The Athletic keeps growing .......

I don't think writers should be involved in official awards.

 

Does The New York Times still have a policy forbidding its employees from participating in anything involving sponsors? As it was explained to me many years ago, reporters could vote for MVP, but not the PaidAd.com MVP.

I'm not clear how MetLife Stadium/Barclays Center/Citi Field, etc. figure into reporting.

 

Who would you have vote then? The players? Coaches? Fans? Tony LaRussa and his minions?

Seriously, no system is going to be perfect, but I think having the beat guys vote seems the most fair to the aspirants.

 

Let GMs vote. Writers should be reporting the news, not helping make it.

 

Agree with the second part, but I don’t think having GMs vote is the answer, either. Can they be impartial? Hell no.

 

When players have incentives and bonuses in their contracts for some of the awards, you really think that makes sense?

 

You think it makes more sense for some possibly mean-spirited writer to take it upon himself to screw over a player who was curt in the locker room?

 

Such love for the profession, you show.

 

Duly noted, Yoda, your sarcasm is.

 

That should be the reason writers shouldn’t be voting. They shouldn’t have a financial impact on the people they cover.

 

Back to the original question: If not the writers, then who? Everyone involved in the game can have a financial impact on a player. Broadcasters, GMs, other players, sportswriters. These people either cover the players or have financial incentives to vote for or against certain guys. Hell, a GM might vote against a guy hoping his market value stays down and he becomes more affordable. Or he might fuck him because the guy didn't sign with him in the past or was a dick during negotiations. The field will be muddied no matter the participants.