From: gordons@netcom.com (Gordon Storga)
Subject: Re: MVP
Organization: Gizmonic Institute - Home of the "Big G Burger"
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 22:41:42 GMT

<1992Dec29.151525.2817@macc.wisc.edu> heim@vms.macc.wisc.edu (JOHN HEIM	) :
><1992Dec29.003918.18953@netcom.com>, mzimmers@netcom.com (Michael Zimmers) ..
>><1992Dec29.002840.17858@netcom.com> gordons@netcom.com (Gordon Storga) writes:
>>>The MVP, Most Valuable Player, is the player who is determined to be the
>>>most valuable to his team during the regular season.  If I've got three
>>>great tailbacks on my team then *individually* they are not as valuable
>>>as the team that only has one great tailback.  Do you understand the logic
>>>here?  If Young isn't in there you put in Bono who "could start for any
>>>other team" and he does the same thing.  How "valuable" does that make
>>>Young?  Look at Barry Sanders, if Sanders goes out who comes in and takes
>>>his place?  Do you think Sanders might be a little more valuable to his
>>>team than Young is to his?  I think most people would say yes.  People who
>>>weren't just being argumentative that is.
>> 
>>There's a qualification to this.  The player in question must be greatly
>>contributing to his team's success in the season in question.  No matter
>>how great Sanders is, his team is likely to finish 5-11, and Barry has
>>been around for most of the year (no?).
...
>I think you're both right to some degree.  I don't agree with Gordon's 
>logic for denying Young the award but if he's saying that when trying 
>to decide who is MVP you have to consider how much a team's depends on 
>any one player, I would agree.  But by this criteria alone John Elway 
>would be a lock (and should have gotten the award for the last 5 years 
>in a row.)  Sterling Sharpe would be runner up.

I disagree with Elway's selection, not because I think he's not their most
valuable player, but because I agree with Mike that the player selected
should have played almost all of the season.

>But you can't give the award to someone just because he's by far the 
>best player on his team.  Usually, when a player has an outstanding 
>personal season his team depends on him a great deal.  They start 
>losing if he's gone.  It's hard to separate the two.

True.  There are no quantifiable metrics to the award.  None that make
sense anyway.

>BTW, being an offensive skill position player and being on a winning 
>team are *not* criteria for the award.  It's just that, commonly, 
>these are the players that are picked.

Like the Heisman.

>>So, Young's a QB (generally acknowledged to be the most important
>>position).  He's not leading the league in passing, but he's way
>>far out in front of #2 (at least in his conference; I don't have
>>AFC numbers handy).  And his team will probably have the best record
>>in the league.  No one has better claim to the award this year.

I disagree with Mike on this.  There are many other players who have
better claim to the award: Sterling Sharpe, Emitt Smith, Barry Foster,
Barry Sanders, Cortez Kennedy, Reggie White, even John Elway.  With any
one of these players out or banged up their teams would/did stumble.
Of course, they don't have a claim by Mike's criteria.  I'd like to see
the official league description of the MVP.

>The term "most important position" is meaningless in football.  It's 
>like asking what's the most important part of a car.  There is no most 
>important part because there are lot's of parts without which the car 
>doesn't run at all.

Good analogy, and the reason why I like football so much: A team game.

>>If you're really interested in a crusade, start pointing out to people
>>that the real inequity is that linemen and most defensive players never
>>have a shot, and so are given their own little awards.  Did LT, Singletary
>
>I believe defensive players *have* won the award.  It's an injustice 
>that more haven't won it.  Suggesting that the award should go to a 
>offensive player just because it always has is a crummy argument.

I agree, it's a crummy argument.  But apparently the MVP award is
analogous to the Heisman Award.  You just have to have good stats, winning
record, and your team suck up to the media.  Why don't they rename it to
the Most Hyped Offensive Player.


Gordon
-- 
The opinions expressed are my own, and not the beliefs or opinions
of whatever company you think I work for.  So there, thhhbbbt!
Message to Kodak:  Freedom for Dan Bredy.