I had some fun with the Ted Williams post this morning, but I would like to make one observation about the upcoming MVP debates and awards season in general: they matter and they don’t. And that’s not necessarily a contradiction.
Remember that time when the voters got the MVP vote wrong and we all died? God, that sucked. Oh, wait, that didn’t happen. Because no one is truly harmed if the MVP voters screw up. Amazingly, that even held when Alan Trammell was ripped off in 1987, and I was pretty sure that was going to kill me. In that sense, no, the awards debates don’t truly matter.
At the same time, the opposite reaction — that since it’s just baseball awards these debates are not even worth having — is also dumb. We’re baseball fans. Arguing about awards is the best possible way to spend one’s time when actual games aren’t on. What the hell else should we do? Pretend there isn’t interesting baseball stuff to consider? Act like we’re above having a time-worn bar argument about which player is better than another? Jeez, that would make us friggin’ communists.
Where to find the balance? I think it’s just like anything else: we should jut be suspicious of extremists. People who think the wrong guy winning is tragedy of some kind are silly. If you’re a Mike Trout guy, the world is not going to end if Miguel Cabrera wins the award and vice-versa. At the same time, however, people who tell me that it’s not worth even engaging in the exercise are off base too. Go not have fun someplace else, please.
Anyway, I’ve not sat down and considered any award fully. I’m seriously leaning Mike Trout for the MVP, of course, but I could theoretically have my mind changed. And if that doesn’t happen I’m not gonna consider it an atrocity if Cabrera wins. It’s just baseball.
But dude, if a bunch of writers try to argue that base running and defense is some sort of esoteric sabermetric invention, I will take up arms and fight until either death or glory is achieved.
Wait … gotta re-read my own post again. Damn.