PRESSURE POINTS
When handing out hardware, not all stats are created equal
THIS is my annual Hardball year-end awards, and I want to begin with Robinson Cano, but not because he is going to have his streak of five straight AL MVP top-six finishes halted.
Cano actually has as many or more homers, extra-base hits and runs than he did last year when he wound up fifth in the voting. His overall stat line by the end of the season will not be as good as previous seasons, but it will not be an eyesore.
The key words in that sentence were “by the end of the season.”
I began with Cano because I believe he was one of the least valuable players in the majors — regardless of the final numbers.
The Mariners needed a strong start to justify their pick as champion title contenders in spring, validate the big money spent the past two years on players such as Cano and Nelson Cruz and keep the negative vibe that has encircled this organization for more than a decade from surfacing again.
Cruz was terrific behind the thirdplace-hitting Cano, but even with the protection, the $240 million man was horrific for three months (.621 OPS and four homers through June 30). So were the Mariners (35-42).
That Cano has a .920 OPS and 16 homers since to pretty up his stat line is the equivalent of garbage time in the NBA. When the Mariners needed their best player, Cano could hardly have been less valuable.
I offer this to say that, for me, context — not just a line of stats on a page — matters in award voting. This is partially how I think of that devilish word “valuable” at a time when I am often told just pick the guy with the best numbers.
I recognize it is not, for example, the great Paul Goldschmidt’s fault the Diamondbacks did not contend. But it means — for context purposes — the first baseman did not take meaningful at-bats this year, while the Cubs’ Anthony Rizzo has taken hundreds of them. Cincinnati’s Joey Votto had a good first half and an otherworldly second half — when the Reds were playing for the future, not now.
By that theory, I know, I shouldn’t even put Goldschmidt or Votto on the ballot. But this is imperfect, and I do feel their tremendous seasons deserve recognition. I accept the criticism of the i nconsistent thinking as I try to balance two different impulses. I admire those who have such devotion to one way of thinking they are not polluted by competing theories. I am not one of those. Sorry.
Look, trying to decide “most valuable” owes something to beauty and the eye of the beholder. I see the push to get Yoenis Cespedes on the ballot. But are the Mets even in contention to acquire Cespedes if Curtis Granderson were not so good when basically no other Met was hitting for the first four months? Would the Mets be anywhere near contention without Jeurys Familia being able to close so expertly after Jenrry Mejia torpedoed his season? How “valuable” was that?
I guess you can make this simplistic: Best numbers win. But I think everyone (sorry, Herm Edwards) plays to win the games (and the season), and, therefore, the context and value in enhancing victory should be considered. You probably don’t agree. So I apologize in advance for upsetting you.