MVP Votes vs. Rookie of the Year: What’s the Real Story Behind Merrill and Skenes? 

The recent MVP voting has sparked quite a debate, especially with Jackson Merrill finishing higher in the MVP race than Paul Skenes, despite Skenes taking home the Rookie of the Year award. This raises some intriguing questions about how we define value in baseball.

Is it fair to say that a player who contributes significantly to a postseason team, like Merrill, should be recognized over a rookie with impressive individual stats but limited impact on a losing team? It seems like the MVP award is meant to highlight overall contribution to a team's success, while the Rookie of the Year focuses more on individual performance.

What do you all think? Should the MVP voting criteria be reevaluated to better reflect a player's impact on their team's success? Or do you believe that individual achievements should always take precedence, regardless of team performance?

Additionally, with the Padres' future looking bright with young talents like Merrill, how do you see their trajectory in the coming seasons? Will they be able to build on this year's success, or are there still significant hurdles to overcome?

Let’s hear your thoughts on the MVP debate, the Rookie of the Year selection, and the Padres' potential moving forward!