Bald Husky
four score
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2021
- Messages
- 2,356
- Reaction Score
- 13,879
Which player had the best individual performance LY in WCBB? In all the POY awards she was eligible for, Paige Bueckers was voted the winner.
Every year, whether it be basketball, baseball, football, etc., there is always a player that is left out in the cold. This player may have had a great season, but the outcome was pointed toward a player who had a better impact performance on a winning team.
I have said this to my friends for years that the voting criteria is far too broad, and possibly confusing at times to the actually voters. IMHO, there should be two awards, in every sport, amateur or professional, with two separate questions.
First would be the "player of the year". This winner would be for the player with the best statistical year, with the most important aspect being that he/she could come from a poor team, not a winner as is most of the past winners.
The second award would be "The most valuable player". This award is for the player that had the most impact on a team, most likely a winning or championship team. The criteria is completely different, which I said before could confuse many voters.
Being very un-biased, I believe the "player of the year" was Caitlan Clark. The stats she put up were undeniably ridiculous and like Paige, she was a freshman.
There is no doubt in my mind that Paige would be the "most valuable player". Hard to deny the impact she played on a team filled with underclassmen and reaching the FF.
So, what is your opinion. If you were an UN-BIASED judge, how would you vote for these separate awards? I would be interested to know who you would vote for, and if you agree that there should be separate awards issued in this category.
Every year, whether it be basketball, baseball, football, etc., there is always a player that is left out in the cold. This player may have had a great season, but the outcome was pointed toward a player who had a better impact performance on a winning team.
I have said this to my friends for years that the voting criteria is far too broad, and possibly confusing at times to the actually voters. IMHO, there should be two awards, in every sport, amateur or professional, with two separate questions.
First would be the "player of the year". This winner would be for the player with the best statistical year, with the most important aspect being that he/she could come from a poor team, not a winner as is most of the past winners.
The second award would be "The most valuable player". This award is for the player that had the most impact on a team, most likely a winning or championship team. The criteria is completely different, which I said before could confuse many voters.
Being very un-biased, I believe the "player of the year" was Caitlan Clark. The stats she put up were undeniably ridiculous and like Paige, she was a freshman.
There is no doubt in my mind that Paige would be the "most valuable player". Hard to deny the impact she played on a team filled with underclassmen and reaching the FF.
So, what is your opinion. If you were an UN-BIASED judge, how would you vote for these separate awards? I would be interested to know who you would vote for, and if you agree that there should be separate awards issued in this category.