Mauer AL MVP

[misterx91578]

Mauer catches AL MVP Award
Three-time batting champ rewarded for big year, leading Twins
fan comments print this pagee-mail this pagepost on facebook
Related Links
http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20091115&content_id=7669440&vkey=news_mlb&fext=.jsp&c_id=mlb

All-time MVP Award winners
Complete 2009 Awards coverage
By Kelly Thesier / MLB.com

11/23/09 2:00 PM EST

MINNEAPOLIS -- Joe Mauer joined an elite group of players when he won his third American League batting title this past season.

Now the 26-year-old Twins catcher has become a member of another illustrious club -- that of MVP winners.


Mauer was named the American League Most Valuable Player by the Baseball Writers Association of America for the first time in his career on Monday, beating out the Yankees' duo of Derek Jeter and Mark Teixeira for the honor.

[DBryant88]

congrats to Mauer
The one things the Yanks couldn't manage to buy...

[Mel_13]

congrats to Mauer
The one things the Yanks couldn't manage to buy...

He hasn't hit free agency yet.

[dbreiden83080]

congrats to Mauer
The one things the Yanks couldn't manage to buy...

Yes it's the Yankees fault they play by the rules.. :lol

[JamStone]

Congrats to Mauer and the Twins.

Amazing he was still able to win in even though he missed like a month of the season.

[The Gemini Method]

You can almost hear the Yankees gearing up to get him when his contract is up...nonetheless, he had a tremendous season and pretty much carried the Twins on his back for most of the season.

[JamStone]

You can almost hear the Yankees gearing up to get him when his contract is up...nonetheless, he had a tremendous season and pretty much carried the Twins on his back for most of the season.

Joe Mauer, Matt Kemp, Carl Crawford, and Tim Lincecum... all in the coming years in pin stripes.

:greedy :greedy :greedy :greedy :greedy

[Mel_13]

Joe Mauer, Matt Kemp, Carl Crawford, and Tim Lincecum... all in the coming years in pin stripes.

:greedy :greedy :greedy :greedy :greedy

Nothing will change until MLB owners show the will to change the system. You would think changes to limit the spending advantage enjoyed by the Yankees would be easy to pass. In reality, there are too many MLB owners that treat the revenue sharing and luxury tax payments they get as welfare checks and do not invest in their teams. There's something wrong with a system where a team can get 60-90M in payments from the central funds and then only spend 30M on payroll.

[symple19]

Joe Mauer, Matt Kemp, Carl Crawford, and Tim Lincecum... all in the coming years in pin stripes.

:greedy :greedy :greedy :greedy :greedy

Lincecum over my dead body!!! Tim is a west coast guy, no way he goes to the NYY. The Giants will do whatever it takes to keep him. LA will pay Kemp what he wants too. Mauer and Crawford are possibilities because they play in small markets.

Congrats to Mauer, very deserving.

[symple19]

Nothing will change until MLB owners show the will to change the system. You would think changes to limit the spending advantage enjoyed by the Yankees would be easy to pass. In reality, there are too many MLB owners that treat the revenue sharing and luxury tax payments they get as welfare checks and do not invest in their teams. There's something wrong with a system where a team can get 60-90M in payments from the central funds and then only spend 30M on payroll.

It's not so much the owners/MLB administration as it is the players union and the current CBA(collective bargaining agreement). The MLBPA is maybe the most powerful union in america, relative to the industry that they're in. It will have to be the players and the MLBPA if anything is ever going to change, and that looks doubtful as of now because they're making too much fucking money.

Your points on how teams spent their revenue sharing are only somewhat valid, as there are regulations in place governing how that money must be spent. It's true that teams like Pittsburgh and Kansas City could do a much better job.

Let's face it, baseball needs a salary cap if it's ever going to be close to what the NFL is in America. I'm all for it!

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

Yes it's the Yankees fault they play by the rules.. :lol


No one is saying the Yankees cheat/break the rules (and I think you know that), people are questioning rules that make it so some teams have payrolls over 10x as high as other teams.

All the Yankees have proven with this WS is an ability to outbid other teams (all of which who have a budget much smaller than that of NY's). Over half of their starting lineup on offense (Johnny Damon, Nick Swisher, Mark Teixeira, A-Rod, Matsui) is talent either developed by another team or overseas. Their two best playoff starters (CC, Burnett) only came to NY cause NY was willing to outbid whatever other offers they got.

So congrats on your WS (however the hell you're a Yankees/Spurs/homos-dressed-in-spandex fan), the Yankees have proven their ability to sign players even the slightest baseball fan knows are good.

[dbreiden83080]

So congrats on your WS (however the hell you're a Yankees/Spurs/homos-dressed-in-spandex fan)

In answer to this and your lame fuckin attempt at a joke, i live in NY grew up on the Yankees, Donnie Baseball was my favorite player. Follow NCAA College ball and Tim Duncan's career was something i always followed and cheered for, so i went with him to the pros. Duncan's my fav player of all time. And yes i am an MMA fan. You have an issue with some of the best fighters on the planet beating the shit out of eachother in a cage and call me a homo.. Yes combat sports is for such faggots, but throwing a fuckin ball through a hoop is manly as it gets right Fuck-Nut??

[Mel_13]

It's not so much the owners/MLB administration as it is the players union and the current CBA(collective bargaining agreement). The MLBPA is maybe the most powerful union in america, relative to the industry that they're in. It will have to be the players and the MLBPA if anything is ever going to change, and that looks doubtful as of now because they're making too much fucking money.

Your points on how teams spent their revenue sharing are only somewhat valid, as there are regulations in place governing how that money must be spent. It's true that teams like Pittsburgh and Kansas City could do a much better job.

Let's face it, baseball needs a salary cap if it's ever going to be close to what the NFL is in America. I'm all for it!

What are these rules and how do they diminish the validity of my points?

You say the problems are not so much the owners, but rather the power of union. Yet you conclude with a call for a salary cap. It is precisely the power of the union that you cite that makes an NFL-type salary cap virtually impossible. Thus my concentration on changes that are within the power of ownership without getting major concessions from the union. The results of multiple work stoppages since 1981 tell us that MLB ownership will never be able to stare down their players like their counterparts in the NFL have done.

[K-State Spur]

Yes it's the Yankees fault they play by the rules.. :lol

well, since they fight tooth and nail against any measure that would level the playing field...it is a little bit their fault.

[K-State Spur]

It's true that teams like Pittsburgh and Kansas City could do a much better job.


Quietly, KC has been spending some money the past couple of years now, they've just spent it poorly.

[dbreiden83080]

well, since they fight tooth and nail against any measure that would level the playing field...it is a little bit their fault.

The Yanks don't control how the game is constructed in terms of cap VS no cap. What about all the teams that get money from the luxory tax and don't put a dime of it back into their team? Their needs to be pentalies for that and there isn't. And everyone talks about a cap. Well if there was a cap of say 90 mil the Yanks, Red Sox and other big market teams would just operate at that high end and the other teams would not raise payroll much at all. Player salaries would also drastically drop which is why the Union will never agree to a cap. Guys making 20 mil now will make 10 or 11 mil to meet the new high cap. Nothing would change Yanks would still get most big FA just at a lower price..

[K-State Spur]

The Yanks don't control how the game is constructed in terms of cap VS no cap. What about all the teams that get money from the luxory tax and don't put a dime of it back into their team? Their needs to be pentalies for that and there isn't. And everyone talks about a cap. Well if there was a cap of say 90 mil the Yanks, Red Sox and other big market teams would just operate at that high end and the other teams would not raise payroll much at all. Player salaries would also drastically drop which is why the Union will never agree to a cap. Guys making 20 mil now will make 10 or 11 mil to meet the new high cap. Nothing would change Yanks would still get most big FA just at a lower price..

Your argument that a cap wouldn't change anything is just wishful thinking. The NBA and NFL models show that. The Knicks and Giants have some advantages compared to smaller markets - but nowhere near the advantages that the Yanks enjoy.

Any cap would also come with a floor. I highly recommend reading "Fair Ball" by Bob Costas. It's a little dated, but still workable. He shows how you can increase the total player salary pool while capping the top end.

The Union would never agree to a cap without a long strike, but being a fan of a team in the AL East that is not NYY or BOS - I'm willing to tolerate a VERY long strike in order to get a model that is workable for everybody in baseball.

You can't buy a championship, but you can buy division titles year after year after year after year.

[FromWayDowntown]

The four players who started in the Yankees infield in 2009 had a combined salary bigger than half the payrolls in baseball. It's not against the rules, but it illustrates how absurd the rules are.

[dbreiden83080]

Throughout history there are the teams always committed to winning in every sport. Yankees, Red Sox, Dallas Cowboys, Celtics, Lakers, etc. Teams that care more about winning than most of the franchises that they compete against. Red Sox committment overcame a supposed curse that had fans convinced was real. That's how bad that franchise wanted to win. MLB at some point can change the rules, but that will not stop the Yankees from being at the top end of that desire to win. Teams like the Pirates and Royals will always have other considerations that come before winning or are just as important as winning. That won't happen with the yanks, not as long as the Steinbrenner family is in charge.. And the Yanks haters can say what they want but i feel that is a committment that should be respected..

[NBA Junkie]

There's no way Mauer leaves Minnesota.

That new stadium means more money in which to sign him with.

[dbreiden83080]

There's no way Mauer leaves Minnesota.

That new stadium means more money in which to sign him with.

Agreed he retires a Twin..

[FromWayDowntown]

Throughout history there are the teams always committed to winning in every sport. Yankees, Red Sox, Dallas Cowboys, Celtics, Lakers, etc. Teams that care more about winning than most of the franchises that they compete against. Red Sox committment overcame a supposed curse that had fans convinced was real. That's how bad that franchise wanted to win. MLB at some point can change the rules, but that will not stop the Yankees from being at the top end of that desire to win. Teams like the Pirates and Royals will always have other considerations that come before winning or are just as important as winning. That won't happen with the yanks, not as long as the Steinbrenner family is in charge.. And the Yanks haters can say what they want but i feel that is a committment that should be respected..

It's funny, when the spending in baseball was relatively even, the Royals and Pirates were perennially competitive. The Royals basically dominated the AL West from about 1976-1985; the Pirates played in 3 straight National League Championship Series as recently as the early 90's.

The common thread to their story isn't a lack of commitment to winning. It's the lack of resources to pursue winning in any meaningful way. The Royals, for example, have developed a significant number of terrific players over the last 10-15 years: Carlos Beltran, Johnny Damon, Zack Greinke, to name just 3. If the playing field were even, the Royals could have conceivably kept those sorts of players and built a roster that had a chance to be competitive. But the playing field isn't even, and Kansas City's woes on the field aren't simply a product of competing agendas. Even if the Royals wanted to put together a $200,000,000 payroll, I'm not sure that they'd have the resources available to do that. It's really easy to say that it's about a commitment to winning, but it's easy to be committed to winning when you have exponentially more resources than most of your competitors.

If the Yankees felt it was necessary to have a $300,000,000 payroll in order to win, they COULD do that -- hell, they committed themselves to $500,000,000 in contracts last winter for 3 players. But if the Royals felt that a $150,000,000 payroll would make them competitive, they likely COULDN'T expend the resources to do that (because they just don't have those resources).

[K-State Spur]

Throughout history there are the teams always committed to winning in every sport. Yankees, Red Sox, Dallas Cowboys, Celtics, Lakers, etc. Teams that care more about winning than most of the franchises that they compete against. Red Sox committment overcame a supposed curse that had fans convinced was real. That's how bad that franchise wanted to win. MLB at some point can change the rules, but that will not stop the Yankees from being at the top end of that desire to win. Teams like the Pirates and Royals will always have other considerations that come before winning or are just as important as winning. That won't happen with the yanks, not as long as the Steinbrenner family is in charge.. And the Yanks haters can say what they want but i feel that is a committment that should be respected..

It's not like the Yanks/Sox are willing to lose money to be competitive. They spend the most because they play in the biggest markets that generate the most revenue.

EVERYBODY (including the Yanks and Sox) care about making money before anything else. Some teams can (and do) do both.

But until the playing field is remotely leveled, Yankee fans are going to have to deal with the fact that - while they DO get to win championships - much of the baseball loving world is going to see it as the result of a completely unfair advantage.

[dbreiden83080]

The financial playing field will never be level in baseball because there is no workable solution that makes sense. They are not able to share the revenue like the NFL can because of the massive TV deals the NFL has. Union will not agree to a cap because it will drop salaries. A step in the right direction would be to start forcing teams to spend money they get off the luxory tax on their teams. So i guess if it bothers you so much then don't watch much baseball anymore. No change appears in site..

[K-State Spur]

The financial playing field will never be level in baseball because there is no workable solution that makes sense. They are not able to share the revenue like the NFL can because of the massive TV deals the NFL has. Union will not agree to a cap because it will drop salaries. A step in the right direction would be to start forcing teams to spend money they get off the luxory tax on their teams. So i guess if it bothers you so much then don't watch much baseball anymore. No change appears in site..

actually, all of those things are changeable - it just involves some short term pain.

[dbreiden83080]

actually, all of those things are changeable - it just involves some short term pain.

If the pain involved salary cuts which it does, than it's not happening without a massive strike.. MLB is still flourishing financially in a bad economy in spite of attendance being down in 2009 compared to 2008. It took MLB a long time to recover from the last big strike..

[K-State Spur]

a strike would be the short term pain. owners can afford to not to pay players longer than players can afford not to be paid. however, at every interval in the past, the big markets and small markets have shown little unity and the players' union in baseball has gotten far more powerful than is healthy for any major sport. it's going to have to get knocked down a few pegs at some point - that is inevitable.

while baseball's overall revenues are fine - it is hurting in a lot of markets. token revenue sharing has not changed that.