Beside the fact it is kind of irksome a pitcher can win the two most prestigious awards (Cy Young and most valuable player), while the best a hitter can do is claim MVP, selecting Justin Verlander for the American League’s top individual prize was wrong.
Sportswriters tend to treat wins as Charlie Sheen would an attractive woman; they ogle first and then eat them up.
Verlander was amazing. No fooling.
But, he shouldn’t have swept the awards show the way Taylor Swift seems to do.
Compare these two pitcher’s numbers:
· 21-5, 2.28 ERA, 248 strikeouts, .98 WHIP, .207 BAA in 233.1 IP · 24-5, 2.40 ERA, 250 strikeouts, .92 WHIP, .192 BAA in 250 IP
Pitcher A, Clayton Kershaw, finished 12th in the National League MVP voting. Pitcher B, Verlander, won the American League MVP.
All things considered, the top hitters in the American League were every bit as impressive as the top contenders in the National League.
The lone notable difference is the American League had only one 30-30 (home runs and stolen bases) guy, in Jacoby Ellsbury. The National League had two, winner Ryan Braun and runner-up Matt Kemp.
Consider also Verlander’s numbers came against American League hitting and the designated hitter, whereas Kershaw breezed through lineups featuring pitchers.
Between the Cy Young winners it is apparent Verlander was the superior pitcher.
But is that eminence worthy of an 11 spot separation in the respective league MVP races?
No way.
The difference came down to a popularity contest, one where Ellsbury and Jose Bautista played Eeyore and Oedipus (post blindness).
Ellsbury reportedly lacked leadership during Boston’s dramatic collapse and Bautista played a mediocre second half for a non-playoff team in the non-baseball town of Toronto.
Sportswriters are supposed to be objective. That’s not what award voting would suggest.
This year a Dallas Morning News writer cast his first place vote to Ranger Michael Young, not even the best player on his team (Ian Kinsler added 6.4 wins above a replacement versus the 2.4 Young contributed).
Three years ago, Tom Haudricourt, a writer for the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, used his first place vote on Ryan Howard, included three Brewers in his top 10 and placed winner Albert Pujols seventh. His reasoning for choosing Howard, other than possibly despising rival St. Louis, was that the Philly played great in September, when games somehow “mattered more.”
Haudricourt said of September, “it separates the men from the boys.”
Last time I checked the best opportunity to face minor league call-ups is during September. Sounds more like a mixing of men and boys than a division.
Baseball Writers’ Association of America should think about revising how its writers vote. Perhaps implement a statue where writers cannot vote for a player on the team they cover and redefine the MVP award to at least guarantee those who play every day win something.
Because when it came down to vote for AL MVP this year, sportswriters, salivating over one statistic – Verlander had the most wins since Bob Welch amassed 27 in 1990 – fed into one another’s postures that a pitcher could be MVP.
One by one until 13 voters agreed, Verlander is the 2011 AL MVP.