What does the Most Valuable Player mean to you?

[AC]

That is true, and I wouldn't necessarily call it my formula, but it shouldn't always be the surplus value leader, for exactly the reason you suggested. It should play a role, though.

[cardinalbird5]

Re: What does the Most Valuable Player mean to you?

Value means to me the total amount of runs produced/saved by offensive production including baserunning and defensive ability, including the position they play, arm strength, fielding ability, and range. More importantly, value means to me how many wins a player can add to his team, again including the position they play (because a catcher's or shortstop's run value is not on the same level as a first basemen's or right fielder's), over what an average player at that position would add.

What I do not consider value, but a lot of fans do includes: how good their team is overall, the division they play in, how much money they make (this can be flawed, but it is definitely something to keep an eye on), what place they finish in their division, if they make the playoffs, or if they win any awards or complete a milestone (I hated people giving the argument that Cabrera was the MVP because he won the Triple Crown).

To me, baseball is a sport of individual matchups, and it is nearly impossible for one player to turn a bad team into a great team in baseball, whereas in Football or Basketball this is feasible. I believe having great hitter's around can you increase one's raw statistics and slightly their rate statistics, but it usually is not as drastic when compared to the other major sports.

Basically I hate when a player wins the MVP award and gets the edge when their team makes the playoffs. I understand if it is nearly a tie, which may be more applicable to the Kemp/Braun comparison, but most of the time it isn't that close.

I know that I'm in the minority, but the fact of the matter was that Miguel Cabrera was more valuable than Mike Trout was. Without Trout, the Angels still finish in third place. Without Cabrera, the Tigers have a lesser chance of winning the Central and certainly do not win the American League. It's pretty simple actually.

This is a perfect example of the flawed argument I was talking about. Sad thing is that you are not the minority...maybe on OS, but not compared to other fans. You are basically saying Cabrera was more valuable because he played in an easier division.

No doubt Cabrera is so far the MVP, but Trout is right there again. I understand if someone thinks Cabrera was that much better, offensively (he actually wasn't, but if that is one's argument then I can't disagree about your philosophy), but when people talk about him saying he provided more value due to his team playing in an easier division is not much of an argument and is somewhat laughable.

Oh and does anyone else think it was one of the biggest rip-offs in MLB award history last year when Trout did not even win a gold golve?? Alex Gordon? That award should go to the 3 best outfielders.