161 G, 602 AB, 115 R, 39 HR, 126 RBI, 40 SB, .324 AVG, .399 OBP, .586 SLG, .419 wOBA, 8.7 WAR
150 G, 563 AB, 109 R, 33 HR, 111 RBI, 33 SB, .332 AVG, .397 OBP, .597 SLG, .433 wOBA, 7.8 WAR
I suppose you could make an argument for picking Braun over Kemp for 2011 National League MVP, but it would be a stretch. Kemp hit 6 more home runs, had 15 more RBI, stole 7 more bases, and was worth almost a full win more to his team than Braun. Not many people would argue against the fact that Kemp had a better season than Braun, but I guess this award isn't about who was the best player in the league.
But shouldn't it be? Did Matt Kemp have anything to do with the Dodgers 79 losses? Did Kemp have any measurable influence on his team's horrid bullpen and poor performance in close games? No, Kemp was incredible all year long. He had one of the best offensive seasons we have seen in a long time, but he gets screwed out of an award he rightfully deserved because his team didn't compete? That doesn't make sense to me.
I can understand an argument that says that a player isn't as valuable to his team if they don't make the playoffs anyway. If Kemp would have had an average season, the Dodgers still would have been in the same spot as before, but if Braun had an average season, his Brewers might not have made it the whole way to the NLCS. However, why would it make sense to give out the MVP trophy only to players that had good teams around them? It's not fair. Kemp and Braun could only do so much for their teams, and they both did about everything they could, the rest was up to their teammates, a factor that they have no impact on. Why let a factor that the player doesn't influence decide who wins the award? Doesn't that just sound stupid?
If you're trying to pick the better of two options at your job, and one looks a little bit better than the other one, would you flip a coin to make your final decision? No, you would look deeper into it and figure out which one is actually better, you wouldn't leave it to random chance. Major League Baseball let random chance decide the NL MVP this year. Braun and Kemp did not determine how their teammates played this year, it was a random variable, and that was the final decision maker for the MVP award.
How about we give the award to the player who had the best season and not worry about the factors around that they couldn't influence? Or maybe just add a new award, that doesn't have a name that can be taken in different ways. "The Best Player Award". Value is relative, so let's not complicate things. I can understand giving an award to a player that did the most to help his team have relevant success, but taking an award away from a player that had a better season doesn't make sense to me.
Ryan Braun had a great season in 2011, but he was not the best player in his league. Maybe there's more to the MVP award than just being the best, but it shouldn't be that way. Give the award to the player that had the best season and stop letting random factors make decisions.