From: doctor8@jhuvms.hcf.jhu.edu (Jason Abner Miller)
Subject: Re: Eck Wins MVP in Horrible Voting
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: The Johns Hopkins University - HCF
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 01:21:00 GMT

In article <1992Nov22.212257.7862@panix.com>, spira@panix.com (Greg "Sarcasm Is A Way Of Life" Spira) writes...
>>for a while.  But for League MVP???  What good are those great numbers
>>if you're gonna play 3 or 4 times a week. Devereaux played every day, 
>>and was a consistent part of the O's rush.  I think Mike Bordick was
>>several times for valuable to Oakland than Rickey the Dude was.
> 
>Bordick had all of 67 more plate appearences than Henderson.  67.
>Bordick batted .300/.358/.371, Henderson .283/.426/.457.
> 
>Considering that Henderson's OBP and SLG were both higher in '92
>than his career OBP and SLG, I don't see how you can say that he
>played poorly for someone of his caliber.

	How productive can a Henderson be in only 375 AB?  OK, maybe
his numbers were impressive, but doesn't mean he deserved any MVP votes.
For a position player to be an MVP candidate, they should have played
nearly every day (I won't go into the whole pitcher as MVP debate right now)

> 
>According to Jeff Sagarin's markov chain analysis, Rickey created 87 runs
>this season while Bordick created 70.  Henderson made 287 outs, Bordick 372.
>17 more runs using up 85 less outs is a lot of offensive value.
> 
>Now, granted, offense at a middle infield position is worth more than
>offense from a left fielder, but that doesn't make up the huge difference
>in offensive contribution between Henderson and Bordick.

	I know Bordick did not have MVP numbers.  But he was the strongest
glue in that infield that looked like it would have gone to pot early in
the year.  Bordick stepping up there and hitting .300, playing every day
when no-one expected him to, provides a bigger team contribution than the
17 extra arbitrary runs that Rickey provided.

> 
>And, by the way, Tony LaRussa insists that Rickey is not lazy, and in fact
>told the press at least once that he played Henderson when Henderson 
>shouldn't have been playing because of his injuries.  I see no reason not
>to believe Rickey when he says that he's hurt.  Baseball people, fans,

	I watched Rickey not play for the final 3 years of his Yankee tenure.
He basically not played his way out of New York.  He has a long rep of
not playing when he feels like it, and even if LaRussa will step up there
and read what the management tells him to say about Rickey, doesn't mean
I believe him.

>Baseball people, fans, and the media seem to think that they can determine
>when a player is or isn't in pain; I'm rather skeptical that anybody has these
>kinds of telepathic powers

>Eventually, this attitude is going to kill someone, as it almost did J.R.
>Richard a decade ago.

	WHAT?  Where on EARTH did J.R. Richard come into this??  The man
had a nearly-fatal stroke, for goodness' sakes!!  Are you trying to suggest
that he had a stroke because people questioned his heart (and no one ever did)?
This statement makes no sense at all and has no place in your posting unless
you can clarify what that's supposed to mean.  I assume you'll be hounding
Jeff Gray next because his stroke cost the Sox the pennant in '91.
	Rickey does not have a life threatening condition.  He never has had.
Please don't make these unfair comparisons unless you can back them up after
you make them.

> 
>Greg  
> 


							Jason Miller
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball