So the debate on the MVP rolls on between Cabrera and Trout. Anytime there is a debate involving the MVP a semantic discussion ensues on what "Most Valuable Player" means. I decided to take a different view of that term and look at the players as a percentage of their team value.
It could be said that he Most Valuable Player is the one who has the biggest impact on his team. Often, and rightfully so, people just find out who was the most valuable total and give them the award. But I wondered what the leaderboard would look like if we took the fWAR of a player and divided it by his teams fWAR.
This way we see which players had the biggest overall impact on their team, who was a great deal more valuable to their team. In other words which team would likely have suffered the most without that player. Flawed analysis? Yes. The way I'd pick my MPV? No. Something to spark discussion? Let's see.
|Team||Team War||Player||Player War||ratio||League|
|White Sox||17.7||Chris Sale||4.9||0.28||AL|
|Blue Jays||16.7||Edwin Encarnacion||4.4||0.26||AL|
|Red Sox||20.1||Dustin Pedroia||4.3||0.21||AL|