Verlander, hyperbole, and the MVP

In terms of good material to blog about, nothing gets any better than the hand-wringing and debate that comes about as a result of the end-of-year MVP voting in Major League Baseball. Invariably, we are forced to bicker about what the word "valuable" means in a baseball context. Sometimes, a random writer will even conclude that a small white guy with no baseball skills has enough "grit" and "competitiveness" to not only overcome his lack of measurable on field accomplishments, but to trump the actual accomplishments of other, far superior players! (Did you know that David Eckstein has actually twice come closer to winning an MVP than Adam Dunn ever has? Really!)

This year the voters of the BBWAA are faced with yet another ball-buster: should (can?) a pitcher win the MVP?

In his latest column, Bill Madden makes a terrible case that Jason Verlander should be this year's AL MVP.

That age-old baseball debate - should pitchers be able to win the MVP award? - rages more furiously than ever this year with Justin Verlander compiling one of the most dominant seasons in history

OK, Verlander is having a very good season, but let's not go overboard with the hyperbole. His ERA is 2.44, tied for first with Jered Weaver. He's 3rd in the league in k/9 with 9.12, and has pitched the most innings in the league. He leads the league in WHIP, with 0.91. He has a .190 BAA, good for best in the league. All of this means that Justin Verlander is almost definitely the right candidate to win the AL Cy Young.

But one of the most dominant seasons EVER? His ERA+ (earned run average adjusted) this season is 166, which would rank as the 207th best ERA+ season of all time. Heck, Felix Hernandez posted a better ERA+ LAST SEASON. In 1999 and 2000, Pedro Martinez posted two of the top ten seasons in ERA+.

So no, Verlander is not having what could be considered even close to one of the "most dominant seasons in history."


In the history of the MVP award, pitchers have won it 18 times, the last being Oakland A's closer Dennis Eckersley in 1992, who led the AL in saves for the AL West champions (51-for-54) and had a 1.91 ERA.

Yes, and thankfully the MVP has not been awarded to a relief pitcher ever since, considering that someone who plays 80 innings the entire season (Eckersley's total in '92) will never be the (actual) most valuable player in the league.

What has made the MVP the most intriguing of all the sports awards is the very definition of it "most valuable - which the creating Baseball Writers Association has left to the interpretation of the voters, other than to say it is not necessarily the "player of the year."

And even though "games played" is listed among the criteria voting writers are told to consider, it has been generally assumed that it was put in there only as a caution for voting for a player who hit .390 or something in a limited number of games.

I'm unsure why Madden brings this up like it supports his point, considering that, according to this criteria, Verlander would not be considered as valuable as a position player who plays 150+ games.

In any case, the writers, by virtue of all the times they've voted the award to a pitcher, have largely ignored the "games played" criteria.

Best example of that was 1934 when the Yankees' Lou Gehrig had one of the greatest seasons of all time, playing every game and leading the league in batting (.363), homers (49), RBI (165), slugging (.706), and on-base percentage (.465), but was beaten out for the MVP by Tigers' catcher-manager Mickey Cochrane who played in only 129 games and led the league in nothing but was obviously given credit for managing the Tigers to the pennant.

This is dumb on multiple levels.

1. Madden all but admits it was a weird (and probably dubious) decision, given how much better Gehrig was at actually playing baseball that season.

2. 129 games is much more than the 35 or so Verlander will play this year.

3. Madden states that Cochrane won the award because he was also the manager of the team; as far as I know, Jim Leyland has managed the Tigers this season, without any input from Justin Verlander.

4. Pointing out a single, outside-the-norm MVP vote for a player-manager in 1934 is probably not the most effective or coherent strategy for arguing that Justin Verlander should win the MVP for pitching in 2011.

And here's why: Of all those candidates, none is more indispensable to his team than Verlander (22-5, 2.44 ERA), who is on his way to becoming only the fifth AL pitcher since 1950 to win the triple crown of pitching (wins/ERA/strikeouts) and who is 15-3 following a Tiger loss this season.

1. We've covered this: W-L record is stupid.

2. The Tigers are 23-8 when Verlander starts. They are 19-8 when Rick Porcello starts, and 19-11 when Max Scherzer starts. The conclusion I draw from this? The Tigers, regardless of who is pitching, seem to be a pretty good team, though they are at their best when Justin Verlander, their best pitcher, pitches for them.

That means that they probably wouldn't have lost all 15 of those games Verlander won after Tiger losses.

3. Verlander, according to Fangraphs, is a 6.4 WAR player this year. There are five position players, and one pitcher, that have a higher WAR this year.


if Leyland really feels that pitchers, by virtue of their 35 or so starts, should not be considered for the Most Valuable Player Award, then why is it so many starting pitchers, Roy Halladay, Josh Beckett, Jake Peavy et al, are the highest-paid players on their team?


That settles it. Jake Peavy for MVP.

Marrage Agenct

A Grimm ending

Not all stories have a happy ending.

Sometimes, the princess's hair just doesn't quite reach the knight in shining armor.

It is the stories without neat, hopeful endings that try our patience and push our emotional boundaries. Maybe for good. Often for bad.

And all too often society has a way of pushing these stories under the surface, largely because they fail to conform to archetypical conceptions of plot development and conclusion. Call these "normative expectations" or what have you, but they've fundamentally shaped our interaction with and perception of sports, and life.

Remember Ted Williams?

No, not the baseball player

Ted Williams was the Ohio Native (and homeless drug addict) who gained fame for a YouTube video demonstrating his unique talent, a particularly sonorous baritone voice perfect for an announcer's booth.

Demonstrating the Internet's amazing capacity to elevate obscurity to renown, this man was offered a job by the Cleveland Cavaliers to announce home games.

The story was perfect. And it spread like wildfire.

For the modern media cycle, that was that. A man down on his luck, with an amazing gift, was ultimately rewarded by a system where the wheat rises from the chaff.

As you may have guessed, this is not one of those stories.

After having lost everything, and regained it all in one fell swoop, Ted Williams entered voluntary rehab. And left less than 2 weeks later.

Talk about a fall from grace! baziiing!

I won't go on and on about the implications this story has for media coverage, in general, and how we relate to sports, specifically, but ask yourself: how much coverage was devoted to the former facts, and how much to the latter?

Stumped?

Unequivocally, people love a success story. And really don't like dealing with being let down. It shapes everything in terms of how we consume media. How the hell else would you explain the box office popularity of Will Smith's "The Pursuit of Happyness"? Crack?

Actually, we can blame a familiar downfall on that one.

Still not the baseball player

Reap what ye sow while ye may

LeBron James ruined the NBA for me

and apparently Damon Jones' night

In hindsight, "The Decision" has fundamentally shifted the landscape of professional basketball stardom. While the change had been imminent for years, this monstrosity of a PR nightmare was the straw that broke the camel's back, proverbially speaking.

One man's decision established precedence for how other "super" stars would treat their teams and their fan-bases.

Maybe the Miami Cheat were fated during that rumored wedding toast. Perhaps New York will yet witness the dawning of its own trifecta, with the public and not-so-public (future) defections of Carmelo and CP3 will prove. Deron Williams is frustrated and is likely to leave Utah when his contract expires in 2 years.

We aren't talking about your typical free-agent bonanza. NBA free agency usually consists of a pou-pou platter of degrading rotation players and discarded draft picks. This isn't the NFL, where you can regularly find talented players undrafted. In the NBA, more often than not, the cream rises to the top. One player can impact the game to a greater degree.

And yet when it comes time for free-agency, it isn't supposed to be those impact players switching teams. In fact, it was practically unheard of for decades (sure, there are notable exceptions). But the point stands, the defections of James and Bosh (taking their "talents" to South Beach) we're in and of themselves unprecedented.

Why wouldn't a group of 20-something rich celebrities not want to hang out all the time in perfect weather?

Because of the precedent set by LeBron's selfish motives, every star athlete views it as his given right to play for a winning team with people he likes.

Who cares about the team that drafted them, gave them a job, took a chance?

Who cares about the fans who have emotionally invested themselves in their team (for better or worse)?

Star players are beginning to believe that it is up to them to do whatever it takes to see that their needs are taken care of above all else. If your team just isn't quite cutting it, demand a trade, or wait and leave.

I've heard the argument that it's a business, and that team's don't show loyalty either.

Aren't we beyond that simplistic logic when we talk about this caliber of player? Doesn't being in the upper stratosphere of talent afford you the luxury of upholding noble principles? Have you ever lectured a famine-victim on ethics? 

Like I said, LeBron James ruined the NBA for me. In one off-season, Miami accomplished (talent-wise) what my team (Blazers) have been building towards for years, patiently, with their own nucleus.

Screw the building approach, now big-market teams can just court superstars through eventual free-agency. And those superstars can and will put entire fan-base's on edge, ultimately breaking their hearts. You don't think Nuggets fans would rather say "screw you" to 'Melo and kick his ass to the curb? It hurts to have someone look you in the eyes and lie to your face.

Maybe Mr. LaLa Anthony can pull the knife out of Denver's back for the next guy to use.

He definitely dropped that baby

Mixed Metaphors (There's no 'I' in Dead Horse)

Today, the Portland Trailblazers announced Center Marcus Camby would require left-knee surgery to repair a meniscus tear.

Karma is, indeed, a B

It is a season, yet again, mired in injury. And yet adversity presents itself as an opportunity for self-reflexivity and, ultimately, improvement.

The man drafted in front of Kevin Durant is out for the season, again.

The franchise hero underwent double knee surgery.

Only recently our backup center returned from injuring the same knee twice the previous season.

And now this.

It seems as if constant injury is a tired theme with this team. References to us as the "frailblazers" cannot be refuted, because health is something outside of the athlete's control. At least presumably. And this news which at first glance appears to be beating a dead horse is actually a lesson in disguise.

We never had a championship window.

In 2007, the Blazers were THE upcoming team. After drafting Oden first overall and uniting him in a core alongside Roy, Aldridge, Batum, Bayless and a stable of vets, we were odds on favorites to contend for the Western Conference title for years to come.

Fast-forward to now, and several season-ending knee surgeries for Mr. Oden later we have never truly experienced a playoffs where we had all our weapons. Hell, we've barely had a playoff run with our best player healthy.

And during this time, the team has gelled more than ever. We've put up 50 win seasons sporting a cumulative injury report rivaling Webster's Encyclopedia. With LaMarcus Aldridge blossoming into an all-star, Wesley Matthews filling in serviceably for Brandon Roy, and a variety of role players contributing above-expectations we're on track for yet another playoff appearance.

In fact, most feel good stories occur outside of first-place.

So while the L*kers, Celtics, cHeat-ers, and Magic make title runs, we can be content with what we have. Fate may have dealt us a bad hand so far. Who knows, maybe in some year to come we'll hit blackjack?

For now, leave the "I" to them.

We have 'Team'.

KG originally killed the horse, then beat it, then pulled down 13 boards that night