It's that time of the year, baseball fans. This is the time when the autumn air is electric with the October heroics of great athletes: Athletes with names like Bonds, Washburn and Hunter. When talk of the playoffs is exhausted, there is one other topic about which die-hard baseball fans can argue into the wee hours of the morning: The postseason awards voting. This year, there are two clear-cut winners in the leagues' Most Valuable Player races, while the Cy Young races are down to the wire.In the American League, Alex Rodriguez was head and shoulders above the rest. He had an epic year, which will serve as fodder to historians for generations. There are many fans who say that Rodriguez does not deserve the MVP award because his team lost 90 games and did not make the playoffs. To them, I say there are two reasons why this is should be a non-issue. First, the MVP is an individual award, not a team award. The reward for playing on a successful team is playing in the postseason and all that goes along with it. The MVP should be, and from certain prior instances is, an award for the player who, through performance, was the best in his league.

The second argument against discrediting A-Rod is the fact that there have been many players who won the MVP for teams that either did not make the playoffs, or were entirely terrible. In 1987, Andre Dawson won the MVP for a Chicago Cubs team that finished in last place. In fact, he won the award over Jack Clark, who had one of the best seasons for a first baseman in recent memory, and led the team to the best record in the National League. Cal Ripken won two MVP awards for teams that did not make the playoffs; Jeff Bagwell was the unanimous choice in 1994 even though his team was not slotted for a playoff berth at the time of the strike. These are just several examples that prove the award goes to the Most Valuable Player, not the Most Valuable Player for a Team That Makes the Playoffs.

Why, statistically, does A-Rod deserve the MVP? He contributed more than anyone else offensively, while playing the most demanding position on the diamond at Gold Glove caliber. A-Rod was eighth in the league in On-Base Percentage, and third in the league in Slugging Average. His OPS (On-Base Percentage plus Slugging) was fourth in the league, and 135 points better than the next best shortstop.

This brings me to the point that a player must be compared within the context of his position to measure value, and he must be judged up against a league average player. There is a statistic that can be found on baseballprospectus.com that measures this quantity and calls it RAP, or Runs Above Position. Shortstop is the position in which a manager is often willing to sacrifice offense for good defense, so if a player can produce really well at short, he is miles ahead of the competition. In 2002, A-Rod had 68.2 RAP, and as each 9.5 or so RAP translates into a win, he was more than 7.5 games above average. The only player in the league to come close to coming within 10 runs of A-Rod's numbers was Jim Thome, who is a below average firstbaseman defensively.

According to preliminary numbers, A-Rod added another 20 or more runs of value with his defensive prowess, more than any other shortstop in the AL. (for comparison: Red Sox utility man Rey Sanchez was worth 45 runs with his glove, while Derek Jeter's defense cost his team more than 20 runs). When you add it all up, A-Rod added nearly 10 wins to his team, while no other player even added seven. There is no doubt about it- A-Rod should be taking home the trophy - but we shall see if the idiot writers of the BBWAA (Baseball Writers Association of America) agree.

The National League MVP race is even more clear-cut. The only player who even produced MVP worthy numbers this season was one Barry Lamarr Bonds. Last year, Bonds broke several of baseballs most important single-season records: Most home runs, most walks and perhaps most importantly, the single season record for Slugging Average which had stood since 1920 and was thought to be unbreakable by most.

This year Barry outdid himself. Although people are still talking about how jacked up the offense is now, and how supposedly everyone is "juiced," offense was way down in 2002, especially in the National League. In addition, Bonds plays in PacBell Park, the best pitchers' park in baseball, and is especially tough on left-handed homerun hitters. In spite of all of this, Bonds went on to break two more supposedly unbreakable records: he had an On-Base Percentage of .582, nearly 30 points better than Ted Williams' .553 in 1941. He also walked 198 times (over 60 of which were intentional), breaking his own incredible record of 177 walks in a single season. All of this helped to give him an OPS of 1.381, breaking Babe Ruth's long standing mark that he himself tied last year.

In terms of RAP, Bonds' greatness is only further elucidated. Bonds posted numbers that are 126.2 runs above average. The next closest National League player is Brian Giles, who had a RAP of 53.9. This means that the gap between Bonds and Giles is larger than the gap between Giles and Rey Ordonez. If that doesn't convince you, you are beyond salvation.

The Cy Young race is a little bit tighter than the National League race. In the American League there are five viable candidates: Derek Lowe, Pedro Martinez, Roy Halladay, Barry Zito and Tim Hudson. These five candidates are all very similar, except for Martinez, in that they are not strikeout pitchers. In addition, most of the candidates have very low walk rates and few wild pitches. In a case such as this, one has to dig deep to set apart the candidates. Both Boston and Oakland had incredible defenses this year that were great at getting outs. This is especially important because good defense helps control-pitchers such as these look better than they are (it has helped Tom Glavine for more than a decade). Toronto, on the other hand, has one of the worst defenses in the league, meaning Halladay was unduly punished statistically for playing in front of a poor defense. Because of this, my vote for Cy Young would go to Roy Halladay, with Pedro Martinez a close second.

The National League Cy Young competition is a three-horse race. In this particular race, win goes to Randy Johnson, place goes to Curt Schilling and show goes to Roy Oswalt. Until the last month of the season, it appeared that Schilling and Johnson were dead even as they had similar innings pitched, strikeout and ERA numbers. However, Johnson had a great September while Schilling got rocked. In the end, Johnson finished with another amazing year and made it clear to all but the densest of sportswriters and fans that he will be a first-ballot Hall of Famer. Schilling had a good year, too, but remember that a 3.23 ERA is not that impressive in a depressed offensive year like this.

The real surprise, though, is 25-year-old Roy Oswalt, who came out of nowhere to be the best NL pitcher in the second half. His accomplishment is made all the more amazing because he pitches in the second best hitters' park in baseball, Enron Memorial Stadium (it was good while it lasted, stockholders), and he had the second worst defense in the league behind him. In almost any other year he would have been a worthy choice for Cy Young, but it's almost certain he 'll have a few before he hangs up his mitt.

While the awards are the anti-climactic part of the postseason, it gives us time to reflect on the phenomenal season we were graced with. We got to see a 38-year-old defy all our notions of aging while a 27-year-old wunderkind proved he is the best shortstop since Honus Wagner. We wouldn't want to run into Randy Johnson in a dark alley, but we never miss his televised starts (and Schilling isn't too shabby either). Let us hope that 2003 is even better, and that this will be the last full season presided over by the evil Fagin known as Bud Selig.