Dustin Pedroia Deserved Major League Baseball's A.L. MVP Award in 2008.

Wow. I say I want to avoid fiddling with semantics, and what happens? Wonderful. <"My opponent failed to accurately highlight his resolution."> Simply because I didn't say "Resolved: Dustin Pedroia Deserved Major League Baseball's A.L. MVP Award in 2008," doesn't necessarily mean that there are any inaccuracies present. In essence, just because it doesn't seem accurate to my opponent doesn't mean it that's, indeed, the case. I worded the topic clearly; what I meant for this debate was very, very obvious. Either way, the topic clearly reads "Dustin Pedroia Deserved Major League Baseball's A.L. MVP Award in 2008," I took con, and I said I don't think he deserved it, so a little deductive reasoning shows the position I'm taking in this debate is con to Pedroia deserving the MVP; if my opponent doesn't understand that, then tough; however, I doubt he misunderstood -- he's just trying to twist this debate into something it isn't -- but the aforementioned facts make the intent clear; I'm in negation of Pedroia deserving the MVP. Despite my opponent trying to employ a semantics trap, I'm still going to go ahead with the argument I planned on using. If he wants to make this debate into an inane battle of word choice, then whatever -- but it'd be much better if he didn't do that, and makes an argument that Pedroia deserved the A.L. MVP in 2008. I believe that Joe Mauer deserved the 2008 A.L. MVP, seeing as he was the best player in the American League; Dustin Pedroia, in my estimation, and as I clearly stated in my opening post, isn't deserving. I'll now explain the statistics I'll be using; they're not very well known, and I feel they're quite sophisticated. The first statistic measure the value of total offense (hitting and baserunning) -- I had a hand it formulating it. It's called "EqAp." EqA as defined by Baseball Prospectus: "Equivalent Average. A measure of total offensive value per out, with corrections for league offensive level, home park, and team pitching. EQA considers batting as well as baserunning, but not the value of a position player's defense. The EqA adjusted for all-time also has a correction for league difficulty. The scale is deliberately set to approximate that of batting average. League average EqA is always equal to .260. EqA is derived from Raw EqA, which is (H + TB + 1.5*(BB + HBP + SB) + SH + SF) divided by (AB + BB + HBP + SH + SF + CS + SB). REqA is then normalized to account for league difficulty and scale to create EqA." www.baseballprospectus.com/glossary/index.php?mode=viewstat&stat=61 EqAp is normalized EqA. What I do is take a player's EqA, divide it by the EqA for his position, and multiply by 100. I adjust for position because positional value isn't taken into account in any of the readily available statistics you'll see in the internet; however, I think it needs to be taken into account -- if a catcher hits .300/.400/.500, it's more valuable than a first basemen who puts up the same line, because those numbers are much rarer, and thus, more valuable, from a catcher. For defense, I'm going to use combination of statistics that are found on the site www.thehardballtimes.com. For Mauer, I'll be using CS%; for the other players, I'll be using RZR and OOZ. RZR = revised zone rating. "Revised Zone Rating is the proportion of balls hit into a fielder's zone that he successfully converted into an out. Zone Rating was invented by John Dewan when he was CEO of Stats Inc. John is now the owner of Baseball Info Solutions, where he has revised the original Zone Rating calculation so that it now lists balls handled out of the zone (OOZ) separately (and doesn't include them in the ZR calculation) and doesn't give players extra credit for double plays (Stats had already made that change). We believe both changes improve Zone Ratings substantially. To get a full picture of a player's range, you should evaluate both his Revised Zone Rating and his plays made out of zone (OOZ). You can read more about the Revised Zone Ratings in this article." www.hardballtimes.com/main/statpages/glossary/#rzr OOZ: "Out Of Zone, or the total number of outs made by a fielder on balls hit outside of his zone." www.hardballtimes.com/main/statpages/glossary/#ooz Lastly, I'll be using PA%, which is, as quoted from www.baseballprospectus.com: <"Percentage of total team plate appearances accumulated by one player. PA% = (Player's PA) / (Team's PA)"> I use this because playing time is a significant factor in the value one contributes to his team; the more you play, the more chances you get to make some sort of contribution to your team. Pedroia's EqAp is 113; Mauer's is 125. A very significant advantage for Mauer. Now, Pedroia's PA% is 11.3%; Mauer's is 10.0%, which is an advantage for Pedroia. But how about defense? Pedroia was a good second basemen throughout the 2006 regular season; His RZR was .826, which is good for sixth in baseball at his position; his OOZ was 37, which is eighth. However, Mauer's CS% is 26.1%, which was second in the A.L., and seventh in Major League Baseball. Mauer's defense gets the slight edge, because a good defensive catcher carries more value than a good defensive second basemen. Mauer has significant advantages in offense and defense, despite Pedroia playing more. Thus, by the criteria for this debate, Joe Mauer was the better player, and was therefore, more valuable, which means he was deserving of the Most Valuable Player award.