The Moronic MVP System We Have In Place.
Ah, the MVP. Should only a player on a playoff-contending team be able to win it? Should it go to the best overall player in the league? Should it go to the player that gave the most production-per-dollar? Any of these suggestions could work with an award named Most Valuable Player.
And also… what happens if a player switches leagues in the middle of a season if the MVP is a league-based award?
Looking to Dictionary.com to define value:
| 1. | relative worth, merit, or importance: the value of a college education; the value of a queen in chess. |
| 2. | monetary or material worth, as in commerce or trade: This piece of land has greatly increased in value. |
| 3. | the worth of something in terms of the amount of other things for which it can be exchanged or in terms of some medium of exchange. |
| 4. | equivalent worth or return in money, material, services, etc.: to give value for value received. |
| 5. | estimated or assigned worth; valuation: a painting with a current value of $500,000. |
| 8. | import or meaning; force; significance: the value of a word. |
| 9. | liking or affection; favorable regard. |
–verb (used with object)
| 16. | to calculate or reckon the monetary value of; give a specified material or financial value to; assess; appraise: to value their assets. |
| 17. | to consider with respect to worth, excellence, usefulness, or importance. |
| 18. | to regard or esteem highly: He values her friendship. |
These are the only relevant definitions that we can work with when trying to define what value in this situation means. To me, going to Costco and getting 200 Aspirin for $10 when they cost $3 for 25 at Shopper’s Drug Mart is value. I am getting the best possible goods-to-dollar ratio.
Clearly, with the MLB’s informal and ambiguous definition of what the MVP is, the voters have gone a different route. It’s not about money. Value in the MVP is about how much you mean to your team from a production standpoint. But production isn’t enough. It needs to be production which helps a team that without that player wouldn’t make the playoffs. At the very least, they get a heavy swing.
Take this year’s NL MVP voting. Albert Pujols got 18 first place MVP votes to Ryan Howard’s 12. Pujols ended up winning the MVP, but not by a wide margin.
Albert Pujols had one of the best years in the history of baseball this year, hitting .357 with a .462 OBP. 37 homers on 116 RBI, 104 BB on 54 SO, .653 SLG on 1.115 OPS.
Ryan Howard had a good year. Ryan Howard is not in the same league, continent, planet, solar system or universe as Pujols this year. Howard hit .251 on a pultry .339 OBP. He did hit 48 homers on 146 RBI, walked 81 times on 199 SO, slugged .543 with a .881 OPS. That’s right, an .881 OPS. And we’re talking about him as if he’s in any competition with Pujols.
Not only was Howard in competition, he nearly won. Why? WHY!?! Why. Because Howard was on the Phillies - a team that squeezed into the playoffs in a garbage division and league. Is his .881 OPS with 48 homers him being valuable or him being in the right place at the right time to qualify himself for this award? Should it be changed to the Most Opportunistic Award? The Most Lucky Award? Shouldn’t it be about how, in the same situation, another player would do - better or worse? Is there any doubt in your mind Pujols (and 30 others) would do better than Howard in his situation?
Anybody who knows baseball in the slightes bit knows that Pujols had the far superior (to the third degree) year, so there’s no reason in continuing to compare stats.
MVP clearly means “the player who did the most for their team and was also in a playoff race, unless a player on another team does an far superior job even on a losing team.”
What is to be done about this? If Ryan Howard won the MVP this year I think I would’ve projectile vomited for days… yes, I’m sure it’s clear by now that I do not agree with the current MVP philosophy our voters go by.
There is one more problem. A big one.
What if a player switches leagues in the middle of the year? As the current MVP “definition” states, they can only win the MVP for their cumulative statistics for ONE team. That is, they can not be the MVP of two teams at once. Makes sense… unless you want the MVP to go to the most opportunistic player instead of the best, which is my case. For example, this year Mark Teixeira switched teams this year. He went from ATL to LAA. If he were to put up the numbers he put up in ATL in LAA instead, he would probably have been the lock for AL MVP this year. But because of him switching leagues he gets no consideration in either league.
So, what’s the solution? My next post will deal with my theoretical picks this year for most of the awards - my solution to what value means. My solution to what player should walk home which represents the best position player in the game.
