Hey kids , You've noticed the world chat is a buzz with the argument "What kind of player should be MVP". So far the discussion has been debated by mostly Mark(The Mish) , Rbedwell(The Proffesor), Zee and Sandberg. Others have also chimed in with thier two cents. This controversy started innocently enough.Here are a few Excerpts
Sandberg: Preliminary award leaders are up. It appears as though it will be power versus speed for the NL MVP.
rbedwell: Those players are out of order. It should be the best all around player
Sandberg: You're saying that Sosa should be ahead of Parra because he steals bases?
rbedwell: No, I'm saying that Pablo Samuel is the best player of the five listed.
Mark: Should a player on a sub .500 team be a league MVP ? Reminds me of the line from Branch Rickey when Ralph Kiner came in to ask for a raise. Rickey said, "Ralph, we finished last with you and we can finish last without you."
Well guys after that exchange, the Fur hit the Fan. Or is it the shit hit the Fan?? Anyways we had a full blown donnybrook on our hands . With some of our best minds digging into the facts and figures of the past MVP winners in M L Baseball.There are alot of good points made in this discusion . Here are a few Nuggets.
Mark: Parra stole the mvp last season as did Dawson in 1987.
Sanberg: If you put Pujols on the Nationals would he still win MVP with the same stats?
rbedwell: You guys are still only talking offense. Defense is a big consideration also, and a guy who plays an up-the-middle position well while also hitting with the league leaders contributes much more value than a one-dimensional player at 1B or LF.
Mark: Logic Ralph ? How dare you bring logic into a discussion regarding MVP voting :)
Zmoty: As it stands right now,my vote is between Sosa, Samuel, and Vic. Those three are all in playoff contention and I'm sure San Fran would be where they are without Sosa, but I don't believe San Juan or my guys would be in contention without Samuel and Velasquez, respectively.No disrespect for Parra who is putting up great numbers, and call me closed-minded if necessary, but I can't put a vote for MVP when the guy's team isn't currently slated for the playoffs. Of course, there's still a lot of games to be played...
ardthomp: I look at awards as individual achievements. I don't think it is fair to say the MVP has to be on a team that is in the playoffs, but ROY, CY Young, etc don't need to be.
Well you get the point of this discusion. It continued on for another page and finally Zee said.
Zmoty: I smell a Wrigleyville WHIF exclusive report coming from mad and his crack team of reporters...perhaps a re-emergence of Underdog to put this issue to rest?
Man , now were talking!! I was gonna give this story to one of my Crack reporters. But they had been smoking Crack all night. So here is the Doons take on what should be the MVP.
Remember when we were like 9 or 10 years old and we all lined up with two captains picking teams. Well the kid that always got picked first was the MVP of the Creekside Elementary Shirts and Skins League. He was the kid who could hit the ball the farthest and could beat up any of us kids. I mean back then we did'nt have OAV's, ERA's and OBP's. The small kids that could run like the wind never got picked first . And the best fielders were overlooked also.
Now that were older shouldn't we make it simpler to pick the MVP. I for one know that Chicks Dig the Longball. And I dig Chicks . Besides when you take a Chick to the game and a player hits a homer. The Chick will jump up and down Therefore her Mammalia Protruberences will Bounce up and down. Therefore i will vote for the player that makes Tits Bounce!!
