[Mike Gallo]

I do not know how the Texas Rangers would have finished in last place without him. [img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img]

Does the award go to the best overall player award or should the award go to the player most valuable to his team.

All sarcasm aside, Alex Rodrigues must have had a heck of a year statistically to win the most valuable player award. Only once before has a player from a losing team won the MVP. Andre Dawson in 1987 with the Cubs.

I think Dawson got it because he paid his dues to the league. When he won the award, I feel the writers compensated him later in his career for the find body of work he his in first leg of work with the Expos. Dawson was a five tool centerfielder with the Expos for ten years prior to his winning the mvp his first year with the Cubs.

I have friends who rave that A-Rod is the best player in the league right now. Since I do not follow the American league, I have never watched him play. I have other friends who claim that he plays poker and does not hold the same mvp status. From another source I heard he paid for the time charge for the entire table the entire night.

Should A-Rod deserve the award no matter how poorly his team finished in the standings because he has paid his dues, and his simply the most dominant player of his generation?

I do not feel a player from a losing team deserves the reward, I do not mean to minimize the award for A-Rod, however I just have a purists heart and I feel the award should go to a player from a winning team.

I just wonder if I stand alone here. For the record every person who I have asked prior to the award getting rewarded has told me A-Rod would get it this year.