winner, because it's a team game, and those are the things that really matter.

[K-Town]

We're not giving out the MVT (Most Valueable Team) it's the MVP, because it focuses on the worth of the individual performance.

 

Actually I think that's the Player of the Year award.

The MVP should go to the best player that propelled their team to the playoffs imo.

That said, I'm taking nothing away from Lee. He should get the POY.

 

But who remembers who the "Player of the Year" was in any given year? That alone tells you the relative worth of that award. It pales in comparison to the MVP. Is that the treatment that the best player in the league in any given year should get? Essentially forgotten because a lesser performing player had a happier set of circumstances beyond his control and took the big one, the MVP?

 

That's the whole point. Nobody cares if you were the best player on a 4th place team. That's a shame for Lee, but it's true.

 

Not just the best player on a 4th placed team, but the best player in the entire league. In the entire league, the best player. In league entire, player best. Best league entire player. Best entire player league. Derrek Lee. 2005 (apparently he wasn't this good in 2004). Jeez, it not complicated, even me understand, me not even Yank. Best player in entire league.

 

What does the fact that the best player in the entire league played on a 4th placed team say? It says that the teammates of this best player must have been pretty rubbish. Beyond that it says absolutely nothing. Besides that he's the best player. In the entire league.

 

....... but not necessarily the most valuable.

 

In my opinion, of course (and many others).

 

I looked up "value", and one of the definitions talks about "importance". Which player was more important this year, Lee or Pujols? Maybe that's how you should look at it. Because being the best player on a team that finished 4th isn't that important to some people.

[UK1679666180]

MVP = the everyday player that contributes more to their team than any other everyday player contributes to any other team

 

Cy Young = the pitcher that contributes more to their team than any other pitcher contributes to any other team

 

Exactly.

 

Never has been true, and probably never will be. It's an arbitrary thing. That's why it's voted on, rather than just punching the numbers into a computer. Someday, that might change. It hasn't yet.

 

It should be done thru a computer and not some sportswriter who is voting on a team he either sees 6 times or 162 times a year as a beat writer. It makes it much easier for a sportswriter to look at the standings rather than looking deeper into the numbers.

 

That's why the voting system is crap and it would be wrong if they didn't give it to Lee.

 

That's fine. I think that calling balls & strikes by computer would be a higher priority, though. And instant replay. And some sort of formula to determine strength of schedule in case of a close Wild Card race....... just to be sure that the best teams get in.

 

All of those things should be a priority over computerizing the MVP winner, because it's a team game, and those are the things that really matter.

 

I'd hate to see Questec and instant replay...

 

Voting for MVP or the Cy Young has little bearing on anything except discussions with fans and potential HOF voting as well as contract incentives.

 

Certain things should be left up to human error, calls during the game is one of them.

The computers have no right with interfering

[Diffusion]

We're not giving out the MVT (Most Valueable Team) it's the MVP, because it focuses on the worth of the individual performance.

 

Actually I think that's the Player of the Year award.

The MVP should go to the best player that propelled their team to the playoffs imo.

That said, I'm taking nothing away from Lee. He should get the POY.

 

But who remembers who the "Player of the Year" was in any given year? That alone tells you the relative worth of that award. It pales in comparison to the MVP. Is that the treatment that the best player in the league in any given year should get? Essentially forgotten because a lesser performing player had a happier set of circumstances beyond his control and took the big one, the MVP?

 

That's the whole point. Nobody cares if you were the best player on a 4th place team. That's a shame for Lee, but it's true.

 

Not just the best player on a 4th placed team, but the best player in the entire league. In the entire league, the best player. In league entire, player best. Best league entire player. Best entire player league. Derrek Lee. 2005 (apparently he wasn't this good in 2004). Jeez, it not complicated, even me understand, me not even Yank. Best player in entire league.

 

What does the fact that the best player in the entire league played on a 4th placed team say? It says that the teammates of this best player must have been pretty rubbish. Beyond that it says absolutely nothing. Besides that he's the best player. In the entire league.

 

....... but not necessarily the most valuable.

 

In my opinion, of course (and many others).

 

I looked up "value", and one of the definitions talks about "importance". Which player was more important this year, Lee or Pujols? Maybe that's how you should look at it. Because being the best player on a team that finished 4th isn't that important to some people.

 

So have we established then that Derrek Lee was the best player in all of the National League in 2005?