One writer's shockingly terrible MVP ballot

[Alfred]

Yeah, it's very frustrating. Baseball is probably the most individual-based of the 4 major North American sports, and basically everything in baseball can be quantified with statistics, so creating these team-centric narratives, instead of using a player's own individual accomplishments is stupid.

[J Dilla]

How about awards in the past? Can't exactly remember, but were they based on individual accomplishments or the player's team performance? (making the playoffs, winning the ws etc)

[kavan]

Clearly the Most Valuable title has a different meaning. A player that helps a team every day vs a player that helps ever 5 days. The one that helps every 5 days gets a Cy Young thats understood unless Verlander was a RP and pitched every game or evena closer for that matter could be MVP in my books as long as he is the reason for winning day in day out setting records and blowing people out of the water. The Closer is a strech but I would never a SP.

[TorontoRaptures]

My favourite Michael Young stat:
He posted his lowest WAR since, get this, 2004.

In 2006, his WAR of 4.6 was nearly twice as high as this season's WAR (2.4).

[torontoaces04]

My favourite Michael Young stat:
He posted his lowest WAR since, get this, 2004.

In 2006, his WAR of 4.6 was nearly twice as high as this season's WAR (2.4).

This writer should not only lose his vote, he should lose his job. I can appreciate a writer showing passion for the home-town team, but this is unexplainable. Knowing that there are actually people who can cover the MLB on a day-to-day basis and still think like this worries me.

[OldNo7]

I guess Bautista should pitch a few innings next year to improve his MVP chances. Does anyone know why they wait until late november to announce the MVP?

The industry needs to do a better job of making the Hank Aaron Award seem more impressive, because it is yet no one pays attention to it.

It is for the most oustanding offensive player. Essentially it is the equivalent of the Cy Young, but for hitters. Only it doesn't carry the history.

Bautista has won this award two years in a row now, which should be a really big deal. If someone won two Cy Youngs in a row, it would be an enormous deal. MLB and their writers are doing a brutal job of increasing the importance of this award by barely ever talking about it.

[satyr9]

I guess Bautista should pitch a few innings next year to improve his MVP chances. Does anyone know why they wait until late november to announce the MVP?

The industry needs to do a better job of making the Hank Aaron Award seem more impressive, because it is yet no one pays attention to it.

It is for the most oustanding offensive player. Essentially it is the equivalent of the Cy Young, but for hitters. Only it doesn't carry the history.

Bautista has won this award two years in a row now, which should be a really big deal. If someone won two Cy Youngs in a row, it would be an enormous deal. MLB and their writers are doing a brutal job of increasing the importance of this award by barely ever talking about it.

Just start announcing it after the Cy and before the MVP and it'll have the desired effect IMO. I also think it's a pretty solid solution to the perennial tard-fest about what the words "most valuable" mean when it's perfectly clear it means a writer can pick his favorite guys in spite of all evidence showing why others are better and more valuable.

I didn't post in this thread before 'cause I'm too tired of this every year and this ballot didn't piss me off too much as it's a yearly occurence that someone does it. Still if pitchers get an award and mvp isn't for best overall player, then let's elevate the Aaron award and make it a triumvirate, which would in turn make it more likely some truly awe-inspiring and overlooked pitching performances from the last 20 years, when people seemed to think you shouldn't vote for pitchers in the MVP, don't miss out in the future. It would also give my heart some joy to see best pitcher and best hitter lose out on MVP so there's really nowhere for the writers to duck when the fans start in on them for their ineptitude.

One last thing that really irks me; if being on a contending team is a prerequisite for MVP, then why vote before the playoffs? If getting to the dance is so important, why isn't your performance in it? Shouldn't the WS MVP be the de facto season MVP under this logic? If step 1 is so important for the valuable conversation and step 1 admittedly is only important because it gives a team and a player a chance to take steps 2 through whatever to win a WS, then how can they justify elevating entry to the playoffs as criteria and then not sticking around to see how the player does? I know they do it 'cause they know they're a bunch of sheep that would just vote for the guy who got the last hit or the last strikeout and then Pat Borders would be a regular season MVP, but since their choices in how to vote and when are ostensibly admitting that they're a bunch of no attention-span having idiots, why does anyone care who they think is best or valuable or anything?

/rant.