Posted by bad_luck on 10/5/2016 11:27:00 AM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/5/2016 10:56:00 AM (view original):
Sure. But, if pitchers contribute a "whole lot more run prevention than anybody else", it seems to me that you'd see more pitchers winning, or at least top 3, in MVP voting. Unless, of course, you believe scoring is more important than preventing scoring.

Nonetheless, I'll get to the point. The MVP voting guidelines that some believe are "crystal clear" are anything but. They're vague. I'm not sure if that was intentional but there's a reason they vote rather than refer to one stat, let's say WAR, to determine who wins.

The ballot doesn't lay out how you should determine the players with the best offense and defense, it specifically says that's up to the voter. But it is clear that voters should vote for the player who they think is the strongest on offense and defense.

Does is specifically say whether or not the team was in contention matters?

Well, does that mean "offense and defense" are weighted equally? That would mean Ortiz (and all AL DH's) should be OUT of the running because he doesn't contribute on defense at all. That would mean Britton (and all AL pitchers) should be OUT of the running because he doesn't contribute on offense at all.

Even if it's 60-40 or 70-30, one-way players (pitchers and DH's) should be out of the running unless they have a transcendent season. Looks pretty much like Trout should win just about every year in the AL....

Posted by bad_luck on 10/5/2016 11:27:00 AM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/5/2016 10:56:00 AM (view original):
Sure. But, if pitchers contribute a "whole lot more run prevention than anybody else", it seems to me that you'd see more pitchers winning, or at least top 3, in MVP voting. Unless, of course, you believe scoring is more important than preventing scoring.

Nonetheless, I'll get to the point. The MVP voting guidelines that some believe are "crystal clear" are anything but. They're vague. I'm not sure if that was intentional but there's a reason they vote rather than refer to one stat, let's say WAR, to determine who wins.

The ballot doesn't lay out how you should determine the players with the best offense and defense, it specifically says that's up to the voter. But it is clear that voters should vote for the player who they think is the strongest on offense and defense.

You keep referring to "the ballot". Does it say something different than the cover letter that dahs posted?

It's up to the voter to decide. I think you could make the argument that a DH, for example, could be so good offensively that he's better than everyone else, even with their defensive value added to the mix.

Its not the case this year, but it could happen.

Posted by tecwrg on 10/5/2016 11:37:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 10/5/2016 11:27:00 AM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/5/2016 10:56:00 AM (view original):
Sure. But, if pitchers contribute a "whole lot more run prevention than anybody else", it seems to me that you'd see more pitchers winning, or at least top 3, in MVP voting. Unless, of course, you believe scoring is more important than preventing scoring.

Nonetheless, I'll get to the point. The MVP voting guidelines that some believe are "crystal clear" are anything but. They're vague. I'm not sure if that was intentional but there's a reason they vote rather than refer to one stat, let's say WAR, to determine who wins.

The ballot doesn't lay out how you should determine the players with the best offense and defense, it specifically says that's up to the voter. But it is clear that voters should vote for the player who they think is the strongest on offense and defense.

You keep referring to "the ballot". Does it say something different than the cover letter that dahs posted?

I'm referring to the letter that comes with the ballot, the same one dahs posted.

Posted by bad_luck on 10/5/2016 11:39:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 10/5/2016 11:37:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 10/5/2016 11:27:00 AM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/5/2016 10:56:00 AM (view original):
Sure. But, if pitchers contribute a "whole lot more run prevention than anybody else", it seems to me that you'd see more pitchers winning, or at least top 3, in MVP voting. Unless, of course, you believe scoring is more important than preventing scoring.

Nonetheless, I'll get to the point. The MVP voting guidelines that some believe are "crystal clear" are anything but. They're vague. I'm not sure if that was intentional but there's a reason they vote rather than refer to one stat, let's say WAR, to determine who wins.

The ballot doesn't lay out how you should determine the players with the best offense and defense, it specifically says that's up to the voter. But it is clear that voters should vote for the player who they think is the strongest on offense and defense.

You keep referring to "the ballot". Does it say something different than the cover letter that dahs posted?

I'm referring to the letter that comes with the ballot, the same one dahs posted.

If that's all you're going by, then it's nowhere near "clear".

"Value" can mean different things to different people. And "rule" #3 potentially throws a wrench into the mix.

Posted by tecwrg on 10/5/2016 11:45:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 10/5/2016 11:39:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 10/5/2016 11:37:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 10/5/2016 11:27:00 AM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/5/2016 10:56:00 AM (view original):
Sure. But, if pitchers contribute a "whole lot more run prevention than anybody else", it seems to me that you'd see more pitchers winning, or at least top 3, in MVP voting. Unless, of course, you believe scoring is more important than preventing scoring.

Nonetheless, I'll get to the point. The MVP voting guidelines that some believe are "crystal clear" are anything but. They're vague. I'm not sure if that was intentional but there's a reason they vote rather than refer to one stat, let's say WAR, to determine who wins.

The ballot doesn't lay out how you should determine the players with the best offense and defense, it specifically says that's up to the voter. But it is clear that voters should vote for the player who they think is the strongest on offense and defense.

You keep referring to "the ballot". Does it say something different than the cover letter that dahs posted?

I'm referring to the letter that comes with the ballot, the same one dahs posted.

If that's all you're going by, then it's nowhere near "clear".

"Value" can mean different things to different people. And "rule" #3 potentially throws a wrench into the mix.

But they define value: strength of offense and defense.

Posted by bad_luck on 10/4/2016 11:17:00 PM (view original):
Well, yeah. What else would equal value?

And you never answered this.

Posted by bad_luck on 10/5/2016 11:38:00 AM (view original):
It's up to the voter to decide. I think you could make the argument that a DH, for example, could be so good offensively that he's better than everyone else, even with their defensive value added to the mix.

Its not the case this year, but it could happen.

"It's up to the voter to decide"?

So, it stands to reason that the voter can also decide whether or not if the player's team was in contention matters. Unless, of course, they're specifically instructed to NOT do that. Are they?

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/5/2016 11:56:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 10/5/2016 11:38:00 AM (view original):
It's up to the voter to decide. I think you could make the argument that a DH, for example, could be so good offensively that he's better than everyone else, even with their defensive value added to the mix.

Its not the case this year, but it could happen.

"It's up to the voter to decide"?

So, it stands to reason that the voter can also decide whether or not if the player's team was in contention matters. Unless, of course, they're specifically instructed to NOT do that. Are they?

Like I said before, voters are free to do that. It's just stupid. You're giving an individual award to a guy because he had the more talented teammates.

I thought you implied that the instructions were clear. If they're "clear", it seems like they wouldn't allow a voter to do something stupid.

The instructions are clear. Value = strength of offense and defense. How would they stop a voter from doing something stupid?

JESUS H. CHRIST

ANOTHER MONGO MELEE!

Mongo just pawn in game of life

and how do you define "strength of offense and defense"? Is a guy who hits .240 with 30 HRs and 100 RBIs more valuable that a guy with a .375 OBP, 50 steals and 100 runs scored? If so, why? Is a SS with great range more valuable than an OF with a great arm? If you say the voter gets to decide, than it is not clear. It is vague. If it was clear there would be nothing to decide.