- Joined:
- Apr 18, 2010
- Posts:
- 3,276
- Liked Posts:
- 680
Why haven't people talked about cliff lee or doc halladay for NL MVP?
- Joined:
- Sep 15, 2010
- Posts:
- 6,122
- Liked Posts:
- 1,642
- Location:
- Misery
They're on the same team. In my mind, if there are two candidates on one team, neither should win. It's most valuable, therefore if you take one away it won't be a huge difference compared to having only one candidate.
- Joined:
- Apr 10, 2011
- Posts:
- 16,341
- Liked Posts:
- 5,990
Right now, they're in a battle for the Cy Young. The fact that they're both on the same team hinders their chance of an MVP possibility.
- Joined:
- Sep 15, 2010
- Posts:
- 6,122
- Liked Posts:
- 1,642
- Location:
- Misery
Exactly. They can battle for winning the Cy Young, but having both of them on the same team hurts the chance of winning MVP. That's why it was ridiculous that people thought LeBron or Wade should've won the MVP this year. They're on the same team, so they can't possibly be the most valuable player.
- Joined:
- Jun 7, 2011
- Posts:
- 18,077
- Liked Posts:
- 3,472
- Location:
- Chicago
Why does that matter? Michael Jordan won a couple MVPs while he had Scottie Pippen and Dennis Rodman playing at his side.
- Joined:
- Apr 10, 2011
- Posts:
- 16,341
- Liked Posts:
- 5,990
That's an entirely different debate there. Michael Jordan is the greatest basketball player ever. Take him away from that team and they don't win any titles.
- Joined:
- Jun 7, 2011
- Posts:
- 18,077
- Liked Posts:
- 3,472
- Location:
- Chicago
They almost got to the Finals in 1994 with Scottie at the helm. We can debate "what ifs" but Michael never won without Scottie either. The MVP voting debate is just that, a debate. There is no true correct answer but some answers will be more logical than others.
- Joined:
- Apr 10, 2011
- Posts:
- 16,341
- Liked Posts:
- 5,990
In the end, they didn't though thus proving how valuable Jordan was. Michael Jordan was the ultimate MVP. Not really much debate about that, but that's for the Bulls forum.
- Joined:
- Sep 15, 2010
- Posts:
- 6,122
- Liked Posts:
- 1,642
- Location:
- Misery
Key word there. Michael was the little thing that pushed the Bulls over the top to winning championships. That's why he's the most valuable.
- Joined:
- Jun 7, 2011
- Posts:
- 18,077
- Liked Posts:
- 3,472
- Location:
- Chicago
All I'm saying is that Roy Halladay (Jordan) is better at pitching than Cliff Lee (Pippen) but the Phillies aren't going anywhere without both of them so the MVP still needs help.
- Joined:
- Aug 11, 2010
- Posts:
- 1,294
- Liked Posts:
- 266
- Location:
- Chicago
Verlander cy young with no question...Granderson MVP.
- Joined:
- Mar 27, 2011
- Posts:
- 5,224
- Liked Posts:
- 1,865
Granderson shouldn't even be mentioned as MVP, but he will win it. The MVP in baseball is pretty fucked up. Hell, with no salary cap, everything in baseball is pretty fucked up.
- Joined:
- Sep 15, 2010
- Posts:
- 6,122
- Liked Posts:
- 1,642
- Location:
- Misery
Of course he'll win. He hasn't even been that great. He'll still get chosen because the writers have major boners for the Yankees. If not Grandy, it will be A-gone because they have boners for the Red Sox too.
videofreak8
Imma Pro
- Joined:
- Sep 8, 2011
- Posts:
- 13
- Liked Posts:
- 2
- Location:
- Kentucky
Goin' Gonzo.
- Joined:
- Apr 10, 2011
- Posts:
- 16,341
- Liked Posts:
- 5,990
The day the sports writers get flaccid when they see the Yank-mes/Red Sawx is the day they gain back some credibility with me.
- Joined:
- Jun 7, 2011
- Posts:
- 18,077
- Liked Posts:
- 3,472
- Location:
- Chicago
The Yankees and Red Sox also happen to be the two best teams in the American League so whatever attention they're getting is at least partially deserved.
- Joined:
- Apr 17, 2010
- Posts:
- 10,038
- Liked Posts:
- 819
- Location:
- Peoria IL
i got granderson. Top 3 in HR, top 3 in RBI..leads in runs by mile...has 25 + SB
- Joined:
- Sep 15, 2010
- Posts:
- 6,122
- Liked Posts:
- 1,642
- Location:
- Misery
The problem is that the sports writers have been like this for quite a few years and they are nation-wide writers, therefore they should be covering all topics. ESPN is terrible journalism.
- Joined:
- Jun 7, 2011
- Posts:
- 18,077
- Liked Posts:
- 3,472
- Location:
- Chicago
It is a nice coincidence that those teams being covered also happen to be two of the best teams in the majors. Naturally you want ratings, and said teams have more resources, but people do gravitate towards winners and the winners get noticed more. Of course you have guys who just have an exceptional year (i.e. Verlander, Bautista) and they'll get noticed too.
- Joined:
- Sep 15, 2010
- Posts:
- 6,122
- Liked Posts:
- 1,642
- Location:
- Misery
It's still bad journalism. Ever heard of bias?
Staff online NOW
-
bamainatlantaYou wake him up, you keep him up