AL MVP: Ortiz or A-Rod

[oykib]

Everyone should know by now that I'm a bigtime Yankees fan. So I'm not going to get into the minutae of the stats (although A-Rod's are marginally better). But I don't see how even if think Ortiz has better numbers that he has enough seperation to make up for the fact that he's a DH and A-Rod is probably the second-best third baseman in the league.

Year	Team	G	AB	R	H	HR	RBI	BB	SO	SB	CS	OBP	SLG	AVG
David Ortiz
2005	BOS	142	536	108	159	42	130	92	107	1	0	.396	.603	.297
Alex Rodriguez
2005	NYY	144	539	108	172	41	112	81	118	13	6	.419	.596	.319

[SirFozzie]

How about clutch hits? How about impact of hits? Ortiz has it over A-Rod (who's an average 3rd baseman)

[Crapshoot]

A- rod- by far. In Boston, Ortiz is playing the "easiest" defensive position. Meanwhile, A-rod is playing a damn good 3b, and is out hitting Ortiz - he leads him in RC. Given that the defensive difference in worth 15-20 runs by itself, I see no reason why Ortiz should win.

And yes, I live in Boston.

[WrongWay]

I want to know how many game saving catches did Ortiz make? How many time Did ortiz turn a game around with a SPECTACULAR defensive play?

Sorry, but Defense if part of the game.

Now, if it was an award for only hitting, say the triple crown, then a DH could win it.

[McSweeny]

Originally Posted by WrongWay

I want to know how many game saving catches did Ortiz make? How many time Did ortiz turn a game around with a SPECTACULAR defensive play?

and how many times has Arod cost the yankees runs and games with his defensive play?

[WrongWay]

Originally Posted by McSweeny

and how many times has Arod cost the yankees runs and games with his defensive play?

As opposed to playing...say David Ortiz at 3rd?

[Crapshoot]

Originally Posted by McSweeny

and how many times has Arod cost the yankees runs and games with his defensive play?

okay, that is ridiculous. A-rod was consistently one of the best SS in baseball via UZR, and was amongst the best 3b last year - having to cover for Derek "no range" Jeter. PLus, A-rod playing a position with a defensive premium (compared to DH) makes him a lot harder to replace that Ortiz. He's had a better offensive season, and plays above average defense at 3b - the Ortiz case seems to be based primarily on Sox fans.

[Eaglesfan27]

Arod's Fielding percentage is 5th best in the AL (only .009 behind the leader Blalock) and his range is among the best stasticially among 3B in the AL. His team has almost as many wins and his offensive numbers are comparable. Therefore, my vote would go to Arod.

[McSweeny]

Originally Posted by Crapshoot

okay, that is ridiculous. A-rod was consistently one of the best SS in baseball via UZR, and was amongst the best 3b last year - having to cover for Derek "no range" Jeter. PLus, A-rod playing a position with a defensive premium (compared to DH) makes him a lot harder to replace that Ortiz. He's had a better offensive season, and plays above average defense at 3b - the Ortiz case seems to be based primarily on Sox fans.

oh i agree completely. It just seems a bit foolish to me to say that Arod makes game saving defensive plays and Ortiz doesn't (which was the post i was replying to). It's not his game saving and spectacular plays that will win him the MVP, it's the fact that he goes out there every day and plays above average defence at a difficult position

[McSweeny]

dola

Originally Posted by WrongWay

Now, if it was an award for only hitting, say the triple crown, then a DH could win it.

this to me implies that you think that a DH should not be allowed to win the MVP because he doesn't play defense. Last i checked the DH was indeed part of the game and of course a DH should be able to win the MVP, just as a pitcher (even a closer) should be able to win the MVP. Of course a pitcher needs to have an amazingly dominate season (and not be left off two ballots) and a DH would have to have a monster season and blow the rest of the field away statistically to make up for the lack of fielding.

For example, if Arod were playing first base and was the worst fielding first baseman in the league, i'm sure this race would be a hell of a lot closer

[Galaril]

How many baseball players have won MVP awards due to their defensive skills?

[Mr. Wednesday]

The only argument to be made in Ortiz' favor is that his "clutch" performance is so outrageous this year (and I have a feeling from seeing some incomplete analysis at SOSH that it is truly outragous), combined with a corresponding lack of clutch-ness from A-rod, overcomes the credit the latter should get for fielding. Numbers-wise overall, there's very little to separate the two.

[ThunderingHERD]

A-Rod without question.

Ortiz's "clutch" hitting? Newsflash: runs scored in the first 6 innings count the same as runs scored in the ninth.

[MrBigglesworth]

A-Rod. Getting that kind of production from a 3B is much more valuable than getting that kind of production from a DH.

[SirFozzie]

Originally Posted by ThunderingHERD

A-Rod without question.

Ortiz's "clutch" hitting? Newsflash: runs scored in the first 6 innings count the same as runs scored in the ninth.

Sure. But you can't win the game with a run scored in the sixth. You can win the game directly on a run scored in the 9th.

let me guess, you're one of those statheads who say "Clutch ability" is a misnomer, that there's no such thing as a clutch player?

[Danny]

Originally Posted by SirFozzie

let me guess, you're one of those statheads who say "Clutch ability" is a misnomer, that there's no such thing as a clutch player?

Let me guess, you're one of those emotional baseball types who ignore all research that clearly shows clutch hitting if it even exists is such a small effect it's not even worth considering.

[SirFozzie]

Originally Posted by Danny Drickman

Let me guess, you're one of those emotional baseball types who ignore all research that clearly shows clutch hitting if it even exists is such a small effect it's not even worth considering.

There are three types of lies, sir.

Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics.

You take a set of numbers, and massage them to say whatever you want them to say.

[ThunderingHERD]

Lets take a game that ends 1-0. Is A-Rod hitting a homerun in the first any more valuable than Ortiz hitting a homerun in the 9th to anyone but the fans who create irrational mythology out of it?

[ThunderingHERD]

Originally Posted by SirFozzie

There are three types of lies, sir.

Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics.

You take a set of numbers, and massage them to say whatever you want them to say.

Ok. I'll accept that to be true. Please massage out some numbers that show a trend that clutch performance actually exists.

Wasn't my point to begin with, but go ahead.

[SirFozzie]

Wish I could find a site with the numbers, but (this is going from memory from a discussion on the radio)

RISP, Less then 2 Outs. Hard to say that this isn't a clutch situation. Every hit here means runs.

League average is .273

A-Rod is slightly better then league average, .277

Ortiz is hitting somewhere in the neighberhood of .325 IIRC

[Danny]

Originally Posted by SirFozzie

There are three types of lies, sir.

Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics.

You take a set of numbers, and massage them to say whatever you want them to say.

Actually I was just making a contradictory post that had the same tone as yours. Just showing how your comment could easily be turned around. Carry on.

[ThunderingHERD]

Originally Posted by SirFozzie

Wish I could find a site with the numbers, but (this is going from memory from a discussion on the radio)

RISP, Less then 2 Outs. Hard to say that this isn't a clutch situation. Every hit here means runs.

League average is .273

A-Rod is slightly better then league average, .277

Ortiz is hitting somewhere in the neighberhood of .325 IIRC

I'm confused at what this proves. First of all, Davd Ortiz is a much better than average hitter, so comparing his RISP to the league average RISP is rather misleading. Secondly, with such a small sample size, there is going to be a large amount of random deviation in any split. I don't feel like looking up any numbers right now, so I'll just take an example off the top of my head: In his first 100 ABs or so, Jeff Francouer was hitting about .380 with 10 HRs. Since then he has dropped off considerably. Does that mean he's a great first 100 AB hitter? Can we expect the same thing from him next year?

[SirFozzie]

I think it's one of those things where we just won't agree, and it's two fucking thirty in the morning, don't feel like arguing, so I'll just leave it there.

[ThunderingHERD]

Ok. I didn't really want to argue this either, as I'm sure this conversation has taken place a thousand times on this board and elsewhere.

[Danny]

I actually find it funny everytime a new argument like this pops up. Neither side is going to convince the other side to change their mind. Sorry for adding a little fuel to the fire there .

[LionsFan10]

Originally Posted by Galaril

How many baseball players have won MVP awards due to their defensive skills?

Exactly, how many times has Barry Bonds won the MVP award? Many, and I highly doubt it's because Bonds is a superb left fielder . Offense wins these awards, as much as I'd like to see defense play a bigger role, I don't think it plays into it much at all.

[jeff061]

Ortiz, he's won about 20 games for the Sox this year. There is no one more valuable to the team than him. You can argue about the existence of clutch all you want, how many homers does Ortiz need to hit that put the Sox up in the last two innings?

And A-Knob's a chode.

[oykib]

No, players don't win the MVP with defense very often. But plenty of shortstops and catchers have won with defense being a main contributor. So, defense is obviously part of it.

How important do you think defense is? Even if you think that it's only worth 10%, that's all an advantage to A-Rod.

Barry Bonds played in the field pretty much every game-- despite ywhat you may have felt about the quality of his play-- when he won his MVPs. Even if you think he was terrible, his margin over his closest competition on offense was probably enough for him to have won if he had been a DH.

A-Rod and Ortiz have offensive numbers of almost equal value. But Ortiz has played ten games, badly, at first. A-Rod has played three games at short and 143 games at third. He'll be in the running for a gold glove at third. To say that that doesn't give Rodriguez the advantage means you're not exercising rational analysis and ther's no point in discussing it with you.

There's a point to be made about clutch hitting. While "clutch hitters" may not exist-- "clutch hitting" does. Ortiz has hit well in close-and-late situations and with runners-in-scoring-position. That's to his advantage. I'd also give him the advantage at this point because we could use team position as a tie-breaker.

However, even though he's hit fifty points higher with RISP, he's hitting twenty points lower overall. Also with all those great at bats his offensive numbers are still, at best, equal to Rodriguez's.

[rkmsuf]

Player of the Year = A-Rod

MVP = Ortiz

[Ryan S]

A-Rod, and it's not even close.

[oykib]

I always thought it was a bullshit copout anyway. But I don't even get the whole Player of the Year vs. MVP thing this year. Their teams are 1 1/2 games apart. This isn't a case that one guy's team has been out of it since July.

You certainly can't make the case with the stats that Ortiz has been immensely more valuable.

[VPI97]

I can't believe there's a thread discussing this. For a DH to win MVP, they're going to have to be head and shoulders above the field in terms of offensive performance. I'm talking dominant triple crown numbers.

[rkmsuf]

Originally Posted by oykib

I always thought it was a bullshit copout anyway. But I don't even get the whole Player of the Year vs. MVP thing this year. Their teams are 1 1/2 games apart. This isn't a case that one guy's team has been out of it since July.

You certainly can't make the case with the stats that Ortiz has been immensely more valuable.

No not on stats alone but I can safely say with his clutch play, the Sox would be no where near first place.

Not seeing A-Rod everyday I can't comment on his relative "value" but Ortiz wins games in the big spots for Boston.

[jeff061]

Without following the Sox I don't know if people understand just how often he has come up big and how much you can depend on him in the late innings. It's freakish.


And he's not a whining little baby jerk Yankee.

[MrBigglesworth]

Originally Posted by jeff061

Ortiz, he's won about 20 games for the Sox this year. There is no one more valuable to the team than him. You can argue about the existence of clutch all you want, how many homers does Ortiz need to hit that put the Sox up in the last two innings?

And A-Knob's a chode.

Originally Posted by jeff061

Without following the Sox I don't know if people understand just how often he has come up big and how much you can depend on him in the late innings. It's freakish.


And he's not a whining little baby jerk Yankee.

I value your opinion on this matter jeff061 because you are in no way biased in any capacity.

Here is an easy question: you had a choice between a player that will hit .320 with 45 HR's and play gold glove caliber 3B, and a player that will hit .300 with 45 HR's and not get anywhere near the field, who would you choose to put on your team? If you don't say the 3B, you are crazy.

[jeff061]

At least I don't try and hide it .

Your post qualifies for Player of the Year awards, not MVP. I'd take Ortiz over A-Rod. That's my totally 100% unbiased opinion.

[MrBigglesworth]

Originally Posted by jeff061

At least I don't try and hide it .

Your post qualifies for Player of the Year awards, not MVP. I'd take Ortiz over A-Rod. That's my totally 100% unbiased opinion.

What is the different between the two in your mind? Playing 3B is definitely more valuable than playing DH.

[rkmsuf]

I'd have to agree. Not taking away from A-Rod, he's great but it's the age old arguement of "valuable".

Is A-Rod more "valuable" on the open market...sure. That is Player of the Year. Take one away from their teams and which teams tanks it more...Red Sox. That's MVP.

[jeff061]

This is not OOTP, this is real life. Ortiz is more valuable to the Sox than A-Rod is to the Yankees.

If we were drafting for a text sim here I'd take A-Rod.

[henry296]

I know that it isn't a perfect stat, game winning RBIs is a potential "clutch" stat. A-Rod actually has 1 more than David Ortiz, 17-16. Basically both players have equally put their team in the lead, while Ortiz' tend to be later in games, I tend to agree with Thunderherd that a home run in the first vs. in the 9th is just as important in a 1-0 game.

[rkmsuf]

It doesn't matter. The voting is done by agenda toting morons who don't even pay attention.

[MrBigglesworth]

Originally Posted by rkmsuf

I'd have to agree. Not taking away from A-Rod, he's great but it's the age old arguement of "valuable".

Is A-Rod more "valuable" on the open market...sure. That is Player of the Year. Take one away from their teams and which teams tanks it more...Red Sox. That's MVP.

So if you have two players with nearly equal stats playing for teams with nearly equal records, and take each away from their respective team, how does the one that plays no defense make the team tank while the one that does play defense has little effect? That doesn't make any kind of logical sense.

[Hammer755]

Originally Posted by rkmsuf

I'd have to agree. Not taking away from A-Rod, he's great but it's the age old arguement of "valuable".

Is A-Rod more "valuable" on the open market...sure. That is Player of the Year. Take one away from their teams and which teams tanks it more...Red Sox. That's MVP.

But how do you create value? By being the best player. A-Rod has a slightly higher SLG than Ortiz, and his OBP is 20 points higher. A-Rod has had a slightly better offensive season, and when you add in his defensive contribution, it's a no-brainer. And this is coming from a guy with a pretty severe dislike of A-Rod.

If you really want to talk value, look at a guy like Mike Sweeney. He is more valuable to the Royals than either Ortiz or A-Rod are to their teams.

[rkmsuf]

Originally Posted by MrBigglesworth

So if you have two players with nearly equal stats playing for teams with nearly equal records, and take each away from their respective team, how does the one that plays no defense make the team tank while the one that does play defense has little effect? That doesn't make any kind of logical sense.

Put a light hitting, good defensive 3b in the Yankees lineup and

put a crappy hitting dh in the red sox lineup and let's compare.

[rkmsuf]

Originally Posted by Hammer755

But how do you create value? By being the best player. A-Rod has a slightly higher SLG than Ortiz, and his OBP is 20 points higher. A-Rod has had a slightly better offensive season, and when you add in his defensive contribution, it's a no-brainer. And this is coming from a guy with a pretty severe dislike of A-Rod.

If you really want to talk value, look at a guy like Mike Sweeney. He is more valuable to the Royals than either Ortiz or A-Rod are to their teams.

great, without Mike Sweeney they'd be more last.

[MrBigglesworth]

Originally Posted by rkmsuf

Put a light hitting, good defensive 3b in the Yankees lineup and

put a crappy hitting dh in the red sox lineup and let's compare.

So the thinking is, if we replace ARod with Brooks Robinson in his prime, and Ortiz with Minnie Mendoza in his prime, then the Red Sox will do worse than the Yankees? I agree with that, but it has nothing to do with our conversation.

[rkmsuf]

Originally Posted by MrBigglesworth

So the thinking is, if we replace ARod with Brooks Robinson in his prime, and Ortiz with Minnie Mendoza in his prime, then the Red Sox will do worse than the Yankees? I agree with that, but it has nothing to do with our conversation.

It always comes back to the definition of most valuable.

It's hard for either side to get a sense of it not watching the majority of games.

[DanGarion]

The fact that Ortiz does not play in the field is an ASSET to the Red Sox, if Ortiz played 3B he would be a liability and thus this makes him better then A-Rod.

[miked]

Didn't A-Rod almost carry the Yanks for a month and a half? I think if you replaced either one with a crappy player, they'd both be a lot worse off. The Red Sox offense has scored more runs than the Yanks offense. So if you take Ortiz away, it would be almost the same as taking A-Rod away, except for the fact that you'd be losing a gold-glove caliber defender in the latter scenario.

[MrBigglesworth]

Originally Posted by dangarion

The fact that Ortiz does not play in the field is an ASSET to the Red Sox, if Ortiz played 3B he would be a liability and thus this makes him better then A-Rod.

I'm assuming this is tongue-in-cheek?