YEAH. Like, it's sad no matter what, but it hits you harder when it's YOUR PLAYER.
Meaning the "everyday player" argument, or the "Cy Young is the pitcher's MVP" argument? I'
HA. Kind of both? My problem is that, as it stands right now, pitchers ARE eligible for the MVP, so I feel like we SHOULD consider them. That said, I do think we probably need two separate awards. I don't think it's fair to compare position players and pitchers. I've seen people suggest separate awards for each and then one overall MVP, but I'm not sure I even like that? They're just too different.
And something I've thought about a lot is how, in a lot of ways, I think there was no more valuable player to his team than Felix Hernandez was for the Mariners in 2010. Now, they lost 101 games, so that also bring in the whole "winning team" argument, BUT he was just THE reason to watch. He carried the Mariners much more so than one guy on a winning team does. I'm not sure if anyone would agree with me, but that's what I think about when people argue about what "valuable" means. (And maybe I'm saying they need to put some actual definitions out there for what "valuable" means.)
Yeah, I think it's good that it's important to win the division! But it sucks that it also means that potentially the team with the second best record has to play in a one game play off. And I know 15 teams in each league makes a lot of sense, but, gosh, I remember disliking interleague play when it first began. And now we're going to have it year round? (Also, I kind of liked the Mariners being in a four team division, hee! Less competition!)
no subject
Meaning the "everyday player" argument, or the "Cy Young is the pitcher's MVP" argument? I'
HA. Kind of both? My problem is that, as it stands right now, pitchers ARE eligible for the MVP, so I feel like we SHOULD consider them. That said, I do think we probably need two separate awards. I don't think it's fair to compare position players and pitchers. I've seen people suggest separate awards for each and then one overall MVP, but I'm not sure I even like that? They're just too different.
And something I've thought about a lot is how, in a lot of ways, I think there was no more valuable player to his team than Felix Hernandez was for the Mariners in 2010. Now, they lost 101 games, so that also bring in the whole "winning team" argument, BUT he was just THE reason to watch. He carried the Mariners much more so than one guy on a winning team does. I'm not sure if anyone would agree with me, but that's what I think about when people argue about what "valuable" means. (And maybe I'm saying they need to put some actual definitions out there for what "valuable" means.)
Yeah, I think it's good that it's important to win the division! But it sucks that it also means that potentially the team with the second best record has to play in a one game play off. And I know 15 teams in each league makes a lot of sense, but, gosh, I remember disliking interleague play when it first began. And now we're going to have it year round? (Also, I kind of liked the Mariners being in a four team division, hee! Less competition!)