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

[BuckyBuckner]

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.

I was thinking about this too. Though I have no problem with someone winning more than one award in a season. They should rename the MVP award the Babe Ruth Award (because he pitched and hit) and the hitter's award could be the Ted Williams Award.

[The Dane]

I was thinking about this too. Though I have no problem with someone winning more than one award in a season. They should rename the MVP award the Babe Ruth Award (because he pitched and hit) and the hitter's award could be the Ted Williams Award.

The names work for me, but the reason I say that no one should win two in one season is because someone would win two in EVERY season. I can't think of a season where we would have three completely different winners, unless of course, things like "clutch" or leadership or play-offs come into play for MVP. I can't imagine that the Cy Young or Ted Williams winners would not be the MVP every year.

[Sour Masher]

For me, it is part their own award thing, and part the fact that the batters faced vs ABs comparison doesn't take into account the defense a hitter plays every day. That makes him, generally, more valuable, imo.

Of course, David Ortiz making that argument is a joke, because as others have said, Kershaw plays more D than Ortiz. But I do agree with his logic--I'd vote for a pitcher for MVP over a DH. A DH would have to have an historic season that far outshines any position player before he should be considered MVP.

But all that said, again, Kershaw should be the MVP this year.

[BuckyBuckner]

The names work for me, but the reason I say that no one should win two in one season is because someone would win two in EVERY season. I can't think of a season where we would have three completely different winners, unless of course, things like "clutch" or leadership or play-offs come into play for MVP. I can't imagine that the Cy Young or Ted Williams winners would not be the MVP every year.

You could be right. With these awards you would not have to worry about the whole "is the team a playoff team?" for the Cy Young and Ted Williams Awards.

[Sour Masher]

The names work for me, but the reason I say that no one should win two in one season is because someone would win two in EVERY season. I can't think of a season where we would have three completely different winners, unless of course, things like "clutch" or leadership or play-offs come into play for MVP. I can't imagine that the Cy Young or Ted Williams winners would not be the MVP every year.

Yeah, good point about overlap, but if voters rightly paid more attention to defense, it wouldn't always be a double dip. My previous post indicates that I don't think a DH should get consideration for MVP unless he gets like the triple crown or something. But if the awards were split, I could see a DH or a poor defensive 1bman like Frank Thomas back in the day get that, but a stud all around 5 tool up the middle player get the MVP. Lighter hitting catchers, SS and CFers would have, I think, a better shot of getting recognized if voters could split the difference by giving a hitters award to the 50 homer corner bopper with the horrible UZR.

[The Dane]

You could be right. With these awards you would not have to worry about the whole "is the team a playoff team?" for the Cy Young and Ted Williams Awards.

Exactly. The Cy and Ted awards could be more based on stats and WAR and there would be less desire to want to link the intangibles or things out of control of the player. Maybe MVP could include those things. Or not. I'm not sure how I feel about that. As I think of it now, Cy is for pitchers and MVP is for hitters and MVP is just named poorly. There should be a separate award for both.

[overkill94]

I think it's fine the way it is. Pitchers hardly ever win the MVP and when they do, it's because they produced an historic season (well, most of the time *cough*WillieHernandez*cough*) and no hitter put up eye-popping enough numbers to leapfrog him. With how inconsistent the Dodgers have been this year, it's always been comforting to know that when Kershaw takes the mound they're going to win. Can any other hitter's contributions to his team guarantee the equivalent of a win every five days?

Looking at the NL OPS leaders it's interesting that Kemp has moved all the way up to 7th yet only has 0.9 WAR?! His defensive metrics must suuuuuck. You have to go all the way to Garret Jones at #44 to find someone with a lower WAR.

And dang, Pittsburgh has three hitters in the top 10 in WAR. McCutchen is not actually #1 among hitters, instead its...Jonathan Lucroy!