1 of 1- forsberg_us
- Administrator
Offline - Registered: 9/08/2010
- Posts: 9,944
Let the debate begin
Verlander wins AL MVP
- alz
- Larry Walker
Offline
- Registered: 9/23/2010
- Posts: 2,396
Re: Let the debate begin
Not sure what side I'm on. I can see a pitcher being the "Most Valuable Player" on a team, and in a league. I also can see the "The Most Valuable Pitcher award is the Cy Young, and should be seperate" argument.
Pick your poison, I would be inclined to just tip my cap to him. Bob Gibson did the same thing, and I'm fairly sure nobody here begrudged him when he did.
- artie_fufkin
- Administrator
Offline
- From: God's Little Acre
- Registered: 9/08/2010
- Posts: 22,429
Re: Let the debate begin
Verlander appeared on only 27 ballots and was omitted by Jim Ingraham of The Herald-News in Ohio, who voted Bautista first. Sheldon Ocker of the Akron Beacon Journal voted Verlander eighth.
Ingraham doesn't think pitchers should be eligible for MVP.
"I'd wrestled with this for a long time. If I was ever going to vote for pitcher for MVP, it would be him this year," Ingraham said. "He hasn't appeared in 79 percent of their games, any starting pitcher really doesn't appear in 79 percent of his team's games in a year.
"Would you vote for an NFL quarterback for MVP if he only appeared in three of his team's 16 games, which would be 21 percent? So that's part of it. Another part of it is I think they're apples and oranges. The guys that are in there every day, there's a grind to a season that a starting pitcher doesn't, I don't think, experience the way the everyday position players do playing 150, 160 games."
That's the stupidest fucking argument I've ever read.
Last edited by artie_fufkin (11/21/2011 3:13 pm)
- artie_fufkin
- Administrator
Offline
- From: God's Little Acre
- Registered: 9/08/2010
- Posts: 22,429
Re: Let the debate begin
One of the things that helped Verlander was none of the position players in the AL put up huge numbers.
I'd be interested to see if George King from the N.Y. Post had a vote and for whom he voted. King left Pedro Martinez off his ballot in 1999 under the rationale he didn't consider pitchers for MVP, a year after he voted for David Wells and Rick Helling.
- Max
- Colby Rasmus
Offline
- From: Pacific Northwest
- Registered: 9/07/2010
- Posts: 5,269
Re: Let the debate begin
I have no problems with a pitcher being MVP.
They could change the system, and make an MVP award for non-pitchers, but that would merely open up a gap for a new award of MVP of all players.
- artie_fufkin
- Administrator
Offline
- From: God's Little Acre
- Registered: 9/08/2010
- Posts: 22,429
Re: Let the debate begin
Max wrote:
I have no problems with a pitcher being MVP.
They could change the system, and make an MVP award for non-pitchers, but that would merely open up a gap for a new award of MVP of all players.
It's an individual voter prerogative to dismiss pitchers under the rationale they don't appear in enough games to warrant consideration. But at least be consistent. You can't vote one year for David Wells because he's on the Yankees, and not vote for Pedro Martinez the next year because he's on the Red Sox.
- alz
- Larry Walker
Offline
- Registered: 9/23/2010
- Posts: 2,396
Re: Let the debate begin
I agree. I'm splitting out the "Most Valuable Player" and saying, well on a baseball team, who's been your most valuable player? That can be a pitcher, and so consequently, the league MVP can also be a pitcher.
Do I think Verlander deserved it? In my opinion a pitcher really needs to go above and beyond to make up for the fact that he's not on the mound for 80% of the teams games. Going 24-5-5 (24 wins, 5 losses, 5 no decisions) is pretty special. Having a 4+/1 strikeout/walk ratio is pretty goddamned amazing too (250/57). I can see the vote. Verlander won 16 games after the Tigers lost the previous game. That's huge.
I have more of an issue with pitchers winning it now, when the rotations are 5 men deep, then I did back in the older ages when pitchers threw every 3 days or less. Doesn't mean I would never vote for them, just means they better be amazing dominant.
I have no problem with a closer winning either. Eckersly winning in 1992 was valid. 7-1 with 51 saves and a 1.91 ERA
I will say however, you have to be AMAZING SICK FILTHY GODDAMNED GOOD to win my MVP vote as a pitcher. Verlander was really damned impressive.
- forsberg_us
- Administrator
Offline
- Registered: 9/08/2010
- Posts: 9,944
Re: Let the debate begin
I don't personally have an issue with it either. In general, the "controversy" only occurs when a pitcher dominates and there isn't a clear cut position player who deserves the award. That's what happened this season. The last time a starter won the award was 1986, so it doesn't happen very often.
- •
Thread Starter- don.rob11
- Édgar Rentería
Offline
- Registered: 9/11/2010
- Posts: 4,299
Re: Let the debate begin
3 Cardinal pitchers have won it .
- artie_fufkin
- Administrator
Offline
- From: God's Little Acre
- Registered: 9/08/2010
- Posts: 22,429
Re: Let the debate begin
3 Cardinal pitchers have won it .
If I recall, Dizzy won in '34 when he won 30 games. He's still the last NL pitcher to win 30. Gibby won in '68, the historic year he had the 1.12 ERA. One of the amazing stats about that year was he lost nine games. Can't you imagine going out to the mound thinking if you give up two runs, you're probably going to lose?
I don't know who the third Cardinals pitcher would be. Maybe Mort Cooper? Pete Alexander? Jesse Haines?
Last edited by artie_fufkin (11/22/2011 9:22 am)
- artie_fufkin
- Administrator
Offline
- From: God's Little Acre
- Registered: 9/08/2010
- Posts: 22,429
Re: Let the debate begin
3 Cardinal pitchers have won it .
I had to look it up. I won't give away the answer in case anyone else wants to guess.
- Max
- Colby Rasmus
Offline
- From: Pacific Northwest
- Registered: 9/07/2010
- Posts: 5,269
Re: Let the debate begin
3 Cardinal pitchers have won it .
If I recall, Dizzy won in '34 when he won 30 games. He's still the last NL pitcher to win 30. Gibby won in '68, the historic year he had the 1.12 ERA. One of the amazing stats about that year was he lost nine games. Can't you imagine going out to the mound thinking if you give up two runs, you're probably going to lose?
I don't know who the third Cardinals pitcher would be. Maybe Mort Cooper? Pete Alexander? Jesse Haines?
Kent Bottenfield 1999
- artie_fufkin
- Administrator
Offline
- From: God's Little Acre
- Registered: 9/08/2010
- Posts: 22,429
Re: Let the debate begin
3 Cardinal pitchers have won it .
If I recall, Dizzy won in '34 when he won 30 games. He's still the last NL pitcher to win 30. Gibby won in '68, the historic year he had the 1.12 ERA. One of the amazing stats about that year was he lost nine games. Can't you imagine going out to the mound thinking if you give up two runs, you're probably going to lose?
I don't know who the third Cardinals pitcher would be. Maybe Mort Cooper? Pete Alexander? Jesse Haines?Kent Bottenfield 1999
Rec