>> |
HKK
!h7MHU9L/Oo
Wow, in that thread, Rich tries to explain MVP:
"He and Bobby both seem to think that a guy whose team finished in 3rd place, 14 games behind the first place team with a record barely over .500 is deserving of the Most VALUABLE Player award even though his efforts werent nearly enough to help carry his team to the post-season.
They, and other sabermetricians like them, value only numbers and care not the least about the intangibles that make up a true MVP. Or in my opinion, they dont understand the meaning of Most Valuable Player.
If anything, Williams was the beneficiary of a split vote between DiMaggio, the Yankee closer Joe Page and their first baseman, George McQuinn. If the vote hadnt been split, Williams would have finished a lot further behind DiMaggio than 1 point. I think Williams came a lot closer to winning than he should have. Remember, only 3 out of 22 writers even gave him a first place vote, the same as McQuinn who finished 6th.
The real question is who gave first place vote to Lou Boudreau? Or maybe the real problem is the Philly writers who gave Eddie Joost two first place votes, likely to spite both the Red Sox and Yankees.
Id say give Williams (retroactively) the Hank Aaron Award which is supposed to go to the player who has the best offensive season but since this year it was awarded to Aramis Ramirez and Kevin Youkilis instead of say Albert Pujols and Alex Rodriguez, that award is more or less a joke now (though Youkilis is more worthy than Ramirez at least).
Now I will admit I dont a tremendous amount about the 1947 season but I do know that you cant judge a season, or an MVP, on numbers alone and considering the Sox poor finish that year, I do not consider Williams to have been the MVP."
Hey guys, objective numbers don't matter, only subjective opinions do.
|