[CTcard]

I wonder ... do you think that voters valued Baker as an all-arounder at NCAAs (IM and back champ, on free relays) over Katie who swam one stroke at NCAAs? I, too, question the choice of Baker. But I wonder if the fact that Katie was a freestyler (and, I might add, the best all-around freestyler in the world, male or female) at NCAAs is the reason why. Not arguing. Just wondering.

I clearly cannot read the minds of those who voted for swimmer of the meet (or year), but my own thought was that there might be some Ledecky fatigue; she has won so many things in so many places that there was an idea to look for someone else to honour if the situation were close. I also got the impression that the brobdingnagian improvements that Baker made over last year's NCAAs may have played a role.

It was certainly strange that the author of the Swimming World article decided to emphasize why Baker deserved the swimmer of the meet over Howe, Manuel, and King given that the award clearly came down to King or Ledecky - and the guy didn't apparently notice that Ledecky was there.  Still, his key statement was nominally true and probably the best argument one could make for Baker edging Ledecky,

no one besides Baker won three individual events outright.

[CTcard]

I wonder ... do you think that voters valued Baker as an all-arounder at NCAAs (IM and back champ, on free relays) over Katie who swam one stroke at NCAAs? I, too, question the choice of Baker. But I wonder if the fact that Katie was a freestyler (and, I might add, the best all-around freestyler in the world, male or female) at NCAAs is the reason why. Not arguing. Just wondering.

I clearly cannot read the minds of those who voted for swimmer of the meet (or year), but my own thought was that there might be some Ledecky fatigue; she has won so many things in so many places that there was an idea to look for someone else to honour if the situation were close. I also got the impression that the brobdingnagian improvements that Baker made over last year's NCAAs may have played a role.

It was certainly strange that the author of the Swimming World article decided to emphasize why Baker deserved the swimmer of the meet over Howe, Manuel, and King given that the award clearly came down to King or Ledecky - and the guy didn't apparently notice that Ledecky was there.  Still, his key statement was nominally true and probably the best argument one could make for Baker edging Ledecky,

no one besides Baker won three individual events outright.