The 1999 MVP Race

When I was a wee tot without cable television, the only baseball I got to watch was the postseason. Admittedly, in 1999, I remember very little as it is, other than worshipping Derek Jeter. I was looking through his stats and noticed he never had an MVP despite his incredible 1999 season, where he hit .349/.438/.552 with 219 hits (league leading), 24 home runs and 102 RBIs on his way to an All Star selection. On top of that, his Yankees won the World Series in a sweep over the Braves. 

But Jeter only finished 6th in the MVP voting. 6th!

The order is as follows:

Please forgive the tiny picture, but that was a lot easier than typing out all their stats. Let's hear it for technology!

First things first, all of the players shown in the screenshot above were on playoff teams. The Yankees swept the Rangers, and Red Sox beat the Indians 3 games to 2. All of these players are valuable to their team, but looking back, I think Jeter deserved this MVP. He played the second-most games of anyone in the top 7, had the highest WAR for position players (though I am anti-WAR), 2nd-highest OBP, and the most hits by a long shot. But to me, the MVP voting isn't just stats, that's what Silver Sluggers and All-Star starts are for. I always decide an MVP by their removal from the team, which is pretty similar to WAR. Call me a hypocrite; I prefer Romantic.

There are a couple of things that stick out to me. In the past 30 years, there have only been a handful of pitchers to win the MVP award (Clemens in 1986, Eckersley in 1992, and Verlander in 2011), but Pedro had better seasons than all of them, and still didn't win the MVP. Pedro was a shoo-in for the Cy Young award and pitchers really have to blow the voters out of the water to be considered, but there is an argument to be made for Pedro winning it over Pudge. Pudge had a great year, don't get me wrong, but I don't think he is the most valuable player. 

I think Pudge won it because of his defensive capability. In 1999, he threw out a league-leading 55% of runners, which was 5% better than the next best catcher, and only allowed 1 passed ball the whole season. I still think Jeter deserved it, despite a .978 fielding percentage. I put a lot of emphasis on team success. The fact that the Yankees went on to sweep the stacked Braves says a lot. The Indians, Rangers, and Red Sox all had two players in the top 7; the Indians were swept in the first round, and the Sox won only 1 game against the Yankees (Pedro's win). 

Okay, okay. I think either Pedro or Jeter should have won it. Pedro got more first place votes, but not enough overall votes to win. In Game 3 of the ALCS, Martinez vs. Clemens, Jeter got a single in his first at-bat, and struck out in his next at-bat, a perfect example of their high levels of talent and MVP caliber seasons. I know postseason stats aren't supposed to be taken into account for the playoffs, which may be a reason also why these guys were left out. They were also clean throughout their careers. Looking back, Pudge was always rumored to have used steroids, and Palmiero and Ramirez were suspended for it. 

Regardless, this race was stacked. Everyone in the top 7 pictured had a legitimate case for the MVP. Pudge had the best combination between offense and defense; Pedro had the best defense, Jeter had the best overall offense, but Jeter won it all. If you ask him, I'm sure he'd much rather have rings than MVPs, but I still think he had a shot at it.

The next few years were not as close as the 1999 race. 2000 and 2001 were still pretty close in terms of stats, but the voting was more spread out. In 1999, Pudge only got 64% of the share while Pedro got 61% of it, the closest margin in the last 15 years, easily.  What a time to be alive. I predicted Trout to win it over Cabrera this year in a two-horse race. Not a 7 horse race like this one. 

Cheers to the weekend. Thanks for reading.