Should MVP always go to a Player on a Contending team?

  From the early part of June to now I’ve always been having this arguement with people about the MVP award. Weather its Basketball Baseball Hockey etc there’s always an argument about the award. This is something that’s talked about every year and It catches my attention a lot. When the MVP is awarded to a player it’s always given to a player on a contending team. Don’t get me wrong I’m not saying the guy did deserve it but it always goes to someone from a team that’s in the playoffs. This year the Dodgers have a player that’s absolutely killing it in Baseball  named Matt Kemp but basically everyone knows his chances at MVP is slim because of the Dodgers performance and record. I find that unfair that Kemp may not win cause the Dodgers maybe out of it. Now I’m not saying this because Kemp is on the Dodgers or because it’s the Dodgers. I don’t believe any player who puts up numbers like that should be penalized at a chance to win the MVP award because of team performance.  I usually get the “It also goes to the player who’s more valuable to the team.” Well guys who do things like that ARE valuable to their team.

 You see awards like Cy Young go to pitchers who aren’t even on play-off teams. Or pitchers with GOOD ERA Stats but a losing record (Felix Hernandez for example). Why can’t MVP awards go to players that aren’t on contending teams? While I was watching the Dodgers/Padres game last night KCAL asked viewers if the MVP award should always go to a player on a contending team. 89% of those viewers said No. MVP is an Individual award just like Gold Glove and Cy Young so why should a team performance  penalize a candidate? Lets open it up here for players who aren’t on contending teams after all it is an Individual award and they have put up the numbers and had the performance to be a candidate after all. I’ll leave it up to you to discus or vote on the Poll but I think MVP shouldn’t always go to a player on a contending team.