Byline: Bob Kravitz Rocky Mountain News Sports Columnist
Two years ago, Dante Bichette was denied the National League Most Valuable Player Award because of the Coors Field Factor. And it was, to a great degree, a justified snub given the mammoth disparity between his home and road numbers.
Last year, Ellis Burks was denied the NL MVP because his Rockies faded down the stretch while Ken Caminiti was leading the Padres to a division title.
And this year?
Larry Walker, MVP.
Can it be anybody else?
If Walker continues to flirt with an average in the neighborhood of .400, continues to hit for power, continues to be one of the game's best right fielders, continues to put up numbers home and away - continues, most important, to stay healthy - it doesn't matter how far out of contention the Rockies finish.
He is your NL MVP.
Period.
``Clearly,'' Don Baylor said before Thursday's game with the Cubs. ``If the vote was right this minute, it would have to be Larry Walker. If you took a poll of players around the league, you'd get the same answer. Maybe Jeff Bagwell would be second. Maybe Tony Gwynn third. But it has to be Walker.''
Ah, but here's the rub:
The Rockies are a losing team, and given the state of the pitching staff and other injuries, there's every reason to believe they will continue to be a losing team. And history is not at all kind to the MVP candidacies of players who toil for bad ballclubs.
Since 1960, just one player - Andre Dawson of the 1987 Chicago Cubs - has won the league MVP while playing for a losing team. During that span, the MVP played on a division winner 23 times, a second-place club 10 times and a third-place team three times. (Pittsburgh's Willie Stargell and St. Louis' Keith Hernandez shared MVP honors in 1979).
The question, then, is what is an MVP?
The criteria are not etched anywhere on stone tablets. Basically, the baseball writers are asked to vote for the player they believe did the most for his team. It's a bit like the Supreme Court justice who said he could not define pornography, but knew it when he saw it. The same seems to hold true with the voters' view of an MVP: They can't define what it is that makes an MVP, but they know one when they see one.
So what is an MVP?
Is it the best player that season?
Or is it the best player on a winning team?
The writers' voting history suggests it is the latter - which doesn't bode particularly well for Walker.
One year ago, Burks had the best numbers on the planet and rendered the Coors Field argument obsolete by doing it on the road and at home - but his team finished third in the division. Meanwhile, Caminiti was having a heroic final two months, including his phoenix-like resurrection in Mexico City, when he battled through food poisoning and hit a couple of home runs.
``That's when Caminiti won it,'' Baylor said. ``After that Mexico trip, that's what everybody focused on.''
The MVP criteria are further muddled by other issues:
Should it necessarily be a position player, as it usually is, or should pitchers, who have the Cy Young Award, be considered?
And how about character issues? Cincinnati's Barry Larkin won it two years ago with very pedestrian numbers. Kirk Gibson of the 1988 Dodgers won it with average numbers. But both got the nod because they were viewed as guys who brought some intangibles to bear in leading their teams to the playoffs. On the flip side, Albert Belle was properly snubbed because he's a creep and an embarrassment to baseball.
The question with Walker, ultimately, is should he be penalized for being on a team whose pitching staff has fallen apart? At some point, the voters have to turn a blind eye to his teammates' shortcomings and fully consider the scope of this guy's accomplishments this season. We're not talking about a great season here. We're talking about a transcendant one - at the plate, in the field, on the basepaths, everywhere.
``In theory, he could be a 30-homer, 30-stolen base guy by mid-August,'' Baylor said, shaking his head.
The Coors Field prejudice? It shouldn't adversely affect Walker when the voters look at the numbers. He went into Thursday's game batting .422 with 10 homers and 43 RBI at Coors Field. He is batting .361 with 19 homers and 40 RBI on the road.
The wild card in all of this might be the Randy Johnson fiasco. Some voters might be moved to ask, ``How can I vote for a guy who didn't step up for his team on a night they were facing baseball's best pitcher?'' Some of us think Walker's decision was fully defensible and blown far out of proportion. Still, it's fair to wonder whether some voters won't hold that decision against him, especially when they view him against the backdrop of a team seemingly headed for last place.
No matter. Here's one vote - right here, right now.
Too bad it doesn't count.
