SpecialFNK wrote:matter of opinion. was Verlander even the most valuable pitcher on his team? in the 2nd half Verlander had great numbers- 100 IP, 12-1, 2.79 ERA, 0.99 WHIP. what about Doug Fister? while with Detroit he had these numbers- 70.1 IP, 8-1, 1.79 ERA, 0.84 WHIP. if you want to add another pitcher, throw in Jose Valverde- 2.24 ERA, 1.19 WHIP, 49 saves, and 0 blown saves.
That wasn't my point. My point was IF a pitcher is the most valuable player in the league, he should win it. If you want to argue Bautista was more valuable to his team, that's fine, but writing off someone solely because they're a pitcher is ridiculous.
I'm someone who believes no pitcher regardless of the numbers he puts up should be able to win the MVP. there already is an "MVP" award for pitchers, the Cy Young. that is the top award a pitcher should be able to win. IMO the MVP award is the award for the best position player. is there a way to even compare what a pitcher does to what a hitter does? at least with offensive players you can compare them all on the same level for hitting and defense(except for DH).
SpecialFNK wrote:matter of opinion. was Verlander even the most valuable pitcher on his team? in the 2nd half Verlander had great numbers- 100 IP, 12-1, 2.79 ERA, 0.99 WHIP. what about Doug Fister? while with Detroit he had these numbers- 70.1 IP, 8-1, 1.79 ERA, 0.84 WHIP. if you want to add another pitcher, throw in Jose Valverde- 2.24 ERA, 1.19 WHIP, 49 saves, and 0 blown saves.
That wasn't my point. My point was IF a pitcher is the most valuable player in the league, he should win it. If you want to argue Bautista was more valuable to his team, that's fine, but writing off someone solely because they're a pitcher is ridiculous.
I'm someone who believes no pitcher regardless of the numbers he puts up should be able to win the MVP. there already is an "MVP" award for pitchers, the Cy Young. that is the top award a pitcher should be able to win. IMO the MVP award is the award for the best position player. is there a way to even compare what a pitcher does to what a hitter does? at least with offensive players you can compare them all on the same level for hitting and defense(except for DH).
The Cy Young is a best pitcher award, not a most valuable player award. A pitcher is a player, just like a hitter, thus since it's called Most Valuable PLAYER, pitchers should be considered. While we're at it, the Hank Aaron Award is an award for the best hitter, so if pitchers don't count, let's just get rid of MVP all together.
As for your last point, the award is, by its very nature, subjective. If we were just going to compare hitting and defense stats, we should just let a computer decide the winner and call it a day, but we don't. As long as it's going to be subjective, no sense excluding players.
IMO there are 2 major awards that count and get all the press and publicity. the MVP and Cy Young. these are the awards that the players want to win. they even put stipulations in their contracts where they get more money depending on where they finish for these awards.
there is no argument that could sway me in any way that a pitcher should be able to win the MVP. a starting pitcher doesn't play nearly as much as an offensive player. a starting pitcher can only help effect his teams outcome every 5 days, while an offensive player can help his teams outcome EVERY day. regardless of how great a pitcher is or how great his numbers could/would be, there are 4 other days where an offensive player is doing what it takes to help his team win.
it's apples and oranges. they're different. pitchers and offensive players should not be combined for an award.
I'd give the award to Miguel Cabrera, also of the Tigers.
SpecialFNK wrote:a starting pitcher doesn't play nearly as much as an offensive player. a starting pitcher can only help effect his teams outcome every 5 days, while an offensive player can help his teams outcome EVERY day. regardless of how great a pitcher is or how great his numbers could/would be, there are 4 other days where an offensive player is doing what it takes to help his team win.
to this:
SpecialFNK wrote:it's apples and oranges. they're different. pitchers and offensive players should not be combined for an award.
In the time it takes to press the "ENTER" key twice. Amazing.
SpecialFNK wrote:a starting pitcher doesn't play nearly as much as an offensive player. a starting pitcher can only help effect his teams outcome every 5 days, while an offensive player can help his teams outcome EVERY day. regardless of how great a pitcher is or how great his numbers could/would be, there are 4 other days where an offensive player is doing what it takes to help his team win.
This is true, but you don't account for the SP having a much bigger effect on the outcome of a game vs. the hitters that day. The SP is the most important guy out on the field, as he is the one whose pitches will affect the outcome the most. A hitter is 1 of 9 guys (or 1 of 8 in the NL).
It is true that a hitter can contribute positively in every game, but they also posses the ability to negatively affect the outcome as well. If a hitter doesn't get on base, he isn't helping his team win. The same with grounding into double plays and failing to drive in RISP. Poor defense will affect every games' outcome as well. But when a SP isn't pitching, he cannot negatively affect the outcome of that game.
Though I do agree that the Cy Young and MVP are the only 2 noteworthy awards. I would not be opposed to awarding the Cy Young to the best pitcher and the MVP to the best hitter (or change the name of the award). But as it stands, that is not the case, so pitchers should be eligible for the MVP.
mweir145 wrote:Bautista won his 2nd straight Hank Aaron award today, btw:
The American League MVP won't be announced for a couple of weeks yet but Jose Bautista's tremendous performance in the plate during the 2011 season was recognized with a second straight Hank Aaron Award on Monday.
First MVP next? We can only hope it won't go to one of those chokers in Boston or a pitcher.
Right, it shouldn't go to a pitcher, because even if they're the most valuable player in the league (literally the only stipulation for winning the award), they shouldn't win it because of what position they play.
If Greg Maddux, Randy Johnson, Pedro Martinez, and Roy Halladay never won a MVP for their incredible seasons, Justin Verlander certainly shouldn't.
First MVP next? We can only hope it won't go to one of those chokers in Boston or a pitcher.
Right, it shouldn't go to a pitcher, because even if they're the most valuable player in the league (literally the only stipulation for winning the award), they shouldn't win it because of what position they play.
If Greg Maddux, Randy Johnson, Pedro Martinez, and Roy Halladay never won a MVP for their incredible seasons, Justin Verlander certainly shouldn't.
First MVP next? We can only hope it won't go to one of those chokers in Boston or a pitcher.
Right, it shouldn't go to a pitcher, because even if they're the most valuable player in the league (literally the only stipulation for winning the award), they shouldn't win it because of what position they play.
If Greg Maddux, Randy Johnson, Pedro Martinez, and Roy Halladay never won a MVP for their incredible seasons, Justin Verlander certainly shouldn't.
You're logic is effectively saying that 2 wrongs make a right. Just because pitchers have been gipped in previous years doesn't mean it should happen again this year.
mweir145 wrote:The last time they tried to buy their way into the playoffs, I'd say. Which the Red Sox failed at this season.
Yep, the Sox most certainly failed doing so this season. I was trying to think of a word worse than failed, but can't think of one.
Anywho, don't blame the Sox (and Yankees) for spending $. Blame the MLBPA (who allows this non-salary cap crap to go on) and the Jays ownership (for not realizing they need to spend if they want to compete in the East).
Cafe Home
Fantasy Football
Fantasy Basketball
Fantasy Hockey
by SpecialFNK » Tue Oct 25, 2011 6:47 pm 
