Verlander wins AL MVP

[Moonlight J]

Grant explains

When somebody can quickly explain the complexities of the concept and standardize the WAR formula, I’ll spend more time with it.
In the meantime, I’ll go with what my eyes told me. My eyes told me Michael Young meant more to the Texas Rangers and their success than any player in the American League.

http://www.dallasnews.com/sports/texas-rangers/headlines/20111121-grant-why-i-gave-michael-young-his-only-first-place-vote-for-al-mvp.ece

Goes on to quote a bevy of isolated stats while glossing over his bad defense saying he more than made up for it with his offensive production.

Sorry, it doesn't work out that way.

[Lucky]

Grant explains

http://www.dallasnews.com/sports/texas-rangers/headlines/20111121-grant-why-i-gave-michael-young-his-only-first-place-vote-for-al-mvp.ece

Goes on to quote a bevy of isolated stats while glossing over his bad defense saying he more than made up for it with his offensive production.

Sorry, it doesn't work out that way.

Brings to mind the age old question - "WAR...what is it good for?"

[chancellor]

Personally, I'm just waiting until Matt Kemp gets jobbed by some undeserving Brewer jerkoff.

Muahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[rhd]

Personally, I'm glad Verlander won. You can argue what the MVP award OUGHT to be, but the fact is it is the person (hitter or pitcher) most valuable to his team's success, and "team's success" is heavily linked to making the playoffs or not. Does Detroit make playoffs w/o Verlander? I think definitely not. Now, there may be some other players that you can say that about, too, but Verlander might have been more important than any of those other guys, and he probably had a better year than any of those other guys.

I also dont buy the argument that pitchers, particularly starters, cant be as valuable as position players because they dont play every day. They may pitch only every 5th game but when they do they're about 5 times more valuable in influencing the outcome of the game than position players, so they're about as equally valuable.

I'm also glad that C.C. got a few votes. Do the Yankees win the division or even make the playoffs w/o him to anchor that shaky rotation that just happenned to overachieve? Arguably not.

I also think that a guy whose team didnt make the playoffs can deserve the MVP, but I think his performance probably has to be head and shoulders above any of the other candidates whose team did make the playoffs.

[amcg]

Brings to mind the age old question - "WAR...what is it good for?"

Take a bow, son...

[wannabegriffey]

It seems like so many guys these days have provisions in their contracts for bonuses if they win certain post-season awards, even if they are unlikely to do so. I wonder if Verlander had any such provisions. I'm guessing he had a Cy Young provision, but an MVP bonus? Would his agent have negotiated for that?

I've never understood why gm's would write in these 'provisions'. You're a major league player making $15 or $20 million and a year and you want a bonus if you win the mvp or cy young? Fu#K a$$hole, you're making $15 million, you SHOULD contend every year considering your salary. In fact, maybe you should give some back if you DON'T make the top 20!!

[Erik]

Maybe Pedro deserved to win it in 99. And if so, the fact that he didn't, shouldn't mean that future deserving SP's never win it.

Agreed. Pedro was hurt that year because two voters refused to include any SP on their ballots at all. There was no such idiocy this year.

[Erik]

I voted for Ellsbury in the RJ poll but thought that he, Granderson, Bautista, and Miggy all had decent cases to be made.

And it's years like that where you can get surprise winners. No one had a year that jumps out and says "I HAVE to be MVP!"

[OaklandA's]

I've never understood why gm's would write in these 'provisions'.

It's pretty simple. The negotiations are a little bit apart. The player asks for $16M, and the team offers $15M. Finally, they settle on the Award bonus. Most likely the team pays $15M, but there is a chance for $16M if the player has a great year. But sides leave the negotiations satisfied.

[Lucky]

It's pretty simple. The negotiations are a little bit apart. The player asks for $16M, and the team offers $15M. Finally, they settle on the Award bonus. Most likely the team pays $15M, but there is a chance for $16M if the player has a great year. But sides leave the negotiations satisfied.

That's what I was going to say, although probably not as well. The bonus provisions cost the teams nothing, most of the time, but are a good bargaining chip. I wouldn't be surprised if some teams didn't lay off that action, too.

[Judge Jude]

"It's pretty simple. The negotiations are a little bit apart. The player asks for $16M, and the team offers $15M. Finally, they settle on the Award bonus. Most likely the team pays $15M, but there is a chance for $16M if the player has a great year. But sides leave the negotiations satisfied."

A shameless name drop, but I think it's allowed here under these circumstances.

Willis Reed was the first pick of the second round of the then 9-team NBA.
He once told me many years later that he wanted 10K, Knicks offered 9K.
He settled for a 1K bonus if he got Rookie of the Year.

A great pregnant pause at that point - I'm a big trivia guy, but at that moment, I'm not sure, off the top of my head, if he got it.
And Willis is as modest as fans imagine him to be (other stories - but only over a beer).
So a standoff - until I stare down Willis, and he finally chuckles.

Yeah.

[dannahann]

Agreed. Pedro was hurt that year because two voters refused to include any SP on their ballots at all. There was no such idiocy this year.

Actually there appears to be one voter who didn't include Verlander on his ballot. Guys like Ells and Grandy received 28 total votes to Verly's 27. Fortunatey it didn't cost Justin the award.

[B-Fly]

And it's years like that where you can get surprise winners. No one had a year that jumps out and says "I HAVE to be MVP!"

Right. That's a big part of why Verlander won. If there had been a consensus Most Valuable Everyday Player in the league, it might have been a very different story. If you're really torn among four or five different everyday players, however, and there's a clear standout pitching ace in the league on a division winner, it gives you the opportunity to avoid splitting hairs among the hitters.

[DJBeasties]

There is too much inconsistency and the writer's criteria change with the wind. What about Steve Carlton losing to Johnny Bench? What about Ron Guidry? I don't think starting pitchers should win if historically others didn't. Verlander's 2011 was not far and away, no-questions-asked better than Carlton, Guidry or Pedro, but now in 2011 -- it's OK because Ellsbury and Bautista's team didn't make the playoffs?

Also, Ellsbury had 700+ plate appearances, 380 putouts without an error and made 91 plays outside of what is considered an average centerfielder's range. Ellsbury's 2011 is the best perfomance from a CF since Ken Griffey Jr. in 1997 -a season that ended with Griffey Jr. unanimously winning the AL MVP award.

Also, in 1997, Roger Clemens won 21 games with a 2.05 ERA, 292 strikeouts in 264 IP -- where did he finish in the AL MVP voting?

He finished 11th.

[popeye]

There is too much inconsistency and the writer's criteria change with the wind. What about Steve Carlton losing to Johnny Bench? What about Ron Guidry? I don't think starting pitchers should win if historically others didn't. Verlander's 2011 was not far and away, no-questions-asked better than Carlton, Guidry or Pedro, but now in 2011 -- it's OK because Ellsbury and Bautista's team didn't make the playoffs?

Also, Ellsbury had 700+ plate appearances, 380 putouts without an error and made 91 plays outside of what is considered an average centerfielder's range. Ellsbury's 2011 is the best perfomance from a CF since Ken Griffey Jr. in 1997 -a season that ended with Griffey Jr. unanimously winning the AL MVP award.

Also, in 1997, Roger Clemens won 21 games with a 2.05 ERA, 292 strikeouts in 264 IP -- where did he finish in the AL MVP voting?

He finished 11th.

So, maybe Clemens deserved a lot better. And if so, that's no reason to subject Verlander to the same unfair treatment. What's wrong with doing away with voting, which has historically been unfair/biased against SP's?