MVP?

Eckstein wins amongst the winners, in a contest for MVP that could have arguable have gone to any of several. But…..I want to talk about somebody who rarely got a mention after one those 99th percentile-type series performances.

Honorable mention? How about that EX-Red Sean Casey, by far the best hitter of the series. 9 for 17 with 2 homeruns (tied teammate Munroe with 2 for the series lead), 5 RBI (led all hitters) and .529 (led all hitters). Way to go Sean! If they had a “hank Aaron award” (best offensive performance), you were hands down winner for this series. You were the only reason I felt bad for the Tigers (well, maybe a little for Leland, too. He did an amazing job with this crew).

The Reds website sucks for not having a brag piece on Sean’s performance. Actually, Sean went amazingly unnoticed. The ESPN pregame guy who went through the tigers starting lineup for game 5 totally skipped over Sean, mentioning everybody else by name and a comment. What’s a guy gotta do? Hit .600? Or be David Eckstein or Albert Pujos?

I heard one sports commentator comment on how much hype a ball player like Eckstein gets, since he’s “so little and scrappy”. He is that, and yet I agree that he is OVERHYPED, and nowhere is this more evident than in his winning the MVP of the Series, when two of his teammates (Molina and Rolen) had higher averages and arguably had as many key hits (and Eckstein had a whopping 4 RBI, all in the final two games). Prior to that, he was HARDLY an MVP. Granted, Weaver was only in two games, but in the role of starting pitcher, one of which he lost (3-1), but he had an overall 2.77 ERA and pitched well in both games. I suppose that with all the equally valuable performances (also that of Carpenter with a gem in game (3 hits in 8 scoreless), and Big Albert out of the running, it was totally not unexpected that the “little guy” would get the nod. MVP? Not a bad choice.