... but I get nowhere unless the team wins.
This is my feeling regarding postseason awards for individual players:
I don't care if it's the MVP, the Cy Young, the Rolaids Relief Award, the Dr. Scholl's Innings-Eater Award, the Al Franken Left-Handed Comic Relief Award, the Countrywide Financial Good Money After Bad Sunk Cost Contract Award, the Gold Glove, the Silver Slugger, the Titanium Spork, or the Polonium-210 Poison Bat Award.
I don't care if the award is voted on by coaches, players, beat writers, bloggers, certified public accountants, dogcatchers, or the audience of Dancing With the Stars via text-messaging.
I just. Don't. Care.
Sure, sure -- baseball is, as Bobby D-as-Al C says in the clip above, a sequence of opportunities for individual achievement. And statistical analysis clearly indicates that the best way to amalgamate those opportunities into wins is by accumulating recognized individual achievers.
But, as with so many other things in life, that individual achievement without context, without a larger purpose, is meaningless. < cough > Bonds in 2007 <cough>
I don't mean that in any moral sense, necessarily. And I certainly do appreciate short-term and long-term individual player achievements.
I just think that once the season's done, it's done. One team won, 29 teams lost (for whatever set of vagaries and improbabilities). Postseason awards are merely gnawing on the already-round-ended soup bones.
Here endeth the lesson.
What's your opinion of individual postseason awards?
This poll is closed
I find them more meaningful than team results
I care about the major awards (MVP, Cy, etc) but I have no use for the proliferation of non-credentialed-beat-writer-sponsored awards
I enjoy the horserace aspect of the awards
I enjoy rooting for my personal favorite players to win, regardless of merit
I'm with monkeyball: after the World Series ends, wake me when pitcher and catchers report
I don't really pay much attention or care strongly one way or the other