Where is Derek Jeter's Recognition?

I think the MVP should be for hitters only, but until (yeah, right :p) the rules change I'll still vote for pitchers with my imaginary votes :(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 200tang

I think the MVP should be for hitters only, but until (yeah, right :p) the rules change I'll still vote for pitchers with my imaginary votes :(

---

I love imaginary votes. Casey Mcgee won my imaginary ROY award.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jeffy25

what would you argue should be the closest race of mvp picks ever? like a year where both players were neck and neck arguable

---

The closet race, vote wise, was 1979 in the National League, a dead tie between Keith Hernadez and Willie Stargell. They were name Co-MVPs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by actionjackson

I hate to do this because he is your favourite player, but Fiore Gino Tennaci (otherwise known as Gene Tenace) had a better year than Thurman Munson in 1975, so Munson's out.

---

Here are the MVP candidates from 1975 and their stats.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/aw...#AL_MVP_voting

The one thing that dear old Mr. Tenace did more than Mr Munson was walk. I know the old saying is a walk is as good as a hit but, come on. Munson hit .318 with 102 RBI, Geno hit .255 with 87 RBI. Munson got 21% of the MVP vote,(on a 4th place team) Tenace 2% (on a first place team) . I have no idea how old you are, but no one but the most partisan A's fan, watching baseball in 1975 would have put Tennace in Munson's class. Munson, Bench and Fisk were the dominate catchers of that era. Saying Gene Tenace had a better year than Munson because he batted eighth and got walked a lot stretches the bounds of reason.

A 30 point edge in OBP is significant. His walks weren't because he batted 8th. His walks were because he took a lot of pitches and had a good eye. He batted 6th more than anywhere else, and 7th the second most. Their value in 1975 was a lot closer than you think. Tenace was undeniably the better hitter that year. The argument Munson has is that he was a better defensive catcher and Tenace spent a lot of time at first base.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoustonGM

A 30 point edge in OBP is significant. His walks weren't because he batted 8th. His walks were because he took a lot of pitches and had a good eye. He batted 6th more than anywhere else, and 7th the second most. Their value in 1975 was a lot closer than you think. Tenace was undeniably the better hitter that year. The argument Munson has is that he was a better defensive catcher and Tenace spent a lot of time at first base.

---

But a 60 point difference in batting average is not significant? I guess I'm too old. I actually think getting hits in baseball is important, and heaven forbid, driving in runs counts for something too. I think the way the sports writers in 1975 did.

As a side note, to see how team placement affected voting in the past check out American League 1959. When the White Sox won the pennant.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/aw...#AL_MVP_voting

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OldYankFan

But a 60 point difference in batting average is not significant? I guess I'm too old. I actually think getting hits in baseball is important, and heaven forbid, driving in runs counts for something too.
I think the way the sports writers in 1975 did.

---

On-base percentage is more important than batting average. Not making outs is more important than getting hits. RBI are heavily influenced by the players that bat in front of you and thus are not useful in determining a player's individual value.

I agree that Munson was more valuable than Tenace that year. I think Tenace is a lot closer to Munson than you think. The reason Munson was more valuable was because he was better defensively and Tenace spent a good deal of time at first base. It's not because Munson had a better batting average and more RBI.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OldYanksFan

As a side note, to see how team placement affected voting in the past check out American League 1959. When the White Sox won the pennant.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/aw...#AL_MVP_voting

---

Again, what's your point? Yes, there are times where it had an effect. Nobody has denied that. In fact, I've repeatedly said as much.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoustonGM

If it were the Best Player on the Best Team Award, I'd pick Jeter.

Of course, it's the Most Valuable Player award, and always has been, even in the "old school." And that's Joe Mauer.

---

Here again is your quote.

Look at 1959, Best Player on Best Team, Only players on the Whitesox were considered. So "always has been, even the old school" is false.

Thats the point.

What? Once again, I never denied that it never had an influence.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OldYankFan

The closet race, vote wise, was 1979 in the National League, a dead tie between Keith Hernadez and Willie Stargell. They were name Co-MVPs.

---

well i wasn't referring to vote wise, just stat wise

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jeffy25

well i wasn't referring to vote wise, just stat wise

---

Probably too many to count.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ragecage

Probably too many to count.

---

I know, i was just looking for a good example to play with :D

Jeter is HOF. His defense is average, but his offense is off the charts. I will give an error here and there vs. his run production anytime. Offensively, he may be the best SS ever. The other would have been A-Rod, but...

As for Munson, contracts have stipulated that they cannot fly their own planes since him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grasshopper

Jeter is HOF. His defense is average, but his offense is off the charts. I will give an error here and there vs. his run production anytime. Offensively, he may be the best SS ever. The other would have been A-Rod, but...

As for Munson, contracts have stipulated that they cannot fly their own planes since him.

---

I will agree that Jeter is HOF, but his defense over the course of his career has not been average. This year somehow at the age of 35, he became an above average defensive shortstop. From 2005-2007, he was the worst defensive full-time shortstop in the major leagues bar none. Credit goes to him for busting his ass to get better, but he's no average defensive shortstop in the overall for his career.

As for the comment that he may be the best offensive shortstop ever, puh-leaze. Give your head a shake. If we can agree on using OPS+ 1) Because it's quick and 2) Because it allows us to compare across eras, factoring for era and home ballpark, Honus Wagner and Arky Vaughan emerge as better than Jeter. Alex Rodriguez, if his career were to end today, would still be considered a SS because he's still played about 60% of his games there, and so would Nomar Garciaparra, but injuries have really derailed him. Also, we'll have to keep an eye on Hanley Ramirez, who when it's all said and done could very well overtake all of them, except probably Wagner. Of course the Yankees could trade for Ramirez/buy him and stick him in the OF so he won't qualify as a SS at the end of his career (It's not like they haven't done that before ;) ). Jeter's a very good hitter, but he's not the best hitting shortstop ever.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OldYankFan

Here are the MVP candidates from 1975 and their stats.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/aw...#AL_MVP_voting

The one thing that dear old Mr. Tenace did more than Mr Munson was walk. I know the old saying is a walk is as good as a hit but, come on. Munson hit .318 with 102 RBI, Geno hit .255 with 87 RBI. Munson got 21% of the MVP vote,(on a 4th place team) Tenace 2% (on a first place team) . I have no idea how old you are, but no one but the most partisan A's fan, watching baseball in 1975 would have put Tennace in Munson's class. Munson, Bench and Fisk were the dominate catchers of that era. Saying Gene Tenace had a better year than Munson because he batted eighth and got walked a lot stretches the bounds of reason.

---

OBP:

Munson .366
Tenace .395

SLG:

Munson .429
Tenace .464

OPS:

Munson .795
Tenace .859

OPS+:

Munson 126
Tenace 145

In every way, shape, and form Tenace was the better hitter in 1975, despite the 63 point difference in batting average and Munson's 15 RBI advantage. As HGM pointed out above, Munson was the slightly more valuable player (6.1 WAR to 5.5 WAR, where WAR equals Wins Above Replacement, a stat that attempts to combine offense and defense in one nice tidy little number) once defense is factored in, but Tenace was easily the more valuable hitter and since all your arguments were offense-based that's what I chose to argue. If that's disingenuous my apologies, but you didn't bring up The Yankee Captain's defensive abilities once in your argument, so I wasn't gonna bring it up in mine.

Besides, has anyone ever selected an MVP on the basis of offense + defense? Nope. AVG, HR, RBI and defensive reputation (which is far different from defensive ability: see Jeter, Derek pre-2009, Palmeiro, Rafael 1999 etc.) only if necessary to justify the decision. These days, with all the wonderful stats available on the interwebs we can do better than that. There's no excuses for getting these awards wrong anymore, but it'll continue to happen. :(