Jump to content

MLB Offseason Thread 2011-12


fish7718
 Share

Recommended Posts

I get that Verlander was filthy and absolutely dominant this year, but how on earth can a guy who plays in 34 of his teams 162 games be considered the Most Valuable Player in the a league? I don't care if he won 25 games, but there is no way that you can convince me that a player who plays in 20% of his teams games is worthy of winning the MVP.

 

Just when I thought that baseball voters were finally starting to get when it came to awards by giving guys like Hernandez and Greinke Cy Young's even though they didn't have 20 wins.

 

As far as I am concerned, nobody other than Ellsbury or Bautista deserved consideration for the award.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I get that Verlander was filthy and absolutely dominant this year, but how on earth can a guy who plays in 34 of his teams 162 games be considered the Most Valuable Player in the a league? I don't care if he won 25 games, but there is no way that you can convince me that a player who plays in 20% of his teams games is worthy of winning the MVP.

 

Just when I thought that baseball voters were finally starting to get when it came to awards by giving guys like Hernandez and Greinke Cy Young's even though they didn't have 20 wins.

 

As far as I am concerned, nobody other than Ellsbury or Bautista deserved consideration for the award.

 

Actually, starting pitchers impact basically the same amount of plays as a position player in the course of a season (obviously this varies...a first baseman will be involved in more plays than an outfielder, for example). In a given game, a position player will likely have 4-5 plate appearances, plus a handful of defensive opportunities. In a given game, a starting pitcher may face upwards of 30-35 batters. They are involved in each of their team's defensive plays. They obviously appear in just 1/5 of their team's games, but the workload they put forth in each start is usually 5x more than that of a position player (sometimes more, sometimes less).

 

As a case study, I will compare Jacoby Ellsbury with Justin Verlander. I chose Ellsbury because he was one of the leading MVP candidates, and he appeared in basically every Red Sox game (158 of them), so he matches up pretty well with Verlander, who didn't miss any time due to injuries or whatnot.

 

Ellsbury in 2011: 729 plate appearances, 394 defensive chances in CF. A total of 1123 "plays"

 

Verlander in 2011: 969 plate-appearances-against (as a pitcher), 50 defensive chances, 4 plate appearances as a batter. A total of 1023 "plays".

 

 

Obviously, this isn't an exact science and it doesn't take certain things into account, such as base running and position value. Obviously, an outfielder like Ellsbury will see way fewer defensive chances than a first baseman (Ryan Howard played 152 games this season and had almost 1400 chances). But hopefully this sort of debunks that myth that a pitcher isn't deserving of this award because they only appear in 30 games. Position players do indeed impact a higher percentage of total team plays, but it is really quite close, and in this case I think the MVP votes for Verlander were certainly warranted

Edited by Phightins
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That makes sense and all, but I still don't agree with it.

 

Sure, you can spin the numbers in a way to make it look like a pitcher appearing in 30 games is comparable to a positional player playing in 150+ games, but as far as I am concerned a positional player has a much larger impact on a team throughout the course of a season. When a picther plays I don't deny that more often than not he is the most important player on the field, but in my opinion, a positional player has a significantly larger impact on a teams success over the course of a season.

 

I'm not really going to argue it in any sort of depth because I can understand why somebody would think that a pitcher may be deserving of an MVP award. I just don't agree with it and likely never will, unless a pitcher is out there shattering records or something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, understand those arguments BFT and Fish.

 

Personally, I think there should be separate awards for pitchers and hitters. Over the years, the MVP award has sort of become a hitter only award, so that's how we view it now. But in the voting instructions, there is nothing stating that pitchers shouldn't be included. It just says that it should go to the player with the most "value". And today, since we have advanced stats and metrics that specifically show value as a concrete number, it should be a much easier process.

 

I think we can all agree that the biggest issue with MVP selection is the idiot writers who get to vote. Somebody gave Michael Young a first place vote. Someone else had Jacoby Ellsbury ranked 10th. Seriously.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That same guy who had Young 1st had Bautista 7th. :lol:

 

I don't really care all that much about MVP awards in any sport, though. More often than not they go to the best player who has some sort of great story on a top 4 team in the league rather than going to the player who is actually the most valuable player in the league.

Edited by Built Ford Tough
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ryan Braun is NL MVP. He had an awesome year, but was not better than Matt Kemp. Kemp gets screwed because his team sucked. Shame.

 

Pretty much.

 

As far as I am concerned, Bautista and Kemp were the two MVP's but because their teammates weren't good enough, they get penalized. Both of them were nuts this year and were the only reason why their teams were .500 instead of having a near 100 loss season.

 

I knew Braun would get it, though. This doesn't bother me as much as Verlander winning the AL MVP, but it is clear that Kemp was more deserving.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think pitchers should win MVP just because the Cy Young is the MVP of pitching, the hitters don't have a title like that, don't know why the 2 haven't been officially separated...

Yeah they do, it's called the Hank Aaron Award. Pretty much the same thing as the Cy Young but for hitters, and it's given to the top voted batter for each league. Winners? Matt Kemp and Jose Bautista. Perfect.

 

It gets absolutely no recognition, because most fans and media outlets recognize the MVP as the best hitter already. But, maybe after this year and Verlander's selection, that changes?

 

When you talk about "Most Valuable", it's all perception. For voters, a guy who had similar stats to Kemp but carried his team down a playoff stretch and had countless winning hits in a divisional race gets extra points. Is that fair? Maybe not.. but at least Kemp was already recognized as the best National League batter. There is definitely some weight to be added to playing well in a playoff race when considering "value" and "most valuable".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah they do, it's called the Hank Aaron Award. Pretty much the same thing as the Cy Young but for hitters, and it's given to the top voted batter for each league. Winners? Matt Kemp and Jose Bautista. Perfect.

 

It gets absolutely no recognition, because most fans and media outlets recognize the MVP as the best hitter already. But, maybe after this year and Verlander's selection, that changes?

 

When you talk about "Most Valuable", it's all perception. For voters, a guy who had similar stats to Kemp but carried his team down a playoff stretch and had countless winning hits in a divisional race gets extra points. Is that fair? Maybe not.. but at least Kemp was already recognized as the best National League batter. There is definitely some weight to be added to playing well in a playoff race when considering "value" and "most valuable".

Exactly lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly lol

Would help a lot of the overall confusion if we could just apply the same value to the given award as we do to the Cy Young. It's one of the major awards given out by the MLB each year, but it's generally ignored. Best hitter, best pitcher, most valuable. Makes sense!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Japanese INF Kawasaki only interested in Mariners

FUKUOKA, Japan (AP)—Japanese infielder Munenori Kawasaki wants to go to the major leagues, provided he can join Ichiro Suzuki(notes) with the Seattle Mariners.

 

Kawasaki said at a news conference Thursday that he is only thinking about playing on the same team as Suzuki and would have to decline other offers.

 

The 30-year-old Kawasaki is a free agent and could negotiate with any major league team, but prefers Seattle. This season, he batted .267 with 161 hits in 144 games and helped lead the Softbank Hawks to their first Japan Series championship in eight years.

 

He teamed up with Suzuki as a member of the Japanese team that won the World Baseball Classic in 2006 and 2009.

----------------

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slug=ap-kawasaki-mariners

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, the Mark Buehrle contract is awful. If the Marlins still give CJ Wilson 6 years on top of it, this turns from an exciting offseason for them to a veryyyy irresponsible one.

Lol 14.5 mil for each of the next 4 years, are you kidding? I think Reyes now has to question whether or not his 18 mil a year is being underpaid. Lol if your going to 14.5 on Buehrle why are you going 24.5 a year on Pujols? Terrible contract, Buehrle is a decent 2 at best as he's going to be 33 next year...lol Marlins

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lol 14.5 mil for each of the next 4 years, are you kidding? I think Reyes now has to question whether or not his 18 mil a year is being underpaid. Lol if your going to 14.5 on Buehrle why are you going 24.5 a year on Pujols? Terrible contract, Buehrle is a decent 2 at best as he's going to be 33 next year...lol Marlins

 

Buehrle seems like an obvious candidate to decline soon and decline big time. Bad strikeout rate, gives up a lot of hits. Not usually a recipe for a long career. The Marlins have gone off the deep end. A 1 or 2 year deal for him would be the longest I'd consider going. 4 is ridiculous.

Edited by Phightins
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Totally and utterly ridiculous.

 

5/75 for Wilson btw.

 

Yep, and he apparently left money on the table from the Marlins.

 

The Marlins will be thankful in a few years that Wilson did not take their 6 year offer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...