NL MVP race not a walk in the park
NL MVP? When you awarded the MVP title to Scott Rolen you must have been talking about the non-Bonds division. As of (today), Bonds' on base % (.628) is better than Rolen's slugging %. A .500 OBP is unheard of, let alone .628! Offensively, Rolen gets the edge in RBI, which we all know is a function of your lineup and the hitters around you. Every other category goes to Bonds and most of them aren't close. I'm sure you can counter that Rolen plays a tougher defensive position better than anyone else in baseball (although Eric Chavez and Corey Koskie should be mentioned), and the positional value argument is one I understand and usually agree with. If Bonds and Rolen were playing offensively at a remotely similar level I would give the edge to Rolen as well. However, the offensive numbers aren't even comparable. Yes, you could argue that the Cardinals are surprisingly in 1st place. But even more surprisingly, the Giants are in 1st place as well. Jason Schmidt and Bonds have masked a plethora of Giant flaws.
Points well taken. Statistically, Bonds in on a different level than every other player in baseball (not to mention baseball history). No player has ever been deemed so good, opponents simply refuse to pitch to him as a matter of course. But you wonder how far it goes. Theoretically, if National League managers walked Bonds every time up and he had an OBP of 1.000, would he still be the most valuable player in the league? Maybe, but he's forcing all of us to redefine the standard perceptions of what constitutes an MVP.
To continue reading this article you must be an Insider