AL MVP announced

[cartman]

So, it ends up being A-Rod after all. Only the 2nd person to ever win from a last place team.

Now that the announcement has been made, what are folks' reactions?

[Maple Leafs]

Would have been nice to see Carlos Delgado win it, but I think they made the right call.

[sterlingice]

Has Steinbrenner put in his daily call to Selig because a Yankee didn't win the award?

SI

[Ksyrup]

They got it right.

[HornedFrog Purple]

Excellent, I can now cross A-Rod for MVP off my list. Now where did I put that World Peace thing.... :)

[cincyreds]

I am glad that A-Rod won it.

I know he makes alot of money, but wouldn't take that kind money.

It is just rare these days to see a player get paid alot of dough and not play hard until the last year of his contract.

A-Rod plays hard along with getting that nice check.

Good job, A-Rod!! Keep it going buddy!

[John Galt]

It looks like the voters got it right. Finally!

[sterlingice]

I dunno- I think this one is right. Basically, if there is a standout statistical guy on a playoff team with not much help, they deserve it (why I think Bonds should get it over Pujols tomorrow despite the fact that I can't stand him). Then you have to go look at other cases: best statistical guy on a playoff team with help (Manny), standout statistical guy on winning team (Delgado), oustanding statistical guy (A-Rod) and try to balance them out. There's really no nice way to sort out those other cases since the award isn't well defined but I think A-Rod's season was more statistically standout than Manny was valuable or Delgado was a balance of the two.

SI

[QuikSand]

"They" got it right, despit themselves. Were there a fairly obvious candidate from a contending team, even with vastly inferior stats to ARod's that guy would have been anointed (cf. Miguel Tejada, 2002). But this year, with about six or eight such guys with only middling claims, they ended up splitting the "heavy on the V" vote, and the most outstanding player won after all.

[Maple Leafs]

Huge split in votes, with ten players getting a first place vote. Only six first place votes for A-Rod.

I still don't understand the Ortiz thing. Other than the fact that Red Sox fans liked to chant "MVP" when he came up, why exactly does he get four first place votes?

[McSweeny]

Originally posted by Maple Leafs
Huge split in votes, with ten players getting a first place vote. Only six first place votes for A-Rod.

I still don't understand the Ortiz thing. Other than the fact that Red Sox fans liked to chant "MVP" when he came up, why exactly does he get four first place votes?

Ortiz was a very big part of the Red Sox making the play-offs he had an amazing final 2 months. Always seemed to have the big hit. He pretty much carried the Red Sox down the stretch (with Nomar slumping horribly)

[Ksyrup]

Like I said in the other thread, the number of things Ortiz did at "clutch" moments this year was amazing. I think that is the only reason he deserved a few votes - although I would not have given him a 1st place vote. It's just another way to measure "valuable."

[Alan T]

Ortiz was a streaky player just like many streaky players.. Where he hit a ton of home runs and game winning RBI over the stretch of a month or two. Because Ortiz had his hot streak in September, while Nomar had his hot streak in the early part of the season, Boston fans became very fond of Ortiz and felt he carried the team to the postseason.

The question if Boston could have made it to the postseason without Ortiz became a popular one that many people felt the answer was no. People did not feel the same way about Nomar, even though Nomar won just as many games for the Red Sox as Ortiz did, just during a different part of the season.

And since alot of the ESPN commetary is New England based, guys like Peter Gammons helped continue to spread a David Ortiz for MVP sentiment around further.

The best player statistically in Boston for the year probably was Manny Ramirez, but Boston fans grew tired of his act and could not love him the same way they did Ortiz...

I guess that is where it came from.

[John Galt]

Originally posted by Alan T
Ortiz was a streaky player just like many streaky players.. Where he hit a ton of home runs and game winning RBI over the stretch of a month or two. Because Ortiz had his hot streak in September, while Nomar had his hot streak in the early part of the season, Boston fans became very fond of Ortiz and felt he carried the team to the postseason.

The question if Boston could have made it to the postseason without Ortiz became a popular one that many people felt the answer was no. People did not feel the same way about Nomar, even though Nomar won just as many games for the Red Sox as Ortiz did, just during a different part of the season.

And since alot of the ESPN commetary is New England based, guys like Peter Gammons helped continue to spread a David Ortiz for MVP sentiment around further.

The best player statistically in Boston for the year probably was Manny Ramirez, but Boston fans grew tired of his act and could not love him the same way they did Ortiz...

I guess that is where it came from.


And besides, the argument for Ortiz made a hell of lot more sense than the argument for Stewart. Why can't writers like Stark understand that correlation doesn't = causation and that other intervening factors were more significant (pitching and specifically the move of Santana to the starting rotation)?

[JW27]

A-Rod deserved it, its a shame its his only one...