Nl mvp

[Gregg]

I win!

Yes you did! Congrats.

Now who is the best NL sleeper this year?

[heyelander]

I win!

[Bene Futuis]

Trea Turner got the mega screw job - he wasn't even named at all on two of the ballots! WTF

[Bene Futuis]

Coming from the guy who left Brandan Crawford off the poll. That is who should win IMO and honestly it makes no sense that he isn't listed.

Crawford, who was in no way ever deserving of the MVP imo, finished 4th primarily because of the trainwreck ballots submitted by San Fran homers. Susan Slusser in particular - yeesh. She had Crawford 1st, Harper 5th, and Soto 6th!


The ballots are especially crazy this year, it seems.

[Bene Futuis]

Harper wins it, becoming only the second player in baseball history to win 2 MVPs with two different teams before the age of 30.

[DMT]

Every time a poll like this gets posted, a significant amount of respondents answer how they think the voters will respond. The question is who *should* win the MVP, not who you think others will vote for based on archaic and arbitrary concepts of "in the playoff hunt" or switching leagues. Go bold! Blaze your own path! Vote for who *you* think deserves it!

Coming from the guy who left Brandan Crawford off the poll. That is who should win IMO and honestly it makes no sense that he isn't listed.

[Bene Futuis]

Every time a poll like this gets posted, a significant amount of respondents answer how they think the voters will respond. The question is who *should* win the MVP, not who you think others will vote for based on archaic and arbitrary concepts of "in the playoff hunt" or switching leagues. Go bold! Blaze your own path! Vote for who *you* think deserves it!

[Todd Zola]

A few reasons:
- an MVP should have 'helped' the club win all season long; or, if not, been the spark of a tremendous run (i.e. Sutcliffe, McGwire, Sabathia, etc). You've said you don't think 'helping a club win' is a factor, so this probably doesn't mean anything to you, but it does to many, including those who vote;
- It's arguable which late-season Dodger acquisition helped them more - Turner or Scherzer;
- The Dodgers have many players who were MVP candidates pre-Turner's acquisition, such as Muncy & Bueller. They could dilute the "Dodger" vote;
- an MVP has never been traded in-season. Of course, that could change, but that plays directly into the "helping your team win" idea. But that said, what if Turner was traded to an AL team instead of an NL team? Would he still be an MVP candidate? If not, why not, since you're just judging based on his overall stats?

My answer to the first three is my interpretation of value is irrespective of how it influences the team's stead. I realize it's non-conventional, but I'm not alone.

The fourth is a flaw with the system with players switching leagues. That said, it's better for promotional purposes to have recipients in each league, so the trade-off is the odd "CC Sabathia" type year.

[revo]

The Hank Aaron Award is for the best hitter, not overall player. Even so, that doesn't answer why Turner's case is hurt by playing for two NL clubs.

A few reasons:
- an MVP should have 'helped' the club win all season long; or, if not, been the spark of a tremendous run (i.e. Sutcliffe, McGwire, Sabathia, etc). You've said you don't think 'helping a club win' is a factor, so this probably doesn't mean anything to you, but it does to many, including those who vote;
- It's arguable which late-season Dodger acquisition helped them more - Turner or Scherzer;
- The Dodgers have many players who were MVP candidates pre-Turner's acquisition, such as Muncy & Bueller. They could dilute the "Dodger" vote;
- an MVP has never been traded in-season. Of course, that could change, but that plays directly into the "helping your team win" idea. But that said, what if Turner was traded to an AL team instead of an NL team? Would he still be an MVP candidate? If not, why not, since you're just judging based on his overall stats?

[chancellor]

I can understand a "best overall player" philosophy, but I just don't believe that *always* wins the award these days

Yup, this. Clearly, the winner needs to be a great player - and the NL MVP race has a good number of them. But the fame component will factor in too, and Tatis leads this field going away in charisma and fame.

[Todd Zola]

I can understand a "best overall player" philosophy, but I just don't believe that *always* wins the award these days (and they have the Hank Aaron award for that), and often in the past it hasn't. I don't think that's changed much.

The Hank Aaron Award is for the best hitter, not overall player. Even so, that doesn't answer why Turner's case is hurt by playing for two NL clubs.

[revo]

Why? it shouldn't have any bearing.

In full disclosure, I'm in the camp that the MVP does not need to play for a playoff-bound team. I see it as most outstanding player - or just the best player.

I can understand a "best overall player" philosophy, but I just don't believe that *always* wins the award these days (and they have the Hank Aaron award for that), and often in the past it hasn't. I don't think that's changed much.

[Gregg]

I know defence takes a back seat in these decisions, but it shouldn't.

That's enough for me to move Turner above Tatis.

Yes it should come into play for MVP in the NL. It was my tie breaker to vote Turner as well.

[harmon]

I know defence takes a back seat in these decisions, but it shouldn't.

That's enough for me to move Turner above Tatis.

[Todd Zola]

Trea had a fantastic season, but being split between two teams hurts him a bit.

Why? it shouldn't have any bearing.

In full disclosure, I'm in the camp that the MVP does not need to play for a playoff-bound team. I see it as most outstanding player - or just the best player.