Should Postseason Success Be A Factor in Award Voting?

[lordtoffee]

I'm probably not the only one who waits until a couple of rounds into the playoffs to mark my ballots for BBA Awards. I need some time to think over the performances I have seen, as when you are invested in your own team, it is easy to get tunnel vision towards your team and your team's opponents. As a GM of Brooklyn, I naturally know the Atlantic the best, as they are the competition you focus on in a playoff format where it all starts with taking care of your divisional matchups first, and then focus on the other division in your league for the series or two that your team faces. But I can't help but notice that there are players that perform in the postseason that might not get a look at recognition for an award that they could be considered. We give out postseason awards in this league, and those series MVP awards can certainly be used as a factor in dealing with moving said player on via a trade or signing them in free agency. I think award voting should include the postseason, and let me explain why.

Take GM of the Year. A common argument for someone winning that award is by having a big improvement in the regular season from one year to the next. When you go into the voting area of StatsPlus, the change in wins is something that you can sort with to see what the change in wins is. That saves us a step if the voter is short on time. But what about the postseason? Take this year for example. Aaron was able to get into the playoffs, and the Pikemen were able to get to the Cartwright Cup and give the Hustlers a huge scare in that series. To have a team that was able to outperform their playoff position is a heck of an accomplishment, and probably should get Aaron much more consideration for GM of the Year. Personally speaking, I put Aaron high up my ballot when accounting for said accomplishment. If GM of the year is viewed as an award for building up a team to a playoff team over a period of time, shouldn't part of a season be included in awards consideration.

As for player awards, it's not like OOTP hides the information. When I do playoff previews, I always take a look at the html page for previous series in which a team participated to see who performed well in a series, or even a clinching game. I've seen TN mention this, and I wouldn't be surprised if playoff success might alter some plans for all of my fellow GMs in the offseason. Postseason stats are tracked, and are easy to find. There is plenty of information that can change an order of award voting, which could swing some tight races this year.

In closing, I think that there is value in waiting, as that way things can change. After all, baseball is a game of surprises, and we've seen a lot of crazy things in the BBA over the past 75 years. I find it hard to imagine that all of those crazy things should matter in award races?

[Dington]

I think player voting should be regular season, but I support postseason results for GM.

[GoldenOne]

Regular season only. Postseason is a whole different beast.

[Joshua Biddle]

Agree with regular season

[CTBrewCrew]

Do you vote for a GM of the year for someone who has improved say +30 wins in a season, but did not make the playoffs, or for that GM that is perennial winner, playoff contender year after year, and finally wins one? Both have merit.

[shoeless.db]

Do you vote for a GM of the year for someone who has improved say +30 wins in a season, but did not make the playoffs, or for that GM that is perennial winner, playoff contender year after year, and finally wins one? Both have merit.

This is a great question. Every Frick League vote for GM of the year, I can’t help but think Ron and Shaw need to be 1-2 or 2-1 every damn year. There’s really no other options until others prove their worth.

As of this writing, I’ve received a bunch of votes. When I saw the results in statsplus, I thought, I’ll know I’m good as a GM when I win a shit-ton of games and hardly receive any votes.

[7teen]

My GM vote is always contingent on a variety of things. I always take into account league participation as well.

Success of team
Improvement of team
Participation of GM.

All weigh pretty evenly when I decide my vote.

[aaronweiner]

Do you vote for a GM of the year for someone who has improved say +30 wins in a season, but did not make the playoffs, or for that GM that is perennial winner, playoff contender year after year, and finally wins one? Both have merit.

This is a great question. Every Frick League vote for GM of the year, I can’t help but think Ron and Shaw need to be 1-2 or 2-1 every damn year. There’s really no other options until others prove their worth.

As of this writing, I’ve received a bunch of votes. When I saw the results in statsplus, I thought, I’ll know I’m good as a GM when I win a shit-ton of games and hardly receive any votes.

As a guy who just made the playoffs for the 15th straight year and finished fifth, I can tell you, you are not wrong.

[bcslouck]

My GM vote is always contingent on a variety of things. I always take into account league participation as well.

Success of team
Improvement of team
Participation of GM.

All weigh pretty evenly when I decide my vote.

For the most part, same. I think I weight the first two more heavy. I also kind of grade improvement on a curve. Taking a 85 win team to 95 wins is tougher than 75 to 85 in my opinion. I also try to take into account what the GM did the previous offseason. Mainly with some of the players acquired that went under the radar at the time but made big impacts.

[RonCo]

What is the "post-season success" you speak of?