Posted by toddcommish on 11/22/2016 7:25:00 PM (view original):
Why didn't Willie Mays win every year? He was pretty clearly the BEST five-tool player every year for a decade (he even led in WAR for 10/13 years) , and still only won a couple of MVPs.

You're right, he should have won more. Voters are idiots.

Posted by bad_luck on 11/22/2016 7:37:00 PM (view original):

Posted by toddcommish on 11/22/2016 7:25:00 PM (view original):
Why didn't Willie Mays win every year? He was pretty clearly the BEST five-tool player every year for a decade (he even led in WAR for 10/13 years) , and still only won a couple of MVPs.

You're right, he should have won more. Voters are idiots.

Possibly, or their idea of "value" isn't the same as yours.

Or both.

Posted by toddcommish on 11/22/2016 7:43:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 11/22/2016 7:37:00 PM (view original):

Posted by toddcommish on 11/22/2016 7:25:00 PM (view original):
Why didn't Willie Mays win every year? He was pretty clearly the BEST five-tool player every year for a decade (he even led in WAR for 10/13 years) , and still only won a couple of MVPs.

You're right, he should have won more. Voters are idiots.

Possibly, or their idea of "value" isn't the same as yours.

Or both.

Let's lay out the "different value" argument and see if it makes sense.

You have a team team full of average players. Two players, not already on your team, are available.

Player A is great. Player B is a little less great.

Is there ever a time where you'd choose B?

No, of course not. Player A makes your team better than player B. Player A is more valuable.

Posted by toddcommish on 11/22/2016 7:43:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 11/22/2016 7:37:00 PM (view original):

Posted by toddcommish on 11/22/2016 7:25:00 PM (view original):
Why didn't Willie Mays win every year? He was pretty clearly the BEST five-tool player every year for a decade (he even led in WAR for 10/13 years) , and still only won a couple of MVPs.

You're right, he should have won more. Voters are idiots.

Possibly, or their idea of "value" isn't the same as yours.

Or both.

No, that can't be it.


Or can it?

Do different sports have different meanings of value?

Seems like the NBA is the best place for an individual to show he has the most skills. Has any player won like 10 MVP in a row?

Posted by MikeT23 on 11/22/2016 7:53:00 PM (view original):
Do different sports have different meanings of value?

Seems like the NBA is the best place for an individual to show he has the most skills. Has any player won like 10 MVP in a row?

In the NBA, it's relatively common for the best player in the league to drag four bad players with him to the playoffs. That isn't possible in baseball.

Yes, it is. How many MVP has LeBron won in a row?

No one has ever won 10 straight but you see swaths of dominance if you look at the winners. 4 for Lebron in 5 years, Bird had three straight, Jordan had a bunch, Jabbar got 5 in 7 years.

Posted by MikeT23 on 11/22/2016 8:00:00 PM (view original):
Yes, it is. How many MVP has LeBron won in a row?

No it isn't. One MLB player cannot pull 24 below average players with him into the playoffs.

OK, looked it up. Jordan and LeBron never won more than two in a row. In their prime, weren't they universally considered the best player in the NBA?

Posted by MikeT23 on 11/22/2016 8:03:00 PM (view original):
OK, looked it up. Jordan and LeBron never won more than two in a row. In their prime, weren't they universally considered the best player in the NBA?

Sure. What's your point?

Well, I had a question. Would you like to field it now?

Do different sports have different meanings of value?

Posted by MikeT23 on 11/22/2016 8:07:00 PM (view original):
Well, I had a question. Would you like to field it now?

Do different sports have different meanings of value?

Nope. Best player is always most valuable.

But just because someone was the best over a 5 or 10 year period, doesn't mean they had the best year, every single year.

Didn't we just agree that LeBron/Jordan were universally considered the best players in the NBA in their prime? And that the NBA is the best sport for an individual to display the skill that makes him the best?

Posted by MikeT23 on 11/22/2016 8:11:00 PM (view original):
Didn't we just agree that LeBron/Jordan were universally considered the best players in the NBA in their prime? And that the NBA is the best sport for an individual to display the skill that makes him the best?

Yes, but the fact that they were the best over a long period doesn't mean they were always the absolute best in every increment within that period.

You get this, right? You're just arguing for the sake of arguing now?