• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

AL MVP award is a joke

N

NeoV

Diamond Member
A starting pitcher should never, ever, win the MVP award.

The Tigers played 162 games - Verlander pitched in 34 of them.

The Cy Young award is for the best pitcher - which he clearly was in the AL this year.
 
Agreed, that's pretty fucking ridiculous. Did the dude pitch blow outs in all 34? Unless they were all significant shut outs, I don't see how they would even get close to qualifying since they have their own Most Valuable Pitcher award.
 
NeoV said:
A starting pitcher should never, ever, win the MVP award.

The Tigers played 162 games - Verlander pitched in 34 of them.

The Cy Young award is for the best pitcher - which he clearly was in the AL this year.
Click to expand...

Just goes to show how weak the AL was this year 🙂
 
i think it's pretty awesome. he probably had the highest WARP of any player in MLB this year. so, yes, he's the most valuable player.
 
I think I am outgrowing baseball. It used to be enjoyable, but for some reason I can't be arsed to watch it any longer. Even when my team is doing well, I just can't get excited. I do have to agree with Drako, maybe the AL is slipping in talent. I don't even think Verlander was all that impressive, he played in the weakest division in the major leagues. Over 20% of his wins were against the White Sox :/ He lost 2 out of 3 against the Yankees, and 2 out of 3 against the Rangers. Maybe he was worn out from taking down the mighty Royals, White Sox, and Twins all year.
 
ElFenix said:
i think it's pretty awesome. he probably had the highest WARP of any player in MLB this year. so, yes, he's the most valuable player.
Click to expand...

He and Bautista tied for lead in the AL in WAR. On that alone he's a contender for MVP because even though he appeared in only 34 games he accomplished more in those games than all except one other player in the league. The Sox missed the playoffs with Ellsbury, the Jays missed the playoffs with Bautista and the Yankees likely would have made the playoffs without Granderson. But without Verlander the Tigers were going nowhere, he made a difference and took a team from also-ran to playoffs. If you focus on the V in MVP Verlander clearly had as much value to the Tigers as any player in baseball had to their team.
 
GagHalfrunt said:
He and Bautista tied for lead in the AL in WAR. On that alone he's a contender for MVP because even though he appeared in only 34 games he accomplished more in those games than all except one other player in the league. The Sox missed the playoffs with Ellsbury, the Jays missed the playoffs with Bautista and the Yankees likely would have made the playoffs without Granderson. But without Verlander the Tigers were going nowhere, he made a difference and took a team from also-ran to playoffs. If you focus on the V in MVP Verlander clearly had as much value to the Tigers as any player in baseball had to their team.
Click to expand...
That argument was good at one point in the season, but the Tigers won the Central by 15 games.
 
It is hard to argue against a pitcher who wins 24 games. He was about as close to a sure thing on the mound this year as I can remember in recent memory.
 
BlahBlahYouToo said:
cabrera was on fire in the playoffs.
Click to expand...
I believe in all the major American sports, awards voting is done at the end of the regular season. Otherwise Barry Bonds and Alex Rodriguez would have many fewer trophies. 😉

IMO guys on non-playoff teams like Matt Kemp and Jose Bautista should be the frontrunners, although I do not understand Bautista's career trajectory. 10 years ago, he'd be a guaranteed PEDs case.
 
no one is saying Verlander wasn't great this year, but he only started 34 games - they played 162. Cabrerra was the MVP on that team, Verlander was just the best pitcher.
 
No player who appeared in only 21% of his team's games should be the league MVP, I don't care how great a year he had. Pitchers have their own award.
 
NeoV said:
no one is saying Verlander wasn't great this year, but he only started 34 games - they played 162. Cabrerra was the MVP on that team, Verlander was just the best pitcher.
Click to expand...

They won 95 games this and this guy directly influenced 25% of those wins. That is quite a bit.
 
I saw this on ESPN which I thought was a good counter-argument:

For all of the "he only played in 35 games" people....Verlander faced on average 35 batters a game. Therefore, in his 35 games, he affected 1,225 plays. A batter who plays ALL 162 games and averages 4 at bats and 4 plays in the field a game affects 1,296 plays..... I say that means they're on equal footing when doing comparisons.
Click to expand...
 
that math around Verlander is ridiculous too - does that mean catchers should be MVP's because they 'affect' more plays than the other fielders do too?

Are we going to ignore any defensive ability/plays too since we only want to count at-bats for position players now?

Pedro Martinez had arguably the best season a starting pitcher has EVER had in 1999 - if that wasn't MVP award worthy, this season from Verlander certainly wasn't.

Quite frankly, they need to change the awards - 1 for best pitcher, 1 for best non-pitcher.
 
HopJokey said:
I saw this on ESPN which I thought was a good counter-argument:
Click to expand...

Regardless, it's only 21% of the team's games. No matter how overpowering of a season a starting pitcher has. It's not that pitching doesn't matter, it's that to me it does not compare to an everyday player's potential contribution.
 
NeoV said:
that math around Verlander is ridiculous too - does that mean catchers should be MVP's because they 'affect' more plays than the other fielders do too?

Are we going to ignore any defensive ability/plays too since we only want to count at-bats for position players now?

Pedro Martinez had arguably the best season a starting pitcher has EVER had in 1999 - if that wasn't MVP award worthy, this season from Verlander certainly wasn't.

Quite frankly, they need to change the awards - 1 for best pitcher, 1 for best non-pitcher.
Click to expand...

It's funny you say that. Pedro finished second in the 1999 MVP vote. He lost to.....a Catcher. A catcher also won the award in 2009.
 
NeoV said:
that math around Verlander is ridiculous too - does that mean catchers should be MVP's because they 'affect' more plays than the other fielders do too?

Are we going to ignore any defensive ability/plays too since we only want to count at-bats for position players now?

Pedro Martinez had arguably the best season a starting pitcher has EVER had in 1999 - if that wasn't MVP award worthy, this season from Verlander certainly wasn't.

Quite frankly, they need to change the awards - 1 for best pitcher, 1 for best non-pitcher.
Click to expand...
You can add putouts to those numbers if you want - guess what, it's comparable. And that's if you don't consider the unquantifiable benefit that an ace gives his team by saving their bullpen every five nights. The argument that an everyday position player has more of an effect than a top-of-the-rotation starter is simply asinine.

Argue his play, his statistics, his hairy sasquatch arms for all I care. Those are all better arguments. Hell, the argument that "the MVP isn't for pitchers" is a better one, because at least the basis of that is opinion that is not so embarrassingly easily refuted.

Your sarcastic commentary also rings true - catchers are undervalued as well, until we continue to learn to analyze their impact on games. Open your mind.

And yes, Pedro got robbed. Doesn't really have any bearing on this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top