MVP's
 

Was anyone who didn't take steroids robbed of more MVP's than Ted Williams. He won 2 MVP's. In those years he DIDN'T

• Win a batting title which he did 6x
• Hit .400 which he did once
• Win a Triple Crown which he did twice

So he hit .400, and won two triple crowns and finished 2nd in all three of those seasons. Needless to say he was the runaway WAR leader in all three of those season.

Then throw in another 3 batting title seasons where he finished 3rd, 2nd and 7th in MVP voting respectively.

I can understand not giving it to him in 1941, because of Joe DiMaggio's streak that year and I can see a sportswriter giving it to the guy whose team won the pennant, but to snub him for Joe Gordon the next year? Or for Joe DiMaggio again in a year when Ted beat DiMaggio in every significant category?

It mostly shows how being press friendly was important. And even then, someone from a pennant winner got more votes.

I couldn't find it quickly if it's even out there, but I would bet that Pesky and Hughson who both had excellent seasons in 42 were ranked higher on many ballots.
Bringing up the question of "value". A great season from a great player is more typical. While a great season from a more average player is unusual, and could be more valuable to the team as a whole.

Yeah, I've always thought the same thing, even being a big Yankees and Joe D. fan.

In 1947 when Ted won the Triple Crown again, and Joe D. was perhaps the 6th best position player in the league, was particularly egregious.

I guess you could argue Babe Ruth, simply because he played in an era when you were only allowed to win 1 MVP during your career.

I always found it kind of ironic, that Joe D. was more beloved in the press, winning titles, movie star type celebrity, Marilyn Monroe, Frank Sinatra affiliations, etc...but among team-mates and those who actually knew them outside of the limelight, Joe D. was generally considered the bigger jerk out of the two of them...by a pretty big margin IMO.

The worst EVER was 1934, Gehrig got robbed.

I don't think ANY argument can be made for him not to have won it. Even worse he didn't finish 2nd, but 5th. Who did he piss off that year?


https://www.baseball-reference.com/a...VP_voting_link

I'm not going to say it's on par with any of Ted's seasons but Ralph Kiner seems like he got totally disrespected in 1951. He led the league in WAR, OBP, Slugging, OPS, Runs, Home Runs, Walks, and Extra Base Hits.

He finished 10th!

agree...helluva year!

I remember reading once that during one of his Triple Crown seasons (47 I think) a New York sportswriter left him completely off the ballot. An 8/9th place vote would have won the MVP for him.

And this is another example of why baseball writers/reporters, or other finite select groups shouldn't always be the main and sole decision makers in determining things like MVPs and HOFers anymore. Back in the early days of baseball, people only saw and learned how great a player was by going to games in person, or reading about them in the papers. The baseball writers and reporters were about the only ones who actually got to see and truly know how well ALL these players were on a day to day basis, other than the players and coaches themselves, because they had to attend all the games as part of their jobs. But over time and the advent of at first radio, followed by TV, and now the internet, apps, and streaming services, virtually anyone can watch literally every player and team pretty much anytime they want now. So why do we still need these special groups like baseball writers/reporters to make decisions on behalf of baseball's fans and followers?

Who else is going to write the short two paragraph stories (???) on the internet laden with typos, grammatical errors and third grade content. If you want quality reporting, you hire a reporter, not an illiterate alien living in a tent, even though this has been tried.;)

LOL

Good one Frank!