Friday, August 15, 2008

Soto for MVP? Really?

Peter Gammons thinks so. (Normally subscription required, though right now it's available to everyone.) Or at least...that's his hook.

Naturally my knee-jerk reaction was that Gammo had finally lost his marbles.
Sure, Soto's having a great year, and I don't think Rookie of the Year is out of reach, but MVP?

Of course, Gammons doesn't really think Soto's the MVP. His points:
  • Soto is one of the best offensive catchers in the league
  • Soto handles the pitching staff very well (and it's one heck of a staff)
  • His defense is good enough
  • Catchers are inherently more valuable if they can also provide real offense
I don't disagree with most of his points, although I'm not sure there's any evidence that "handling a pitching staff" is actually a skill, or has any measurable effect. I know pitchers think so, but that doesn't mean anything: just because you play the game doesn't mean you truly understand how it works. (See Morgan, Joe.)

Soto's pretty important to the Cubs, don't get me wrong. He's having a hell of a year, and I expect that he'll have many more. For a team that's spent a long time rolling out a number of real stiffs behind home plate, I'm thrilled beyond words.

But MVP? No.

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

Who do you think would make a better MVP?

Christopher D. Heer said...

Well I'd start with Albert Pujols and then start looking at David Wright, I suppose.

The thing about the Cubs is that none of them are really having a dominant season, offensively; I don't think you can make a real case for any of them to be MVP.