OOTP Developments Forums - View Single Post

sixto · 11-13-2002, 12:14 AM

There was supposed to be the "Aaron Award" that was going to differentiate between best hitter and most valuable player. I don't know the full story, but I know somehow MLB dropped the ball.

There's an award for pitcher of the year, but there's no award for position player/hitter of the year. That's really what causes all the problems.

Still, despite all the logic that Rob Neyer and Bill James and Baseball Prospectus have, and I'm almost always on the same side as those folks, I don't have a problem with players on winning teams getting the award instead of someone like A-Rod. I think taking "most valuable" to such a literal level as "this 75-win team would have won 42 games without X player" is not in the spirit of the award. Strictly speaking, the award is not about who was worth more wins than any other player.

The A's sure are piling up awards...but no rings. I find that very interesting.

11-13-2002, 12:14 AM	#13
sixto Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 2,275	There was supposed to be the "Aaron Award" that was going to differentiate between best hitter and most valuable player. I don't know the full story, but I know somehow MLB dropped the ball. There's an award for pitcher of the year, but there's no award for position player/hitter of the year. That's really what causes all the problems. Still, despite all the logic that Rob Neyer and Bill James and Baseball Prospectus have, and I'm almost always on the same side as those folks, I don't have a problem with players on winning teams getting the award instead of someone like A-Rod. I think taking "most valuable" to such a literal level as "this 75-win team would have won 42 games without X player" is not in the spirit of the award. Strictly speaking, the award is not about who was worth more wins than any other player. The A's sure are piling up awards...but no rings. I find that very interesting.