Every year, as the Major League Baseball season approaches the final two months and later, fans, analysts, and experts start discussing the front-runners for the season awards. Since many of the awards (such as league’s most valuable player) depend on how the sports writers vote, no matter who wins, arguments ensue about who “got snubbed” and who “should have won” the awards. Voting is highly subjective, and the voters may have differing opinions of what constitutes the most valuable player.
Best statistics?
Do the best statistics actually mean most valuable player? Think back two and three decades for two classic examples.
1) Fans old enough to remember the 1995 American League MVP vote should remember the controversial election of the Boston Red Sox’ Mo Vaughn as the winner ahead of the Cleveland Indians’ Albert Belle. Check the 1995 final standings. Boston won the A.L. East by seven games over the wild-card New York Yankees; Cleveland won the A.L. Central by 30 games over the second-place Kansas City Royals. Look at the numbers each player put up.
- Vaughn: .300/.388/.575, 39 HR, 126 RBI, 28 2B, 150 K, and 4.3 WAR. In addition, he was an All-Star and won the Silver Slugger for first base.
- Belle: .317/.401/.690, 50 HR, 126 RBI, 52 2B, 80 K, and 6.9 WAR. He was an All-Star and won the Silver Slugger in left field.
Vaughn put up some great numbers, but Belle clearly out-slugged him in all aspects. Yet, Vaughn won the MVP.
2) In 1987, Cubs right fielder Andre Dawson (pictured, an all-time Cubs favorite) slashed .287/.328/.568. He also slugged 49 HR and drove in 137 runs (both league leaders). He was an All-Star, and he won the Gold Glove and Silver Slugger award for right field. He had a WAR of 4.0. In most cases, these numbers deserve strong consideration for the MVP award if not the final vote. Dawson won it — for the last-place Cubs, who finished 18.5 games out in the N.L. East (four divisions then).
The Cardinals’ Hall-of-Fame shortstop Ozzie Smith and slugging first baseman Jack Clark finished 2 and 3, respectively. See how they matched up with Dawson here. Both had higher WAR. The Cardinals won the N.L. East and the NLCS to reach the World Series.
Value to team?
In the 1995 voting, Vaughn certainly meant more to his team’s winning the division. Remove his WAR, and the Red Sox barely squeak by the Yankees. Removing Belle’s WAR shows that Cleveland still wins the A.L. Central by 23 games. Obviously, we cannot remove those statistics, but the WAR demonstrates that the Red Sox needed Vaughn’s performance far more than the Indians needed Belle’s in order to win their respective divisions.
In 1987, the Cubs never had a chance. St. Louis won the division by three games. Removing either Smith’s WAR (6.4) or Clark’s (5.4), and the Cardinals may not win. There was no wild card yet.
Player of the Year award?
Perhaps MLB could rectify this situation by awarding the MVP and the Player of the Year. In that case, Belle and Dawson then get proper credit (Player of the Year) for their accomplishments, and Vaughn and Smith get their awards (MVP). No, not every player deserves an award. However, since the definition of Most Valuable Player is vague and subjective to a few writers’ opinions, adding one extra official award clarifies the matter. Only one Player of the Year — not one for each league — would suffice.
FEATURED PHOTO CREDIT: Ronald C. Modra/Sports ImageryGetty Images Sport
