2008 Sports Mogul Awards - The Winners

[HoustonGM]

I'm a Giants fan and all, but... how does Rowand win a GG? I was really unimpressed with him in the outfield this year. His arm doesn't seem that great, especially in CF. I think they should move him to LF and let one of the younger guys play CF. He just wasn't that impressive to me.

Anyone who voted for him care to explain?

I had him 5th on my ballot, but you're right. Rowand, by most advanced defensive measures, is no more than an average center fielder, maybe slightly better than that. His reputation, though, is of a great center fielder, because of his propensity to go "all out". Honestly, I have a feeling that if he never ran into a wall and broke his nose, he wouldn't have quite the defensive reputation that he currently has.

[TheNamelessPoet]

Most ignorant statement ever. The best player IS the most valuble. If the Rangers didn't have Hamilton, they'd have about 10 more losses, or more. The only reason Pedroia won is because he's on a good team. Is it Josh Hamilton's fault Texas has no pitching? You people make me sick.

You are not serious are you??? Unless the guy DOMINATES how is he the best player on a losing team... A-Rod was different... he was DOMINATING the league when he won it in Texas.

You are probably hte same Guy that says Howard should win over Pujols.
You take Howard off the Phillies they still probably make the playoffs... you take pujols off the Cards and they are lucky SNIFF 75 wins MAYBE... Its who is most valuable not who puts up the gaudiest statistics...

[HoustonGM]

You are not serious are you??? Unless the guy DOMINATES how is he the best player on a losing team...

Because the player's teammates do not affect how good, valuable, or effective he is.

You are probably hte same Guy that says Howard should win over Pujols.

Actually...that's exactly the type of argument that Moot is arguing AGAINST. There's no small portion of people out there that argue Pujols shouldn't be the MVP because his team didn't make the playoffs. Frankly, that nonsense makes me sick, too. There is no reason whatsoever that a player's MVP case should hinge on the performance of his teammates, except in the extremely, extremely close cases.

[TheNamelessPoet]

Because the player's teammates do not affect how good, valuable, or effective he is.

so its safe to say if you took pujols on the yankees he would not have more RBI's and possibly more HR due to better protection?

[justanewguy]

I had him 5th on my ballot, but you're right. Rowand, by most advanced defensive measures, is no more than an average center fielder, maybe slightly better than that. His reputation, though, is of a great center fielder, because of his propensity to go "all out". Honestly, I have a feeling that if he never ran into a wall and broke his nose, he wouldn't have quite the defensive reputation that he currently has.

Rowand is very solid with the glove and rarely makes mistakes. He has good range. He also shows up more often than the average CFs on Web Gems, which helps his case for anyone who doesn't watch 162 Giants games in a season.

It's definitely a matter of reputation as well, kinda like Greg Maddux. Although Maddux is still in the upper echelon of fielding pitchers, with outstanding range and great skills with the glove and arm.

As far as Pedroia goes, I don't think it's a case of homerism, or picking the player on the best team, or anything. There's no possible way you can argue beyond a shadow of a doubt that Hamilton is somehow MORE deserving of the MVP than Pedroia.

Hamilton, Rodriguez, Quentin, Pedroia, Youkilis, Mauer, Morneau, Sizemore, Lee... ANY of these players could win the award and it would not be shocking, and it wouldn't be them stealing the award from another, more deserving player. I pretty much see it as a 9-or-so-way tie for first. No ONE player really stood out at all.

It's interesting to note... in my opinion at least, Pujols, Berkman, or Wright could have walked away with this award if they played in the AL and put up the same numbers they did in the NL.

[HoustonGM]

so its safe to say if you took pujols on the yankees he would not have more RBI's and possibly more HR due to better protection?

More HR, doubtful. "Protection" affecting anything besides walk totals has largely been debunked.

RBI, yes, he'd have more, but that is a function of the players in front of him. The number of RBI's a player racks up tells you nothing about how good the player is, nor does it give you any indication of his value.

[TheNamelessPoet]

More HR, doubtful. "Protection" affecting anything besides walk totals has largely been debunked.

good point.. altho I think it would help... you will pitch to A-Rod more if Pujols (shudder at that lineup ) is behind him than if say Matsui is behind him, would you not. Then again... it depends on the game situation.

RBI, yes, he'd have more, but that is a function of the players in front of him. The number of RBI's a player racks up tells you nothing about how good the player is, nor does it give you any indication of his value.

BUT the so called "prefessionals" who have control over the REAL ballots use is. In the same way runs are also not based entirely on you, they have a lot to do with who hit behind you. Granted HR's are a product of entirely yourself and the pitcher.

[HoustonGM]

good point.. altho I think it would help... you will pitch to A-Rod more if Pujols (shudder at that lineup ) is behind him than if say Matsui is behind him, would you not. Then again... it depends on the game situation.

Yeah. You'd pitch to him more, meaning he'd draw less walks.

BUT the so called "prefessionals" who have control over the REAL ballots use is. In the same way runs are also not based entirely on you, they have a lot to do with who hit behind you. Granted HR's are a product of entirely yourself and the pitcher.

Right...but, this doesn't change the fact that the player's ACTUAL VALUE is unaffected by his teammates performance. Just because the idiotic sportswriters use a stat like RBI to determine value, and they assign value based on teammate performance (such as people arguing that Pujols shouldn't win the MVP because his team didn't make the playoffs), doesn't mean that the actual value of the player is changed.

[TheNamelessPoet]

good points Houston.

1 Question tho...

if he had less walks he would have more plate appearences... and with more plate appearences couldn't I assume "and I'm sure its dangerous to do this but..." with the "extra" plate appearences he would hit more HR?

[HoustonGM]

1 Question tho...

if he had less walks he would have more plate appearences... and with more plate appearences couldn't I assume "and I'm sure its dangerous to do this but..." with the "extra" plate appearences he would hit more HR?

Less walks doesn't equal less plate appearances. It equals less at bats. And sure, it's possible that he would hit more HR. But, overall, player's offensive performance, in terms of hitting for average, getting on-base, and power, does not change significantly based on the player hitting behind them, except their walk rate fluctuates a bit (better batter behind them = lower walk rate and vice versa).

[justanewguy]

Less walks makes for more at-bats.

[TheNamelessPoet]

IC what you mean now.

Less walks makes for more at-bats.

lol I was thinking the same thing

[metsguy234]

metsguy, just curious...you had Dustin Pedroia #2 on your AL MVP ballot...how do you think he was a BAD pick then?

Because I think there's a large margin between 1st and 2nd place this year... I feel Hamilton should've been the clear winner.

[HoustonGM]

Because I think there's a large margin between 1st and 2nd place this year... I feel Hamilton should've been the clear winner.

I'm sorry, but that's just not true. As justanewguy said, there's like 10 guys in the AL who have a good case for the MVP.

[metsguy234]

I'm sorry, but that's just not true. As justanewguy said, there's like 10 guys in the AL who have a good case for the MVP.

But Pedroia this year looks like Rollins last year and Jeter in 06... the type of player I call the "Sampler"... not good at anything in particular, but decent at everything...