I know writers hated him and Joe Dimaggio was so beloved ut is there any actual explanation from anyone of merit that excuses this abomination? (or however you spell that)
2007-10-25 11:18:38 · 9 answers · asked by Dennis Leary 1 in Sports ➔ Baseball
Ted also won two triple crowns (only player other than Rogers Hornsby to do so) and I don't think he won either of those years. Wow.
2007-10-25 11:47:53 · update #1
The voters messed that one up horribly, and there's no good reason why Dimaggio was the winner.
Sure, Dimaggio had his fluky streak that season, but Williams still hit almost 50 points higher. He also had an amazing 113 point advantage in OBP, and was almost 100 points ahead in slugging. Sure, Dimaggio had a few more RBIs, but that's the only category in which he was more impressive, and Williams made that up in runs. It's impressive that Dimaggio struck out only 13 times, but that was only 14 fewer than Ted. And, Williams again more than made up for that by having 71 more walks.
Like another answer mentioned, much of it had to do with the Yankees being a better team, and Ted's attitude towards the media didn't help. Still, even if a guy is a jerk, how can you deny him his greatness and vote for someone else? This vote was a crime, and at least the Sporting News got it right when they voted Williams the Player of the Year.
2007-10-25 11:47:46 · answer #1 · answered by Craig S 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
I wouldn't call it an abomination. Williams hit .406 that year, with 37 homers and 120 RBI. Dimaggio hit .357 with 30 homers and 125 RBI. If you just look at the numbers, Williams was a little better statistically, but Dimaggio played for a first place club, and the voters tend to award the MVP to players on successful teams. I guarantee if the Red Sox had won the AL that year Williams would have been the MVP. I'm a Red Sox fan and I can't argue with Dimaggio getting it;
.357-20-125 is a great season, plus he also had the 56 game hitting streak.
The real abomination came in 1947. Williams came in second to Dimaggio again, but the problem wasn't that he lost to Dimaggio, it was the way he lost. That year Williams was .343-32-114. I'm not trying to say that Dimaggio didn't deserve to win it, because he also but together an MVP caliber 315-20-97 season with the pennant winning Yankees.
The thing about 1947 is that a writer kept Williams off the ballot completely because he didn't like him personally. Williams lost that year by one point. If he had gotten even a ninth place vote he would have won that year. I think you can make the argument that Dimaggio was the MVP, but you can't argue that Williams wasn't worth at least a ninth place vote.
2007-10-25 11:28:24 · answer #2 · answered by bencas9900 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
the sportswriters had a lot to do with it, and Ted also didnt win an MVP when he won a triple crown...Teddy Ballgame was never a big fan of the sportswriter, and vice versa..also it was DiMaggios yr of hitting in 56 straight and 73 out or 74 games, which was amazing and the Yankees did win the pennent that yr. Also my opinion is that it wasnt that far removed from an era where you did have .400 hitters so it looks more awesome in a historical aspect that it did at that time
2007-10-25 11:30:01 · answer #3 · answered by allenmontana 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
That was the same year DiMaggio had his 56-game hitting streak. The writers must have put a higher weight to that. Remember New York had 3 teams, thus 3 times the votes at that time. The year was 1941.
2007-10-25 11:27:17 · answer #4 · answered by pricehillsaint 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Hi,
Good question. According to Baseball Reference, they two legends finished one-two in the 1941 MVP race.
You're right that Williams hit .406 that year (the last time anyone has hit over .400 for the season), but it's worth noting that Joe DiMaggio had his famous 56 game hitting streak that same year.
Additionally, the Bronx Bombers won the World Series that year. If you take the stance that the MVP is someone who helps their team win, then perhaps Joe was the more deserving candidate. (Personally, I prefer Ted.)
Mike
2007-10-25 11:30:31 · answer #5 · answered by Ask Mike 4 · 3⤊ 0⤋
That was the year of Joe DiMaggio's 56-game hitting streak. That wasn't a bad accomplishment either. And the Red Sox didn't win the pennant that year.
Remember, .400 hitters were fairly common in the 1930's. We didn't know at the time that no one would reach that number for more than 60 years.
2007-10-25 11:25:35 · answer #6 · answered by wdx2bb 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋
He was competing against Joe DiMaggio's 56 game hitting streak which also was a fantastic accomplishment.
2007-10-25 11:51:40 · answer #7 · answered by Sharon S 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No offense to "Ask Mike", but I kinda like seeing staff screw up ("they two legends"). Mike, you're a good guy, I'm sure, but thanks for giving us all a little less faith in Y! Answers (not that we had much to begin with).
It was because of the 56 game hitting streak and lack of historical context as far as a .400 season is concerned (both) that did in Ted Williams. Add the fact that he hated sportswriters about as much as Barry Bonds hates Dixie cups (lol), and that's not going to get you an MVP award.
Have a great night!
2007-10-25 11:51:28 · answer #8 · answered by herfinator 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋
i hate people that pick out small typing errors. does that make you feel more intelligent.
2007-10-25 12:10:25 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋