Just for fun, who would be your MVP of this year's team?

[moqui]

Right, but isn't that because CJ always played well pretty much? (Obviously it's not only just because of that, but its part of it). If you have 2 really good players, and one always plays well and one that is more hit or miss, then you're gonna do better when 2 of them play well, but that doesn't mean (to me, at least) that the inconsistent one is more valuable.

I guess put another way, would Mike have been less valuable to the team if he was more consistent? Or CJ would be more valuable if Mike was more consistent and CJ less consistent?

It's kind of like, though not really and on a much smaller scale (so not really like it all that much) a stat I remember seeing a lot from 2003. We had a really good record when Duany scored in double figures. That wasn't because he was our most valuable or anything like that, but he was our #4 option probably; when you're #4 option has a good game you're probably going to win because you're almost always getting at least solid contributions from guys 1-3.

Which isn't to say Mike was not necessarily the MVP; he still may have been because he had a really good season. But I'm not sure I agree with the line of reasoning being used in the thread, if that makes sense.

personally, I think that, not only was Mike the most valuable, but that he was easily the best player on the team (and the draft board rankings reflect that to a degree). He was even, arguably, more consistent than CJ. Recall that in November and December, "what's wrong with CJ" was a hot topic on the board. In our weekly rankings, although CJ took more weekly first places (by one), Mike was 1st or 2nd every week but 2 and far outpaced CJ in total votes. When Mike had a bad game, it was more noticeable - which is another indication of how valuable he was.