Thinking about it some more, I guess I like the 4-3-2-1 method for deciding the winner, period, instead of going by whoever wins two categories, with average as the tiebreaker.
In this scenario:
Code:
4-3-2-1
AVG. HR RBI Points
Player A 35-100, .350 3 12 6
Player B 34-100, .340 8 22 10
Player C 33-100, .330 6 23 8
Player D 32-100, .320 7 21 6
Players A, B, & C each win one category, but Player A wins your way because he won Batting Average, while Player B, who clearly had the better month, wins in a 4-3-2-1 set-up.
Or here:
Code:
4-3-2-1
AVG. HR RBI Points
Player A 35-102, .343 6 13 9
Player B 35-103, .340 5 21 10
Player C 33- 98, .337 4 15 7
Player D 33- 99, .333 3 14 4
Player A wins your way because he won two categories, but with a 4-3-2-1 system Player B, who clearly had the better month, wins.
In this scenario
Code:
4-3-2-1
AVG. HR RBI Points
Player A 22-100, .220 6 20 9.0
Player B 35-103, .340 5 19 9.5
Player C 33- 98, .337 5 18 7.0
Player D 33- 99, .333 4 18 4.5
Player A wins under your system, while he arguably had the worst month of the three, while Player B, who arguably had the best month wins in a 4-3-2-1 setup
