Lee first to 20 wins

[RedsoxRockies]

I think that Bill Bavasi should get the MVP. He played a big role in giving the Angels more wins

[HoustonGM]

Your view is your view,GM,but when you know you are the only power source & you actually do continue to hit .300+ with power --- then that should be considered in what you bring to the team & subsequently to MVP voting,IMO.

That's implying that if a player "knows hes the only power source", that it takes something "more" to continue being that power source, and I don't see how that's true. A player is going to continue playing how he plays regardless of whether or not he's the only player on his team that brings his skills to the table.

Let's put this into perspective with a hypothetical. Take two players, identical players. They each were worth 8 wins to their team. One plays for a team that's 88-74 at the end of the season, narrowly winning their division. The other plays from a team that's 98-64, winning the division by 10 games. Without that player, the first team would be sub-.500, and not in the playoffs. The second team would be 90-72 and still be in the playoffs. Using the system that you use, and many others, I've seen, particularly in the mainstream media, the player on the first team would be more valuable than the player on the second team, despite the fact that they were worth an identical amount of wins in the standings. How is a player that is worth 8 wins more valuable than another player worth an equal amount? How does the makeup of a player's team change the value of his production?

Minnesota are in the bottom 4 in HR production(2nd worst in the AL by 2 HRs) but are still in a division race.You remove Morneau or replace him with a "league" average 1B then they would be on the outside looking in.

Would they?

Again it is my opinion a MVP is a difference maker to a team

And it's my opinion that the MVP is the player that provides the most value.

How is a great player on a good team more valuable than a great player on a great team? How is a great player on a great team more valuable than a great player on a bad team? I really just can't understand that notion, and trust me, you're far from the only person I've seen use it. I just really can't grasp it. It's an individual award, and should be based on the value of the individual player's production, and I don't think the performance of a player's teammates changes the value of his production.

[FRENCHREDSOX]

It's an individual award, and should be based on the value of the individual player's production, and I don't think the performance of a player's teammates changes the value of his production.

Um it does GM.....it is a team sport & OPPONENTS know (aren't they corrupt to know these things) that X or Y is the best hitter or power source & PLAY accordingly.

Just ask Barry Bonds or look at IBBs if you dont follow what I mean - every action has a reaction & more so in a team sport.Thus a player's production is intrinsically linked to the production of his team mates - if your team is full of free swinging Power mongers then it will reduce your RBI (& vice versa),if your team is a slap happy but no power unit then team's will BB the power threat etc etc.

I was just stating an opinion that unlike the OTHER teams' Morneau was an unique case where he provides both BA & the sole source of power which has been the major reason that Minny are still in the Central race whilst having the likes of phemon power hitters Casilla/Lamb/Everett or Punto/Gomez/Young & Span PLAYING every day around you.*



* 29 HRs TOTAL in roughly 2100 ABs!

[justanewguy]

Myself, I see a clear standout. He goes by the name of...Albert Pujols. He's hitting .363/.470/.648, for a 192 OPS+. He leads the league in all three triple slash stats. He plays ridiculously good defense at first base. He's criminally underrated because he's so good that he's taken for granted. He's not getting the MVP talk he deserves because he has a teammate with more home runs and RBIs than him, and people don't understand that he's a big part of the reason why that teammate has more RBIs. Pujols is having a dominating season, and should really be the clear NL MVP, but I think he faces an uphill battle because of ridiculous ignorance on the part of the voters.

Don't tell Ryan Ludwick, he may say you talk too much.

I agree 100% about all things Pujols. I don't remember ever seeing a player taken for granted as much as he is. Without him, the Cardinals are wallowing with the Astros, Reds and Pirates.

Minnesota are in the bottom 4 in HR production(2nd worst in the AL by 2 HRs) but are still in a division race.You remove Morneau or replace him with a "league" average 1B then they would be on the outside looking in.

Take Carlos Quentin out and keep Mackowiak/Podsednik/whoever out in LF instead, and the White Sox are looking up 10 or 15 games at Morneau and his Twins. Especially the way he carried that team early on. Same argument can be made for both. I'd put Q just a little bit above Morneau. Did you see the White Sox in April and May? Nobody was hitting except Quentin and Dye, but it was really Quentin (on the offensive side) that put them in first place. It can't even be described how terribly that entire team was playing...

Again it is my opinion a MVP is a difference maker to a team - the other teams - Tampa/Angel/both Sox dont have 1 difference maker but multiple - Tampa 149HRs,Red Sox 148,Angels 128,White Sox a ludicrous 199 - Minny ? 98!

I agree with the difference-maker argument, and it's very strong with Morneau. I think simply quoting HR numbers doesn't really prove a point, though, and I disagree about the White Sox having more than one difference maker. Although they do, I don't think it factors THAT heavily into the MVP race, because of what Quentin has done.

Maybe I have a bias towards Quentin over Morneau because I've watched at least 1/3 of the Sox games this season, but I think the difference making is... well, a little different, because Morneau's team as a whole is overachieving, where Quentin pulled an underachieving offense into first place and kept his production up through the season.

[HoustonGM]

Um it does GM.....it is a team sport & OPPONENTS know (aren't they corrupt to know these things) that X or Y is the best hitter or power source & PLAY accordingly.

Okay.

Just ask Barry Bonds or look at IBBs if you dont follow what I mean - every action has a reaction & more so in a team sport.Thus a player's production is intrinsically linked to the production of his team mates - if your team is full of free swinging Power mongers then it will reduce your RBI (& vice versa)

Hence using statistics that are majorly team-oriented such as RBI to evaluate the value of a single player is a silly practice.

,if your team is a slap happy but no power unit then team's will BB the power threat etc etc.

True, but the boost to walks is miniscule in the overall scope of things, and is also a plus to the player's value which can be accurately estimated based on his individual statistics (ie. not RBI, runs, etc.).

I was just stating an opinion that unlike the OTHER teams' Morneau was an unique case where he provides both BA & the sole source of power which has been the major reason that Minny are still in the Central race whilst having the likes of phemon power hitters Casilla/Lamb/Everett or Punto/Gomez/Young & Span PLAYING every day around you.*

The main reason that Minnesota is still in then race is because they are hitting freakishly with runners in scoring position AS A TEAM (including Morneau).

The fact that Morneau's teammates don't hit for power doesn't change the value of that power. He'd be equally valuable on a team of good power hitters.

And if we're using the "difference maker" argument...still, Cliff Lee. Sure, he's not making the difference between being in the race or not, but what would the Indians season look like if Lee wasn't pitching the way he's pitching? Here's a hint - really disastrous, rather than pretty disappointing.

[justanewguy]

Jeff Passan agrees about Cliff Lee being way beyond K-Rod:

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news;_yl...yhoo&type=lgns

Passan is a pretty good barometer of the average baseball writer. I think I've read way more from writers in terms of giving Cliff Lee the nod than I have about Rodriguez deserving the award. That's why I say I expect Lee to win the award, and I'd actually be surprised if Rodriguez even finishes above Halladay.

[HoustonGM]

Anybody who knows anything about pitching statistics even slightly beyond wins and saves would know that Rodriguez isn't even in the ballpark when it comes to this award.

I do expect Cliff Lee to win it, but that's because Lee's got a good story. If it was Johan Santana posting the same season in the AL, for instance, K-Rod would likely win, as it's "expected" from Santana, you know? As sad as that is. The writers aren't analysts. They're story tellers, and they vote accordingly.

Passan, though, is generally a very competent writer. Yahoo has some of the better baseball writers of the major sites.

[Slingshot]

Anybody who knows anything about pitching statistics even slightly beyond wins and saves would know that Rodriguez isn't even in the ballpark when it comes to this award.

I do expect Cliff Lee to win it, but that's because Lee's got a good story. If it was Johan Santana posting the same season in the AL, for instance, K-Rod would likely win, as it's "expected" from Santana, you know? As sad as that is. The writers aren't analysts. They're story tellers, and they vote accordingly.

Passan, though, is generally a very competent writer. Yahoo has some of the better baseball writers of the major sites.

I agree. I think K-Rod has had a very good season though, but compared to Cliff Lee, he doesn't and shouldn't have a chance.

[RedsoxRockies]

Jeff Passan agrees about Cliff Lee being way beyond K-Rod:

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news;_yl...yhoo&type=lgns

Passan is a pretty good barometer of the average baseball writer. I think I've read way more from writers in terms of giving Cliff Lee the nod than I have about Rodriguez deserving the award. That's why I say I expect Lee to win the award, and I'd actually be surprised if Rodriguez even finishes above Halladay.

Passan can be good, or he can be an ignorant retard. He has his good days and bad days.

[justanewguy]

I like Passan because he tends to get into the "numbers beyond the numbers," but manages to do a pretty good job telling Joe Schmo about the importance of stats they may not have known about. His analysis is usually pretty good. He also has appeal in non-stat terms, so he's a very good overall writer.

And I agree with HGM, Yahoo does have some of the best writers for a big website, in other sports as well.

[Slingshot]

Dayn Perry from foxsports.com is the worst writer. I don't think I've ever read a good article from that guy.

[HoustonGM]

Dayn Perry from foxsports.com is the worst writer. I don't think I've ever read a good article from that guy.

He writes some stinkers, but he's far, far from the worst.

[Slingshot]

He writes some stinkers, but he's far, far from the worst.

Well, he's certainly not the best.

[justanewguy]

He writes some stinkers, but he's far, far from the worst.

Who's the worst?

[HoustonGM]

Who's the worst?

I don't know if there is any one "worst."

Richard Justice, Murray Chass, Bill Plaschke, Woody Paige, Jay Mariotti....all pretty terrible.