I was listening to the Yankee-White Sox game on ESPN, and then watched Baseball Tonight afterwards, and I believe I heard someone say at least at three different points during the evening that David Ortiz should win MVP.
Now, Ortiz is having a fine year. Very fine. Terrific, to be sure. He's hardly a "bad" MVP candidate....but at this point, he's not a great one. He hits homers and drives in runs(thanks in no small part to having a tremendous number of chances to do so), but he hasn't been the best overall hitter this year. Not by OPS(fifth), not by OPS+(fourth) not by EqA(fourth), not by win shares(third) or any major offensive barometer. Infact, not only has he not even been the best hitting DH(or the second best DH for that matter), he hasn't even been the best hitter on his own team.
And while his proponents usually cite examples of his "clutch hitting" as proof he's an MVP, Hafner, Dye, Thome and Ramirez have all hit better with runners in scoring position. Then there's the fact that, if the playoffs were to start today, Boston wouldn't be included. Even if you eliminate Hafner from consideration due to his team's poor performance, Manny is still clearly better. His numbers are better, and he plays the field. Not expertly, but he does go out there. He doesn't get to rest between every at bat, and avoid fielding practices.
I don't have anything against Ortiz. I just find it interesting how the media tends to latch on to certain players and defend them jealously, while simultaneously shitting on other certain players at every opportunity. The outrage displayed by a lot of the national media last year in the A-Rod/Papi MVP race being a perfect example, I think.
Walkoff homeruns are great, and it does seem that Ortiz is the best at doing that, but those hits at the beginning and middle matter just as much, even if they are less dramatic.
