Is the MVP Race Rigged? The Case for Bobby Witt Jr.
Posted: Fri Nov 22, 2024 12:34 pm
The recent MVP and Cy Young voting results have sparked quite a debate, particularly surrounding the unanimous selection of Aaron Judge over Bobby Witt Jr. for the AL MVP. While Judge's historic offensive season is undeniable, the fact that Witt received zero first-place votes raises some serious questions about how we define value in baseball.
Is it time to rethink the criteria for these prestigious awards? Should we be placing more emphasis on a player's overall contribution to their team rather than just their WAR? Witt's all-around skills as a five-tool player certainly make a compelling case for his value, especially considering the Royals' success this season. Without him, would they have even reached 86 wins?
Moreover, the trend of voters defaulting to the WAR leader is becoming alarmingly predictable. Over the last two years, only six out of 240 first-place votes for MVP or Cy Young have gone to players who weren't the WAR leaders. Does this suggest a lack of courage among voters to break from the norm? Are we witnessing the death of subjective analysis in favor of cold, hard statistics?
Let's dive into this discussion. How do you define valuable in the context of these awards? Should the voting process be more subjective, allowing for personal interpretations of a player's impact? And what bold predictions do you have for next year's MVP and Cy Young races? Will we see a shift in how these awards are determined, or are we destined to see more of the same? Share your thoughts and let's get the conversation rolling!
Is it time to rethink the criteria for these prestigious awards? Should we be placing more emphasis on a player's overall contribution to their team rather than just their WAR? Witt's all-around skills as a five-tool player certainly make a compelling case for his value, especially considering the Royals' success this season. Without him, would they have even reached 86 wins?
Moreover, the trend of voters defaulting to the WAR leader is becoming alarmingly predictable. Over the last two years, only six out of 240 first-place votes for MVP or Cy Young have gone to players who weren't the WAR leaders. Does this suggest a lack of courage among voters to break from the norm? Are we witnessing the death of subjective analysis in favor of cold, hard statistics?
Let's dive into this discussion. How do you define valuable in the context of these awards? Should the voting process be more subjective, allowing for personal interpretations of a player's impact? And what bold predictions do you have for next year's MVP and Cy Young races? Will we see a shift in how these awards are determined, or are we destined to see more of the same? Share your thoughts and let's get the conversation rolling!