LogFAQs > #909843341

I am hopeful with Stanton winning last year (and Votto in 2nd), that the voters are shifting back more towards best overall player. I think deGrom's pitcher status is a bigger hurdle to get over here, than the fact he comes from a losing team. Because there is an inherent value inequality in pitchers and hitters, and that is definitely difficult to judge and a huge part of that MVP subjectivity, as long as the V is properly defined.

Aside:
[Although, that one you can better examine by looking at At Bats effected instead of just games played or innings played (ie, a pitcher deals with say 25 ABs a game every 5 games, plus defensive chances and a batter deals with 4-5 ABs a game, plus defensive chances... but not arguing this facet of it now lol)]

Un-aside:
Stanton won last year, with Votto 2nd. That's a fact. That's what the voters have collectively decided in 2017 was "the most value". You can disagree of course, but people are voting for him. So what barrier decides when it is "ok" to vote for someone from a losing team? There shouldn't be one, My main point is that isn't it more impactful and meaningful to give an award to "the best player" as opposed to abunch of weird criteria involving teammates? Don't you just want to see "the best player period" get recognized? (On this note, I think there should also be a more publicized "Best Overall Hitter" award, much like there is a Cy Young... there is one, the Hank Aaron award, but its not BBWAA, so no one cares about it).

People have what they want MVP to mean, but it is laid out what it actually means (article mentions this too, but gears it towards pitcher vs hitter). And although it says "to the team", you provide the same value to the team no matter if that teams wins or loses the game. You give your team X more or less chance of winning by putting the performance you did out there.

A pitcher who goes 6 innings and gives up 0 runs but his team loses the game contributed more value to his team than a pitcher who goes 6 innings and gives up 1 run, but his team wins the game anyway.

This is all about the interpretation of value, with the popular belief that a player provides minimal value when his team is out of the hunt. But if you want to look even closer, why not fold in the players salary, too? Is that not a part of the players presence on the roster? You can make a good argument that salary ought to be included, as well, but nobody wants that. What if a player is a particularly good box-office draw? Theres no appetite for this. Nobody wants to have to think about these other factors. So keeping it just on the field, its true that every team is trying to make the playoffs, but its also true that every team is trying to win every game. Every game is of import. Even the Mets games in September mattered.

(I posted this before your post but I will respond to that too just wanted to get this in)
---

~Wigs~ Dp Guru Wins over Me: 1, Fantasy Baseball Wins over Dp: 3
2015 NATIONAL LEAGUE CHAMPION NEW YORK METS