Boog, I think you have done a good job at proving your point.  However in fairness to Jeter, in the overall defensive spectrum he isn't a horrible defender.  He'd probably be an averagish to slightly under average second basemen.

Juan Gonzalez was over-rated. By a lot. Two MVP Awards. 

Here are some 1996 Stats: 

Bernie Wiliams .305 avg. .391 OBP .535 SLG .926 OPS 29 HRs

Juan Gonzalez ..314 avg. .368 OBP .643 SLG 1.011 OPS 47 HRs

Now I am not saying Bernie should have been MVP, but he came in 17th in the MVP voting that year with Juan getting it. 

Now 1998:

Juan Gonzalez .318 avg. 366 OBP .630 SLG .997 OPS  45 HRs 

Bernie Williams .339 avg..422 OBP .575 SLG .997 OPS 26 HRs 

Bernie was 7th that year in MVP. Probably there were players more deserving than Bernie. But I don't see it as open and shut that Gonzalez gets it over Bernie. And if it is that close between the MVP and the number 17 and 7 player in both Juan's MVP seasons, then it must be close with other players, at least.
Strikeouts, total for 1996 and 1998

BW: 153
JG: 208

Both seasons Gonzo has almost 20 more dingers than Bernie. 

It's gotten to the point now where OBP is overrated and homers are underrated. 

Gonzo kills Bernie both those seasons

I'm saying this as a BoSox fan, so there may be a slight bias, but no one was "scared" when Bernie got up to plate.  You knew he could hurt your team, but you didnt avoid him either. Now, J-Gon, at that point was a monster.  If guys were on base, look out.     

Rbi count 1996: Williams: 102, JGon 144
                   1998 Williams: 97,  JGon 157

Williams was a far better fielder and runner.  Far better may not even be strong enough.  But, the rbi & hr totals were almost as lopsided.

1998 was weird too.  Williams was almost viewed as JAG, in that loaded NyY team.  Every dude was an all-star.    JGon, had a lot less to work with around him that season.



Now, if you want to argue about unfair MVP votes, 1999 calls.  Which two NY writers left pedro off the ballot again? 

Looking at stats that matter a whole lot more than RBI:

Williams 1996
OPS: .926
OPS+: 131
WAR: 4.0 (Williams was a lousy fielder...his offensive WAR was 5.1)

Williams 1998
OPS: .997
OPS+: 160
WAR: 5.2 (Again, lousy defense was dragging him down...offensive WAS was 6.6)

Gonzalez 1996
OPS: 1.011
OPS+: 145
WAR: 3.8 (like Williams, a lousy fielder...offensive WAR was 4.7)

Gonzalez 1998
OPS: .997
OPS+: 149
WAR: 4.9 (offensive WAR 5.1)

Williams by a wide margin in 1998....pretty close in 1996.

Of course, A Rod should have been MVP in both seasons (1996 WAR 9.3, 1998 WAR 8.5).

1996: 

Texas Rangers: .284 221 HRs 

Dean Palmer .280 38 HRs
Daryl Hamilton .293
Rusty Greer .332 18 HRs
Mickey Tettleton .246  24 HRs
Ivan Rodriguez .300 19 HRs
Will Clark .284 13 HRs
Mark McLemore .290 .381 OBP
Kevin Elster .252 24 HRs


1996 Yankees: .288 162 HRs


Team leader in home runs: 

Bernie Wiliams .302 29 home runs
Tino Martinez .292 25 HRs

Paul O'Neill .302 19 HRs
Daryl Strawberry plus Cecil Fielder total .261 24 HRs

Derek Jeter .314  10 HRs
Mariano Duncan .340
Joe Girardi .294 

That is about it, good bench. Hardly loaded. The 1998 Yankees, yes, but without Gonzalez the Rangers are still scarier offensively in 1996. 

If MVP means "the player that made the most difference between his team and all others" then Mariano Rivera was clearly MVP in 1996. 

Take him away the Yankees are not even probably divisional champs, With him they won the World Series. With Pedro the Red Sox won neither and without him they would have won neither. No difference. 

And while I do not think (even Rivera aside) that  Bernie Williams was the MVP either season or the best player by a long shot, he was not "a lousy fielder" unless you never saw him field. I do not think WAR is worth the paper it is printed on as a stat or instrument of analyzing players. 

It is about as precise as saying: Gonzalez hit 47 home runs, I will give him 1 point for each of those. Williams 29 one point each. I will arbitrarily give them 10 points each for how well they park cars on crowded streets, give Bernie 5 points for playing classical guitar ...

Oh, I like home runs. But of course RBIs are a combo of (someone else's) OBP and HRs or other power hitting. 

But I agree we should not devalue HRs for OBP or other more esoteric stats. 

What did devalue Home Runs in the 1990s was the steroid era. Those 47 home runs? How many are they really? 

Yes Gonzalez was scary at the plate. And effective. But he is still over- rated. 

Moving on, however, I have a tougher one: 

Is Eddie Murray over rated or under rated ? 

I think Murray is usually pegged about right. A very good hitter, with a few seasons when he was a feared slugger. Much like Rice, but less polarizing because he never had a Red Sox Nation singing his praises.

Posted by italyprof on 6/26/2013 5:42:00 AM (view original):
boogerlips, I compared Jeter to other hard-hitting Shortstops and found him superior to them offensively. I am pretty sure that means he is not over-rated. Game. Set. Match. 


Checkmate. 

Maybe if Jeter could actually play a league average SS.

Posted by joshkvt on 7/5/2013 9:38:00 PM (view original):
I think Murray is usually pegged about right. A very good hitter, with a few seasons when he was a feared slugger. Much like Rice, but less polarizing because he never had a Red Sox Nation singing his praises.

I'm pretty sure Murray is under-rated.  And I am positive that he was a much much better hitter overall than Rice.   It is just that Murray's peak came in the '80's which was a weird time in baseball- no one hit for both average and power, though no one came closer to Steady Eddie.  He may not have been "feared" like Rice, but he should have.  Look at Murray and Rice's OPS+ scores organized in descending order through their career.  Essentially Murray had six years as good as Rice's two best years.  In fact for every year Rice had, Murray had a better year.  Rice might get a slight edge in slugging, but that is entirely a product of playing at Fenway.   Rice did play a tougher defensive position, but given the size of LF in Fenway, it isn't much of a difference.

Murray	Rice
159	157
159	154
157	147
156	141
156	137
156	131
149	128
140	123
138	122
136	120
136	117
130	112
129	102
123	101
120	89
115	70
113
112
105
87
87
55

zubinsum, this sounds convincing. But what are these numbers exactly? Sorry but as an official old fogey I am sure that this is one of those newfangled measures that proves that everything we know is wrong or whatever, and maybe I am the only one here who doesn't know what it is. Could you at least tell what Murray had 159 of?