You Call That a Comeback?

The criteria for winning a batting title are crystal clear. A player needs:
-
1. 3.1 plate appearances per team game in either the NL or AL
-
2. The highest batting average (H/AB) in that respective league
Even in the exceedingly rare circumstance in which a player can win the batting title with fewer than 3.1 PA per team game, as long as he would still possess the highest batting average if he went hitless in enough at-bats to reach the necessary plate appearance threshold, the rules are fully laid out. There’s no room for interpretation.
Few other individual honors in the sport work this way. For proof, look no further than the MVP debate, which rages on to this day: Is there a meaningful difference between the best player and the most valuable player? After decades of argument, a consensus remains out of reach.
Awards like the MVP, Cy Young, and Rookie of the Year will always be contentious because they are determined by a panel of human voters rather than a statistical calculation. But the difference between the batting title and the BBWAA awards goes beyond the subjective/objective distinction. The criteria for the BBWAA awards (and most other individual honors) aren’t just subjective; they are incredibly minimal. Not only is it up to each individual voter to decide who the most valuable player is, but it is also each voter’s job to determine what the word “valuable” even means. As the BBWAA puts it on the MVP ballot, there is no “clear-cut definition” of “most valuable.”
This goes beyond the MVP award, even if that particular prize is the source of the fiercest argumentation. I’ve taken part in debates about whether pitcher defense (and before the universal DH, pitcher offense) should play a role in Cy Young voting. I am a firm “no” in that discussion, but I’ve been surprised to learn how many people feel the opposite way. To be fair, they have a point; it’s not totally clear if the Cy Young is for the best pitcher or the best pitcher.
There is plenty of squabbling to be had over any subjective award, but I have found none as difficult to pin down as the Comeback Player of the Year, presented by MLB itself and selected by a panel of MLB.com beat writers. We can nitpick the definitions of terms like “most valuable,” “best pitcher,” or “top rookie,” but ultimately, the difference between anyone’s individual opinions will be relatively small. The word “comeback,” however, is open to far more interpretation. Where do I even begin? Read the rest of this entry »