Justin Verlander Named AL MVP

[emkayseven]

Verlander had the highest WAR in the AL.

As a pitcher.

Generally I am against pitchers winning the award and yes Verlander was somewhat lucky this year but the man pitched 250 innings and pitched them marvelously. If you replace Miguel Cabrera with a league average 1B you have a better team than if you replace Verlander with a league average starter.

The idea that Cabrera was more valuable than Verlander just doesn't make sense to me in any way, especially given that Cabrera adds nothing in the field or on the basepaths. He's a one trick pony (hitting) just like Verlander is a one trick pony (pitching) so where is the argument?

Bautista is the only other guy I would have been okay with getting it.

[DropkickAlex]

Someone posted this on another site I visit which I found interesting:

Someone explain Verlander's MVP candidacy to me without using the following:

1. Pitcher wins (because they are useless)
2. The Tigers would not have won the Central without him (see below)




This is a fun exercise. The Tigers won the Central by 15 (!) games. I'm going to substitute all of JV's starts with a pitcher who will have an ERA of 5.00 in EVERY SINGLE START (rounding up too, just for kicks) - and I'm going to name this pitcher "Tommy LaRussa". If JV goes 9 IP, 2 ER and gets a 3-2 win, Tommy goes 9 IP, 5 ER and takes a 5-3 loss. If JV goes 8 IP, it's 8 IP, 5 ER for our boy Tommy. All bullpen performances after that remain the same. Ready for the results?

They went 11-20-3 with a pitcher who had an ERA of 5 before I rounded up a ton. Let's say they lose 2 of those 3 extra IP games. Total record of 12-22. Sounds terrible right? Well JV's starts lead to 25-9. That costs the Tigers a whopping 13 games. Except they STILL win the division by 2 games.

In other words, even if you substitute JV with any old piece of crap, the Tigers still make the playoffs. Or, if you just do the math and subtract all of his starts from the Tigers' win total and base their percentage on that. Whatever, they still run away with the division.


During the summer, the narrative was the JV was carrying his team to the playoffs. That might have been true then, but now the Tigers ran away with the division. And in spite of all the evidence, the narrative is continuing.

[Mainge]

I think that helps the Verlander for MVP argument more than it hurts it.

Only a 13 game difference? What a scrub.

[Beef]

I suppose not losing all those games might do more for a team than just change the w-l record on any given day.

Also, did that guy do a similar study for what would happen if Miggs was also replaced with a Volstad?

[Valid]

Verlander had the highest WAR in the AL.

As a pitcher.

Generally I am against pitchers winning the award and yes Verlander was somewhat lucky this year but the man pitched 250 innings and pitched them marvelously. If you replace Miguel Cabrera with a league average 1B you have a better team than if you replace Verlander with a league average starter.

The idea that Cabrera was more valuable than Verlander just doesn't make sense to me in any way, especially given that Cabrera adds nothing in the field or on the basepaths. He's a one trick pony (hitting) just like Verlander is a one trick pony (pitching) so where is the argument?

Bautista is the only other guy I would have been okay with getting it.

Because he plays everyday?

I like sabermetric statistics, but sometimes you have to just use your own judgment because they do not always tell the whole story. For example, according to WAR, Cameron Maybin was more valuable to his team than Mike Stanton was this season. I find that ridiculously laughable.

I'm sorry, but regardless of what the WAR stat says, I have a very hard time believing that Detroit would have been better off with an average first baseman in place of Cabrera than an average pitcher.

[Beef]

I'd be interested to see some research on that.

[Valid]

There really is no "research" you can use to truly determine that. I already pointed out that I feel the WAR statistic is flawed, so while I am not ignoring the stat entirely, I just don't see how you can dismiss Cabrera over Verlander because of it. I mean, how many of us would rather have Maybin than Stanton?

I'm basing it off the fact that Cabrera played in 161 games and Verlander played in 34. I really don't understand how someone who plays in one-fifth of their team's games can win the Most Valuable Player award, but to each his own.

[Bobbob1313]

Cabrera plays in all of those games, but he only has roughly 15% of his team's plate appearances. Just saying "161 IS MORE THAN 34!" ignores that an individual position player's impact isn't huge on a day to day basis anyways.

[Valid]

Cabrera's impact on the offense goes much deeper than just his plate appearances. The players around him see better pitches to hit.

[Beef]

Verlander's impact goes deeper than just those games in which he pitches

[Valid]

Verlander's impact goes deeper than just those games in which he pitches

How so?

[Beef]

Bullpen better off, team not fighting to end a losing streak, prob other stuff

[emkayseven]

Yeah a pitcher pitching 250 innings like it's 1980 all over again sure has no impact on the rest of the team

[Mainge]

Cabrera's impact on the offense goes much deeper than just his plate appearances. The players around him see better pitches to hit.

This is conventional wisdom that is incorrect.

[nny]

Yeah I REALLY REALLY hate that logic.

"Let's give the other hitters better pitches to hit so that they get on base and then there are more people on base for Cabrera to drive in/more PA for Cabrera in a game"

How does that make sense at all? Why in the WORLD do people believe it? It bothers me to know end. It's completely counter productive and is just so silly.