fathom Posted November 21, 2011 Share Posted November 21, 2011 Justin Verlander Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted November 21, 2011 Share Posted November 21, 2011 jaysonst Jayson Stark Before Verlander, you know how many starting pitchers had gotten a 1st-place MVP vote in the 2000s? Exactly one (Johan in '06). That's crazy ESPNStatsInfo ESPN Stats & Info Justin Verlander is the 1st pitcher to win MVP since Dennis Eckersley in 1992 & the 1st SP to win since Roger Clemens in 1986. Ken_Rosenthal Ken Rosenthal Verlander won despite not being named at all on one ballot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flavum Posted November 21, 2011 Share Posted November 21, 2011 Good call. The right guy won, but I hate that somebody didn't even give him a 10th place vote. If they just changed the rule, and made it an offense-only award, I wouldn't mind. but under the current rules, I think Verlander earned it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan4life_2007 Posted November 21, 2011 Share Posted November 21, 2011 Dumb. Pitchers should not win MVPs. Bautista should've won. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted November 21, 2011 Share Posted November 21, 2011 DKnobler DKnobler Six players received first-place votes, including 1 for Michael Young DKnobler DKnobler Verlander had 13 of 28 first-place votes. No one else had more than 5 (Bautista) jaysonst Jayson Stark Amazing that Ellsburgy, Bautista, Granderson & Cabrera appeared on every MVP ballot -- & the guy who won (Verlander) was only on 27 of 28 DKnobler DKnobler Verlander was on 27 of 28 ballots. 26 of 28 had him 6th or higher. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bjm676 Posted November 21, 2011 Share Posted November 21, 2011 I have no doubt that the Tigers would have gone that far without Verlander. Simply put, he was their MVP. Good call. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milkman delivers Posted November 21, 2011 Share Posted November 21, 2011 (edited) I don't agree with this. While Verlander is probably the most worthy pitcher in a long time to deserve to be in the running, there is a reason that there is a Cy Young award. I want a hitter to get the Cy Young once. Edited November 21, 2011 by Milkman delivers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milkman delivers Posted November 21, 2011 Share Posted November 21, 2011 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 21, 2011 -> 01:06 PM) jaysonst Jayson Stark Before Verlander, you know how many starting pitchers had gotten a 1st-place MVP vote in the 2000s? Exactly one (Johan in '06). That's crazy ESPNStatsInfo ESPN Stats & Info Justin Verlander is the 1st pitcher to win MVP since Dennis Eckersley in 1992 & the 1st SP to win since Roger Clemens in 1986. Ken_Rosenthal Ken Rosenthal Verlander won despite not being named at all on one ballot. Well, that's pretty cool. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted November 21, 2011 Share Posted November 21, 2011 DKnobler DKnobler Jim Ingraham from Cleveland was the only voter to leave Verlander off the ballot. Sheldon Ocker of Cleveland had him 8th I'll be honest, when I first heard someone left him off completely was to wonder if Cowardly was voting again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted November 21, 2011 Share Posted November 21, 2011 QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Nov 21, 2011 -> 01:23 PM) I don't agree with this. While Verlander is probably the most worthy pitcher in a long time to deserve to be in the running, there is a reason that there is a Cy Young award. I want a hitter to get the Cy Young once. False equivalency. Its not like Verlander won the Hitter of the Year award. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milkman delivers Posted November 21, 2011 Share Posted November 21, 2011 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 21, 2011 -> 01:31 PM) False equivalency. Its not like Verlander won the Hitter of the Year award. Yeah, but I think those two awards are the oldest traditional ones. The two main awards anybody cares about are Cy Young and MVP, and most view them as being for pitchers and hitters, respectively. They just need to change the rules slightly to make MVP only for hitters. Oh, and shut your face. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitewashed in '05 Posted November 21, 2011 Share Posted November 21, 2011 Wow, a pitcher shouldn't be MVP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chw42 Posted November 21, 2011 Share Posted November 21, 2011 QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Nov 21, 2011 -> 01:12 PM) Dumb. Pitchers should not win MVPs. Bautista should've won. Bautista had a .730 OPS in the second half. Ellsbury should have ran away with the thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted November 21, 2011 Share Posted November 21, 2011 I'm kinda surprised they actually gave it to a pitcher...but from watching the season it was the right move. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chw42 Posted November 21, 2011 Share Posted November 21, 2011 (edited) QUOTE (Whitewashed in '05 @ Nov 21, 2011 -> 02:14 PM) Wow, a pitcher shouldn't be MVP. I'm of the stance that a pitcher could be the MVP, but only if there are no worthy position players that year or if the pitcher is just THAT good. Verlander was awesome this year, but I think people might have overrated him by thinking Detroit had an absolute s*** pitching staff outside of him and that he had no other support. Which is obviously wrong. The Tigers had one of the best offenses in baseball and the Yankees' staff was probably worse outside of Sabathia. Even though Verlander was awesome, I don't think he was more valuable than Ellsbury or Bautista. So I don't agree with this decision at all. Edited November 21, 2011 by chw42 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve9347 Posted November 21, 2011 Share Posted November 21, 2011 We just need a Babe Ruth Award already for the leagues best hitter, then MVP won't be an issue and can go to THE best player in each league without ignoring hitters for the entire year if a pitcher wins (like this). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Felix Posted November 21, 2011 Share Posted November 21, 2011 QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Nov 21, 2011 -> 02:29 PM) We just need a Babe Ruth Award already for the leagues best hitter, then MVP won't be an issue and can go to THE best player in each league without ignoring hitters for the entire year if a pitcher wins (like this). But Babe Ruth was a pitcher too Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rowand44 Posted November 21, 2011 Share Posted November 21, 2011 QUOTE (Felix @ Nov 21, 2011 -> 03:32 PM) But Babe Ruth was a pitcher too So does the Babe Ruth award go to the best hitting pitcher or best pitching hitter? I'm so confused... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chw42 Posted November 21, 2011 Share Posted November 21, 2011 QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Nov 21, 2011 -> 02:34 PM) So does the Babe Ruth award go to the best hitting pitcher or best pitching hitter? I'm so confused... Just call it the Ted Williams award then. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quin Posted November 21, 2011 Share Posted November 21, 2011 Under the current qualifications, Verlander earned it. There needs to be a Best Hitter Award though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chw42 Posted November 21, 2011 Share Posted November 21, 2011 I wonder why nobody made a case for Zack Greinke to win the 2009 MVP when he was even better than 2011 Verlander that season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted November 21, 2011 Share Posted November 21, 2011 QUOTE (chw42 @ Nov 21, 2011 -> 02:43 PM) I wonder why nobody made a case for Zack Greinke to win the 2009 MVP when he was even better than 2011 Verlander that season. Because Kansas City didn't win anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chw42 Posted November 21, 2011 Share Posted November 21, 2011 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 21, 2011 -> 02:45 PM) Because Kansas City didn't win anything. And there lies the problem... This decision was a result of the Boston collapse, even though Ellsbury hit like an MVP during it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Felix Posted November 21, 2011 Share Posted November 21, 2011 @BMcCarthy32 Just so we're clear, I will never think someone should win or lose an MVP or other award, based on team success/failure. NEVER. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted November 21, 2011 Share Posted November 21, 2011 QUOTE (chw42 @ Nov 21, 2011 -> 02:48 PM) And there lies the problem... This decision was a result of the Boston collapse, even though Ellsbury hit like an MVP during it. Like it or not, with a couple of exceptions, this is how it has always been done. The pitcher thing is a much bigger exception though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.