MLB Award Season 2011

[pmoehrin]

I could understand why Yankee fans would feel that Nova deserved the award, but Hellickson had 30 more IP's, a lower ERA and a lower WHIP. Those are three of the biggest stats I look for with pitchers and if one guy is better then the other in all three I'm going with him every single time.

The only thing Nova had on Hellickson was a better strikeout to walk ratio and gave up less HR's per nine innings, but it wasn't like he blew Hellickson out of the water in either of those categories.

Stats wise this isn't even close between the two.

I think the argument for Trumbo over Hellickson has more validity to it then Nova over Hellickson, and I think Trumbo is going to be a superstar, but the lack of bat control is preventing him from getting into that elite category of first basemen for now. He solves that he's right up there with Gonzalez, Pujols and Votto.

I'd like to throw Greg Holland up there as an honorable mention, but he didn't pitch enough innings for me to give it to him over Hellickson.

All in all I agree with both ROY winners.

[Still MIGHTY]

Verlander is the unanimous AL Cy Young winner. Yawn.

Weaver was two, but the interesting one in the voting was Jose Valverde in fifth.

[pmoehrin]

But the interesting one in the voting was Jose Valverde in fifth.

Yeah Valverde had a very solid season, but I was not blown away by his numbers. Save situations he was lights out, but non-save situations he could give a , and he had four losses on the year, so there were obviously games he came in that were non-save situations that he blew.

To me the best reliever in the AL this year was David Robertson, and outside of saves he has Valverde either virtually tied or beat hands down in every major pitching category. But the position has become so save driven there's no way voters are ever going to put him above Valverde.

I'd like to think Verlander has a legit chance at the MVP, but I know there's voters out there that will never vote for a pitcher for MVP no matter what kind of numbers they put up. If Pedro couldn't do it in either '99 or 2000 I don't think anyone is going to. That's not how its always been but it is now.

[ninersdd]

Kershaw grabs NL Cy Young. I can't argue with that.

[pmoehrin]

Kershaw grabs NL Cy Young. I can't argue with that.

About as easy of a call to make as it was with Verlander.

I think Halladay was alot closer to Kershaw then Jered Weaver was to Verlander, but when you have somebody leading the NL in Wins, ERA, WHIP and striketouts and is third in innings pitched, you have to give it to him.

A little upset that Tyler Clippard got no love. I would have put him in the top ten myself, but end of the day, Kershaw was the right choice.

[Gary]

Justin Verlander 2011 American League MVP!

[njmeadowlanders]

First pitcher since Eckersley in '92 and first starter since Clemens in '86.

[Dexter Morgan]

I think baseball should have two separate awards for position players and pitchers.

[AlMagz]

Verlander (or no pitcher for that matter) should even be eligible for the MVP. Playing once every 5 days does not make you the most valuable player in the league. He was a unanimous Cy Young winner, and thats what he deserves, thats why the Cy Young award exists. Nothing against Verlander, I like him as a player but telling me that his once every 5 days is better than Granderson's 40 HRs or Ellsbury's 40/40 season is just not true.

[Dexter Morgan]

Verlander (or no pitcher for that matter) should even be eligible for the MVP. Playing once every 5 days does not make you the most valuable player in the league. He was a unanimous Cy Young winner, and thats what he deserves, thats why the Cy Young award exists. Nothing against Verlander, I like him as a player but telling me that his once every 5 days is better than Granderson's 40 HRs or Ellsbury's 40/40 season is just not true.

Ellsbury had 32 home runs/39 stolen bases.

[AlMagz]

Sorry I meant 30/30 for Ellsbury but thats not even the point im trying to make. You have to look at how someone helps a team everyday to be the most valuable player, you cant do that as a starting pitcher.

[Dexter Morgan]

If Pedro Martinez doesn't win in 1999, no pitcher should.

[Lights Out]

Jose Bautista should be the MVP. Period.

[NEW.ERA]

Jose Bautista should be the MVP. Period.

Agreed. Man missed quite a bit of time to injury, and still dominated. What does he need to do to get the respect. Man is a tremendous fielder, and can change the course of a game with a single swing. Can't really argue with Verlander though as he was probably the best player on the field when he played. I'm kinda mull on Pitchers winning MVP it doesn't happen often, so I think I can live with that.

[GFB]

Verlander (or no pitcher for that matter) should even be eligible for the MVP. Playing once every 5 days does not make you the most valuable player in the league. He was a unanimous Cy Young winner, and thats what he deserves, thats why the Cy Young award exists. Nothing against Verlander, I like him as a player but telling me that his once every 5 days is better than Granderson's 40 HRs or Ellsbury's 40/40 season is just not true.

This is not true. As someone who watched almost every Tigers game last year, I can tell you Verlander affected not only the games he pitched in, but also games he wasn't in. For example, say you are managing a team who has Verlander scheduled to start the next day. You know JV is going to give you at least 8 innings of 1-2 run baseball tomorrow, thus you can afford to use up as much of your bullpen as you want today. The bullpen is also rested and fresh for the game after a Verlander start too.

Now flip it around. If your going to play against Verlander tomorrow, it's going to put a lot more urgency on winning today because you know it's going to be alot tougher tomorrow.

Also, what does it matter if Justin Verlander plays once every 5 days if he is directly responsible for 20-24 outs in that game. This is a quote from Peter Abraham of the Boston Globe:

"Verlander faced 969 batters this season. Jacoby Ellsbury, by way of comparison, had 729 plate appearances. Obviously, a position player faces more of a challenge physically playing every day in the field. But the idea that a starting pitcher contributes so much less that he should be excluded from the ballot is false."

On another note, Jim Ingraham from Cleveland was the only voter to leave Verlander off the ballot. Sheldon Ocker of Cleveland had him 8th, and Evan Grant of Dallas Morning News gave first-place vote to Michael Young. Pathetic.

[pmoehrin]

Verlander (or no pitcher for that matter) should even be eligible for the MVP. Playing once every 5 days does not make you the most valuable player in the league. He was a unanimous Cy Young winner, and thats what he deserves, thats why the Cy Young award exists. Nothing against Verlander, I like him as a player but telling me that his once every 5 days is better than Granderson's 40 HRs or Ellsbury's 40/40 season is just not true.

My only argument against that is lets say its true. Pitchers are not worth the same as everyday players. Then how come star pitchers get paid just as much as star position players?

You can't say on one hand pitchers aren't as valuable as everyday players and yet at the same time have them be the most valuable commodity in the free agent market most years.

That being said I do agree with the decision. Verlander was by far the best pitcher in the AL, and I thought the best plyaer in baseball with Jose Bautsita and Jacoby Ellsbury right behind him. If you want to argue that Bautista or Ellsbury should have been MVP, I'm not going to disagree but to me the difference was that there was no doubt Verlander was the best pitcher. Its not as clear cut for who was the best outfielder. I'll give Bautista the edge overall as well as at the plate, but Ellsbury wins on the bases and defensively, so while push comes to shove I'll say Bautista over Ellsbury, I regard the two as being almost equal. There was no equal to Justin Verlander this year among pitchers.

I am happpy however that somebody threw a point to David Robertson and Jose Valverde didn't get any. As mentioned earlier I thought Robertson was the best reliever in the AL, and if you take Valverde's saves away what you'll find is a good reliever but not a dominant one, and again those four losses tell me he wasn't lights out in every end of game situation.

[GFB]

I am happpy however that somebody through a point to David Robertson and Jose Valverde didn't get any. As mentioned earlier I thought Robertson was the best reliever in the AL, and if you take Valverde's saves away what you'll find is a good reliever but not a dominant one, and again those four losses tell me he wasn't lights out in every end of game situation.

Spot on. Valverde's ERA:

In save situations - 0.52

In non-save situations - 5.79

[pmoehrin]

I am happpy however that somebody through a point to David Robertson and Jose Valverde didn't get any. As mentioned earlier I thought Robertson was the best reliever in the AL, and if you take Valverde's saves away what you'll find is a good reliever but not a dominant one, and again those four losses tell me he wasn't lights out in every end of game situation.

Spot on. Valverde's ERA:

In save situations - 0.52

In non-save situations - 5.79

The way I look at relief pitchers is very similar to the way I look at starters. I take into account innings pitched, WHIP, ERA, strikeout to walk ratio, HR's allowed and hits allowed. Only major difference is with relievers I throw out wins because I regard a reliever win as having to do more with luck then anything, and put more of an emphasis on loses. I don't even look at saves. To me if your a dominant reliever you'll show up on those stats. You can hide behind save numbers. You can't hide behind the numbers I look at.

[AlMagz]

Also, what does it matter if Justin Verlander plays once every 5 days if he is directly responsible for 20-24 outs in that game. This is a quote from Peter Abraham of the Boston Globe:

"Verlander faced 969 batters this season. Jacoby Ellsbury, by way of comparison, had 729 plate appearances. Obviously, a position player faces more of a challenge physically playing every day in the field. But the idea that a starting pitcher contributes so much less that he should be excluded from the ballot is false."

On another note, Jim Ingraham from Cleveland was the only voter to leave Verlander off the ballot. Sheldon Ocker of Cleveland had him 8th, and Evan Grant of Dallas Morning News gave first-place vote to Michael Young. Pathetic.

thats fine if you want to look at that quote. but you need to realize that Verlander can face a minimum of 3 batter per inning pitched obviously, Ellsbury averages 3-4 plate appearances a game, so of course the number will be skewed.

Jim Ingraham had it right that Verlander only participates in 21% of the Tigers' games. He relates it to the NFL, if a player played 21% of an NFL season that equals 3 games.. is that MVP worthy?

Verlander definitely had a great season no one can argue that but I think there is a reason that only a dozen or so pitchers have even won the MVP.

[pmoehrin]

Verlander definitely had a great season no one can argue that but I think there is a reason that only a dozen or so pitchers have even won the MVP.

I do too but I don't think it has much to do with the value of a pitcher.

For the AL its 12 pitchers in 81 years, but you go back to 1986 that number is 10 in 56 years. Somewhere along the line the voters decided to start ignoring pitchers.