Does Juan Soto not apply to MVP for not being in a “contender” team?

John heyman has ignited the controversy in social networks with a tweet where he questions the possibilities of Juan Soto to get into the fight for the National League MVP for not being in a team “contending” for the playoffs of MLB.

The comment of Heyman, perhaps on purpose, brings to the table one of the most controversial points of the “Most Valuable Award”Originated by the ambiguity of its definition and the different profiles to which it has been delivered over the years.

And the question is, what is it to be the most valuable in MLB?

Who cares about Ohtani’s campaign on a team that has no chance of making the World Series? What is worth more individual numbers or the possibility of contributing to the team? What do you prefer a good campaign or a championship ring?

The controversy is a lot because SotoObviously, he has numbers to fight for the MVP and the only thing that could leave him out following the argument of the contending team, like Ohtani, Vladi Jr, Harper, Tatis and many others would be not being in the playoffs.

And it is not, of course, the first time that a similar argument has been put on the table. Remember that the controversy occurs every year with Trout and his perfect seasons and playoffs from home. If this year Trout is not in the conversation it is just because he is injured but every year it is the same: Does Trout deserve the MVP or not without being able to get his team into the postseason?

Proponents of this argument ignore (deliberately or not) a fact:

  1. Baseball is the sport where individuals have the least impact on the victory or defeat of a team … therefore the possibility of incidence of a single player is less. Still being Trout.

However, the controversy is served, does it deserve or not Soto and all “non-contenders” the possibility of a Mvp? what do you say?