Help settle a player of the year debate

I don't think a kid's choice of school should be anywhere in a discussion for athlete of the year. I know a player who goes to Pittsburgh is probably better than someone who attends Slippery Rock (DII), but it has no bearing on what they accomplished over the course of the season.

 

it's not A's fault he's playing lesser teams. it's a copout, but i'd split it.

 

I cringed when I heard that, too. Especially when the coach broke out the old, "Well, he wanted the ball" quote. That's fine, but you don't have to give it to him. You want to bring him for an inning or two at the end to lock it down, fine. You want to throw him for seven innings? Not fine.
Worst part is, this team's second-round series starts Thursday. It wouldn't surprise me if he starts Game 1.

 

Oh, and another fun element to all this is that the parents of both players are totally batshit crazy. Whoever we pick, we're going to get psychotic e-mails and phone calls. Is kevlar available for sale most anywhere, or do I have to go to a specialty shop?

 

Which one of them is white?

 

I think it should be one of the litany of factors one should consider. Consider it a second opinion from an unbiased outside source.

 

These things are always difficult and with the players in different divisions of play, it becomes even tougher to do. Have you consulted with other coaches (or scouts, if available)? You know, the whole, if you could trade for just one guy, who would it be?

 

Talking to my editor this morning, I think he has. He seems to be leaning toward Player B right now. I haven't yet, but will probably have to before this is over.
When the numbers are relatively even, I usually look at who was more valuable to their team. In this case, neither team would be having the success it is without their guy. Other than the level of competition, these guys are dead even in every way. It may come down to a coin flip.

 

I guess I just don't see how a college decision should factor into this choice. This should be about what happens on the field, not a player's resume. I understand it's an unbiased opinion, which is great, but you can get those from other people -- like Red said, other coaches.

Maybe it's just my personal preference, but if you factor in the schools at the beginning of the year -- depending on where you are -- only a few kids would have a shot at this award. Everyone should start the season with a clean slate. And after all, Player A is the one going to play at school. Player B might walk onto the team. So if anyone gets the edge there, it's got to be Player A. For all we know, Player A is inferior to Player B, so why should him playing at school and Player B's not even be in the discussion? You can't have it both ways. (And I'm not pointing the finger at you, SG.)

 

Co-players of the year is the lame, easy way out of this. I'd go with the second guy.

 

Why don't we go ahead and keep that between us, though.

 

I was just thinking about the letter to the editor if that leaked out.