Specifically, I'm talking MVP's, Cy Youngs, Defensive Players of the Year, the numerous hockey trophies-The personal handouts that make the mantle at home look really nice. No Gold Gloves, Pro Bowls or All-Star changes please. Explanations are appreciated!
Baseball, 1999 AL MVP, Pedro Martinez; 2002 AL Cy Young, Pedro Martinez.
First and foremost, a disclaimer: I am in no way a part of Red Sox Nation.
These two years, Pedro got cheated.
1999: Because of the idea that "pitchers can't win the MVP," which writers have lodged in their heads. George King of the New York Post and Lavelle Neal of the Minneapolis/St. Paul Star-Tribune didn't even place Pedro on their ballots; if they had, even as low as 4th, Martinez would have been the MVP. Martinez had every thing you wanted in an MVP, including stats (23-4, 2.07 ERA, 313 strikeouts-Triple Crown), a playoff team, and that extra something. Call it swagger, or presence, but Pedro in '99 was indomitable, and every night you expected something special at the ballpark. Throw in that Fenway is a notorious hitter's park, and the historical stances (Height of the steroid era), and Pedro is the clear winner.
2002: This is more of a historical do-over. Pedro came in second behind the Oakland A's Barry Zito. Pedro had a lower ERA, more strikeouts, better WHIP, and gave up fewer hits and home runs than Zito. So why did Zito win? The A's won 103 games, and Zito had 23 wins. Voters are unusually enamored with wins at this time, and so Zito claims the prize. Now, the Cy Young is supposed to go to the best pitcher, irregardless of anything else. Pedro was pretty clearly the better pitcher.
Baseball, 1999 AL MVP, Pedro Martinez; 2002 AL Cy Young, Pedro Martinez.
First and foremost, a disclaimer: I am in no way a part of Red Sox Nation.
These two years, Pedro got cheated.
1999: Because of the idea that "pitchers can't win the MVP," which writers have lodged in their heads. George King of the New York Post and Lavelle Neal of the Minneapolis/St. Paul Star-Tribune didn't even place Pedro on their ballots; if they had, even as low as 4th, Martinez would have been the MVP. Martinez had every thing you wanted in an MVP, including stats (23-4, 2.07 ERA, 313 strikeouts-Triple Crown), a playoff team, and that extra something. Call it swagger, or presence, but Pedro in '99 was indomitable, and every night you expected something special at the ballpark. Throw in that Fenway is a notorious hitter's park, and the historical stances (Height of the steroid era), and Pedro is the clear winner.
2002: This is more of a historical do-over. Pedro came in second behind the Oakland A's Barry Zito. Pedro had a lower ERA, more strikeouts, better WHIP, and gave up fewer hits and home runs than Zito. So why did Zito win? The A's won 103 games, and Zito had 23 wins. Voters are unusually enamored with wins at this time, and so Zito claims the prize. Now, the Cy Young is supposed to go to the best pitcher, irregardless of anything else. Pedro was pretty clearly the better pitcher.