Most Valuable Post

In the past couple days, I've been going through the ESPN boards and seeing a lot of angry people.  ...Okay, that's not really all that surprising. But the MVP race has been a controversial one this year, with multiple good candidates in both leagues. Pretty much every year, someone is going to get "robbed", if you will. So in light of today's vote, let's go through both leagues.

AMERICAN LEAGUE
Justin Verlander, Detroit Tigers

 The spread of first place votes was pretty impressive here, but the plurality went the direction of Verlander. Hard to argue against his dominant season, especially given his Cy Young award. But let's look at the numbers again.

24-5, 2.40 ERA, 251 IP, 250 K, 57 BB, 115.9 P/GS (34), .192 BAA, 0.92 WHIP, 4 CG, 2 SO, No-Hitter

Impressive. Almost a strikeout per inning, which, given how much of a workhorse he was, plus throwing well over 100 pitches every time he went out, is astounding. Yes, he only played in 34 games, but each of those 34 games was something to behold. He had that astounding mark following Detroit losses. You'd be surprised how much momentum the team racked up after he won a start or how he'd prevent a long skid with a great outing.

Let's compare to Jacoby Ellsbury, the guy many feel deserved the AL MVP.

.321/.376/.552, 32 HR, 105 RBI, 32 SB, 46 2B, 119 R

An excellent all-around year. He did this in 732 plate appearances, most in the majors. Justin Verlander faced a total of 969 batters, and threw the most pitches out of everyone in baseball this year. The whole "Verlander shouldn't have won because he only played every 5th day, while Ellsbury played everyday" argument is ludicrous. Verlander was involved in more situations going just by plate appearances. For the sake of argument, let's add in fielding chances to see how many plays total were affected. Ellsbury had 394 chances (Putouts, assists, errors), putting him at 1126 plays he was involved in this year. Verlander was involved in another 50 chances which puts him at 1019. Here, yes, Ellsbury was involved in more plays, but over 158 games. Verlander had about 100 fewer plays to be involved in, in just 34 games. Don't tell me pitchers shouldn't win because they don't have as many opportunities to affect the outcome.

NATIONAL LEAGUE
Ryan Braun, Milwaukee Brewers

This one seems to be causing just as much of an uproar. I can easily understand the arguments against Braun, one especially being that Prince Fielder finished third, just behind Matt Kemp. I figured during the season that the two of them would take votes away from each other and neither one would get it, but the voters still felt strongly about a guy I fear every time he steps to the plate. For argument, let's talk numbers.

Braun: .332/.397/.597, 33 HR, 111 RBI, 33 SB, 38 2B, 109 R
Kemp: .324/.399/.586, 39 HR, 126 RBI, 40 SB, 33 2B, 115 R


It's close, but overall the numbers go towards Kemp, right? Kemp deservedly won the Hank Aaron Award, handed out to the best offensive player. The MVP is based largely on stats, but there's more to it than that.


Let's go back to 2005. It's a year I hate because the White Sox won the World Series, but still a fun year because Derrek Lee went bonkers. Yet he finished 3rd in the NL MVP voting behind Albert Pujols and Andruw Jones. Let's look at their numbers.

 Lee (CHC): .335/.418/.662, 46 HR, 107 RBI, 15 SB, 50 2B, 120 R
Pujols (STL):  .330/.430/.609, 41 HR, 117 RBI, 16 SB, 38 2B, 129 R
Jones (ATL): .263/.347/.575, 51 HR, 128 RBI, 5 SB, 24 2B, 95 R

As far as all-around years go, Lee's 2005 campaign was fantastic not just because of the numbers, but he also had so many huge home runs that year that helped the Cubs win ball games. Andruw Jones had an obscene 51 homers, but other than RBI's, not as good an all-around year. Pujols definitely had the better year than Lee and deserved the MVP. But one of the other reasons? St. Louis made the playoffs. Like Lee, here in 2011, Braun had a number of huge hits to help Milwaukee win games.


I think that's one thing people forget. It's called the Most Valuable Player award, not the Most Outstanding Player award. If you have a great year that leads your team to the playoffs, you deserve it. I can see cases where someone has a monster year on a bad team, but can win MVP if no one else really approaches the numbers. But look at Verlander and Braun. They both led their respective teams to the playoffs, and the numbers were close. I think that's enough of an argument to give them the awards. But don't disrespect the years Ellsbury and Kemp had. They both had excellent years, and had they won, I wouldn't really argue with the decision. But there's logic behind the way the voters voted this year. Congratulate the winners, and come back next year with hopes for your team and your favorite player's MVP chances.

(Like I will with Starlin Castro, who by some miracle cracked the voting with a 10th place vote.)