PDA

View Full Version : Justin Verlander named AL MVP



savafan
11-21-2011, 03:09 PM
http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/7265534/cy-young-winner-justin-verlander-detroit-tigers-wins-al-mvp

blumj
11-21-2011, 03:26 PM
Just heard on the radio that one of the Cleveland writers left Verlander off his ballot, and the other had him 8th.

757690
11-21-2011, 03:32 PM
As long as Ellsbury, Granderson and Bautista can win the Cy Young, I'm fine with this ;)

redsmetz
11-21-2011, 03:34 PM
I had to update this Sporcle quiz I created:

http://www.sporcle.com/games/jametz/PitcherMVPs

kaldaniels
11-21-2011, 03:44 PM
I know some say pitchers only pitch every fifth day and shouldn't win the MVP....

But if we are quantifying things, how many pitches is a starting pitcher involved in a year versus say a first baseman? Point being, despite only playing every 5 games, when a pitcher is on the mound he has a greater effect on the game than anyone else on the field. To what extent is certainly debatable.

blumj
11-21-2011, 03:46 PM
David Robertson got an MVP vote, Michael Young got a 1st place vote.

crazybob60
11-21-2011, 04:01 PM
I have no problem with Verlander winning it at all. In my opinion, he deserved it...regardless if the pitchers have the Cy Young or not.

RANDY IN INDY
11-21-2011, 04:09 PM
Not a problem at all with it.

dougdirt
11-21-2011, 04:24 PM
I don't have a problem with a pitcher winning the MVP. But I do have a problem with Verlander winning this one. The problem is, Verlander was outstanding this year, but he wasn't Pedro 99/00 type good, nor was he Maddux 94/95 type good. Verlander wasn't clearly better than the position players on the ballot, so I take issue there.

thatcoolguy_22
11-21-2011, 04:56 PM
I don't have a problem with a pitcher winning the MVP. But I do have a problem with Verlander winning this one. The problem is, Verlander was outstanding this year, but he wasn't Pedro 99/00 type good, nor was he Maddux 94/95 type good. Verlander wasn't clearly better than the position players on the ballot, so I take issue there.

Not for the first time, but Doug posted almost exactly what I came here to say. I get he was the best pitcher in the AL, but there were positional players more deserving. My vote would have been Ellsbury or Bautista. I honestly didn't think it would be close.

Johnny Footstool
11-21-2011, 04:57 PM
I know some say pitchers only pitch every fifth day and shouldn't win the MVP....

But if we are quantifying things, how many pitches is a starting pitcher involved in a year versus say a first baseman? Point being, despite only playing every 5 games, when a pitcher is on the mound he has a greater effect on the game than anyone else on the field. To what extent is certainly debatable.

Here are a couple of quick estimates:

A pitcher throws about 80-100 pitches every 5 games.

A hitter faces about 15-18 pitches per game on offense, or about 75-90 pitches per week. So that's basically a push.

RedsBaron
11-21-2011, 05:38 PM
Not a problem at all with it.

I agree.
IIRC, years ago Bill James calculated how many batters Rod Guidry faced during his epic 1978 season as compared to how many at bats Jim Rice had in that, his MVP winning season. Guidry's batters pitched to was about the same number as Rice's at bats.
I don't think a modern closer/relief pitcher, making about 60 appearances a year, all of one inning, deserves consideration for the MVP award but I have no problem with a starting pitcher, who faces as many batters a season as a batter has at bats, being considered.

muddie
11-21-2011, 06:19 PM
Verlander deserved this award. The guy had an awesome year.

The last five Detroit MVP winners have all been pitchers.

dougdirt
11-21-2011, 07:17 PM
I agree.
IIRC, years ago Bill James calculated how many batters Rod Guidry faced during his epic 1978 season as compared to how many at bats Jim Rice had in that, his MVP winning season. Guidry's batters pitched to was about the same number as Rice's at bats.
I don't think a modern closer/relief pitcher, making about 60 appearances a year, all of one inning, deserves consideration for the MVP award but I have no problem with a starting pitcher, who faces as many batters a season as a batter has at bats, being considered.

And what about defense?

Spitball
11-21-2011, 07:29 PM
Pedro Martinez didn't deserve the award in 1999 because he was a pitcher. In my opinion, a precedence was set when they voted Ivan Rodriguez the award based on that standard of judgement.

blumj
11-21-2011, 07:31 PM
I don't have a problem with a pitcher winning the MVP. But I do have a problem with Verlander winning this one. The problem is, Verlander was outstanding this year, but he wasn't Pedro 99/00 type good, nor was he Maddux 94/95 type good. Verlander wasn't clearly better than the position players on the ballot, so I take issue there.
I agree with you that he wasn't clearly better than the position players, but he was clearly "in the same ballpark" as the position players, which is good enough for me. The only problem I might have with Verlander winning is, was he first on so many ballots because those voters really believed his season was more valuable than that of all the position players, or was it more because he stood out, not compared to the position players, but compared to other pitchers? Because I do have problem with it if he was being judged on a separate scale and found more deserving because it was easier than really trying to compare the value of his season with those of worthy position players.

dougdirt
11-21-2011, 07:39 PM
I agree with you that he wasn't clearly better than the position players, but he was clearly "in the same ballpark" as the position players, which is good enough for me. The only problem I might have with Verlander winning is, was he first on so many ballots because those voters really believed his season was more valuable than that of all the position players, or was it more because he stood out, not compared to the position players, but compared to other pitchers? Because I do have problem with it if he was being judged on a separate scale and found more deserving because it was easier than really trying to compare the value of his season with those of worthy position players.

My issue with it is that the pitchers have an MVP style award with the Cy Young. So unless a pitcher is easily the best player in the league, rather than in the ballpark with some position guys, he probably shouldn't be getting that award too.

kaldaniels
11-21-2011, 08:02 PM
My issue with it is that the pitchers have an MVP style award with the Cy Young. So unless a pitcher is easily the best player in the league, rather than in the ballpark with some position guys, he probably shouldn't be getting that award too.

If he is in the ballpark, I don't have a problem with a guy voting him first for MVP if said guy comes into the voting thinking the pitcher was the most valuable that year.

It appears to come into this issue setting a higher bar for pitchers than everyday players to win the MVP. But some of us and voters take every single player in the league, put them in a pool, and pick the one player, whatever postition he might player, who they view as the MVP.

For arguments sake, lets assume WAR is highly refined and accurate. A pitcher has an 8.1 WAR and a fielder has a 8.0 WAR...would you give the award to the fielder simply because you view the Cy Young as the pitching MVP?

Spitball
11-21-2011, 08:42 PM
Good points.

I can live with the award going to Verlander, although Pedro Martinez should have won in 1999 when the steroid era had pitchers struggling to keep up. What really burns me though is the voter who cast a ballot with Ellsbury in the 10th spot.

That voter cast a ballot with irresponsible intent to unfairly affect the outcome of the voting.

dougdirt
11-21-2011, 08:43 PM
For arguments sake, lets assume WAR is highly refined and accurate. A pitcher has an 8.1 WAR and a fielder has a 8.0 WAR...would you give the award to the fielder simply because you view the Cy Young as the pitching MVP?

If that were the case, yes. I would go with the fielder.

RedsBaron
11-21-2011, 09:19 PM
And what about defense?

Jim Rice played nearly a third of the 1978 season, 49 games, as a DH, and it is doubtful that his fielding skills added to his value that season.

RedsBaron
11-21-2011, 09:25 PM
I don't have a problem with a pitcher winning the MVP. But I do have a problem with Verlander winning this one. The problem is, Verlander was outstanding this year, but he wasn't Pedro 99/00 type good, nor was he Maddux 94/95 type good. Verlander wasn't clearly better than the position players on the ballot, so I take issue there.

Baseball Reference.com shows Verlander with a WAR score of 8.5, higher than Pedro's 8.3 in 1999. Verlander was tied with Bautista at 8.5; Ellsbury had a 7.2. In 1999 Pedro Martinez lead the AL with an 8.3 while Manny Ramirez and Derek Jeter each had an 8.0 WAR score.

mth123
11-21-2011, 09:31 PM
He deserved this. I'm glad the writers had the guts to vote for a pitcher. It seems that all I ever hear is how a number 1 starter is the most valuable thing a team can have, but the same people often tell me they aren't valuable enough to win MVP.

Verlander was the most dominant force in the AL in 2011. He's the MVP IMO.

757690
11-21-2011, 10:12 PM
I have no problem with Verlander winning, if there was a separate award for best non-pitcher, or there was no Cy Yoing award. It just is unfair that a pitcher can win two awards, but a hitter only one.

dougdirt
11-22-2011, 12:21 AM
Baseball Reference.com shows Verlander with a WAR score of 8.5, higher than Pedro's 8.3 in 1999. Verlander was tied with Bautista at 8.5; Ellsbury had a 7.2. In 1999 Pedro Martinez lead the AL with an 8.3 while Manny Ramirez and Derek Jeter each had an 8.0 WAR score.

I am not the biggest fan of BR WAR. Fangraphs has his WAR in 99 at 12.1, which jives a lot more with reality.

dougdirt
11-22-2011, 12:22 AM
Jim Rice played nearly a third of the 1978 season, 49 games, as a DH, and it is doubtful that his fielding skills added to his value that season.

I wasn't talking about Rice, merely that because a pitcher has as many batters faced as a hitter does PA's doesn't mean they have similar impact because defense also comes into play.

AtomicDumpling
11-22-2011, 12:26 AM
Pretty ridiculous that we give the MVP to the same guy that won the pitchers's award. This year none of the position players gets credit for being the best, so the MVP and Cy Young are redundant and the Best Position Player Award (Babe Ruth Award?) just gets skipped altogether. Another brilliant marketing strategy by the MLB brain trust, always happy to squander opportunities to make more people care about baseball.

Why do we have an award for best pitcher while there is no equivalent award for best position player? If pitchers are eligible for MVP why should there also be a Cy Young award? Either there should be an award for best hitter with the same prestige as the Cy Young Award merits, or pitchers should not be eligible for MVP.

kaldaniels
11-22-2011, 12:50 AM
For each position on the field there is an award given for both the best hitting and best fielding player at that position. Due to the uniqueness of the pitcher and his role in the game, there is also an award for the player who pitched the best that year. And to top it off you have the MVP of the league, which is for the one player out of them all who meant the most to his team.

What's the problem?

Edit - it seems that the problem may lie with the perception of the Cy Young award. If it were relegated to silver slugger status I don't think there would be quite the uproar we are seeing.

dougdirt
11-22-2011, 01:13 AM
Edit - it seems that the problem may lie with the perception of the Cy Young award. If it were relegated to silver slugger status I don't think there would be quite the uproar we are seeing.

This is the main gripe. If baseball held its Hitter of the Year award in a high standing like the Cy Young, then there wouldn't be an issue, but it isn't.

Phhhl
11-26-2011, 04:41 AM
Verlander is the only reason the Tigers were relavent in 2011. Noone can dispute his justification for either of these awards.

blumj
11-26-2011, 08:44 AM
Verlander is the only reason the Tigers were relavent in 2011. Noone can dispute his justification for either of these awards.

I don't have a problem with Verlander winning the awards, but I don't understand that belief at all. The Tigers scored 787 runs, 4th most in the AL and best in that division by 50+ runs, and won it by 15 games. While playing their home games in a pitcher's park, and in a division full of them.

_Sir_Charles_
11-26-2011, 11:23 AM
Here are a couple of quick estimates:

A pitcher throws about 80-100 pitches every 5 games.

A hitter faces about 15-18 pitches per game on offense, or about 75-90 pitches per week. So that's basically a push.

Not really. Because the "hitter" is also involved in some of those pitches the pitcher throws as well. It's a bit more lopsided in the hitters favor I'd think.

PuffyPig
11-26-2011, 01:41 PM
As long as Ellsbury, Granderson and Bautista can win the Cy Young, I'm fine with this ;)

They can, as long as they pitch better than anyone else.

kaldaniels
11-26-2011, 02:50 PM
Not really. Because the "hitter" is also involved in some of those pitches the pitcher throws as well. It's a bit more lopsided in the hitters favor I'd think.

And to counter pitchers hit and field in addition to pitching.

blumj
11-26-2011, 04:04 PM
And to counter pitchers hit and field in addition to pitching.

Sorry, can't resist: 5 errors in 50 chances and .000 in 4 PAs.

_Sir_Charles_
11-26-2011, 05:25 PM
And to counter pitchers hit and field in addition to pitching.

I was about to say he's in the AL....then it hit me...interleague play. :p

camisadelgolf
11-26-2011, 08:12 PM
I think it's stupid to say that a pitcher can't win MVP based on the one-in-five-days argument. When you look at the possibilities, a starting pitcher can easily have as much impact on a season as an everyday position player. However, I understand the argument that pitchers already have the Cy Young Award, so there should be a separate award for hitters. However, until that specific award is made or gets the press it deserves, I'm not going to complain too much about Verlander winning the MVP.

mth123
11-26-2011, 08:25 PM
I think it's stupid to say that a pitcher can't win MVP based on the one-in-five-days argument. When you look at the possibilities, a starting pitcher can easily have as much impact on a season as an everyday position player. However, I understand the argument that pitchers already have the Cy Young Award, so there should be a separate award for hitters. However, until that specific award is made or gets the press it deserves, I'm not going to complain too much about Verlander winning the MVP.

The Hank Aaron award is theoretically the position player version of the Cy Young Award, but since position players usually win the MVP, the Aaron award gets little attention. I'd imagine that if a pitcher were to win the MVP most of the time, little attention would be paid to the Cy Young award. The Cy Young award has more status simply because it is usually all the pitcher has. The Aaron award is more of a consolation prize because position players win the MVP. IMO, both the Aaron award and the Cy Young are secondary awards to the MVP with each focusing on its limited pool of players while the MVP takes everyone into account. IMO, that is as it should be.

kaldaniels
11-26-2011, 11:06 PM
Sorry, can't resist: 5 errors in 50 chances and .000 in 4 PAs.

Mock and deride but I've been talking about pitchers generically the whole time.

Johnny Footstool
11-27-2011, 01:51 AM
Not really. Because the "hitter" is also involved in some of those pitches the pitcher throws as well. It's a bit more lopsided in the hitters favor I'd think.

Again, this was a quick estimate, based solely on average pitches per PA for hitters, and average pitch counts. It's actually way more lopsided, because most hitters outside of the DH also contribute on defense 6 times a week.

Johnny Footstool
11-27-2011, 01:55 AM
And to counter pitchers hit and field in addition to pitching.

Verlander didn't hit enough to make a difference.

And in general, pitchers have the opportunity to contribute on defense in one out of every 5 games, and NL pitchers face maybe 12 pitches every 5 games. That doesn't balance the hitters' contributions on defense.

kaldaniels
11-27-2011, 03:44 PM
NL pitchers face maybe 12 pitches every 5 games..

Strangest way to state 90 PA a year (Halladays avg) I have ever seen. But if that helps your argument why not.

Johnny Footstool
11-28-2011, 06:35 PM
We started this conversation talking about how many pitches a starting pitcher is involved in as opposed to a first baseman, so I'm still discussing it in those terms.

kaldaniels
11-28-2011, 10:24 PM
Ok, first time I introduce a Verlander stat here. Verlander led the league with 3900 pitches thrown. Pedroia led the league with 3000 pitches seen at the plate.

And I know some will still object and that is your right. I just don't think it is a lopsided case in favor of fielders.

Johnny Footstool
11-29-2011, 01:09 AM
Ok, first time I introduce a Verlander stat here. Verlander led the league with 3900 pitches thrown. Pedroia led the league with 3000 pitches seen at the plate.

And I know some will still object and that is your right. I just don't think it is a lopsided case in favor of fielders.

Verlander's 3941 pitches plus his 50 Total Chances give him just under 4000.

Add Pedroia's 3070 pitches seen to his 722 Total Chances in the field, and you have just under 3800. That doesn't count his baserunning ability, but still the numbers are very close. So no, it's not as lopsided as I thought.

kaldaniels
11-29-2011, 01:30 AM
Verlander's 3941 pitches plus his 50 Total Chances give him just under 4000.

Add Pedroia's 3070 pitches seen to his 722 Total Chances in the field, and you have just under 3800. That doesn't count his baserunning ability, but still the numbers are very close. So no, it's not as lopsided as I thought.

And honestly, pitch count is hardly the be-all end-all stat to show how much a player is involved. Gun to my head, I'll say that Pedroia's "on field action time" was greater than that of Verlanders this past season, as 1 chance is certainly worth more than 1 generic pitch to me. And had the Red Sox, not the Tigers, made the playoffs, we aren't even having this discussion cause Pedroia would be the MVP. I found it funny that the 2 guys we are discussing actually led the league in said categories. I think I find it even funnier that in the NL the 2 leaders are Joey Votto and Chris Carpenter. :D

kaldaniels
11-29-2011, 01:44 AM
And above I mixed Pedroia and Ellsbury up as I normally do...doesn't really change anything thought. Ellsbury had even less pitches seen than Pedroia.