from Amazon
Tuesday, August 23, 2011
MPP: Most Productive Player Award
Poz says to he!! with Value in MVP, and instead says Productive.
I prefer the word Outstanding, because you get the cool acronym MOP. It has that Nick Choice Awards feel to it, where they give out surfboards, and slime the winners. Keeps things from getting too heated, too serious.
But, whatever. As Poz notes:
In 2003, Albert Pujols had one of the greatest seasons of the last 25 years. His basic numbers: .359, 51 doubles, 43 homers, 137 runs, 124 RBIs. He played left field and first base, and played them both exceedingly well. He was a phenomenon, though it went almost unnoticed because 2003 was right in the middle of the Barry Bonds’ absurdity tour. But my point is not about individual achievement. My point is that Albert Pujols in 2003 was about as good as a player has been … and the Cardinals finished third behind not-especially impressive Houston and Chicago teams. What could Pujols do to change that? Hit for an even higher average? Bang even more home runs? Come through in the clutch even more often?
And directly to the point: What does that have to do with whether or not he’s more valuable than another player who isn’t nearly as productive?
And that’s what it is, right there. Take away one HR, one single, one walk, one run scored, one RBI, but put him on a team that finishes in 1st place. Now, all of a sudden, he’s more “valuable” because his teammates are better? He does less, his teammates do more, and Pujols himself is now MORE valuable?
Recent comments
Older comments
Page 1 of 344 pages 1 2 3 > Last »Complete Archive – By Category
Complete Archive – By Date