Verlander deserves MVP

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from SleeStack1. Show SleeStack1's posts

    Re: Verlander deserves MVP

    My problem is with semantics vs intent.  To me, the following is what I believe the awards SHOULD mean:

    Cy-Young = Most valuable (best) pitcher
    MVP = Most valuable (best) positional player

    Hank Aaron and Silver Slugger awards do not have the cachet of MVP or Cy-Young.

    Wish they would just change 'MVP' to 'MVPP' and then no one could argue for a pitcher to win it anymore.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: Verlander deserves MVP

    In Response to Re: Verlander deserves MVP:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Verlander deserves MVP : I have to disagree with the concept you're using.  For one thing it's rare that you can identify just one player as making the difference between making the playoffs and not making the playoffs.  If the team makes the playoffs by one game, there might be a lot of players who qualify.  If they make it by ten games there might not be anybody.  It doesn't really make sense in my opinion.
    Posted by Hfxsoxnut[/QUOTE]

    Well, there are some years that are more obvious than others.  In '93, the Giants scored 230 more runs than they did in '92, and the only difference in their lineup was Barry Bonds in left.  That's a no-brainer mvp.

    But the reason people disqualify guys like Bautista is that the Blue Jays could have missed the playoffs with him or wihout him.  Well, the Tigers could have made the playoffs without Verlander (almost definitely would have) so in my opinion you can't disqualify one without the other.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: Verlander deserves MVP

    In Response to Re: Verlander deserves MVP:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Verlander deserves MVP : Well, there are some years that are more obvious than others.  In '93, the Giants scored 230 more runs than they did in '92, and the only difference in their lineup was Barry Bonds in left.  That's a no-brainer mvp. But the reason people disqualify guys like Bautista is that the Blue Jays could have missed the playoffs with him or wihout him.  Well, the Tigers could have made the playoffs without Verlander (almost definitely would have) so in my opinion you can't disqualify one without the other.
    Posted by slomag[/QUOTE]

    I would agree that there's a bias against players on teams who missed the playoffs.  I think there's also a bias against pitchers.  It's tough for a player in either of those groups to win.  Verlander is only the second starter and fifth pitcher to win in 40 years (80 awards).
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: Verlander deserves MVP

    In Response to Re: Verlander deserves MVP:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Verlander deserves MVP : I would agree that there's a bias against players on teams who missed the playoffs.  I think there's also a bias against pitchers.  It's tough for a player in either of those groups to win.  Verlander is only the second starter and fifth pitcher to win in 40 years (80 awards).
    Posted by Hfxsoxnut[/QUOTE]

    There should be a bias against pitchers - you can't be the MVP if you have no say in 4 out of every 5 games.  Impact players don't just have an effect during their at-bats - they change the entire game.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: Verlander deserves MVP

    In Response to Re: Verlander deserves MVP:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Verlander deserves MVP : There should be a bias against pitchers - you can't be the MVP if you have no say in 4 out of every 5 games.  Impact players don't just have an effect during their at-bats - they change the entire game.
    Posted by slomag[/QUOTE]

    See I think Verlander did affect the other games.  He threw 251 innings.  That's 60 more than Beckett or Lester, equivalent to the number of innings a lot of relievers throw in a season.  Verlander didn't have one start that was less than 6 innings.  So he gave the Tigers bullpen a break on many occasions, leaving guys available for the next game...he benefitted the entire pitching staff over the season.  If the Red Sox had had a Verlander maybe Bard wouldn't have imploded in September. 
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from SoxFanInIL. Show SoxFanInIL's posts

    Re: Verlander deserves MVP

    In Response to Re: Verlander deserves MVP:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Verlander deserves MVP : Thurman Munson(76'), Pudge Rodriguez(99'), Joe Mauer(09') 
    Posted by jete02fan[/QUOTE]

    76 feet, 99 feet, and 09 feet?

    What are you trying to say?
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: Verlander deserves MVP

    In Response to Re: Verlander deserves MVP:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Verlander deserves MVP : See I think Verlander did affect the other games.  He threw 251 innings.  That's 60 more than Beckett or Lester, equivalent to the number of innings a lot of relievers throw in a season.  Verlander didn't have one start that was less than 6 innings.  So he gave the Tigers bullpen a break on many occasions, leaving guys available for the next game...he benefitted the entire pitching staff over the season.  If the Red Sox had had a Verlander maybe Bard wouldn't have imploded in September. 
    Posted by Hfxsoxnut[/QUOTE]

    I think that's a fair point, but the value of eating an extra inning or two over the course of a week pales in comparison to a guy that forces pitching changes or feeds meatballs to the guy in front of him in the lineup every day for 162 games.

    Besides, if you are swayed by that argument you probably voted for James Shields and his 11 complete games!


     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: Verlander deserves MVP

    In Response to Re: Verlander deserves MVP:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Verlander deserves MVP : I think that's a fair point, but the value of eating an extra inning or two over the course of a week pales in comparison to a guy that forces pitching changes or feeds meatballs to the guy in front of him in the lineup every day for 162 games. Besides, if you are swayed by that argument you probably voted for James Shields and his 11 complete games!
    Posted by slomag[/QUOTE]

    Jacoby Ellsbury had an outstanding season and was a worthy MVP candidate.  But I will bet you that if you go through the game logs you'll only be able to find maybe 20 games where you could directly tie something he did to a win.

    Anyway it's all just fodder for discussion really.
     
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from seattlepat70. Show seattlepat70's posts

    Re: Verlander deserves MVP

    In Response to Re: Verlander deserves MVP:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Verlander deserves MVP : There should be a bias against pitchers - you can't be the MVP if you have no say in 4 out of every 5 games.  Impact players don't just have an effect during their at-bats - they change the entire game.
    Posted by slomag[/QUOTE]


    why arbitrarily set your unit of criteria to number of games that a player is involved in vs the number of plate appearances that a player is involved in, or even vs number of pitches that a player is involved in? a sp may only impact 1 of every five games but his effect on that one game is much much more than 5x that a position player affects that game.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Verlander deserves MVP

    ...but Bautista is disqualified because his team finished 10 games out of playoff contention.

    Players have won MVP while not playing for a playoff team, but it is very rare. I do think making the pkayoffs should be a factor, but not as big as it appears to be.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Verlander deserves MVP

    In Response to Re: Verlander deserves MVP:
    Don't hitters need not great fielding to get more hits? Don't hitters need to face some God-awful pitching to pad their stats?  To me, it is very simple: we have an award for best pitcher, best hitter, best hitter by position, and best fielder. The MVP is the award given to the best of the best. Batters and Pitchers and fielders are all "players", and MVP rewards the best and most dominating player.
    Posted by moonslav59


    Really Moon? That came from you? I would have expected a better argument from one of the smarter guys on this forum.

    I thought it was a brilliant reply...

    ;)

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Verlander deserves MVP

    My problem is with semantics vs intent.  To me, the following is what I believe the awards SHOULD mean:

    Cy-Young = Most valuable (best) pitcher
    MVP = Most valuable (best) positional player

    Hank Aaron and Silver Slugger awards do not have the cachet of MVP or Cy-Young.'

    Maybe the Hank Aaron Award doesn't carry much weight because he wasn't even close to being the alltime best hitter in MLB history; I don't know.

    To me, they have a best hitter award.
    They have a best pitcher award.
    They have a best fielder by position award.
    They have a best hitter by position award.

    Then, they have a best overall player award... MVP.

    I think it is fine the way it is. A pitcher can be the most valuable player on his team and the league, and when he is, he should be considered for the league MVP award.

    Jacoby had a great season, but Verlander had a once in a dcade or more season.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: Verlander deserves MVP

    Won't there always be a hitter that kicks azz all year? So when can a pitcher ever be given the chance to be MVP? Elles played for a team that blew it... Verlander was a huge part of why is team made the play-offs. Last I checked the Tigers don't have 7 all*stars that they either stole or over-payed to play on their team.

    No Boston hitter deserves the MVP this year.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Verlander deserves MVP

    No Boston hitter deserves the MVP this year.


    Even if Boston or Toronto made the playoffs, Verlander's season was much more dominating. He led the league in the areas most considered important. He faced more batters than Ellsbury or Bautista faced pitchers. Only Pedro's 1999-2000 years were more dominating over the past 15-16 years, when compared to his peers.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from kimsaysthis. Show kimsaysthis's posts

    Re: Verlander deserves MVP

    In Response to Re: Verlander deserves MVP:
    [QUOTE]They rarely give it to players from teams that don't make the playoffs. Perhaps that factor is too great for fairness, but I do think it should be a consideration. Verlander was clearly the most dominating PLAYER at his position. He basically won the triple crown of pitching, but just because he won another award, some think that should be a disqualifier. Just because he gets all his "PAs" and then some every 5 days instead of every day, some want him disqualified. Pitchers are players too. When a pitcher has an amzing year like Verlander just did, he should be rewarded with the top prize: MVP.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    Exactly, Moon.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from Thesemenarecowards. Show Thesemenarecowards's posts

    Re: Verlander deserves MVP

    "Most Valuab;e "PLAYER"."  Moonslav

    Seems sound like an open and shut case to me.  Unless pitchers aren't players, but then what are they?  That is a tough sell, but then again, what is Valuabl=e?

    It should be a rare honor that a pitcher achieves a season worthy of MVP status, I don't know if Verlander '11 reached that level, I know Pedro 99/00 did.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Verlander deserves MVP

    In Response to Re: Verlander deserves MVP:
    [QUOTE]"Most Valuable "PLAYER"."  Moonslav

    Seems sound like an open and shut case to me.  Unless pitchers aren't players, but then what are they?  That is a tough sell, but then again, what is Valuable? It should be a rare honor that a pitcher achieves a season worthy of MVP status, I don't know if Verlander '11 reached that level, I know Pedro 99/00 did.
    Posted by Thesemenarecowards[/QUOTE]

    While Verlander's 2011 season was not like Pedro's '99-'00, it was still the best since then. I'd say the best starting pitcher season in 11 years means he should be strongly considered. I also think that the fact that Ellsbury and bautista's teams did not make the playoffs factors into the choice. I do not think it should disqualify them, but it is and should be at least a small factor.

    While I do see Jacoby's
    9.4 WAR as being 1.1 above Bautista's 8.3 and being pretty dominating when you consider he stole many bases and won the Gold Glove as well (an award I have no faith in), I do not think it was as dominating as Verlander's "triple crown" season. If you look at just the batting component of WAR, here's what you'll find:
    1) Bautista  64.7
    2) Miggy      64.4
    3) AGon       47.4
    4) Jacoby   46.0
    5) Napoli     41.3
    6) Grandy   40.2
    7) Papi         39.6
    8) Gordon   35.5
    9) Pedey     31.7
    10) Konerko 31.4 

    Jacoby finished 5th in OPS.

    He had a fantastic year, no doubt, but he did not have a season a cut above the rest as Verlander did.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: Verlander deserves MVP

    In Response to Re: Verlander deserves MVP:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Verlander deserves MVP : Jacoby Ellsbury had an outstanding season and was a worthy MVP candidate.  But I will bet you that if you go through the game logs you'll only be able to find maybe 20 games where you could directly tie something he did to a win. Anyway it's all just fodder for discussion really.  
    Posted by Hfxsoxnut[/QUOTE]

    I think you're right, but try that same exercise with Ben Zobrist.  
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: Verlander deserves MVP

    In Response to Re: Verlander deserves MVP:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Verlander deserves MVP : why arbitrarily set your unit of criteria to number of games that a player is involved in vs the number of plate appearances that a player is involved in, or even vs number of pitches that a player is involved in? a sp may only impact 1 of every five games but his effect on that one game is much much more than 5x that a position player affects that game.
    Posted by seattlepat70[/QUOTE]

    Because the goal is to win as many games as possible - not to dominate in a select few games.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: Verlander deserves MVP

    Pitchers have won the World Series MVP many times...a high percentage in fact, and there's been little controversy about it.  If a pitcher can be the MVP over one series of 4-7 games, why can't they be MVP over a full season?
     
  21. This post has been removed.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: Verlander deserves MVP

    In Response to Re: Verlander deserves MVP:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Verlander deserves MVP : an interesting point nut one that I don't recall hearing B4 while I have NP with pitchers winning it maybe pitching every 4 days vs 5 days is the break off point ;-)
    Posted by pinstripezac[/QUOTE]

    Aha, yes, zac, and what I would expect some people to say is, well, if he was the winning pitcher in 2 of the 4 wins, he won half the games.  Once you buy into that argument, you're at least admitting that a guy who was only in 2 games could be more important than a guy who was in 7. 
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from saintJ. Show saintJ's posts

    Re: Verlander deserves MVP

    In Response to Re: Verlander deserves MVP:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Verlander deserves MVP : Aha, yes, zac, and what I would expect some people to say is, well, if he was the winning pitcher in 2 of the 4 wins, he won half the games.  Once you buy into that argument, you're at least admitting that a guy who was only in 2 games could be more important than a guy who was in 7. 
    Posted by Hfxsoxnut[/QUOTE]

    Well no, he didnt win half the games, he won half the wins. There is a big difference in post season play with extra time off between games.  Now if that pitcher won half his teams regular season games we can talk.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: Verlander deserves MVP

    In Response to Re: Verlander deserves MVP:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Verlander deserves MVP : Well no, he didnt win half the games, he won half the wins. There is a big difference in post season play with extra time off between games.  Now if that pitcher won half his teams regular season games we can talk.
    Posted by saintJ[/QUOTE]

    But do you agree that if a pitcher has 2 complete-game wins and his team wins the series 4-3, that he could be a worthy series MVP?
     
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: Verlander deserves MVP

    Just think; in an alternate universe somewhere, Verlander is on the Red Sox, made the playoffs as a result, and Ellsbury is on the Tigers. Ellsbury wins the MVP, and the poll at the top would indicate Verlander should have won.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share