02-15-2023, 10:49 AM
(This post was last modified: 02-16-2023, 11:15 PM by dude_man. Edited 2 times in total.)
I don't think it is a secret that the current runoff process for awards is a bit controversial. Now, I know there have been media posted (see here) defending the switch to ranked-choice voting, and it is also a trend that we see in real life elections - but we used to use a Heisman-like system for voting for award winners where each vote grants a certain amount of points.
I won't go into major details about the pros and cons of each system here, but the gist is this - ranked choice allows the voter to "transfer" their vote to their second- and third-choice if their first choice does not achieve a majority of first-place votes, while the Heisman system grants a first place vote 3 points, a second place vote 2 points, and a 3rd place vote 1 point.
Below are the results comparing the two systems, as well as an accounting of the votes each player received. You can look at the runoffs here. I'm not going to make this an opinion piece, I just want to give some analysis into what differences we see. Whether you think one system or the other is fair is up to you.
Most Valuable Player
Right off the bat we have a spicy one! Looking back at the very friendly conversation in the S39 Awards Ballot thread, there was significant debate between our two lead vote-getters in Kumquat Archipelago and Carter Knight. Both players had fantastic seasons, and were both deserving of a nod at this award. Looking at the runoff, we see that Kumquat did have more first place votes at the beginning, but it took two runoffs for him to achieve a majority count of 9 first-place votes. There were a total of 17 ballots submitted, which means that Archipelago was actually left off of 3 ballots and Knight was left off of 2 - but unfortunately for Knight one of those ballots (specifically NOLA's ballot) did not include him, and so when The Stig's votes were transferred they went to Archipelago to help him clinch the award. It should be noted here that The Stig had their vote transferred before Kalam Mekhar as they received fewer total votes - specifically in the third place tally (5 to 2).
Using the old Heisman system, we see that the fact Knight was left off one fewer ballot would have helped him take the MVP award by 1 singular point. We also see that The Stig - who technically placed 4th in the runoff system, received by far the fewest amount of points. But because NOLA voted him into first place, he technically ranked higher than Lalu Muhammad Zohri and Wendell Sailor.
Offensive Player of the Year
This vote here is less controversial than it looks here, perhaps? Because Archipelago won the MVP, Knight becomes an easy shoe-in vote. In the Heisman situation, the reverse would be true. What is interesting is that if we ignore that rule and simply look at the points, Carter Knight technically edges this one out as well due to a higher number of second place votes! The old system ran the tiebreaker by going down the ranks one by one, and so despite being tied in points and first place votes Knight technically wins this one as well. We also see The Stig get a boost from his own team in NOLA once again, boosting their place in the ranked-choice vote but not necessarily the point vote, while Sailor's inclusion on more ballots pushes him up on this point ranking over Kaepercolin, who had more second place votes.
Defensive Player of the Year
Not controversial. This did require a runoff, but both of McTurtle's votes were transferred to Mekhar. I think the point gap fairly accurately measures the lack of complete consensus but still displays Mekhar's deservedness to win the award.
Special Teams Player of the Year
Fairly similar analysis here - Double Doink was clearly the favorite here and while it did again require a runoff, the two systems agree.
Offensive Rookie of the Year
This vote did not require a runoff, and the nearly 20 point difference from first to second does a fairly good job at mapping this out. When the results are so clear, it's good to see that the two different systems agree.
Defensive Rookie of the Year
This vote was close - but both systems agree that Antoine Winfield Jr. was the winner. A 3 point spread is not a lot at all when it comes to the Heisman system, and we see that also reflected in the fact that it took four runoffs to figure this out. In the end, Winfield won by just 1 vote over Maxwell Jacob Friedman (9-8, after vote transfers). Interestingly, Winfield Jr. was on one fewer ballot than MJF (Winfield was left off of NOLA and Opera_Phantom's ballots, while MJF was left off of Dreamsloth's), but the higher number of second-choice votes helped him prevail in both systems.
Performance of the Year
Perhaps the biggest point of interest in this vote is the fact that Archipelago received 2 first place votes but was on fewer ballots than Knight and the same as Fontaine. This change in vote distribution helped him be a distant second in the instant runoff while down in fourth in the Heisman count. Second place doesn't get anything here though (especially given St. Christmas's margin of victory), so the point is a bit moot.
I hope this vote analysis is helpful for everyone - awards are always controversial and no matter what I don't know if there is a perfect system. Personally, I do find the runoff to be more representative of actual voter choice, though I can see both sides of this coin. When a vote is as close as the MVP was this season, I think the opinions on which system is better will be clouded by bias as to which player/team you actually support. Overall, both systems tend to agree until we get to that kind of ballot, where there really is no consensus - and that is where the debate begins.
I won't go into major details about the pros and cons of each system here, but the gist is this - ranked choice allows the voter to "transfer" their vote to their second- and third-choice if their first choice does not achieve a majority of first-place votes, while the Heisman system grants a first place vote 3 points, a second place vote 2 points, and a 3rd place vote 1 point.
Below are the results comparing the two systems, as well as an accounting of the votes each player received. You can look at the runoffs here. I'm not going to make this an opinion piece, I just want to give some analysis into what differences we see. Whether you think one system or the other is fair is up to you.
Most Valuable Player
Right off the bat we have a spicy one! Looking back at the very friendly conversation in the S39 Awards Ballot thread, there was significant debate between our two lead vote-getters in Kumquat Archipelago and Carter Knight. Both players had fantastic seasons, and were both deserving of a nod at this award. Looking at the runoff, we see that Kumquat did have more first place votes at the beginning, but it took two runoffs for him to achieve a majority count of 9 first-place votes. There were a total of 17 ballots submitted, which means that Archipelago was actually left off of 3 ballots and Knight was left off of 2 - but unfortunately for Knight one of those ballots (specifically NOLA's ballot) did not include him, and so when The Stig's votes were transferred they went to Archipelago to help him clinch the award. It should be noted here that The Stig had their vote transferred before Kalam Mekhar as they received fewer total votes - specifically in the third place tally (5 to 2).
Using the old Heisman system, we see that the fact Knight was left off one fewer ballot would have helped him take the MVP award by 1 singular point. We also see that The Stig - who technically placed 4th in the runoff system, received by far the fewest amount of points. But because NOLA voted him into first place, he technically ranked higher than Lalu Muhammad Zohri and Wendell Sailor.
Offensive Player of the Year
This vote here is less controversial than it looks here, perhaps? Because Archipelago won the MVP, Knight becomes an easy shoe-in vote. In the Heisman situation, the reverse would be true. What is interesting is that if we ignore that rule and simply look at the points, Carter Knight technically edges this one out as well due to a higher number of second place votes! The old system ran the tiebreaker by going down the ranks one by one, and so despite being tied in points and first place votes Knight technically wins this one as well. We also see The Stig get a boost from his own team in NOLA once again, boosting their place in the ranked-choice vote but not necessarily the point vote, while Sailor's inclusion on more ballots pushes him up on this point ranking over Kaepercolin, who had more second place votes.
Defensive Player of the Year
Not controversial. This did require a runoff, but both of McTurtle's votes were transferred to Mekhar. I think the point gap fairly accurately measures the lack of complete consensus but still displays Mekhar's deservedness to win the award.
Special Teams Player of the Year
Fairly similar analysis here - Double Doink was clearly the favorite here and while it did again require a runoff, the two systems agree.
Offensive Rookie of the Year
This vote did not require a runoff, and the nearly 20 point difference from first to second does a fairly good job at mapping this out. When the results are so clear, it's good to see that the two different systems agree.
Defensive Rookie of the Year
This vote was close - but both systems agree that Antoine Winfield Jr. was the winner. A 3 point spread is not a lot at all when it comes to the Heisman system, and we see that also reflected in the fact that it took four runoffs to figure this out. In the end, Winfield won by just 1 vote over Maxwell Jacob Friedman (9-8, after vote transfers). Interestingly, Winfield Jr. was on one fewer ballot than MJF (Winfield was left off of NOLA and Opera_Phantom's ballots, while MJF was left off of Dreamsloth's), but the higher number of second-choice votes helped him prevail in both systems.
Performance of the Year
Perhaps the biggest point of interest in this vote is the fact that Archipelago received 2 first place votes but was on fewer ballots than Knight and the same as Fontaine. This change in vote distribution helped him be a distant second in the instant runoff while down in fourth in the Heisman count. Second place doesn't get anything here though (especially given St. Christmas's margin of victory), so the point is a bit moot.
I hope this vote analysis is helpful for everyone - awards are always controversial and no matter what I don't know if there is a perfect system. Personally, I do find the runoff to be more representative of actual voter choice, though I can see both sides of this coin. When a vote is as close as the MVP was this season, I think the opinions on which system is better will be clouded by bias as to which player/team you actually support. Overall, both systems tend to agree until we get to that kind of ballot, where there really is no consensus - and that is where the debate begins.