One of the dumbest things that happens every year is the argument about the definition of “Most Valuable Player” in the major American sports leagues. The argument goes like this; Most Valuable is a nebulous concept and it leads to a bunch of unanswerable, fake deep questions and interminable arguments about whether the Most Valuable Player can be on a bad team and that changing the award to simply say “Best Player” or “Most outstanding” would fix this. That doesn’t make any sense. Most valuable and best are virtually the same concept in sports, change the award to Best and the argument will go from “How can Connor McDavid be the most valuable player when his team didn’t make the playoffs?” to “How can Connor McDavid be the best player when his team didn’t make the playoffs?” and then we will have the exact same debate that we have today except it will be about what “Best” means. The problem with the debate isn’t the specific wording of the award, the problem is the contrived controversy that exists to create fodder for conversation from the airwaves of ESPN to the Whole Foods bar that weird misshapen dads gather at in my hometown. Anywys, I’m Mike Wilder and that’s my take.