Since their championship in 1987, the Minnesota Twins had fallen on some hard times, and finished last in their division in 1990. This year, they pulled a worst-to-first, and led the league in wins. They beat the Blue Jays in the league playoffs, then won a tremendous World Series against the Braves. The final two games were classics; the Twins needed a win in Game Six to extend the Series, and got it when star/hero Kirby Puckett homered in the bottom of the 11th inning. The Twins then won again in a classic Game Seven.

        The league MVP was Orioles shortstop Cal Ripken. Entering this season, Ripken had played in 1,411 consecutive games, almost exactly two-thirds of the way to Lou Gehrig's record. But it was doubtful how much longer the streak could last. After a brilliant start to his career, his batting numbers had been declining for five years; 1990 was the worst season of his career to that point. Questions were being raised over whether the streak was harming his performance at the plate.
        This season, Ripken put everything together and had the best year of his career. It was a one-shot return to greatness; next season he hit .251 with 14 homers, and he never again had an MVP-quality season. But he played well enough to stay in the lineup, and five years later he broke Gehrig's record. The streak did not end until 1998, at 2,632 consecutive games. When he retired in 2001, Ripken had 3,184 career hits, 431 homers and 1,695 RBI, numbers that demand a place in the Hall of Fame, and rank him among the greatest shortstops ever.
        But did Ripken's streak hurt his career? Ripken won an MVP Award at age 22, and ranks as one of the greatest under-25 players in baseball history. After he turned 25 years old, he was never the same, with the exception of this one season. He was always a good hitter for a shortstop, and was a very fine defensive player, and he had an undeniable flair for the dramatic. But the truly great numbers of his youth weren't there. In 1999, Ripken hit .340 as a part-time player, fuelling his critics who argued that his lifetime .276 average could have been 30 points higher without the physical burden of the streak.
        It is difficult to judge the streak. We are all taught, from a young age, that the good of the team is more important than individual stats — a rule that Ripken flagrantly violated. On the other hand, he made millions of people feel good, and more importantly, fell good about the game; Ripken's passing of the Gehrig streak was baseball's first great public relations move after the 1994 work stoppage. People have to live their lives however they like, and I won't criticize Ripken for chasing a dream that was important to him. But as a fan, I regret that the brilliant 22-year-old of limitless talent did not have a dozen more seasons as equally great as this one.
        This year, Ripken was a rare case of a player playing for a bad team (the Orioles lost 95 games) and winning the MVP Award. But who else are you going to vote for? Cecil Fielder was runner-up in the vote. Fielder was a scary power hitter who drove in lots of runs... but Big Cecil contributed little beyong home runs and RBI. I think that two other first basemen, Frank Thomas and Rafael Palmeiro, were clearly better than Fielder.
        But Cecil "Big Daddy" Fielder was a very popular player, and did remarkably well in MVP voting. His 1990 season was a legitimately great one; this season was something you would expect from Dick Stuart or Nate Colbert, and I don't recall either of those two players ever being considered an MVP candidate. Part of Cecil's appeal had to do with his dramatic, unexpected success after returning from Japan. He also was a big fat guy with a big smile, and those guys are always a hit with both the fans and media.
        Julio Franco won the batting title this season. Younger fans know Julio as baseball's modern Methuselah, the guy still batting .300 at age 45. He is also the nightmare of many Little League coaches, who for 22 years have had to deal with young kids trying to imitate his wild batting stance, in which he holds the bat high above his head and points the barrel towards the pitcher.
        How anybody can hit major league pitching with such a stance is one of baseball's great mysteries, but Franco is a lifetime .300 hitter, who has over 150 career home runs and was an effective base stealer before a 1992 knee injury. Early in his career, Franco was a shortstop with the Indians who was a good hitter, but had lapses in the field; his tenure in Cleveland was also troubled by unexplained absences from the team, and clashes with management. Traded to the Rangers, he thrived as a second baseman, and put up his best numbers with the bat.
        Incredibly, Franco has over 2,400 career hits, despite missing four full seasons from his career. He spent the entire 1995 season in Japan, came back for two years, then spent three seasons (1998-2000) playing in Japan, Korea and Mexico. He spent much of 2001 playing in Mexico, then signed with the Braves late in the season, and at age 45 is still playing. And he still has the same stance at the plate.
        The best second basemen this year were Franco and Roberto Alomar. It is not a clear choice between them; Alomar was an outstanding defensive player, and helped the Blue Jays win their division. Does this make him better than Franco, who was clearly the better hitter? I'm not sure; Franco was among the most underrated players of his generation, and this was his best season. This year, I think Franco was better then Alomar; his combination of average, power, and speed made him a flawless hitter.
        Paul Molitor was 35 years old, and was aging like fine wine. He had given up playing the infield, where he always tended to get hurt. The next five years would be the most productive of his career.