This might be considered minor to most players, but it is driving me crazy.
Player A and Player B both play for Team 1 (record 102wins 60losses. 3rd straight division title)
Player A--22hr 106rbi .339avg(Batting Title) 72.4vorp
Player B--39hr 128rbi .309avg 65.3vorp
Player C plays for team B (record 84wins 78 losses 3rd place 18games out. Never in pennant race.
Player C--20hr 98rbi .326avg 79.3vorp
Why is player C MVP of the league? Who cares if he has a higher VORP. His record isn't as good as the other two players. His team wasn't as nearly as good. How is he most valuable. Basing the MVP on the highest VORP should only apply for first place teams not teams 18 games out. Sure the MVP votiing can get controversial but players with inferior records playing for inferior teams do not get voted MVP.
Whew. Thank you for letting me vent.