Yeah. Hey look he was a great professional. And the writers always dig the long ball and the RBIs with most MVPs. At least he could play D too.
My beef is it is an MVP, so by definition it would be the player who would have the most impact being added or replaced from a roster on a given team, based on a qualitative judgement. Not whether a guy had the most dingers. Or pitcher wins, etc. That's the HR king, batting champ, triple crown winner, Cy Young winner etc.
That qualitative part is why I am not a big Sabremetric fan as I think it reduces baseball statistics ad absurdum and misses the point of baseball. That is, it is not a bunch of discrete individuals playing unaffected by others and that the only things of value a player can do must be quantifiably measurable. Of course, there are many valuable things that are unmeasurable in every moment of a game. Even banging on trash cans!
So, I can agree with Dawson being a worthy choice, or an unworthy choice, depending on your argument
How's that for equivocation?
Cheers,
Quarky