Cal in 1984

[willshad]

I posted this question in another post, but no one responded:
Why did Cal Ripken get so little support for MVP in 1984? Does anyone know, or have any theories? it was nearly the equal to his 1983 MVP season(maybe better with defense factored in), yet he got only ONE 10TH PLACE VOTE! The Os werent in first, but werent horrible either. Its not like that was a season with a lot of guys having monster years either..a RELIEF PITCHER won the darn thing, and another relief pitcher finished third. Was he much less popular with the media earlier in his career as opposed to later on?

[Captain Cold Nose]

I posted this question in another post, but no one responded:
Why did Cal Ripken get so little support for MVP in 1984? Does anyone know, or have any theories? it was nearly the equal to his 1983 MVP season(maybe better with defense factored in), yet he got only ONE 10TH PLACE VOTE! The Os werent in first, but werent horrible either. Its not like that was a season with a lot of guys having monster years either..a RELIEF PITCHER won the darn thing, and another relief pitcher finished third. Was he much less popular with the media earlier in his career as opposed to later on?

If he were that unpopular, he wouldn't have won the award the previous season.

Teammate Eddie Murray, runner-up to Cal in 1983 and I believe Yount in 1982, was perceived the better player that year, and he finished higher in the voting. The Tigers appeared so much better than anyone else that year, thus placing three players in the top 10. Kent Hrbek hit well for a Twins team that wasn't terrible, and that got him second place. Quisenberry set the saves record, and that meant a lot more in 1984 than it would when Bobby Thigpen established the current record a few years later. Plus, the Royals took their division. Don Mattingly won a very tight and exciting batting race against teammate Dave Winfield. There are other factors as to why Ripken didn't finish higher than he did, a lot of candidates were worthy of looks. Remember, this was the era of the game-winning RBI, and decry it as much as you want now, in 1984, it got a lot of press.

It's very easy to shoot something down because it's not your own standards, but winning has always meant a lot in regards to MVP voting. Other players appeared to contribute more to that.

[Brooklyn]

Don't forget the power of RBIs and runs, too, particularly RBI's

His rate stats in 1984 might have been very similar to his rate stats in 1983, and he hit 27 HRs both years, but his RBI's decreased from 102 to 86 and his runs decreased from 121 to 103

His runs went from first in the AL to 8th. His RBI went from 9th to out of the top ten.

His batting average also decreased .318 to .304, which may not be that significant, but with two of the three triple count stats declining, it was definitely viewed as a lesser year.

I can't disagree that he should have gotten more support then one lousy vote, but he was viewed as the second best hitter on a 5th best team, with stats declining from his MVP year.