|
Post by GEO on Oct 5, 2006 17:00:57 GMT -5
Alright, so lets see if this topic gets us back on track.
MVP Voting. Even though voters are onyl supposed to use the regular season, all awards are decided after the Playoffs. Voters aren't supposed to count the Playoffs, but isnt' that hard to do? You have Ortiz and Jeter as your top two guys. You see Jeter go 5-5 while leading the Yanks to victory. Meanwhile, Ortiz is waiting for the vote to go down. As a vote, can you really ignore the guy who is the Playoffs and making an impact?
If you can ignore the playoffs a voter, then why not announce the awards before the playoffs begin? Start voting with a week to go and announce it by the end of the divisional series. If Jeter goes on to lead the Yanks to the World Series, there's no way Ortiz has a shot.
The same is true in the NL. If Pujols can put together an amazing postseason. He batts .400, he leads the Cards to the Series, he wins MVP of the series, then that is going to play apart in who gets the NL MVP. The voter will sit down, look at Howard's name, remember who the Phillies are, and then look at Pujols. He'll think "the regular season wasn't great, but he was amazing in the Series. MVP!"
Also, tell me if this is a good topic. If not, I'll think of something.
|
|
|
Post by blindlywewander on Oct 5, 2006 19:30:00 GMT -5
This is a good topic.
I think rather than changing the announcement of MVP to before the playoffs, they should include the playoffs in the voting or perhaps make two seperate MVP's- regular season and post season. I think the real issue of this debate is how we define MVP. If you think it's 50+ homers in the regular season, then voting should be prior to the playoffs. But if you define MVP the way I do, you include the playoffs. MVP to me is a player that would drastically change the team without him. MVP's are team captains. They're consistent hitters. They are clutch. Their teams win consistently. But added to this, they carry their team into the playoffs. Take Pujols. Without him, the Cards would have nothing. Yeah, Edmonds is okay and they have good players, but Pujols carries that team on his back. With him at the beginning of the season, they started great and many predicted a WS title for St. Louis. When he got hurt, the number in the 'L' Column began to increase and the W's barely moved at all. That makes Pujols a candidate. BUT, if the Cards get knocked out in the first round of the playoffs and Pujols doesn't perform, he doesn't deserve it. Perhaps, as I said before, he'd deserve a regular season award, but MVP should be something different.
Jeter is a perfect example of an MVP. Why? Because his team is in the playoffs. He is the lifeblood of the Yankees. As their captain, he leads their team. When he's off, things just aren't right. He makes plays on defense and swings the bat consistently. He's not prideful. Wins are all he cares about. Ortiz may be a good candidate, but without him, the Red Sox are still the Red Sox. It's hard to think of the Yankees without Jeter, but I can imagine the Sox without Ortiz.
One last thing, if Pujols does what you said.. leads the Cards to the World Series, he deserves two MVP awards. Their pitching is good in St. Louis, but without hitting they can't do anything. Hitting is something they don't have. Now, if Pujols can take a team with poor hitting and turn thim into a WS champ, then he deserves the MVP. Why? Because success in the playoffs.
The title of MVP should include the playoffs. Winning games is more important then numbers. An MVP wins games.
|
|
|
Post by GEO on Oct 6, 2006 13:45:46 GMT -5
They do have two sepearte MVP's. The playoff MVP and the regular season MVP.
Now, why is it fair to count the Playoffs? It's not Ryan Howard's fault the Phillies didn't make it. So why should he be penalized? And going even further: if Pujols has a terrible post-season, does that effect him in a negative way?
|
|
|
Post by BlackOps on Oct 6, 2006 17:50:30 GMT -5
Yes, close your eyes. You can vote on playoff performance, but you better realize and tell yourself you would be a bad voter.
Added distraction, more expectations.
I can't really imagine the Red Sox without Ortiz. Without him, all those game winning/tying RBIs would've given the fans absolutely nothing to root for.
Point? So, because the yankees are America's team, the players should be more valuable? I don't get it. Because they made the playoffs?
I understand that he may have had the best season this year, but if there's any question at all, and knowing he doesn't care, should that be extra incentive to not vote for him?
MVP should be voted for one day before the postseason begins. It should be uncovered a week after. The best player should be voted MVP. You want an MVP, go find the two best players of the two best teams. This is not a school predidential election. It isn't a popularity contest. d**n.
|
|
|
Post by GEO on Oct 6, 2006 21:03:51 GMT -5
I understand where BlackOps is coming from. If the best player is on the Kansas City Royals, he shouldn't be excluded if he doesn't want to win as badly as Jeter. It's not always just about winning, so the playoffs have no effect. Not a bad point.
I'm just wondering what you find wrong with the current system, if you find that the playoffs don't matter, why not just keep the system the same/
|
|
|
Post by rodneychikees on Oct 6, 2006 22:26:26 GMT -5
The Phillies had a fire sale in midseason and GM Pat Gillick said they may not even contend in 2007. The Phillies ended up with 85 wins and narrowly missed the playoffs. That has never happened. Ryan Howard carried the Phillies on his back while the lovey dovey St Louis Cardinals (Scott Rolen's baseball heaven) slipped majorly down the stretch. Why give the award to Pujols when he could not even stop the Cardinals hideous losing streak. He hit a homer on the last day of the season, so what! Where was he during their nearly historic collapse. Meanwhile, in Philly Howard was leading the Phils to the top of the Wild Card standings. Is it really his fault that Rick White blew a game against Houston or that Flash Gordon lost some of his luster down the stretch. Did i mention that is the Phils and Cards were in the same division the Cards would not even be in the postseason. (Phils:85-77, Cards 83-79). Talk about backing in to something. Howard prefers to surge!
|
|
|
Post by GEO on Oct 6, 2006 22:34:29 GMT -5
Good argument for the MVP, but it has nothing to do with the debate.
Are you saying that the Playoffs are completely irreleavant since Pujols couldn't get the cards to 85 wins? You forget that he missed a month of the season.
And if they were in the same division, then they would play each other more, and the Cards would play the Nats more.
|
|
|
Post by blindlywewander on Oct 8, 2006 23:03:01 GMT -5
Every weekend I get busy, don't get on and miss out on a lot of stuff. This is tiring and I don't have the time I want to put into this.
I wasn't aware there was a playoff MVP. I knew there was WS mvp but, I didn't know about the playoffs one.
Regarding the Jeter being the lifeblood argument, it has nothing to do with him being "America's team." He's the best player on the best team in baseball (in my opinion) (disregarding their awful playoff play). That's why he deserves it. The best player on the best team. Two best's>Anyone else. (I used BlackOps's little 'greater than less than crap, haha).
Also, you can't ignore the playoffs. Any conscious person with cable TV is going to watch the playoffs and their voting will be influenced by it.
Finally, I think wins do matter. Wins are the most important part. The most valuable player in the league leads his team to VICTORY. He doesn't hit well just to let them lose. Jeter is a good candidate. So is Pujols. Why? Because they won games. Howard's season ended a while ago. Why? Because even though he hit homers, he didn't lead his team to victory. He homered and his team still lost.
Excuse me if it seems like I'm not 100% into this debate. I'm tired. I've got a lot of work to do, so.. I can't give it my all like I normally do.
|
|
|
Post by GEO on Oct 9, 2006 15:02:48 GMT -5
Sorry, when I said Playoff MVP, I meant WS and ALCS MVP.
Does the Yankees' early exit affect Jeter now?
|
|
|
Post by blindlywewander on Oct 9, 2006 22:51:53 GMT -5
Yes, unfortunately, it does. If another AL player steps up, dominates and leads his team to a WS title, then yes, he should be considered. Wins, to me, are more important. Maybe a tiger will step up? Maybe someone with decent, consistent stats will shine. That will cause more people to look at his regular season stats and even if it 'doesn't count,' his playoff success will gain him votes.
|
|