The MVP and Team Performance

[Fordgalaxy]

In 1987 Andre Dawson wins the MVP while playing for the last place Cubs. Without his efforts, they'd have been much further behind. Edited October 22, 2019 by Fordgalaxy

[Mithrandir]

In 1987 Andre Dawson wins the MVP while playing for the last place Cubs. Without his efforts, they'd have been much further behind.

So you're saying that he was more valuable to his team than anyone else? My point exactly!

[laughedatbytime]

The team performance shouldn't factor in to the award. Players arent responsible for the ineptitude of their teammates. Why should they be?

I don't think that's the question. To me the question is exceptional performance in a successful team campaign vs exceptional performance that is of no team consequence throughout a season.

 

As I've noted, there are numerous individual awards for statistical performance, MVP should - and traditionally has - reflect outstanding achievement throughout a successful team season.

The award isn't, "MVP from a winning team". Its simply MVP. One can be the most valuable on any team. Trout was the most valuable player in the AL to his team

You keep saying that, yet haven't built a case for it.

I provided the stats. WAR says so. Where is your evidence that Bregman was more valuable?

More runs and rbi? Better batting avg? More walks than strikeouts? Filling in at shortstop when called upon to do so? Contributing 107 wins, vs a guy that only played in 134 total games?

But who was more valuable to his team? It's close, but Trout is more valuable. And that's the name of the award.

Why be objective when you can introduce subjectivity into the equation?

 

Trout's advantage over Cabrera in his triple crown year was far greater than it is over Bregman this year. In fact, according to Fangraphs, Trout was only a tenth of a win better than Bregman this year, so Bregman is a clear choice for Player with the Most Value on the Pennant Winning Team, or what some people call MVP.

[goose]

The team performance shouldn't factor in to the award. Players arent responsible for the ineptitude of their teammates. Why should they be?

I don't think that's the question. To me the question is exceptional performance in a successful team campaign vs exceptional performance that is of no team consequence throughout a season.

 

As I've noted, there are numerous individual awards for statistical performance, MVP should - and traditionally has - reflect outstanding achievement throughout a successful team season.

The award isn't, "MVP from a winning team". Its simply MVP. One can be the most valuable on any team. Trout was the most valuable player in the AL to his team

You keep saying that, yet haven't built a case for it.

I provided the stats. WAR says so. Where is your evidence that Bregman was more valuable?

More runs and rbi? Better batting avg? More walks than strikeouts? Filling in at shortstop when called upon to do so? Contributing 107 wins, vs a guy that only played in 134 total games?

But who was more valuable to his team? It's close, but Trout is more valuable. And that's the name of the award.

A lising record does not reflect value, imo. It's not the best statistical performance award, as you note.

 

[goose]

The team performance shouldn't factor in to the award. Players arent responsible for the ineptitude of their teammates. Why should they be?

I don't think that's the question. To me the question is exceptional performance in a successful team campaign vs exceptional performance that is of no team consequence throughout a season.

 

As I've noted, there are numerous individual awards for statistical performance, MVP should - and traditionally has - reflect outstanding achievement throughout a successful team season.

The award isn't, "MVP from a winning team". Its simply MVP. One can be the most valuable on any team. Trout was the most valuable player in the AL to his team

You keep saying that, yet haven't built a case for it.

I provided the stats. WAR says so. Where is your evidence that Bregman was more valuable?

More runs and rbi? Better batting avg? More walks than strikeouts? Filling in at shortstop when called upon to do so? Contributing 107 wins, vs a guy that only played in 134 total games?

But who was more valuable to his team? It's close, but Trout is more valuable. And that's the name of the award.

Why be objective when you can introduce subjectivity into the equation?

 

Trout's advantage over Cabrera in his triple crown year was far greater than it is over Bregman this year. In fact, according to Fangraphs, Trout was only a tenth of a win better than Bregman this year, so Bregman is a clear choice for Player with the Most Value on the Pennant Winning Team, or what some people call MVP.

Successful team season. Let's not move goalposts.

[laughedatbytime]

The team performance shouldn't factor in to the award. Players arent responsible for the ineptitude of their teammates. Why should they be?

I don't think that's the question. To me the question is exceptional performance in a successful team campaign vs exceptional performance that is of no team consequence throughout a season.

 

As I've noted, there are numerous individual awards for statistical performance, MVP should - and traditionally has - reflect outstanding achievement throughout a successful team season.

The award isn't, "MVP from a winning team". Its simply MVP. One can be the most valuable on any team. Trout was the most valuable player in the AL to his team

You keep saying that, yet haven't built a case for it.

I provided the stats. WAR says so. Where is your evidence that Bregman was more valuable?

More runs and rbi? Better batting avg? More walks than strikeouts? Filling in at shortstop when called upon to do so? Contributing 107 wins, vs a guy that only played in 134 total games?

But who was more valuable to his team? It's close, but Trout is more valuable. And that's the name of the award.

Why be objective when you can introduce subjectivity into the equation?

 

Trout's advantage over Cabrera in his triple crown year was far greater than it is over Bregman this year. In fact, according to Fangraphs, Trout was only a tenth of a win better than Bregman this year, so Bregman is a clear choice for Player with the Most Value on the Pennant Winning Team, or what some people call MVP.

Successful team season. Let's not move goalposts.

What constitutes a "successful team season"?

[goose]

The team performance shouldn't factor in to the award. Players arent responsible for the ineptitude of their teammates. Why should they be?

I don't think that's the question. To me the question is exceptional performance in a successful team campaign vs exceptional performance that is of no team consequence throughout a season.

 

As I've noted, there are numerous individual awards for statistical performance, MVP should - and traditionally has - reflect outstanding achievement throughout a successful team season.

The award isn't, "MVP from a winning team". Its simply MVP. One can be the most valuable on any team. Trout was the most valuable player in the AL to his team

You keep saying that, yet haven't built a case for it.

I provided the stats. WAR says so. Where is your evidence that Bregman was more valuable?

More runs and rbi? Better batting avg? More walks than strikeouts? Filling in at shortstop when called upon to do so? Contributing 107 wins, vs a guy that only played in 134 total games?

But who was more valuable to his team? It's close, but Trout is more valuable. And that's the name of the award.

Why be objective when you can introduce subjectivity into the equation?

 

Trout's advantage over Cabrera in his triple crown year was far greater than it is over Bregman this year. In fact, according to Fangraphs, Trout was only a tenth of a win better than Bregman this year, so Bregman is a clear choice for Player with the Most Value on the Pennant Winning Team, or what some people call MVP.

Successful team season. Let's not move goalposts.

What constitutes a "successful team season"?

.500+ ?

 

 

lol

 

 

 

Edited October 24, 2019 by goose

[Rick N. Backer]

The team performance shouldn't factor in to the award. Players arent responsible for the ineptitude of their teammates. Why should they be?

I don't think that's the question. To me the question is exceptional performance in a successful team campaign vs exceptional performance that is of no team consequence throughout a season.

 

As I've noted, there are numerous individual awards for statistical performance, MVP should - and traditionally has - reflect outstanding achievement throughout a successful team season.

The award isn't, "MVP from a winning team". Its simply MVP. One can be the most valuable on any team. Trout was the most valuable player in the AL to his team

You keep saying that, yet haven't built a case for it.

I provided the stats. WAR says so. Where is your evidence that Bregman was more valuable?

More runs and rbi? Better batting avg? More walks than strikeouts? Filling in at shortstop when called upon to do so? Contributing 107 wins, vs a guy that only played in 134 total games?

But who was more valuable to his team? It's close, but Trout is more valuable. And that's the name of the award.

Why be objective when you can introduce subjectivity into the equation?

 

Trout's advantage over Cabrera in his triple crown year was far greater than it is over Bregman this year. In fact, according to Fangraphs, Trout was only a tenth of a win better than Bregman this year, so Bregman is a clear choice for Player with the Most Value on the Pennant Winning Team, or what some people call MVP.

Successful team season. Let's not move goalposts.

What constitutes a "successful team season"?

 

At least making the post season? What difference does it make, and thus what "value" is added by an individual performance, if a team finishes 10 games out of the playoff chase or 15?

[laughedatbytime]

The team performance shouldn't factor in to the award. Players arent responsible for the ineptitude of their teammates. Why should they be?

I don't think that's the question. To me the question is exceptional performance in a successful team campaign vs exceptional performance that is of no team consequence throughout a season.

 

As I've noted, there are numerous individual awards for statistical performance, MVP should - and traditionally has - reflect outstanding achievement throughout a successful team season.

The award isn't, "MVP from a winning team". Its simply MVP. One can be the most valuable on any team. Trout was the most valuable player in the AL to his team

You keep saying that, yet haven't built a case for it.

I provided the stats. WAR says so. Where is your evidence that Bregman was more valuable?

More runs and rbi? Better batting avg? More walks than strikeouts? Filling in at shortstop when called upon to do so? Contributing 107 wins, vs a guy that only played in 134 total games?

But who was more valuable to his team? It's close, but Trout is more valuable. And that's the name of the award.

Why be objective when you can introduce subjectivity into the equation?

 

Trout's advantage over Cabrera in his triple crown year was far greater than it is over Bregman this year. In fact, according to Fangraphs, Trout was only a tenth of a win better than Bregman this year, so Bregman is a clear choice for Player with the Most Value on the Pennant Winning Team, or what some people call MVP.

Successful team season. Let's not move goalposts.

What constitutes a "successful team season"?

 

At least making the post season? What difference does it make, and thus what "value" is added by an individual performance, if a team finishes 10 games out of the playoff chase or 15?

MVP as a team award. Interesting. But not a true measure of value.

 

Better take that number 9 out of the rafters in Fenway. 15 years or so and only one year where he did anything meaningful. What was Varitek's number? The space is there...

[Rick N. Backer]

The team performance shouldn't factor in to the award. Players arent responsible for the ineptitude of their teammates. Why should they be?

I don't think that's the question. To me the question is exceptional performance in a successful team campaign vs exceptional performance that is of no team consequence throughout a season.

 

As I've noted, there are numerous individual awards for statistical performance, MVP should - and traditionally has - reflect outstanding achievement throughout a successful team season.

The award isn't, "MVP from a winning team". Its simply MVP. One can be the most valuable on any team. Trout was the most valuable player in the AL to his team

You keep saying that, yet haven't built a case for it.

I provided the stats. WAR says so. Where is your evidence that Bregman was more valuable?

More runs and rbi? Better batting avg? More walks than strikeouts? Filling in at shortstop when called upon to do so? Contributing 107 wins, vs a guy that only played in 134 total games?

But who was more valuable to his team? It's close, but Trout is more valuable. And that's the name of the award.

Why be objective when you can introduce subjectivity into the equation?

 

Trout's advantage over Cabrera in his triple crown year was far greater than it is over Bregman this year. In fact, according to Fangraphs, Trout was only a tenth of a win better than Bregman this year, so Bregman is a clear choice for Player with the Most Value on the Pennant Winning Team, or what some people call MVP.

Successful team season. Let's not move goalposts.

What constitutes a "successful team season"?

 

At least making the post season? What difference does it make, and thus what "value" is added by an individual performance, if a team finishes 10 games out of the playoff chase or 15?

MVP as a team award. Interesting. But not a true measure of value.

 

Better take that number 9 out of the rafters in Fenway. 15 years or so and only one year where he did anything meaningful. What was Varitek's number? The space is there...

 

The MVP isn't a "team" award, but I don't think it's completely divorced from team performance. It's an award for the player who brings the most value to his team Is finishing 79-83 ultimately much better than finishing 70-92? And your reference to the retired numbers actually proves my point. Numbers are retired regardless of how the team did, it's an individual honor. Just like the Hall of Fame. How come Brady Anderson didn't win the MVP?

[Mithrandir]

The team performance shouldn't factor in to the award. Players arent responsible for the ineptitude of their teammates. Why should they be?

I don't think that's the question. To me the question is exceptional performance in a successful team campaign vs exceptional performance that is of no team consequence throughout a season.

 

As I've noted, there are numerous individual awards for statistical performance, MVP should - and traditionally has - reflect outstanding achievement throughout a successful team season.

The award isn't, "MVP from a winning team". Its simply MVP. One can be the most valuable on any team. Trout was the most valuable player in the AL to his team

You keep saying that, yet haven't built a case for it.

I provided the stats. WAR says so. Where is your evidence that Bregman was more valuable?

More runs and rbi? Better batting avg? More walks than strikeouts? Filling in at shortstop when called upon to do so? Contributing 107 wins, vs a guy that only played in 134 total games?

But who was more valuable to his team? It's close, but Trout is more valuable. And that's the name of the award.

Why be objective when you can introduce subjectivity into the equation?

 

Trout's advantage over Cabrera in his triple crown year was far greater than it is over Bregman this year. In fact, according to Fangraphs, Trout was only a tenth of a win better than Bregman this year, so Bregman is a clear choice for Player with the Most Value on the Pennant Winning Team, or what some people call MVP.

Successful team season. Let's not move goalposts.

What constitutes a "successful team season"?

 

At least making the post season? What difference does it make, and thus what "value" is added by an individual performance, if a team finishes 10 games out of the playoff chase or 15?

MVP as a team award. Interesting. But not a true measure of value.

 

Better take that number 9 out of the rafters in Fenway. 15 years or so and only one year where he did anything meaningful. What was Varitek's number? The space is there...

 

The MVP isn't a "team" award, but I don't think it's completely divorced from team performance. It's an award for the player who brings the most value to his team Is finishing 79-83 ultimately much better than finishing 70-92? And your reference to the retired numbers actually proves my point. Numbers are retired regardless of how the team did, it's an individual honor. Just like the Hall of Fame. How come Brady Anderson didn't win the MVP?

Trout brought the most value to his team. So by your own words he should win

 

[Rick N. Backer]

The team performance shouldn't factor in to the award. Players arent responsible for the ineptitude of their teammates. Why should they be?

I don't think that's the question. To me the question is exceptional performance in a successful team campaign vs exceptional performance that is of no team consequence throughout a season.

 

As I've noted, there are numerous individual awards for statistical performance, MVP should - and traditionally has - reflect outstanding achievement throughout a successful team season.

The award isn't, "MVP from a winning team". Its simply MVP. One can be the most valuable on any team. Trout was the most valuable player in the AL to his team

You keep saying that, yet haven't built a case for it.

I provided the stats. WAR says so. Where is your evidence that Bregman was more valuable?

More runs and rbi? Better batting avg? More walks than strikeouts? Filling in at shortstop when called upon to do so? Contributing 107 wins, vs a guy that only played in 134 total games?

But who was more valuable to his team? It's close, but Trout is more valuable. And that's the name of the award.

Why be objective when you can introduce subjectivity into the equation?

 

Trout's advantage over Cabrera in his triple crown year was far greater than it is over Bregman this year. In fact, according to Fangraphs, Trout was only a tenth of a win better than Bregman this year, so Bregman is a clear choice for Player with the Most Value on the Pennant Winning Team, or what some people call MVP.

Successful team season. Let's not move goalposts.

What constitutes a "successful team season"?

 

At least making the post season? What difference does it make, and thus what "value" is added by an individual performance, if a team finishes 10 games out of the playoff chase or 15?

MVP as a team award. Interesting. But not a true measure of value.

 

Better take that number 9 out of the rafters in Fenway. 15 years or so and only one year where he did anything meaningful. What was Varitek's number? The space is there...

 

The MVP isn't a "team" award, but I don't think it's completely divorced from team performance. It's an award for the player who brings the most value to his team Is finishing 79-83 ultimately much better than finishing 70-92? And your reference to the retired numbers actually proves my point. Numbers are retired regardless of how the team did, it's an individual honor. Just like the Hall of Fame. How come Brady Anderson didn't win the MVP?

Trout brought the most value to his team. So by your own words he should win

 

What was it? How were the Angels appreciably better this year than they would have been had he not been on the team?

[laughedatbytime]

The team performance shouldn't factor in to the award. Players arent responsible for the ineptitude of their teammates. Why should they be?

I don't think that's the question. To me the question is exceptional performance in a successful team campaign vs exceptional performance that is of no team consequence throughout a season.

 

As I've noted, there are numerous individual awards for statistical performance, MVP should - and traditionally has - reflect outstanding achievement throughout a successful team season.

The award isn't, "MVP from a winning team". Its simply MVP. One can be the most valuable on any team. Trout was the most valuable player in the AL to his team

You keep saying that, yet haven't built a case for it.

I provided the stats. WAR says so. Where is your evidence that Bregman was more valuable?

More runs and rbi? Better batting avg? More walks than strikeouts? Filling in at shortstop when called upon to do so? Contributing 107 wins, vs a guy that only played in 134 total games?

But who was more valuable to his team? It's close, but Trout is more valuable. And that's the name of the award.

Why be objective when you can introduce subjectivity into the equation?

 

Trout's advantage over Cabrera in his triple crown year was far greater than it is over Bregman this year. In fact, according to Fangraphs, Trout was only a tenth of a win better than Bregman this year, so Bregman is a clear choice for Player with the Most Value on the Pennant Winning Team, or what some people call MVP.

Successful team season. Let's not move goalposts.

What constitutes a "successful team season"?

 

At least making the post season? What difference does it make, and thus what "value" is added by an individual performance, if a team finishes 10 games out of the playoff chase or 15?

MVP as a team award. Interesting. But not a true measure of value.

 

Better take that number 9 out of the rafters in Fenway. 15 years or so and only one year where he did anything meaningful. What was Varitek's number? The space is there...

 

The MVP isn't a "team" award, but I don't think it's completely divorced from team performance. It's an award for the player who brings the most value to his team Is finishing 79-83 ultimately much better than finishing 70-92? And your reference to the retired numbers actually proves my point. Numbers are retired regardless of how the team did, it's an individual honor. Just like the Hall of Fame. How come Brady Anderson didn't win the MVP?

Trout brought the most value to his team. So by your own words he should win

 

What was it? How were the Angels appreciably better this year than they would have been had he not been on the team?

They would have been about 9 games worse than they were with him.

Which is more VALUE than any other player contributed to his team in the American League.

[Mithrandir]

The team performance shouldn't factor in to the award. Players arent responsible for the ineptitude of their teammates. Why should they be?

I don't think that's the question. To me the question is exceptional performance in a successful team campaign vs exceptional performance that is of no team consequence throughout a season.

 

As I've noted, there are numerous individual awards for statistical performance, MVP should - and traditionally has - reflect outstanding achievement throughout a successful team season.

The award isn't, "MVP from a winning team". Its simply MVP. One can be the most valuable on any team. Trout was the most valuable player in the AL to his team

You keep saying that, yet haven't built a case for it.

I provided the stats. WAR says so. Where is your evidence that Bregman was more valuable?

More runs and rbi? Better batting avg? More walks than strikeouts? Filling in at shortstop when called upon to do so? Contributing 107 wins, vs a guy that only played in 134 total games?

But who was more valuable to his team? It's close, but Trout is more valuable. And that's the name of the award.

Why be objective when you can introduce subjectivity into the equation?

 

Trout's advantage over Cabrera in his triple crown year was far greater than it is over Bregman this year. In fact, according to Fangraphs, Trout was only a tenth of a win better than Bregman this year, so Bregman is a clear choice for Player with the Most Value on the Pennant Winning Team, or what some people call MVP.

Successful team season. Let's not move goalposts.

What constitutes a "successful team season"?

 

At least making the post season? What difference does it make, and thus what "value" is added by an individual performance, if a team finishes 10 games out of the playoff chase or 15?

MVP as a team award. Interesting. But not a true measure of value.

 

Better take that number 9 out of the rafters in Fenway. 15 years or so and only one year where he did anything meaningful. What was Varitek's number? The space is there...

 

The MVP isn't a "team" award, but I don't think it's completely divorced from team performance. It's an award for the player who brings the most value to his team Is finishing 79-83 ultimately much better than finishing 70-92? And your reference to the retired numbers actually proves my point. Numbers are retired regardless of how the team did, it's an individual honor. Just like the Hall of Fame. How come Brady Anderson didn't win the MVP?

Trout brought the most value to his team. So by your own words he should win

 

What was it? How were the Angels appreciably better this year than they would have been had he not been on the team?

To add to LABT's previous post Trout added 8-9 more wins. Just as many, if not more, than the Astros got from Bregman. And that's playing 22 fewer qames than Bregman. Edited October 26, 2019 by Mithrandir

[Rick N. Backer]

The team performance shouldn't factor in to the award. Players arent responsible for the ineptitude of their teammates. Why should they be?

I don't think that's the question. To me the question is exceptional performance in a successful team campaign vs exceptional performance that is of no team consequence throughout a season.

 

As I've noted, there are numerous individual awards for statistical performance, MVP should - and traditionally has - reflect outstanding achievement throughout a successful team season.

The award isn't, "MVP from a winning team". Its simply MVP. One can be the most valuable on any team. Trout was the most valuable player in the AL to his team

You keep saying that, yet haven't built a case for it.

I provided the stats. WAR says so. Where is your evidence that Bregman was more valuable?

More runs and rbi? Better batting avg? More walks than strikeouts? Filling in at shortstop when called upon to do so? Contributing 107 wins, vs a guy that only played in 134 total games?

But who was more valuable to his team? It's close, but Trout is more valuable. And that's the name of the award.

Why be objective when you can introduce subjectivity into the equation?

 

Trout's advantage over Cabrera in his triple crown year was far greater than it is over Bregman this year. In fact, according to Fangraphs, Trout was only a tenth of a win better than Bregman this year, so Bregman is a clear choice for Player with the Most Value on the Pennant Winning Team, or what some people call MVP.

Successful team season. Let's not move goalposts.

What constitutes a "successful team season"?

 

At least making the post season? What difference does it make, and thus what "value" is added by an individual performance, if a team finishes 10 games out of the playoff chase or 15?

MVP as a team award. Interesting. But not a true measure of value.

 

Better take that number 9 out of the rafters in Fenway. 15 years or so and only one year where he did anything meaningful. What was Varitek's number? The space is there...

 

The MVP isn't a "team" award, but I don't think it's completely divorced from team performance. It's an award for the player who brings the most value to his team Is finishing 79-83 ultimately much better than finishing 70-92? And your reference to the retired numbers actually proves my point. Numbers are retired regardless of how the team did, it's an individual honor. Just like the Hall of Fame. How come Brady Anderson didn't win the MVP?

Trout brought the most value to his team. So by your own words he should win

 

What was it? How were the Angels appreciably better this year than they would have been had he not been on the team?

They would have been about 9 games worse than they were with him.

Which is more VALUE than any other player contributed to his team in the American League.

 

How did that materially change the Angels’ season?

[Rick N. Backer]

The team performance shouldn't factor in to the award. Players arent responsible for the ineptitude of their teammates. Why should they be?

I don't think that's the question. To me the question is exceptional performance in a successful team campaign vs exceptional performance that is of no team consequence throughout a season.

 

As I've noted, there are numerous individual awards for statistical performance, MVP should - and traditionally has - reflect outstanding achievement throughout a successful team season.

The award isn't, "MVP from a winning team". Its simply MVP. One can be the most valuable on any team. Trout was the most valuable player in the AL to his team

You keep saying that, yet haven't built a case for it.

I provided the stats. WAR says so. Where is your evidence that Bregman was more valuable?

More runs and rbi? Better batting avg? More walks than strikeouts? Filling in at shortstop when called upon to do so? Contributing 107 wins, vs a guy that only played in 134 total games?

But who was more valuable to his team? It's close, but Trout is more valuable. And that's the name of the award.

Why be objective when you can introduce subjectivity into the equation?

 

Trout's advantage over Cabrera in his triple crown year was far greater than it is over Bregman this year. In fact, according to Fangraphs, Trout was only a tenth of a win better than Bregman this year, so Bregman is a clear choice for Player with the Most Value on the Pennant Winning Team, or what some people call MVP.

Successful team season. Let's not move goalposts.

What constitutes a "successful team season"?

 

At least making the post season? What difference does it make, and thus what "value" is added by an individual performance, if a team finishes 10 games out of the playoff chase or 15?

MVP as a team award. Interesting. But not a true measure of value.

 

Better take that number 9 out of the rafters in Fenway. 15 years or so and only one year where he did anything meaningful. What was Varitek's number? The space is there...

 

The MVP isn't a "team" award, but I don't think it's completely divorced from team performance. It's an award for the player who brings the most value to his team Is finishing 79-83 ultimately much better than finishing 70-92? And your reference to the retired numbers actually proves my point. Numbers are retired regardless of how the team did, it's an individual honor. Just like the Hall of Fame. How come Brady Anderson didn't win the MVP?

Trout brought the most value to his team. So by your own words he should win

 

What was it? How were the Angels appreciably better this year than they would have been had he not been on the team?

To add to LABT's previous post Trout added 8-9 more wins. Just as many, if not more, than the Astros got from Bregman. And that's playing 22 fewer qames than Bregman.

 

How did that materially change the Angels’ season? I don’t dispute Trout is better than Bregmsn. Was he more valuable to his team?

 

As I said, I think the fact that the award isn’t called “Best All Around Player” is significant.

[laughedatbytime]

The team performance shouldn't factor in to the award. Players arent responsible for the ineptitude of their teammates. Why should they be?

I don't think that's the question. To me the question is exceptional performance in a successful team campaign vs exceptional performance that is of no team consequence throughout a season.

 

As I've noted, there are numerous individual awards for statistical performance, MVP should - and traditionally has - reflect outstanding achievement throughout a successful team season.

The award isn't, "MVP from a winning team". Its simply MVP. One can be the most valuable on any team. Trout was the most valuable player in the AL to his team

You keep saying that, yet haven't built a case for it.

I provided the stats. WAR says so. Where is your evidence that Bregman was more valuable?

More runs and rbi? Better batting avg? More walks than strikeouts? Filling in at shortstop when called upon to do so? Contributing 107 wins, vs a guy that only played in 134 total games?

But who was more valuable to his team? It's close, but Trout is more valuable. And that's the name of the award.

Why be objective when you can introduce subjectivity into the equation?

 

Trout's advantage over Cabrera in his triple crown year was far greater than it is over Bregman this year. In fact, according to Fangraphs, Trout was only a tenth of a win better than Bregman this year, so Bregman is a clear choice for Player with the Most Value on the Pennant Winning Team, or what some people call MVP.

Successful team season. Let's not move goalposts.

What constitutes a "successful team season"?

 

At least making the post season? What difference does it make, and thus what "value" is added by an individual performance, if a team finishes 10 games out of the playoff chase or 15?

MVP as a team award. Interesting. But not a true measure of value.

 

Better take that number 9 out of the rafters in Fenway. 15 years or so and only one year where he did anything meaningful. What was Varitek's number? The space is there...

 

The MVP isn't a "team" award, but I don't think it's completely divorced from team performance. It's an award for the player who brings the most value to his team Is finishing 79-83 ultimately much better than finishing 70-92? And your reference to the retired numbers actually proves my point. Numbers are retired regardless of how the team did, it's an individual honor. Just like the Hall of Fame. How come Brady Anderson didn't win the MVP?

Trout brought the most value to his team. So by your own words he should win

 

What was it? How were the Angels appreciably better this year than they would have been had he not been on the team?

To add to LABT's previous post Trout added 8-9 more wins. Just as many, if not more, than the Astros got from Bregman. And that's playing 22 fewer qames than Bregman.

 

How did that materially change the Angels’ season? I don’t dispute Trout is better than Bregmsn. Was he more valuable to his team?

 

As I said, I think the fact that the award isn’t called “Best All Around Player” is significant.

As a laywer, you should know that words mean things, value being one, and WAR is the purest objective measure of player value there is. Trout contributed more VALUE to his team than Bregman. If you want to give an award to Bregman, that's fine, but it shouldn't be the one with value in the name, at least without additional qualifiers. Most Valuable Player on a Successful Team, for example.

[goose]

The team performance shouldn't factor in to the award. Players arent responsible for the ineptitude of their teammates. Why should they be?

I don't think that's the question. To me the question is exceptional performance in a successful team campaign vs exceptional performance that is of no team consequence throughout a season.

 

As I've noted, there are numerous individual awards for statistical performance, MVP should - and traditionally has - reflect outstanding achievement throughout a successful team season.

The award isn't, "MVP from a winning team". Its simply MVP. One can be the most valuable on any team. Trout was the most valuable player in the AL to his team

You keep saying that, yet haven't built a case for it.

I provided the stats. WAR says so. Where is your evidence that Bregman was more valuable?

More runs and rbi? Better batting avg? More walks than strikeouts? Filling in at shortstop when called upon to do so? Contributing 107 wins, vs a guy that only played in 134 total games?

But who was more valuable to his team? It's close, but Trout is more valuable. And that's the name of the award.

Why be objective when you can introduce subjectivity into the equation?

 

Trout's advantage over Cabrera in his triple crown year was far greater than it is over Bregman this year. In fact, according to Fangraphs, Trout was only a tenth of a win better than Bregman this year, so Bregman is a clear choice for Player with the Most Value on the Pennant Winning Team, or what some people call MVP.

Successful team season. Let's not move goalposts.

What constitutes a "successful team season"?

 

At least making the post season? What difference does it make, and thus what "value" is added by an individual performance, if a team finishes 10 games out of the playoff chase or 15?

MVP as a team award. Interesting. But not a true measure of value.

 

Better take that number 9 out of the rafters in Fenway. 15 years or so and only one year where he did anything meaningful. What was Varitek's number? The space is there...

 

The MVP isn't a "team" award, but I don't think it's completely divorced from team performance. It's an award for the player who brings the most value to his team Is finishing 79-83 ultimately much better than finishing 70-92? And your reference to the retired numbers actually proves my point. Numbers are retired regardless of how the team did, it's an individual honor. Just like the Hall of Fame. How come Brady Anderson didn't win the MVP?

Trout brought the most value to his team. So by your own words he should win

 

What was it? How were the Angels appreciably better this year than they would have been had he not been on the team?

They would have been about 9 games worse than they were with him.

Which is more VALUE than any other player contributed to his team in the American League.

I admire the depth of your faith in numbers.

[Mithrandir]

The team performance shouldn't factor in to the award. Players arent responsible for the ineptitude of their teammates. Why should they be?

I don't think that's the question. To me the question is exceptional performance in a successful team campaign vs exceptional performance that is of no team consequence throughout a season.

 

As I've noted, there are numerous individual awards for statistical performance, MVP should - and traditionally has - reflect outstanding achievement throughout a successful team season.

The award isn't, "MVP from a winning team". Its simply MVP. One can be the most valuable on any team. Trout was the most valuable player in the AL to his team

You keep saying that, yet haven't built a case for it.

I provided the stats. WAR says so. Where is your evidence that Bregman was more valuable?

More runs and rbi? Better batting avg? More walks than strikeouts? Filling in at shortstop when called upon to do so? Contributing 107 wins, vs a guy that only played in 134 total games?

But who was more valuable to his team? It's close, but Trout is more valuable. And that's the name of the award.

Why be objective when you can introduce subjectivity into the equation?

 

Trout's advantage over Cabrera in his triple crown year was far greater than it is over Bregman this year. In fact, according to Fangraphs, Trout was only a tenth of a win better than Bregman this year, so Bregman is a clear choice for Player with the Most Value on the Pennant Winning Team, or what some people call MVP.

Successful team season. Let's not move goalposts.

What constitutes a "successful team season"?

 

At least making the post season? What difference does it make, and thus what "value" is added by an individual performance, if a team finishes 10 games out of the playoff chase or 15?

MVP as a team award. Interesting. But not a true measure of value.

 

Better take that number 9 out of the rafters in Fenway. 15 years or so and only one year where he did anything meaningful. What was Varitek's number? The space is there...

 

The MVP isn't a "team" award, but I don't think it's completely divorced from team performance. It's an award for the player who brings the most value to his team Is finishing 79-83 ultimately much better than finishing 70-92? And your reference to the retired numbers actually proves my point. Numbers are retired regardless of how the team did, it's an individual honor. Just like the Hall of Fame. How come Brady Anderson didn't win the MVP?

Trout brought the most value to his team. So by your own words he should win

 

What was it? How were the Angels appreciably better this year than they would have been had he not been on the team?

They would have been about 9 games worse than they were with him.

Which is more VALUE than any other player contributed to his team in the American League.

 

How did that materially change the Angels’ season?

They won more games. So by your logic is the worst Astros player is more valuable than Trout?

[Mithrandir]

The team performance shouldn't factor in to the award. Players arent responsible for the ineptitude of their teammates. Why should they be?

I don't think that's the question. To me the question is exceptional performance in a successful team campaign vs exceptional performance that is of no team consequence throughout a season.

 

As I've noted, there are numerous individual awards for statistical performance, MVP should - and traditionally has - reflect outstanding achievement throughout a successful team season.

The award isn't, "MVP from a winning team". Its simply MVP. One can be the most valuable on any team. Trout was the most valuable player in the AL to his team

You keep saying that, yet haven't built a case for it.

I provided the stats. WAR says so. Where is your evidence that Bregman was more valuable?

More runs and rbi? Better batting avg? More walks than strikeouts? Filling in at shortstop when called upon to do so? Contributing 107 wins, vs a guy that only played in 134 total games?

But who was more valuable to his team? It's close, but Trout is more valuable. And that's the name of the award.

Why be objective when you can introduce subjectivity into the equation?

 

Trout's advantage over Cabrera in his triple crown year was far greater than it is over Bregman this year. In fact, according to Fangraphs, Trout was only a tenth of a win better than Bregman this year, so Bregman is a clear choice for Player with the Most Value on the Pennant Winning Team, or what some people call MVP.

Successful team season. Let's not move goalposts.

What constitutes a "successful team season"?

 

At least making the post season? What difference does it make, and thus what "value" is added by an individual performance, if a team finishes 10 games out of the playoff chase or 15?

MVP as a team award. Interesting. But not a true measure of value.

 

Better take that number 9 out of the rafters in Fenway. 15 years or so and only one year where he did anything meaningful. What was Varitek's number? The space is there...

 

The MVP isn't a "team" award, but I don't think it's completely divorced from team performance. It's an award for the player who brings the most value to his team Is finishing 79-83 ultimately much better than finishing 70-92? And your reference to the retired numbers actually proves my point. Numbers are retired regardless of how the team did, it's an individual honor. Just like the Hall of Fame. How come Brady Anderson didn't win the MVP?

Trout brought the most value to his team. So by your own words he should win

 

What was it? How were the Angels appreciably better this year than they would have been had he not been on the team?

They would have been about 9 games worse than they were with him.

Which is more VALUE than any other player contributed to his team in the American League.

I admire the depth of your faith in numbers.

So what else do you use?

[Rick N. Backer]

The team performance shouldn't factor in to the award. Players arent responsible for the ineptitude of their teammates. Why should they be?

I don't think that's the question. To me the question is exceptional performance in a successful team campaign vs exceptional performance that is of no team consequence throughout a season.

 

As I've noted, there are numerous individual awards for statistical performance, MVP should - and traditionally has - reflect outstanding achievement throughout a successful team season.

The award isn't, "MVP from a winning team". Its simply MVP. One can be the most valuable on any team. Trout was the most valuable player in the AL to his team

You keep saying that, yet haven't built a case for it.

I provided the stats. WAR says so. Where is your evidence that Bregman was more valuable?

More runs and rbi? Better batting avg? More walks than strikeouts? Filling in at shortstop when called upon to do so? Contributing 107 wins, vs a guy that only played in 134 total games?

But who was more valuable to his team? It's close, but Trout is more valuable. And that's the name of the award.

Why be objective when you can introduce subjectivity into the equation?

 

Trout's advantage over Cabrera in his triple crown year was far greater than it is over Bregman this year. In fact, according to Fangraphs, Trout was only a tenth of a win better than Bregman this year, so Bregman is a clear choice for Player with the Most Value on the Pennant Winning Team, or what some people call MVP.

Successful team season. Let's not move goalposts.

What constitutes a "successful team season"?

 

At least making the post season? What difference does it make, and thus what "value" is added by an individual performance, if a team finishes 10 games out of the playoff chase or 15?

MVP as a team award. Interesting. But not a true measure of value.

 

Better take that number 9 out of the rafters in Fenway. 15 years or so and only one year where he did anything meaningful. What was Varitek's number? The space is there...

 

The MVP isn't a "team" award, but I don't think it's completely divorced from team performance. It's an award for the player who brings the most value to his team Is finishing 79-83 ultimately much better than finishing 70-92? And your reference to the retired numbers actually proves my point. Numbers are retired regardless of how the team did, it's an individual honor. Just like the Hall of Fame. How come Brady Anderson didn't win the MVP?

Trout brought the most value to his team. So by your own words he should win

 

What was it? How were the Angels appreciably better this year than they would have been had he not been on the team?

They would have been about 9 games worse than they were with him.

Which is more VALUE than any other player contributed to his team in the American League.

 

How did that materially change the Angels’ season?

They won more games. So by your logic is the worst Astros player is more valuable than Trout?

 

No, because the worst player on the Astros isn't the reason they won as many games as they did.

[Mithrandir]

The team performance shouldn't factor in to the award. Players arent responsible for the ineptitude of their teammates. Why should they be?

I don't think that's the question. To me the question is exceptional performance in a successful team campaign vs exceptional performance that is of no team consequence throughout a season.

 

As I've noted, there are numerous individual awards for statistical performance, MVP should - and traditionally has - reflect outstanding achievement throughout a successful team season.

The award isn't, "MVP from a winning team". Its simply MVP. One can be the most valuable on any team. Trout was the most valuable player in the AL to his team

You keep saying that, yet haven't built a case for it.

I provided the stats. WAR says so. Where is your evidence that Bregman was more valuable?

More runs and rbi? Better batting avg? More walks than strikeouts? Filling in at shortstop when called upon to do so? Contributing 107 wins, vs a guy that only played in 134 total games?

But who was more valuable to his team? It's close, but Trout is more valuable. And that's the name of the award.

Why be objective when you can introduce subjectivity into the equation?

 

Trout's advantage over Cabrera in his triple crown year was far greater than it is over Bregman this year. In fact, according to Fangraphs, Trout was only a tenth of a win better than Bregman this year, so Bregman is a clear choice for Player with the Most Value on the Pennant Winning Team, or what some people call MVP.

Successful team season. Let's not move goalposts.

What constitutes a "successful team season"?

 

At least making the post season? What difference does it make, and thus what "value" is added by an individual performance, if a team finishes 10 games out of the playoff chase or 15?

MVP as a team award. Interesting. But not a true measure of value.

 

Better take that number 9 out of the rafters in Fenway. 15 years or so and only one year where he did anything meaningful. What was Varitek's number? The space is there...

 

The MVP isn't a "team" award, but I don't think it's completely divorced from team performance. It's an award for the player who brings the most value to his team Is finishing 79-83 ultimately much better than finishing 70-92? And your reference to the retired numbers actually proves my point. Numbers are retired regardless of how the team did, it's an individual honor. Just like the Hall of Fame. How come Brady Anderson didn't win the MVP?

Trout brought the most value to his team. So by your own words he should win

 

What was it? How were the Angels appreciably better this year than they would have been had he not been on the team?

They would have been about 9 games worse than they were with him.

Which is more VALUE than any other player contributed to his team in the American League.

 

How did that materially change the Angels’ season?

They won more games. So by your logic is the worst Astros player is more valuable than Trout?

 

No, because the worst player on the Astros isn't the reason they won as many games as they did.

So if two or more players are in a virtual dead heat, the player from the better team always wins? That seems counterintuitive because the better team usually has better players in addition to the MVP candidates. Edited October 26, 2019 by Mithrandir

[laughedatbytime]

The team performance shouldn't factor in to the award. Players arent responsible for the ineptitude of their teammates. Why should they be?

I don't think that's the question. To me the question is exceptional performance in a successful team campaign vs exceptional performance that is of no team consequence throughout a season.

 

As I've noted, there are numerous individual awards for statistical performance, MVP should - and traditionally has - reflect outstanding achievement throughout a successful team season.

The award isn't, "MVP from a winning team". Its simply MVP. One can be the most valuable on any team. Trout was the most valuable player in the AL to his team

You keep saying that, yet haven't built a case for it.

I provided the stats. WAR says so. Where is your evidence that Bregman was more valuable?

More runs and rbi? Better batting avg? More walks than strikeouts? Filling in at shortstop when called upon to do so? Contributing 107 wins, vs a guy that only played in 134 total games?

But who was more valuable to his team? It's close, but Trout is more valuable. And that's the name of the award.

Why be objective when you can introduce subjectivity into the equation?

 

Trout's advantage over Cabrera in his triple crown year was far greater than it is over Bregman this year. In fact, according to Fangraphs, Trout was only a tenth of a win better than Bregman this year, so Bregman is a clear choice for Player with the Most Value on the Pennant Winning Team, or what some people call MVP.

Successful team season. Let's not move goalposts.

What constitutes a "successful team season"?

 

At least making the post season? What difference does it make, and thus what "value" is added by an individual performance, if a team finishes 10 games out of the playoff chase or 15?

MVP as a team award. Interesting. But not a true measure of value.

 

Better take that number 9 out of the rafters in Fenway. 15 years or so and only one year where he did anything meaningful. What was Varitek's number? The space is there...

 

The MVP isn't a "team" award, but I don't think it's completely divorced from team performance. It's an award for the player who brings the most value to his team Is finishing 79-83 ultimately much better than finishing 70-92? And your reference to the retired numbers actually proves my point. Numbers are retired regardless of how the team did, it's an individual honor. Just like the Hall of Fame. How come Brady Anderson didn't win the MVP?

Trout brought the most value to his team. So by your own words he should win

 

What was it? How were the Angels appreciably better this year than they would have been had he not been on the team?

They would have been about 9 games worse than they were with him.

Which is more VALUE than any other player contributed to his team in the American League.

 

How did that materially change the Angels’ season?

They won more games. So by your logic is the worst Astros player is more valuable than Trout?

 

No, because the worst player on the Astros isn't the reason they won as many games as they did.

So if two or more players are in a virtual dead heat, the player from the better team always wins? That seems counterintuitive because the better team usually has better players in addition to the MVP candidates.

Sorry, but for a consistent argument, you have to declare co-MVPs. Anything else and you bring team/teammate quality into an argument for the individually best player.

[goose]

The team performance shouldn't factor in to the award. Players arent responsible for the ineptitude of their teammates. Why should they be?

I don't think that's the question. To me the question is exceptional performance in a successful team campaign vs exceptional performance that is of no team consequence throughout a season.

 

As I've noted, there are numerous individual awards for statistical performance, MVP should - and traditionally has - reflect outstanding achievement throughout a successful team season.

The award isn't, "MVP from a winning team". Its simply MVP. One can be the most valuable on any team. Trout was the most valuable player in the AL to his team

You keep saying that, yet haven't built a case for it.

I provided the stats. WAR says so. Where is your evidence that Bregman was more valuable?

More runs and rbi? Better batting avg? More walks than strikeouts? Filling in at shortstop when called upon to do so? Contributing 107 wins, vs a guy that only played in 134 total games?

But who was more valuable to his team? It's close, but Trout is more valuable. And that's the name of the award.

Why be objective when you can introduce subjectivity into the equation?

 

Trout's advantage over Cabrera in his triple crown year was far greater than it is over Bregman this year. In fact, according to Fangraphs, Trout was only a tenth of a win better than Bregman this year, so Bregman is a clear choice for Player with the Most Value on the Pennant Winning Team, or what some people call MVP.

Successful team season. Let's not move goalposts.

What constitutes a "successful team season"?

 

At least making the post season? What difference does it make, and thus what "value" is added by an individual performance, if a team finishes 10 games out of the playoff chase or 15?

MVP as a team award. Interesting. But not a true measure of value.

 

Better take that number 9 out of the rafters in Fenway. 15 years or so and only one year where he did anything meaningful. What was Varitek's number? The space is there...

 

The MVP isn't a "team" award, but I don't think it's completely divorced from team performance. It's an award for the player who brings the most value to his team Is finishing 79-83 ultimately much better than finishing 70-92? And your reference to the retired numbers actually proves my point. Numbers are retired regardless of how the team did, it's an individual honor. Just like the Hall of Fame. How come Brady Anderson didn't win the MVP?

Trout brought the most value to his team. So by your own words he should win

 

What was it? How were the Angels appreciably better this year than they would have been had he not been on the team?

They would have been about 9 games worse than they were with him.

Which is more VALUE than any other player contributed to his team in the American League.

 

How did that materially change the Angels’ season?

They won more games. So by your logic is the worst Astros player is more valuable than Trout?

 

No, because the worst player on the Astros isn't the reason they won as many games as they did.

So if two or more players are in a virtual dead heat, the player from the better team always wins? That seems counterintuitive because the better team usually has better players in addition to the MVP candidates.

Better season-long performances.

 

Add World Series grand slam to Bregman's case for MVP. How'd Trout do today?

[Mithrandir]

Post season performance now counts in the award?

 

I guess having Altuve. Springer, Correa, Gurriel. Cole and Verlander didnt really contribute to the Astros success

Bregman was their lone star!

Edited October 27, 2019 by Mithrandir