Kershaw...MVP....end of story

[Mithrandir]

Anyone disagree?

There isn't any other NL player who stands out.

[revo]

It's gotta be him, but you can make strong cases for Stanton, McCutchen or Posey.

[madducks]

If the Pirates could pull off winning the division in the final days it could swing some votes for McCutchen.

[Mithrandir]

If the Pirates could pull off winning the division in the final days it could swing some votes for McCutchen.

As great as Cutch is, Harrison was just as key to the Pirates season as was Cutch..maybe even Martin.

[madducks]

As great as Cutch is, Harrison was just as key to the Pirates season as was Cutch..maybe even Martin.

True, even McCutchen says that Harrison was more valuable. Harrison will definitely cost McCutchen some votes from the writers.

[The Dane]

I'm someone who thinks that pitchers should probably not be the MVP, but Kershaw deserves it if anyone does. If I had a vote, I'd vote for Stanton, then Posey, then Kershaw, then McCutchen.

[dslaw]

I'm someone who thinks that pitchers should probably not be the MVP,

I'm in this group but I would have voted for Verlander a couple of years ago and would vote Kershaw this year. Great year and no hitter that is having that outstanding kind of year to out vote Kershaw.

[DMT]

I generally eschew voting pitchers as MVP but Kershaw is an exception.

[Sour Masher]

Yeah, I too favor hitters for MVP, but as El D said, Kershaw is having an historic year. Even with the time he missed early, he is the MVP. Had Stanton not gotten hit in the face, and had finished strong, he'd be the MVP. But in the absence of a clear cut hitter, it should go to the all time great pitching season.

[BuckyBuckner]

David Ortiz doesn't think Kershaw (or any pitcher) should win the MVP, but Ortiz is an idiot.

http://www.bostonherald.com/sports/red_sox_mlb/boston_red_sox/2014/09/david_ortiz_pitchers_stick_with_the_cy_young_award

[Mithrandir]

David Ortiz doesn't think Kershaw (or any pitcher) should win the MVP, but Ortiz is an idiot.

http://www.bostonherald.com/sports/r...cy_young_award

So by his own thought process on the matter a DH should never win the MVP because "They never dived for a ball" all season.

The argument that the MVP should be for players who play EVERY GAME, how about the games when said player goes 0-5? That's not helping the team win.

[BuckyBuckner]

So by his own thought process on the matter a DH should never win the MVP because "They never dived for a ball" all season.

That's the best part about his statement, that he's a DH. I bet Kershaw has way more putouts than Ortiz this season. He's just a clueless man who has a microphone shoved in his face all the time and is more than happy to spew crap.

The argument that the MVP should be for players who play EVERY GAME, how about the games when said player goes 0-5? That's not helping the team win.

Another heard scratcher. He says hitters need to be at the top of their game every game. Going 0-5 is hardly at the top of their game. I would say that this is actually more important for a pitcher to be at the top of their game since they only pitch every 5 days. Hitters can go on a three game 0-fer slump and it's ok. If a pitcher does that? It's a much bigger issue.

I do think that a pitcher winning the MVP should be due to an exceptionally great season and possibly one where there is no hitter that stands out.

I've never had a problem with Ortiz, he seems like a likable fun guy but sometimes he just says the dumbest things.

[The Dane]

I do not think there is a legitimate, well thought out argument in favor of precluding pitchers from MVP discussions. I'm pretty surprised that some otherwise intelligent posters here favor that flawed thought process.

For me, it's not about playing every day. I simply like the symmetry of a Best Pitcher Award and Best Hitter Award and they just happen to be called "Cy Young" and "MVP". In my perfect world, there would be THREE major awards: The Cy Young for best pitcher, The Mickey Mantle (or some other name) for best hitter and the MVP for most valuable player, hitter or pitcher. A player cannot win two in one season, and MVP is the more prestigious. So, in a year like this, perhaps Cueto would win the Cy Young, but Kershaw would be the MVP. Stanton would likely be the Mickey Mantle winner. That's the way I see it.

Truth is, I could certainly see Kershaw win the MVP and I would not be surprised or disappointed one bit.

[BuckyBuckner]

I do not think there is a legitimate, well thought out argument in favor of precluding pitchers from MVP discussions. I'm pretty surprised that some otherwise intelligent posters here favor that flawed thought process.

They don't pitch every day? Yeah, but on the days they do pitch they face so many batters that all this essentially equals out. A batter gets 4-5 ABs per game. A pitcher faces, on average (for all pitchers, not just elite ones) 26+ batters per game. In the NL, pitchers also bat, adding to their importance.

The whole "I won't vote for a pitcher as MVP" is antiquated and silly and does not consider the overall impact players have, imho.

http://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/2014/9/23/6831341/pitchers-are-mvps-too

Edit: I, too, used to think that MVPs shouldn't go to pitchers. It was the data-based arguments that swayed me. They are extremely compelling, imo.

This dawned on my the other day. If you stretch that out over 25 games (a conservative number of starts) you are looking at 650 batters faced. That's the equivalent of a hitters full season. You could be looking at something closer to 1,000 at bats for an elite pitcher who pitches a full season (33 starts and 30 at bats per game). So that should more than make up for only pitching once every 5 days.

[DMT]

Yeah, that's legitimate. Pitchers already have "their" award.

I think that's what most of us are basing the 'hitters-first' argument on.