Great line on the Lions!

"Truth is, no one never knows anything about the NFL any year. This year is no different. That's why it's impressive for bettors here in Las Vegas going about 60% for the year, which is as good as it gets. And think about it: If you bet money, and you go 60%, that means that you have actually come out ahead and made money betting on football, assuming that you bet the same amount on all games. Not many people can say that."

That would be true if King was picking against the spread; he's not, though.

Looks like the Panthers followed Mr. Kaufman's example and took the Vikings for granted. Maybe next time he'll include their accomplishments as part of his preview.

unrelated to this article, but King did suggest we post letters to him here rather than email them:

I would like to say just a few words about one of the great controversies to plague the modern era -- MVP voting in Major League Baseball.

There is an argument in favor of position players over starting pitchers that goes something like this -- position players play in 140-160 games a year, starting pitchers play in about one-fifth that many games. Therefore, position players have a bigger impact on more games than starting pitchers, thus are inherently more valuable to their teams.

I was thinking this over to myself, and later overheard my mom echoing my unspoken sentiments to my dad. If you really want to break it down to exactly how often a player may have a truly pivotal impact on the outcome of a game- I think it comes out in something much closer to a wash than those who advocate for position players over starting pitchers might think.

The two Twins most mentioned as possible MVP candidates this season are 1B Justin Morneau, and starting-pitcher Johan Santana. Consider some of these numbers:

Justin Morneau has 583 plate-appearances this year (535 AB + 49 Walks).

Johan Santana has faced 867 batters.

That's 284 more at-bats that Johan has been involved in. And when you're the pitcher, you play a clearly pivotal role in EVERY at-bat. Pitchers can do nothing more clearly impactful than strike a player out, which Johan has done 237 times. A position player can do nothing more clearly impactful than get on-base, Justin has been on-base 226 times (172 hits + 49 walks + 5 hit-by-pitch).

I would also say one strikeout is more impactful to a game than a player just getting on-base. Now you could argue it's less impactful than one RBI or one run-scored. But for a position player to get either of those, he's much more dependent on the hitters and runners around him than a pitcher is reliant on anyone else for a strikeout.

Anyway, I've got homework to do, I think I've said enough to make my point. I'm not gonna lay out a clear-cut thesis... I think I've said enough to show that a starting pitcher can be equally, if not more impactful, on a team's season than a position player.

And, really, although if you take any 5 games for a team- a position player will usually play 4 or 5 of those games, a starting-pitcher for only one, but how many of those games is that position-player likely to be the most pivotal player in the game? In the case of someone like Johan, almost every time he is the biggest factor of the 1 game he appears in. Justin Morneau is much less likely the most pivotal player.

Now of course there are other factors to consider-- defensive plays (which is another way a pitcher can make the occasional impact)-- and how about how much more involved a catcher is at-bat by at-bat than other position players!!??, an argument for Mauer then develops-- especially when you consider the young pitcher Mauer has had to work with this year!...

Another factor to consider is how a position player's presence in a lineup effects how the batters around him are pitched to.

Bottom line-- I'd say starting pitchers are as equally worthy of MVP consideration as your big-time position player is. And I think Johan is as much MVP material as any candidates whose name comes up.

Interesting points, Steve.

You're giving way too much credit to this debate, I think. The usual stated reason for pitchers not getting consideration for the MVP is "They have their own award, the Cy Young." That is, except in the random years when the voters decide to give the MVP to a pitcher.

Getting to what you're actually talking about, I think the value of a top starting pitcher and a top hitter is probably pretty close. The traditional baseball thinking, and by that I mean the thinking around mid-century and for a few decades on either side, was that players were worth more than pitchers because they helped you every day. In today's offensive environment, good pitching is at such a premium that great pitchers are like gold. You can kind of always find a bopper. Not really, but it sorta feels that way.

Baseball Prospectus has some numbers that might be useful, such as Value Over Replacement Player (VORP), Wins Above Replacement Player (WARP), etc.

If you go to that site and play around in the stats and look at individual players' pages (for this year in the A.L. pay particular attention, aside from the Twins you mentioned, to Derek Jeter and Travis Hafner, plus Roy Halladay if you want another pitcher), you'll see that the top pitchers and the top hitters account for similar numbers of runs produced/prevented, and therefore roughly the same number of wins above replacement level (what a borderline major leaguer would produce). A great hitter and a great pitcher are both worth about 10 wins over replacement.

I'm in favor of limiting the MVP to position players, and giving it to the best player, as opposed to whatever tortured definition of "value" is employed to justify giving it to whoever strikes your fancy that year. And the Cy Young Award is the MVP for pitchers.

But nobody, ever, asks me.