Red Mosquito

So should the World Series MVP go to whichever player puts up the best stats in the series, regardless of whether or not his team wins as well?

Lament wrote:So should the World Series MVP go to whichever player puts up the best stats in the series, regardless of whether or not his team wins as well?

Absolutely

Lament wrote:So should the World Series MVP go to whichever player puts up the best stats in the series, regardless of whether or not his team wins as well?

Definitely, if he was clearly the best player in the World Series.

I've got green monster seats for tomorrow's Sox game, I've never sat up there so I'm pretty stoked.

philpritchard wrote:

Lament wrote:So should the World Series MVP go to whichever player puts up the best stats in the series, regardless of whether or not his team wins as well?

Definitely, if he was clearly the best player in the World Series.

Now that's just crazy.

numbers wrote:I dont have a problem with giving the award to someone from a bad team if they were far and away better than everyone else, but if it comes down to two guys that are pretty close and one of them is on a good team and one is on a bad team, I couldnt imagine giving it to the guy on the bad team just because his stats are a little bit better.

I don't mind the idea of the playoffs as a tie-breaker, but that's rarely the case. We often see players left off the ballot or bumped much higher than they deserve to be because of where their teams finished.

philpritchard wrote:

numbers wrote:I dont have a problem with giving the award to someone from a bad team if they were far and away better than everyone else, but if it comes down to two guys that are pretty close and one of them is on a good team and one is on a bad team, I couldnt imagine giving it to the guy on the bad team just because his stats are a little bit better.

I don't mind the idea of the playoffs as a tie-breaker, but that's rarely the case. We often see players left off the ballot or bumped much higher than they deserve to be because of where their teams finished.

Would you agree that it's a lot easier to have a good year when your team sucks and your own individual numbers are all you are playing for?

numbers wrote:

philpritchard wrote:

Lament wrote:So should the World Series MVP go to whichever player puts up the best stats in the series, regardless of whether or not his team wins as well?

Definitely, if he was clearly the best player in the World Series.

Now that's just crazy.

Why? To give a ridiculously extreme example: a pitcher throws a no-hitter in game one, a no-hitter in game four and loses game seven 1-0.

Do you give him the MVP? If not, I guess we'll never agree. If so, then it's at least conceivable that a player could perform at a level high enough to win the award without winning the series. If that's the case, then it's just a matter of where you choose to draw that line.

numbers wrote:

philpritchard wrote:

numbers wrote:I dont have a problem with giving the award to someone from a bad team if they were far and away better than everyone else, but if it comes down to two guys that are pretty close and one of them is on a good team and one is on a bad team, I couldnt imagine giving it to the guy on the bad team just because his stats are a little bit better.

I don't mind the idea of the playoffs as a tie-breaker, but that's rarely the case. We often see players left off the ballot or bumped much higher than they deserve to be because of where their teams finished.

Would you agree that it's a lot easier to have a good year when your team sucks and your own individual numbers are all you are playing for?

I wouldn't.

Under that extreme example, I guess I would give it to the losing pitcher, but I'd have to think about it and there would have to be no one on the winning team that had a standout performance.

philpritchard wrote:

numbers wrote:

philpritchard wrote:

numbers wrote:I dont have a problem with giving the award to someone from a bad team if they were far and away better than everyone else, but if it comes down to two guys that are pretty close and one of them is on a good team and one is on a bad team, I couldnt imagine giving it to the guy on the bad team just because his stats are a little bit better.

I don't mind the idea of the playoffs as a tie-breaker, but that's rarely the case. We often see players left off the ballot or bumped much higher than they deserve to be because of where their teams finished.

Would you agree that it's a lot easier to have a good year when your team sucks and your own individual numbers are all you are playing for?

I wouldn't.

I guess we just disagree then, my friend.

Oh and Phil, wtf happened to the jays? I saw the standings yesterday and all of a sudden the orioles are running away with the division.

numbers wrote:

philpritchard wrote:

numbers wrote:

philpritchard wrote:

numbers wrote:I dont have a problem with giving the award to someone from a bad team if they were far and away better than everyone else, but if it comes down to two guys that are pretty close and one of them is on a good team and one is on a bad team, I couldnt imagine giving it to the guy on the bad team just because his stats are a little bit better.

I don't mind the idea of the playoffs as a tie-breaker, but that's rarely the case. We often see players left off the ballot or bumped much higher than they deserve to be because of where their teams finished.

Would you agree that it's a lot easier to have a good year when your team sucks and your own individual numbers are all you are playing for?

I wouldn't.

I guess we just disagree then, my friend.

Fair enough. I think as a whole you would find that the competitiveness of a team has little effect on the fluctuations in an individual player's stats.

numbers wrote:Oh and Phil, wtf happened to the jays? I saw the standings yesterday and all of a sudden the orioles are running away with the division.

I don't want to talk about it.

With the Sox completely out of it, I havent paid as much attention as I normally would to what the other teams in the division are doing, I was just surprised to see that Baltimore has opened up such a lead. Really, if either of those teams made the playoffs they would be the one I am rooting for. I've always liked Baltimore as a baseball city, and the Blue Jays were THE team when I got into baseball and I've always had a soft spot for them.

numbers wrote:With the Sox completely out of it, I havent paid as much attention as I normally would to what the other teams in the division are doing, I was just surprised to see that Baltimore has opened up such a lead. Really, if either of those teams made the playoffs they would be the one I am rooting for. I've always liked Baltimore as a baseball city, and the Blue Jays were THE team when I got into baseball and I've always had a soft spot for them.

It's been a pretty frustrating couple of months. In mid-June the Jays had a six game lead over Baltimore and now they're nine back. That's a pretty dramatic fall in just over two months. They're 4.5 back for the second Wild Card right now, and they definitely have the talent to go on an extend run and get right back into the race, but so much has gone wrong that it can be hard to stay optimistic sometimes.

I think the offense will really pick up up down the stretch now that Lind and Encarnacion are back in the lineup. The top 5 in the lineup is absolutely ridiculous when they're healthy.

philpritchard wrote:

numbers wrote:Oh and Phil, wtf happened to the jays? I saw the standings yesterday and all of a sudden the orioles are running away with the division.

I don't want to talk about it.

Still time but I'm baffled as well. I hope they get hot the next few weeks.

numbers wrote:I'm not really that opposed to the MVP needing to be on a good team thing.

MVP should pretty much go to the guy with the best WAR in the league.

Electromatic wrote:

4/5 wrote:So, uh, Giancarlo Stanton.

"Mike"?

He'll always be Mike to me.

cutuphalfdead wrote:

numbers wrote:I'm not really that opposed to the MVP needing to be on a good team thing.

MVP should pretty much go to the guy with the best WAR in the league.

You can stop blowing Keith Law any second now.