Crosby is a very good player, I think he could be the MVP on his TEAM, but not in the AL.
I think the whole MVP award should be renamed from "Most Valuable Player" to "Best Player" or something like that. Most valuable means the player does the most for his team and means the most to them, thus numbers should not matter as much. When Crosby played last year the A's were fantastic, when he was gone they barely won games, that means he is thei "Most VALUABLE player" since they cannot survive without his stats and presense. On the contrary, if you are talking BEST player in terms of stats (as the MVP award is taken into account for) you don't consider his achievements for hsi team since its really all about the BEST PLAYER and thus he is overlooked.
You know why Payton Manning in not an "MVP", its because his team would have made it to the playoffs with David Carr in center since the rest of the lineup was absolutely fantastic. He does have the BEST numbers though and thus he is awarded.
I think the entire award name should be changed because as is we are not rewarding most valuable players, we are simply rewarding the best players.
After all that, Bobby Crosby will not win the award but I see great numbers from him either way.
Sean Tracey has my apologies, we all know Ozzie Guillen is an idiot. I'm rooting for you!
I think the whole MVP award should be renamed from "Most Valuable Player" to "Best Player"
OR, they should actually start giving out the MVP award to the right guy instead of the person with the best numbers that mean absolutely nothing to his team's success.
"The government cannot give to anyone anything that it does not first take from someone else"
I think the whole MVP award should be renamed from "Most Valuable Player" to "Best Player"
OR, they should actually start giving out the MVP award to the right guy instead of the person with the best numbers that mean absolutely nothing to his team's success.
If the guy has the best numbers, how can he not mean anything to his team's success? It's not his fault his teammates are awful.
If the guy has the best numbers, how can he not mean anything to his team's success? It's not his fault his teammates are awful.
1. If his team sucks, who cares about his numbers
2. Great players elevate the play of their teammates and make their teams relevant.
3. If you take the money to play for a crappy team, you don't deserve MVP.
4. Its a heck of a lot easier to get good numbers when your team is out of the race.
Absolute nonsense. If Albert Pujols is traded to the Royals, he isn't any less valuable to the Royals then he is to the Cardinals. He's the franchise cornerstone either way. Baseball is a team sport. The only way one player can make the difference in contending is if the rest of his team is strong enough to get him to that point, which has nothing to do with the aforementioned player.
Absolute nonsense. If Albert Pujols is traded to the Royals, he isn't any less valuable to the Royals then he is to the Cardinals. He's the franchise cornerstone either way. Baseball is a team sport. The only way one player can make the difference in contending is if the rest of his team is strong enough to get him to that point, which has nothing to do with the aforementioned player.
Boy, no offense, but that was a crappy comparison. Let's see, where to begin - first off, Pujols getting traded to a poor team would be different than him signing with a crappy team for the most $$$. Second of all - I'm not saying that playing for a bad team disqualifies a guy from winning MVP - IF he has raised that team's play to a new level and gotten them into contention. There are plenty of examples of guys who carried a mediocre team on his back into a playoff race. That is an MVP - not someone who posts fantastic numbers as his team lingers in last place. If Pujols were traded to KC - I bet they'd improve noticably and he'd prove my point.[/b]
"The government cannot give to anyone anything that it does not first take from someone else"