Chicago Fanatics Message Board :: View topic

It's not the best player award. It's not an award for the best player on the best team. It's not an award for the best player under pressure. Or is it one of those? WTF is this award? The fact is, it's all of them and none of them. It depends what year it is. If it's the best player on the best team award then why would anyone on a team that doesn't make the playoffs even get a vote? If it's an award for the best player under pressure then why have players won the award with less than stellar Septembers?
This award, along with the Heisman (although I think this award is "supposed" to be for the most outstanding college player...but it's not), has as many explanations for winning the award as there are voters for the award. Having a clear idea what the award is presented for wouldn't eliminate debate but it would eliminate the confusion. And since the writers are also the voters, I don't see anything being done about it ever since the way it is now gives writers much more to write about. Plus, since there's no clear criteria, writers are free to vote with hometown/regional biases and used whatever justification they choose. I think Rick Telander voted for the a backup running back at Miami and an incoming freshman running back at Miami one year just so he'd have something to write about (plus he's a hack and an arrogant prick). The awards are nice but the process is a joke.

Author:	Keyser Soze [ Mon Nov 17, 2008 2:00 pm ]
Post subject:	NL MVP
I'm sure Pujols will win but it should go to Ryan Howard. Anyone winning the MVP playing on a team that doesn't go to the playoffs is a crock of shit.

Author:	rogers park bryan [ Mon Nov 17, 2008 2:04 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: NL MVP
Keyser Soze wrote: I'm sure Pujols will win but it should go to Ryan Howard. Anyone winning the MVP playing on a team that doesn't go to the playoffs is a crock of shit.

Author:	man of few opinions [ Mon Nov 17, 2008 2:07 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: NL MVP
i dont get or agree with the argument that the most valuable player can only play on a playoff team. why cant a great player on a good or even horrible team win MVP?

Author:	RFDC [ Mon Nov 17, 2008 2:11 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: NL MVP
Yeah it is an award about the regular season, not the playoffs.

Author:	Keyser Soze [ Mon Nov 17, 2008 2:20 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: NL MVP
It's not the best player award. It's an award for the player that plays the best under pressure. It's alot easier to come to the ballpark everyday and put up huge numbers if there's nothing on the line. The Phillies were in a dog fight with the Mets and every at bat mattered. Howard hit .352 11 HR's 32 RBI and 26 runs scored in September! He carried his team into the post season and there is nothing more VALUABLE than that.

Chicago Fanatics Message Board https://mail.chicagofanatics.com/

NL MVP https://mail.chicagofanatics.com/viewtopic.php?f=92&t=26610	Page 1 of 1

Author:	Keyser Soze [ Mon Nov 17, 2008 2:45 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: NL MVP
If it were a best player award it would be called the 'Babe Ruth award' or the 'Hank Aaron award' (oh wait they already have that!). Nobody is denying that Pujols is a great player but the Cards suck with or without him. This used to be a unique award but the stupid lazy sportswriters put an end to that.

Author:	WestmontMike [ Mon Nov 17, 2008 2:57 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: NL MVP
It's not the best player award. It's not an award for the best player on the best team. It's not an award for the best player under pressure. Or is it one of those? WTF is this award? The fact is, it's all of them and none of them. It depends what year it is. If it's the best player on the best team award then why would anyone on a team that doesn't make the playoffs even get a vote? If it's an award for the best player under pressure then why have players won the award with less than stellar Septembers? This award, along with the Heisman (although I think this award is "supposed" to be for the most outstanding college player...but it's not), has as many explanations for winning the award as there are voters for the award. Having a clear idea what the award is presented for wouldn't eliminate debate but it would eliminate the confusion. And since the writers are also the voters, I don't see anything being done about it ever since the way it is now gives writers much more to write about. Plus, since there's no clear criteria, writers are free to vote with hometown/regional biases and used whatever justification they choose. I think Rick Telander voted for the a backup running back at Miami and an incoming freshman running back at Miami one year just so he'd have something to write about (plus he's a hack and an arrogant prick). The awards are nice but the process is a joke.

Author:	Keyser Soze [ Mon Nov 17, 2008 3:11 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: NL MVP
If the Cy Young were called the Most Valuable Pitchers award would Tim Lincecum still win?

Author:	SHARK [ Mon Nov 17, 2008 3:16 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: NL MVP
I think this was simply a regular season award, but I thought the Phillies' Ryan Howard was a lot more valuable to the new World Champions than Albert Pujols was for a Cardinals team that was out of the race around Labor Day.

Page 1 of 1	All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group https://www.phpbb.com/

Author:	man of few opinions [ Mon Nov 17, 2008 3:24 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: NL MVP
again, i have no argument with ryan howard - he may well win and deserve it, but due to the confusion about what the award should be awarding, in some cases i think pujols is more deserving. yes, his team was done by labor day, but it was largely because of him that they were in it THAT long, and he never had a huge slump where he was killing his team with K's like howard had, he has constantly hitting and hitting and hitting. howard was KILLING his team early in the year. he came up big in september, absolutely, when it counts, and he derves accolades for that, but to me that doesnt completely overshadow his horrible start, especially when you have another guy who brought it day after day constantly.