Kind of not sure if the concept is correct. For eg for the bowling MVP. U have mentioned in most teams the top four batsman are the best players. I guess you need to understand that not all teams are playing tournaments or even if they are, and that a lot of the games played leather or tennis are by ppl who enjoy playing cricket. So it’s not necessary that top four are best batsman..

Coz based on what u say if teams worst batsman opens and a bowler takes a wicket then that means his MVP points are higher than the bowler who took the main batsman wicket just because he came lower in the order.

Isn’t it just better to see how many wickets and economy rate and did they help win or turn the match around.

This is difficult for batsman unless they have scored 50+ and no bowler took more than three wickets.

My concern is because you don mention every teams first 2–4 bowlers are best. So if batsman score runs of them they should get more points right.

This is my feeling so wrote. How many runs, strike rate, how many wickets, economy, did they contribute in win or help turn match around. These are basics and best parameters I belive.

And yes I am a batsman so you could say little pissed seeing bowlers have more advantage on getting MVP 😊🙈