Friday September 12, 2003

Today, we’ve got a very full posting. We will cover a number of topics and give our readers plenty of voice today with the Discussion Question of the Week, and also an open Mailbag for other comments or questions. Also, it’s a Friday of the football season, so be sure to check out our “Experts Picks.” Click on a link if you want to go to a specific section. Thanks for stopping by the website. I hope you find it interesting and consider coming back frequently!

DISCUSSION QUESTION OF THE WEEK - What is an MVP?

“EXPERT” FOOTBALL PICKS - Week 2

MORE MAILBAG - Football Edition

MORE MAILBAG – Baseball Edition

Big Series à Game 4 (Twins 5, White Sox 2) and MUCH MORE!

Don’t worry!  We will get to this week’s Discussion Question’s responses. But first, I think it’s necessary to discuss the Twins big win yesterday.  Coming off Johan Santana’s impressive outing on Wednesday night, and really feeling that the Twins would be OK if they won just 1 out of the 3 games, I wondered what kind of performance the Twins would put forth.  Well, same equation as yesterday was put into place! It’s all about starting pitching, isn’t it?  And yesterday in Chicago, Brad Radke was terrific for the second straight outing. On Saturday, I saw him pitch a great game against Texas in which he gave up 2 runs in 7 innings. He was even better yesterday, going the complete game route, giving up just two runs, both on solo home runs. He gave the Twins exactly what they needed, saving the bullpen as they don’t have a day off for another week.

Shannon Stewart was the hitting hero. With the bases loaded in the third inning, Stewart came to the plate and drilled a double to right centerfield to clear the bases. He was able to go to third on a throw, and then score on a Denny Hocking sacrifice fly! Hocking later came up with a single to score AJ Pierzynski from 2B with two outs in the 7^th inning. 

That was plenty of run support for Radke. He must have been watching the White Sox hitters struggle with Johan Santana’s changeup, as Radke used his well. In 9 innings, he did give up 9 hits, but 90 of his 126 pitches were strikes!

With the win, the Twins climbed back into a first-place tie with the White Sox! The Twins now begin a big four-game series with the Cleveland Indians while the White Sox travel to Boston to play the Red Sox. Many are saying that the Twins pretty much locked up the division by splitting with the White Sox because of the schedules. But, the White Sox are very good and can play with both the Red Sox and the Yankees. The Twins have struggled with the Cleveland Indians all year! The Twins really can’t let down. There are just 16 games left on the schedule and every one of them is important! Here are the current standings in the American League Central:

The weekend pitching matchups should be interesting. We know that tonight Kenny Rogers will be facing CC Sabathia. If they keep the rotation as is, Saturday Kyle Lohse should pitch. But who will take the spot in the rotation currently held by Carlos Pulido? I think Eric Milton will be pitching on Sunday for the Twins. The other option is to have Rick Reed pitch. Either way, then Johan Santana would be set to pitch the fourth game of the series on Monday. My thought is that the Twins could get a little creative. They could have Milton pitch on Saturday, followed by Rick Reed on Sunday and Kyle Lohse on Monday. That would move the rotation back so that Johan Santana can pitch again against the White Sox.  What do I think they should do?  Play one game at a time. Put Milton into the rotation, leave Reed in the bullpen and keep Santana in his regular spot.  As I said earlier, the Twins can’t look past the Indians. They still have to win those games too!

NEWMAN UPDATE - The most recent news is that Twins 3B Coach Al Newman is going to be OK, but is going to stay in the hospital for more tests. He went to the hospital and they thought it was an aneurysm. Yesterday, they thought that is was a brain hemorrhage. Either way, it’s good that they were able to get him to the hospital. He definitely won’t be in Cleveland for the weekend. It’s strange, as serious and stressful as the game of baseball becomes, we keep getting reminders of just where it should rank on our priority list!  Get well, Newmie!!  If you want to wish Al Newman well, the Twins have set up a link on their site to leave him a Get Well message! Click here, to wish him well!

DISCUSSION QUESTION OF THE WEEK - What is an MVP?

It’s Friday, and again that means that we have opened up the mailbox for our Question of the Week. I think we had a good question, and based on the number of responses I got to it, you did too!  Here’s the Question:

This is a question that I think comes into question at this time every year… The MVP award.  What does the term “Most VALUABLE Player” mean? Does it mean just the best player in the league statistically for the year?  Does it mean the most clutch player?  Does it mean the best player on the best team? Last year, Miguel Tejada of the Oakland A’s won the AL MVP award even though his overall numbers weren’t as good as Texas Rangers SS Alex Rodriguez. But, the A’s went to the playoffs, and the Rangers didn’t play a ‘meaningful game after Memorial Day.  So, what do you think? I know that everyone has different opinions on this, and I would love to hear from you on your thoughts.

Let’s get right to your answers!

First up, from Kirk. He and I have disagreed to some extent on this question for awhile. Here are his thoughts:

“When I think of a most valuable player, I think of the player in the league who had the best season of the year regardless of the team he's on. If A-Rod has stats that are clearly head and shoulders above all the other players in the league, he should be the MVP. I have trouble seeing why this is such a problem. I should rephrase that. I understand where the team performance issue comes in. The debate I've heard from my friends that agree that team performance should factor in, centers around this question: how valuable can the player be if his team isn't in contention? I agree with this to a point. However, if you put Alex Rodriguez in at shortstop for the Tigers, I think there's a chance that they win 20 more games. Is there another player in the league that can do that much, single-handedly for their team? I don't think so. Clearly the Rangers would have a much better record if they had even adequate starting pitching. If they were to finish above .500 we would be talking about Rodriquez as one of the favorites for the MVP award. It just seems wrong to me that he loses consideration because his teammates can't hold up their share of team responsibilities. Yes, I realize that statement seems to lend something to the opposing view. I just think that if Miguel Tejada has his same season, but Barry Zito and Mark Mulder struggle last year and the A's finish at or below .500, Tejada's name wouldn't even be mentioned. I guess I can live with the idea that team finish can help a player's bid for an MVP, I just don't like the idea of a player being hurt by his team's poor play. I think the main problem with the award is the name of it. The term "most valuable" is fairly vague, a point that is evidenced by us having this very discussion. If we can't even define what "most valuable" means, then how can we choose the player that is most deserving of the title? A simple change of name for the award, or a clear definition of the criteria would make the whole thing a lot easier to decide. If it's that important to people, let's have two awards--a "best player" award for the guy with the best season regardless of team finish, and an MVP for the player that was most responsible for getting his team to the playoffs or keeping them in a pennant race.”

From Tim –

“My answer is not insanely in depth, I am sure that most of these number hungry sabermatricians will provide you with ... well, "Gleeman Length" thoughts. & will actually use specific examples ... I am answering in generalities. But I like the question because I wanted to toss a brick through the TV when A Rod was garnering serious considerations last year.

But, to keep it short & sweet, I will say, metaphorically, that it is a recipe of all of the factors that you note, but there are a few key ingredients ... that is, certain factors that stand out if I were to pick MVP.

1. Consistency, having a reasonably solid season, with very few "slumpy" phases.

2. An MVP candidate's success has to mean something to baseball in general, it has to mean something to the overall profile of the whole league for the season when all is said & done in October. I don't care if (hypothetically, for the sake of illustration) Bobby Higgonson hits .401 with a 274 RBI's & 68 HR's for the Tigers, if his team finishes with 121 losses. Of course, that creates a bit of an oxymoron situation, you get the point. But ole' Bashing Bobby would have 100%, justifiably, fair & square, won other awards & a few entries into the record books, the batting title & the 'Triple Crown'. That is what those titles are for. Like the Cy Young.

3. Generally good clutch performance, on a regular basis (which, I suppose is a bit of a corollary to #1).

4. The player does not need to play for the "best" team. In all honesty what is a "best team"? Really, like baseball in general, there are many ways to interpret that concept. Best record, best offense, best pitching staff, best management, most 'heart', World Series champs ... Of course, once the season is over, there is something to be said for the WS champs because they made it happen, they went all the way. But as anyone can observe, solid teams like the 2002 Yankees, 2001 Mariners, 2000 Indians ... etc have fallen short & been outplayed when it was most important. But some folks would suggest the idea that the 1991 Twins were the best team that year after the Jack Morris (pitching performance). However, MVP is determined at the end of the regular season, which I like.

5. So, yes, I feel that the MVP has to come from a team which has been successful over the course of the season. Does that team have to make the playoffs? I think so, but exceptions could be made.

So. there you have it, Seth, my thoughts. Good question, I needed to ventilate my moldy frustrations from last year's A-Rod talk.”

From Lee -

“You are going to think I'm a politician when you get done reading this.

First, I believe the MVP should be any everyday player. That said, I also believe that an outstanding year’s performance is merit as well. Let's say an ERA under 1.00 and setting the single season save record, etc...

Second, I believe the MVP should come from a competitive team. That said, I don't believe that it has to come from a playoff team. But with the wild card, there are a lot of teams in it until the end. I feel the MVP should come from one of those teams.

Third, I feel that “clutchness” is a big factor. Someone who hits .350 with runners in scoring position for the second half of the year, etc... If you are considered for MVP you need to carry your team. Sure, the 1st half counts but not to the extent that it is (magnified) in the 2nd half. You can loose a playoff berth in the 1st half but you cannot win a playoff berth until the second half.

Examples: 1.) (Shannon) Stewart -he was an instant spark plug for the Twins. His numbers don't rank with the League MVP, but he has been more valuable than Giambi this year. 2.) (David) Ortiz for the Red Sox. His numbers aren't elite, but if you consider he didn't get the every day DH locked up until late June, his numbers since then are MVP caliber.

Albert Pujols of the Cards has been steady all year, but I believe Bonds does more for his team if not just with intimidation.

My AL MVP is Frank Thomas of the bad guys & my NL MVP is Bonds of the Giants.

With all that I said, I don't like Thomas, as he's a DH but with Konerko playing so crappy the first half of the year, Thomas played way more at first base than he should have. That is more the reason both Konerko & Magglio are not lighting up the pitchers this year. Bonds is Bonds.

If you think about not having a pitcher as the MVP because he starts every fifth day. The MVP caliber pitchers touch the ball as many times per year as the MVP caliber hitters. 110 pitches per game compared to 4 at bats and 5 fielding plays except catchers & 1B men. Just a thought. “

From Anthony at The Bad Twin-

“I love your poll question about the most valuable player in the league, and I thought I'd chime in...

To me, a Most Valuable Player means, quite frankly, a Most Valuable Player. There are some players that just distinguish themselves from the rest of the league in one way or another through the course of the season that makes them a MVP. Any number of things could contribute to this.
Last year, Miguel Tejada had pretty good numbers, but he came through on several occasions with key hits, and he almost single-handedly propelled the A's into a twenty game win streak. This is one way to win an MVP. It's almost like the Heisman Trophy - a player accumulates the best "moments" throughout the season, and he gets voted on because of the emotional power of his clutch moments. Byron Leftwich made a very convincing Heisman case last year out of one play - (when) his linemen carried him up the field after a completed pass. When Ted Williams won the Triple Crown but Joe Dimaggio won the MVP, it was because Joe D's 56 game hitting streak was far more compelling of a story than Williams' consistent play.
On the other hand, there are pure statistical winners. When Barry Bonds won the MVP in 2002, it was because he was clearly a head above Brian Giles (who was a head above everyone else). He didn't have the same emotional home runs he'd swatted in 2001 when he set the all-time record. Instead, he was just statistically a wrecking crew.
I think that we need to work with a mixture of the two. If a player distinguishes himself as having an ability to hit when it counts coming down the stretch and contributes a large amount on his team's winning, you have to look at him for the MVP, regardless of numbers. When someone dominates a league statistically, no matter how bad their team is (see: ARod last year), they should be considered. When there are no dominant players in a league (see: American League, this year), you need to go by who means the most to his team or who impacts the race the most. Or you can roll dice. I think this might be ARod's year to win the MVP just because there's nobody distinguishing themselves, but he's still obviously the class of the league.”

Leslie -

“I read your discussion question and it's a good one.
MVP is most valuable player to his team based on what he did for his team not who post good numbers. Tejada deserved the MVP because he carried the A's to a great season. Oakland got pitching, but without offense, what is the point. You can throw great games like the Dodgers pitchers do, but if you are not getting any run support or anything from offense, it's useless. That's where Tejada comes to play. He had a career year for the A's and he stepped up when the team needed him the most in the regular season. If Miggy does not have a great year, A's don't win the AL West.
I think Frank Thomas should win the AL MVP this year because he has carried the White Sox to first place because of HRs and big hits when they needed him to. Plus he has had a heck of a year considering the team actually wanted to dump him.”

SETH’S THOUGHTS

Alright, we’ve now read a few different opinions on what the MVP award means and what it should represent.  Now it’s time for my opinion.

I believe that the MVP should go to the player most valuable to his team’s success. The last 3 words of that sentence “his team’s success”, to me means that the team should be a success.  Does that mean that I think the MVP should only come from teams that win their division or make the playoffs? No. But, my thought against Alex Rodriguez winning the 2002 AL MVP award is that the Rangers were awful.  How many of his at bats were really important toward getting the Rangers to the playoffs last year?  None after about… Memorial Day. Is it his fault that the pitching staff on his team is terrible? No, but that said, the Rangers offense at times throughout the last 2 years has featured Rafael Palmiero, Ivan Rodriguez, Juan Gonzalez, Mark Teixiera, Hank Blalock and others. So, yes, Alex Rodriguez puts up monster numbers, but his team is always behind, usually by a bunch, so pitchers can pitch to him.  A-Rod doesn’t get intentionally walked much, because the games are out of hand and his runs don’t matter much.

Last year, I completely was in agreement that Oakland’s Miguel Tejada should have been the American League MVP award. No, his numbers weren’t as good as Alex Rodriguez, but how many times did he come up in clutch situations for the A’s as they were fighting for the AL West title? And how often did he come through!  Clearly, he was the Most “Valuable” Player in the American League last season.

If the award were called the Most “Outstanding” Player, then absolutely that should have gone to Alex Rodriguez.

But, I think the MVP award is much more than just numbers, and it should be. I like that the term “Most Valuable Player” isn’t defined specifically! My fear with that is that it could definitely encourage players to play for stats, not for their team, which, when they do that, is not very valuable!

I love that this issue can be argued over and over. It keeps people talking (or arguing) about baseball for a month or more after the season is complete! And that’s a good thing!

Should a pitcher win the MVP award? I really don’t think so. They have the Cy Young Award. For sure, I don’t think a starting pitcher should be an MVP candidate. However, I believe that the Dodgers Eric Gagne should receive plenty of votes, and maybe finish as high as 3^rd place (Behind Bonds and Pujols).

There are 2 ½ weeks left to the season, so this could change, and when the season is over, I will write up my picks, but if the season were to end today, here would be my choices for MVP:

AL - Frank Thomas, NL - Barry Bonds

The Cy Young Award should go to the Pitcher that had the best season in each league. Although the word “best” can cause discussion (some may think that’s wins, or ERA, or K/IP, or some other stat, or a combination of them all), but it’s a little easier. In the American League, ESPNs Jeff Brantley said that Chicago’s Esteban Loaiza should win the Cy Young Award (if the season ended today) because his numbers are from a winning team, whereas Halladay’s Blue Jays fell out of the race in the AL East earlier. For the Cy Young, I don’t think that should be a factor!

“EXPERT” FOOTBALL PICKS - Week 2

Here we are again, about to hit the weekend and another week of Football games on Sunday and Monday. So today, our panel of “experts” will make our football picks on this site. Be sure to also check out our Football Picks Page to see the Standings and results. This week, I also asked the panel to include a QB, 2 RB, and 2 WR to watch this weekend. Be sure to check out Ben Jacob’s Universal Baseball Blog but also check out his Fantasy Football article in today’s Rochester (NY) Democrat and Chronicle. He will write the article every Friday. So, with no further ado, here are this week’s games: