When the “best” player who “unquestionably provides the most value to his team” is not the MVP

82 Comments

I take it back. Heyman’s MVP column was not all that convoluted after all. That’s because I just read Buster Olney’s and I can’t recall anything as confounding. And that’s with 98% of it being excellent.

It’s behind a paywall so you may not be able to read it. But I will do it justice in summary. Really — I am not adding my own gloss here. This is a faithful summary of Olney’s reasoning:

    • Doing something because “that’s the way it’s always been done” is stupid;
    • Voting for MVP award winners based on them being on a winning team is the way it’s always been done and that’s stupid. Writers do it, though, because they are slaves to this precedent which started in the 1930s.
    • It shouldn’t be this way. The MVP should go to the best player regardless of how his team finishes in the standings.
    • “I also think [Mike] Trout is the best player in baseball, and he unquestionably provides the most value to his team of any player in the sport.”
    • He then says that if he had a vote he’d vote for Miguel Cabrera because “the MVP voting is chained to the past, for now: That’s the way we’ve always done it.  Because the criteria hasn’t changed — and until it does, the precedent should continue to carry interpretative weight.”

I repeat: all of that precedent is stupid. It should no longer stand. But it binds me, Buster Olney, to say Miguel Cabrera is the MVP despite the fact that I think Mike Trout is “the best player in baseball, and he unquestionably provides the most value.”

I’m sorry. We’re through the looking glass here.

I tweeted the upshot of this post a few minutes ago. Here was Buster’s response to me:

I guess I can get why he might consider my criticism of his stunning incoherence here to be a personal attack (though he’s the one calling people names). However, I personally see it as an instance in which one of the most influential opinion makers in all of baseball is making a strong argument that he himself is afraid to follow.

Question: If Buster can’t listen to his own reason and conscience with respect to this matter, why should anyone else?

Boston is naming a street after David Ortiz

Getty Images
1 Comment

The Red Sox are going to retire David Ortiz’s number 34 tomorrow. The City of Boston is going to give Ortiz a different honor: they’re going to name a street after him.

The street: Yawkey Way Extension, which will be renamed David Ortiz Drive. Note: this is not the Yawkey Way that runs outside of Fenway Park. This is the, duh, extension of it beyond Brookline Avenue just to the northwest. See here, via Google Maps:

There is already a David Ortiz Bridge, which is the bridge that takes Brookline over the Turnpike just north of what will now be David Ortiz Way.

Now: rename Yawkey Way and we’re really cooking with gas.

Yoenis Cespedes advises younger player to hustle

Getty Images
9 Comments

Bill wrote last night about Yasiel Puig admiring a homer and raising the ire of the New York Mets because of it. I expanded on that some in the recaps. As far as significant baseball events go, it ain’t one. It’s just a silly thing that happened in one of 15 games and is, at best a minor footnote in the Chronicle of the Unwritten Rules.

But it does deserve one more post, because I missed something from it all. This passage from the AP recap of the game:

“He disrespected us,” Flores said. “I think there’s a way to enjoy a home run. That was too much.”

Between innings, Mets veteran Jose Reyes and outfielder Yoenis Cespedes, also from Cuba, spoke with Puig on the field.

“After I talked to Cespedes, he told me, `Try to run a little bit faster,’ and tried to give me some advice,” Puig said through a translator. “I don’t look at it that way, but it is what it is.”

Because, obviously, when you think about respect, professionalism, decorum and the proper way to comport oneself, you think about Jose Reyes. And when you think about hustle, you think about Yoenis Cespedes.