Many fans, writers, players, and analysts argue about what being the “Most Valuable Player” truly means. Some argue it requires being the “best player on the best team,” while others suggest it belongs to “the season’s best player.”
I personally fall somewhere in between—choosing to fully recognize the “valuable” component, while not disqualifying a player who fell just short in a pennant race.
In many seasons, the best team—such as the 1998 Yankees—is just that: a “team.” They are a unit comprised of multiple high-quality players that represent something far greater than the simple sum of the team's parts.
A “Most Valuable Player” many times cannot be chosen from the game’s best team, as no player distinguishes himself as more important than the men standing next to him.
In other cases, a player has a season immortalized in baseball lore, and his accomplishments can/should sometimes outweigh a great season by a pennant winner—so long as they occur as part of a competitive ball club.
As a result of my slightly modified criteria, I have created a list of five controversial MVP decisions that particularly irritated me. Each personifies my frustration and disappointment with the MVP voting process and shows why things need to change.
Also seen at: http://heartbeatofthebronx.blogspot.com/