Cabrera won MVP Topic

Whatevs

11/15/2013 1:54 PM
I told you it was hard to understand.
11/15/2013 1:57 PM
Posted by bad_luck on 11/15/2013 1:54:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 11/15/2013 1:13:00 PM (view original):
Value is a fluid word.   If I have 10 apples, another apple has little value to me.    If you're starving, that apple I don't want is your salvation. 

Good players on bad teams might not provide value to some people.    Not sure what's so hard to understand.
So did the Tigers had 10 apples and the Angels were starving?

Or...???

 
Whatevs??? You don't want to explain your analogy?
11/15/2013 1:58 PM
This post has a rating of , which is below the default threshold.
Fine, better analogy.  And if you don't understand, I'm sorry.

I need to raise $100 to be able to get X.  My goal is to get X.  I get $ from a lot of people, the most someone gave me is $25.  I reach my goal of $100, exactly on the nose.

Someone else also needs to raise $100 to be able to get X.  You give this person $50.  Alas, he only raised $90, so this person could not get X.  While you gave the most amount of $ overall, the $25 that I received was MORE VALUABLE to me than the $50 was to someone else.

There are people who feel this way when voting for MVP.  If the goal is to make the playoffs (and it should be for every team) then Cabrera was more valuable to the Tigers than Trout was to the Angels.
11/15/2013 2:03 PM
Wow, look who's into personal attacks now.

I'm just asking for clarification on your analogy that an apple is MORE VALUABLE to a starving person than it is to someone who already has a bunch of really good apples.

 
11/15/2013 2:03 PM
Posted by burnsy483 on 11/15/2013 1:57:00 PM (view original):
I told you it was hard to understand.
Not really.   What's valuable to you may hold no value to me.   I don't care about your relationship with your parents.  I imagine you do.

The MVP is a vote where individuals define "value". 
11/15/2013 2:04 PM
Posted by burnsy483 on 11/15/2013 2:04:00 PM (view original):
Fine, better analogy.  And if you don't understand, I'm sorry.

I need to raise $100 to be able to get X.  My goal is to get X.  I get $ from a lot of people, the most someone gave me is $25.  I reach my goal of $100, exactly on the nose.

Someone else also needs to raise $100 to be able to get X.  You give this person $50.  Alas, he only raised $90, so this person could not get X.  While you gave the most amount of $ overall, the $25 that I received was MORE VALUABLE to me than the $50 was to someone else.

There are people who feel this way when voting for MVP.  If the goal is to make the playoffs (and it should be for every team) then Cabrera was more valuable to the Tigers than Trout was to the Angels.
Would you trade the $25 dollar donation for the $50 dollar donation?
11/15/2013 2:04 PM
Posted by burnsy483 on 11/15/2013 2:04:00 PM (view original):
Fine, better analogy.  And if you don't understand, I'm sorry.

I need to raise $100 to be able to get X.  My goal is to get X.  I get $ from a lot of people, the most someone gave me is $25.  I reach my goal of $100, exactly on the nose.

Someone else also needs to raise $100 to be able to get X.  You give this person $50.  Alas, he only raised $90, so this person could not get X.  While you gave the most amount of $ overall, the $25 that I received was MORE VALUABLE to me than the $50 was to someone else.

There are people who feel this way when voting for MVP.  If the goal is to make the playoffs (and it should be for every team) then Cabrera was more valuable to the Tigers than Trout was to the Angels.
I understand it perfectly. 
11/15/2013 2:05 PM
Posted by bad_luck on 11/15/2013 2:04:00 PM (view original):
Posted by burnsy483 on 11/15/2013 2:04:00 PM (view original):
Fine, better analogy.  And if you don't understand, I'm sorry.

I need to raise $100 to be able to get X.  My goal is to get X.  I get $ from a lot of people, the most someone gave me is $25.  I reach my goal of $100, exactly on the nose.

Someone else also needs to raise $100 to be able to get X.  You give this person $50.  Alas, he only raised $90, so this person could not get X.  While you gave the most amount of $ overall, the $25 that I received was MORE VALUABLE to me than the $50 was to someone else.

There are people who feel this way when voting for MVP.  If the goal is to make the playoffs (and it should be for every team) then Cabrera was more valuable to the Tigers than Trout was to the Angels.
Would you trade the $25 dollar donation for the $50 dollar donation?
Obviously, but it's not possible.  I don't know you and you didn't offer me $50.  You offered $0 to me, and have NO VALUE TO ME.
11/15/2013 2:09 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 11/15/2013 2:05:00 PM (view original):
Posted by burnsy483 on 11/15/2013 2:04:00 PM (view original):
Fine, better analogy.  And if you don't understand, I'm sorry.

I need to raise $100 to be able to get X.  My goal is to get X.  I get $ from a lot of people, the most someone gave me is $25.  I reach my goal of $100, exactly on the nose.

Someone else also needs to raise $100 to be able to get X.  You give this person $50.  Alas, he only raised $90, so this person could not get X.  While you gave the most amount of $ overall, the $25 that I received was MORE VALUABLE to me than the $50 was to someone else.

There are people who feel this way when voting for MVP.  If the goal is to make the playoffs (and it should be for every team) then Cabrera was more valuable to the Tigers than Trout was to the Angels.
I understand it perfectly. 
Obviously, anyone with a brain should at least understand the argument, even if you don't agree with it.  I DON'T AGREE WITH IT. MVP should go to the best player, IMO.  But I understand why there are voters who look at value relative to the player's team.
11/15/2013 2:09 PM
Posted by burnsy483 on 11/15/2013 2:09:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 11/15/2013 2:04:00 PM (view original):
Posted by burnsy483 on 11/15/2013 2:04:00 PM (view original):
Fine, better analogy.  And if you don't understand, I'm sorry.

I need to raise $100 to be able to get X.  My goal is to get X.  I get $ from a lot of people, the most someone gave me is $25.  I reach my goal of $100, exactly on the nose.

Someone else also needs to raise $100 to be able to get X.  You give this person $50.  Alas, he only raised $90, so this person could not get X.  While you gave the most amount of $ overall, the $25 that I received was MORE VALUABLE to me than the $50 was to someone else.

There are people who feel this way when voting for MVP.  If the goal is to make the playoffs (and it should be for every team) then Cabrera was more valuable to the Tigers than Trout was to the Angels.
Would you trade the $25 dollar donation for the $50 dollar donation?
Obviously, but it's not possible.  I don't know you and you didn't offer me $50.  You offered $0 to me, and have NO VALUE TO ME.
The analogy is getting away from the point a little. MLB is a closed system, everyone knows everyone, there are trades, etc.

Even if the $25 was all you needed to hit your goal, $50 is still more valuable. To everyone.

 
11/15/2013 2:12 PM
It's actually directly on point.  Fine, you know me, and didn't offer me $50.  We're fighting for X, actually.  Does that make the analogy better?
11/15/2013 2:14 PM
Posted by burnsy483 on 11/15/2013 2:15:00 PM (view original):
It's actually directly on point.  Fine, you know me, and didn't offer me $50.  We're fighting for X, actually.  Does that make the analogy better?
$50 is still more valuable than $25. Offered in trade or not.
11/15/2013 2:15 PM
Something I can't have has no value to me. 
11/15/2013 2:18 PM
◂ Prev 1|2|3|4|5...35 Next ▸
Cabrera won MVP Topic

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2024 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.