I know there has been a lot of discussion about how leagues figure out the MVP, because a player can play one game, get a 9, and then play no more and win the award. My solution is as follows: instead of finding the highest average rating, award the MVP to the player with the highest cumulative rating. This will reward players who play well and play in a lot of games, which is a better indication of the player that is most valuable to that team over the course of the season.

There are some potential shortcomings to this: for example, teams who are constantly improving may not play the same players very often. However, who is more valuable to a team: a superstar on a team of superstars who plays half of the team's games, or a star on a team of ordinary players who plays all of his games?

I think this method would be better to figure out the player who deserves MVP more, and not a player who has just played one game. It also should not be hard to program. If Top Eleven can determine the average rating, the sum of the ratings should not be too difficult to figure out.

Let me know what you guys think!