PDA

View Full Version : Time to gear up again, Sox Army


Realist
05-18-2005, 10:54 AM
Who has been the Chicago baseball MVP so far? (http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/)


Jon Garland
Derrek Lee
Vote

DumpJerry
05-18-2005, 11:07 AM
VOTE VOTE VOTE! Lee has a 10 point lead over Jon.:angry: :angry:

Lee may be a "valuable" player, but since his team's chances at first place are as good as the Sox's chances at making the Super Bowl, he cannot be a "most" valuable player.

bluestar
05-18-2005, 11:16 AM
Isn't it a little ridiculous to compare an everyday player to a pitcher that pitches every five games? As good as Garland has been, I don't know that his impact can be measured against an everyday player that is excelling. It would be more appropriate to compare the entire Sox pitching staff to Lee. It would seem the poll is already skewed to favor Lee.

Iwritecode
05-18-2005, 11:18 AM
Isn't it a little ridiculous to compare an everyday player to a pitcher that pitches every five games? As good as Garland has been, I don't know that his impact can be measured against an everyday player that is excelling. It would be more appropriate to compare the entire Sox pitching staff to Lee. It would seem the poll is already skewed to favor Lee.

You also have to consider the fact that Garland has helped the team to the best record in baseball while Lee has helped his team tie the Pirates in the standings...

skottyj242
05-18-2005, 11:29 AM
Call me a realist here but I think that D. Lee (although I voted for Garland) has had the most impact. I mean the Cubs are like what three games under five hundred they would be ten without D. Lee.

Realist
05-18-2005, 11:34 AM
Call me a realist here but I think that D. Lee (although I voted for Garland) has had the most impact. I mean the Cubs are like what three games under five hundred they would be ten without D. Lee.

Bah. Screw being a Realist. :?: Vote Sox!

daveeym
05-18-2005, 11:36 AM
VOTE VOTE VOTE! Lee has a 10 point lead over Jon.:angry: :angry:

Lee may be a "valuable" player, but since his team's chances at first place are as good as the Sox's chances at making the Super Bowl, he cannot be a "most" valuable player. He's the ONLY reason that team isn't the worst in baseball so far. I've never seen ONE player support a BASEBALL team as much as he has this year. He's winning games for them like a young Jordan did for the bulls but in a sport where that's really tough to do.

edit: I did vote sox, but i'm just sayin.

CHISOXFAN13
05-18-2005, 11:36 AM
You also have to consider the fact that Garland has helped the team to the best record in baseball while Lee has helped his team tie the Pirates in the standings...


Because of my allegiances, I voted for Garland. But how many games under .500 do you think the Coob would be without Lee?

Lee is arguably the best position player at this point of the season, while Garland has been the game's most valuable pitcher.

It's a dumb poll, IMO.

LVSoxFan
05-18-2005, 11:39 AM
I hate the Cubs with a passion that knows no bounds, but D. Lee is the only thing keeping that team alive.

DumpJerry
05-18-2005, 11:39 AM
You also have to consider the fact that Garland has helped the team to the best record in baseball while Lee has helped his team tie the Pirates in the standings...
My point exactly. A "most" valuable player in the league produces results that causes his team to achieve a high level of success in the course of the season. If D. Lee hits 80 homers, bats .401, but the Flubs finish in 4th well below .500, what serious impact has he had? Kept them out of last place? Whoop dee doo. If Lee's homer production represents a significant percentage of the team's overall homer production, that makes him all the less "most" valuable in the league's perspective.

Clearly D. Lee is the "most" valuable Flub player, but then look at the competition for that title.

The MVP for the Sox? Now, there is a debate!

Iwritecode
05-18-2005, 11:56 AM
Because of my allegiances, I voted for Garland. But how many games under .500 do you think the Coob would be without Lee?

Lee is arguably the best position player at this point of the season, while Garland has been the game's most valuable pitcher.

It's a dumb poll, IMO.

Take away Garlands 8 wins and the Sox would be at .500.

I think comparing a guy that's helping keep his team in first with a guy that's just keeping his team out of the cellar is a no-brainer...

nccwsfan
05-18-2005, 11:58 AM
The Cubs MVP (so far) is Derek Lee. The Chicago MVP (so far) is Jon Garland. When it's all said and done the Chicago MVP will be Mark Buehrle...

itsnotrequired
05-18-2005, 12:09 PM
My point exactly. A "most" valuable player in the league produces results that causes his team to achieve a high level of success in the course of the season. If D. Lee hits 80 homers, bats .401, but the Flubs finish in 4th well below .500, what serious impact has he had? Kept them out of last place? Whoop dee doo. If Lee's homer production represents a significant percentage of the team's overall homer production, that makes him all the less "most" valuable in the league's perspective.

Clearly D. Lee is the "most" valuable Flub player, but then look at the competition for that title.

The MVP for the Sox? Now, there is a debate!

Your point is valid for most valuable player in the whole LEAGUE but when you're only looking at a couple teams, the W-L record shouldn't matter. DLee is the only decent thing on that team right now. Take him out of there and you have to subtract at least six Cub victories. He has had that big an impact on the team. Yeah, there isn't much competition but it isn't like DLee is simply a standout on a crummy team that would be average on a better team. He could easily be considered one of the top three players in the entire NL.

The Sox losing Garland wouldn't have nearly the same impact. Sure, the Sox would have a few more losses in the number 5 spot but it wouldn't be like last year's debacle.

That being said, the poll is still stupid since it compares a pitcher to an everyday player. Oh, and I voted for Garland anyway.:D:

itsnotrequired
05-18-2005, 12:10 PM
Take away Garlands 8 wins and the Sox would be at .500.

I think comparing a guy that's helping keep his team in first with a guy that's just keeping his team out of the cellar is a no-brainer...

That really isn't a realistic look at the situation. This suggests that Garland's replacement would lose every game. Seems unlikely although we all remember last year...:rolleyes:

RockyMtnSoxFan
05-18-2005, 12:13 PM
Vote where?

CHISOXFAN13
05-18-2005, 12:13 PM
Take away Garlands 8 wins and the Sox would be at .500.

I think comparing a guy that's helping keep his team in first with a guy that's just keeping his team out of the cellar is a no-brainer...

There are many problems with the poll, the main one being its impossible to compare a pitcher's importance to that of a position player.

I voted for Garland for the reasons you said, but I'm not about to just turn my shoulder to Lee's hot start because the rest of his team sucks. I respect what he's done to help his team win.