09-22-2009, 03:58 PM
<!--quoteo(post=64035:date=Sep 22 2009, 02:30 PM:name=veryzer)-->QUOTE (veryzer @ Sep 22 2009, 02:30 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=64023:date=Sep 22 2009, 01:26 PM:name=jstraw)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (jstraw @ Sep 22 2009, 01:26 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I used to argue that MVP didn't mean simply "best." If you were the best...but on a loaded team...then your year may not have made a difference...and if you were the best but on a last place team...then it clearly made no difference. What was your VALUE? It should go to the player who's excellence made the most difference to his team.
I gave up. It always goes to the best player (in people's opinions) regardless of whether it added any value.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
there have been many examples of the best player in the league not winning an mvp. most of the time (not all of the time) the mvp comes from a contending team, whether that player had the best year or not.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That's as it should be...though I'm not confident that there are many examples where this occurred when there were incontrovertibly "better" players that did not win.
I gave up. It always goes to the best player (in people's opinions) regardless of whether it added any value.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
there have been many examples of the best player in the league not winning an mvp. most of the time (not all of the time) the mvp comes from a contending team, whether that player had the best year or not.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That's as it should be...though I'm not confident that there are many examples where this occurred when there were incontrovertibly "better" players that did not win.