10 or 15 years ago Stanton or Votto have a shot but players on losing teams rarely if ever win it anymore. I'd be amazed if it wasn't Goldschmidt or Blackmon
Stanton led the NL in WAR and hit 59 damn homeruns.
It should be a slam dunk.
1. Stanton
2. Blackmon
3. Goldschmidt
Stanton led the NL in WAR and hit 59 damn homeruns.
It should be a slam dunk.
Yet outside of homeruns Votto's offensive numbers are better than Stanton's.
I mean, Joey Votto pretty much is a ****ing baseball. He's perfect. If I'm picking somebody to be on the Yankees, I take Votto. (And not because we already have a RF, I'm saying in a vacuum)
But 59 homers is just the kind of number I'm going to remember when I'm old af. "Hey guys remember when Giancarlo hit 59?"
It's the mythical. It's the spectacular. It depends on what you're looking for. I wouldn't be mad at all if Votto won it, just personally speaking.
When I say "slam dunk" I'm trying to see how the voters might look at it. But these days voters are more and more into the analytical approach and the value of the wallk so who knows?
Who cares if it's mythical or spectacular? Would you give NBA MVP to whoever does the best windmill dunk?
No, but Patrice Bergeron is probably the most dominant 200 foot player in the NHL, and a 50 goal guy is more likely to win the MVP, and I've never argued that Bergeron should be MVP.
I'm confused. How did Votto become Bergeron?
They're both aliens from another planet where hockey/baseball are played at a completely higher level?