|
|
|||||||
| View Poll Results: Is "going steady" cool? | |||
| Yes, always has been and always will be. |
   
|
2 | 28.57% |
| No, it's not 1993 anymore |
  
|
5 | 71.43% |
| Voters: 7. You may not vote on this poll | |||
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#71
09-05-2007, 05:41 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: NL MVP
Historical question:
I have no doubt that in the past couple of decades, at least, voters have been much more inclined to give the MVP award to player on a playoff team. But I wonder whether the same tendency occurred before divisional play began. With divisional play - and the addition of wildcard teams - I think an argument can be made that it makes more sense now to consider whether a team made the playoffs, or at least was a serious contender. Also, I don't think the factor of a team's success is merely a matter of giving the MVP candidate credit for propelling his team to the playoffs. To some degree, I think that voters understandably discount the performance of a player who amasses huge numbers outside the pressure of a playoff race. In other words, we take into account the team's performance not because we assume the candidate is responsible for the team's success, but also because he is accomplishing under a lot more pressure. 
|
|
#72
09-05-2007, 06:47 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: NL MVP
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Wow, this post is so stupid it is hilarious. Please tell me this is a level. [/ QUOTE ] Gibson .290 25hrs 76 rbi 130 OPS+ McReynolds .288 27hrs 99rbi 142 OPS+ Strawberry .269 39hrs 101rbi 165 OPS+ Why did Gibson win? [/ QUOTE ] I was referring mainly to this part: "Baseball is a team game. Wins and Losses are all that matter. If you went 5-5 with 5 homeruns and your team lost, then you were not the most valuable player of that game. If you went 5-5 with 5 homeruns and 5 rbi and your team won 5-4 then you were the most valuable player of that game. The rest of the team was valuable for only allowing 4 runs, playing defense, and supporting you so that you could go 5-5. The team won the game, and you were the most valuable player on the team." Edit: bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahaahahahahahahah ahahahahahaha [/ QUOTE ] i was exagerating. He asked a ridiculous question so i gave an exagerated answer. [ QUOTE ] Ok, then explain to me what the phrase "baseball is a team game" means, and do it in a way that allows us to say a single player is the best because his team makes the playoffs. [/ QUOTE ]
|
|
#73
09-05-2007, 06:53 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: NL MVP
[ QUOTE ]
metsandfinsfan, You agree that in the AL, the MVP MUST play on the WC team correct? Also, The Mets will probably make the playoffs by over 5 games, thus by your logic Wright has ABSOLUTELY NO CHANCE of deserving to win the MVP. [/ QUOTE ] I didnt say that you guys just love to put words in peoples mouths I think The MVP could come from a contending team that just misses if he helped his team win a lot of games sure. It should not go to someone on a less than .500 team when over 25% of teams make the playoffs in my opinion Of course there are exceptions. Giving it to anyone but Bonds in 2001 would have been pretty ludicrous. But again, the Mets are in first place. Would they be there without David Wright? No way. And the voters take that into account, whether you agree or disagree [ QUOTE ] wow metsandfinsfan might be dumber than vyse [/ QUOTE ] i cannot believe i am being called stupid for stating my opinions. I'm willing to debate and everything but i kindly ask for no personal attacks. I also have not said David Wright should win it hands down either. I listed fielder and admitted that even if the Brewers fall short, he deserves a lot of consideration for taking the team as far as he did. You guys are acting like I said the MVP has to always come from a team that wins by 2 games, or a division winner, or as somebody said the wild card. I never said any of that nonesense. I said that the voters take how the team did greatly into consideration when voting, and I agree with that. I also said that the Hank Aaron award should get more recognition as it goes to the best hitter, and then maybe there would be less controversy about the MVP
|
|
#74
09-05-2007, 06:57 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: NL MVP
God I hate the MVP award, they need to get rid of that damn thing. Just replace it with John Madden's Turducken and just give legs to everyone who had a "good" year
|
|
#75
09-05-2007, 07:07 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: NL MVP
Can we please rename the award "Player of the Year" and get rid of all this crap debate about what "valuable" means? It's looooooong overdue.
IMO, the question to the voters should be "Who is the best player this year in the NL/AL?"
|
|
#77
09-06-2007, 03:27 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: NL MVP
[ QUOTE ]
wow metsandfinsfan might be dumber than vyse [/ QUOTE ] lol @ me owning you so badly you consistently find ways to bring up my name in threads. plz keep me off your mind. I know it's hard. Just focus on your burgeoning athletic career [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]
|
|
#78
09-06-2007, 11:52 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: NL MVP
so right now we have it wright/utley/fielder
good chance that's how it really goes i would think
|
|
#79
09-06-2007, 02:01 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: NL MVP
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] wow metsandfinsfan might be dumber than vyse [/ QUOTE ] i cannot believe i am being called stupid for stating my opinions. I'm willing to debate and everything but i kindly ask for no personal attacks. [/ QUOTE ] I think it is just his opinion that you are dumber than vyse. I don't know vyse, but I agree.
|
|
#80
09-06-2007, 03:38 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: NL MVP
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] metsandfinsfan, You agree that in the AL, the MVP MUST play on the WC team correct? Also, The Mets will probably make the playoffs by over 5 games, thus by your logic Wright has ABSOLUTELY NO CHANCE of deserving to win the MVP. [/ QUOTE ] I didnt say that you guys just love to put words in peoples mouths I think The MVP could come from a contending team that just misses if he helped his team win a lot of games sure. It should not go to someone on a less than .500 team when over 25% of teams make the playoffs in my opinion Of course there are exceptions. Giving it to anyone but Bonds in 2001 would have been pretty ludicrous. But again, the Mets are in first place. Would they be there without David Wright? No way. And the voters take that into account, whether you agree or disagree [ QUOTE ] wow metsandfinsfan might be dumber than vyse [/ QUOTE ] i cannot believe i am being called stupid for stating my opinions. I'm willing to debate and everything but i kindly ask for no personal attacks. I also have not said David Wright should win it hands down either. I listed fielder and admitted that even if the Brewers fall short, he deserves a lot of consideration for taking the team as far as he did. You guys are acting like I said the MVP has to always come from a team that wins by 2 games, or a division winner, or as somebody said the wild card. I never said any of that nonesense. I said that the voters take how the team did greatly into consideration when voting, and I agree with that. I also said that the Hank Aaron award should get more recognition as it goes to the best hitter, and then maybe there would be less controversy about the MVP [/ QUOTE ] If the Mets end up winning the division by 6 or 7 games, then they most certainly would have "been there without Wright." He doesn't add more wins than that. So, he is essentially completely valueless to his team. Also, 25% of teams make the playoffs? What?
|
|
|
|
Linear Mode
