Your thoughts on a pitcher winning the MVP award

[MansGame]

Started having the conversation at the water cooler at work and thought I'd raise it here... do you think a pitcher should win the MVP or is the Cy Young award suppose to be enough for a pitcher? Any and all thoughts welcome.

Obviously the debate has been had because Clayton Kershaw is having a freaking amazing season and one would argue he is deserving of the MVP award.

For me, I don't see why a pitcher shouldn't win the MVP if he is deserving but I'm getting more reaction going the other way.

 

[200lbhockeyplayer]

Unless there's an absolute runaway hitter (and unless the Marlins get into the Playoffs, Stanton is out), I don't see any issue with Kershaw winning it.

It truly takes a remarkable, historic season for a pitcher to really be considered...this is it.

A couple strikeouts away from the Triple Crown, but everything else is just absurd.

 

[BBCgalaxee]

No, NOPE, nah, never, neva, nevah

Pitchers have their award, mvp should be batter exclusive, like the cy young award is for pitchers.

And don't even bring up the "hank aaron" award.

Sent from my HTCONE using Freedom Card Board mobile app

 

[TNP777]

Admittedly, I'm biased on the subject. If I was a Marlins fan, I would rationalize to the best of my ability that Stanton clearly deserves the award over a "part time" player.

Some cannot get past the fact that a pitcher doesn't have the daily impact that an everyday position player does. I cannot get past the fact that the Marlins with Stanton are still under .500 and in 3rd place. That may change by the end of the season, but maybe not. Without Kershaw's dominance, the Dodgers would be trailing the Giants. No question. Yes, he missed six games. And yet he's still challenging for the pitching triple crown. His mind-blowing ERA includes that disastrous May start against Arizona.

Stanton winning MVP would be justified. I'd be disappointed, but would understand. At least it wouldn't be as odorous as Kemp losing out to a guy who cheated, lied about it, lied some more, all while trying to destroy someone's career and reputation over his lies.

 

[TNP777]

No, NOPE, nah, never, neva, nevah

Pitchers have their award, mvp should be batter exclusive, like the cy young award is for pitchers.

And don't even bring up the "hank aaron" award.

Sent from my HTCONE using Freedom Card Board mobile app

You may believe that the MVP should be batter exclusive, but we all know history has proven that it's not. Because that door has been repeatedly opened, pitchers having exceptional seasons, such as Kershaw this year, warrant strong consideration.

Pitchers who have won the MVP (or its equivalent, depending on the era)
1913 Walter Johnson and Jake Daubert
1924 Walter Johnson and Dazzy Vance
1931 Lefty Grove
1933 Carl Hubbell
1934 Dizzy Dean
1936 Carl Hubbell
1939 Bucky Walters
1942 Mort Cooper
1943 Spud Chandler
1944 Hal Newhouser
1945 Hal Newhouser
1950 Jim Konstanty
1952 Bobby Shantz
1956 Don Newcombe
1963 Sandy Koufax
1968 Denny McLain and Bob Gibson
1971 Vida Blue
1981 Rollie Fingers
1986 Roger Clemens
1992 Dennis Eckersley
2011 Justin Verlander

So, it's happened more times than I was thinking. Now, if you want to debate whether or not a particular player deserves the MVP, consider the DH. It has only happened once: Don Baylor in 1979.

 

[olerud363]

Hitters have Silver Slugger Awards for offense, pitchers have the Cy Young Award for pitching, everyone has Gold Glove Awards for defense. I believe the MVP is for the most valuable all-around player, be it hitter or pitcher.

 

[Enfuego79]

In my mind, the Cy Young IS the MVP award.

 

[swish54_99]

Hitters have Silver Slugger Awards for offense, pitchers have the Cy Young Award for pitching, everyone has Gold Glove Awards for defense. I believe the MVP is for the most valuable all-around player, be it hitter or pitcher.

Pretty much exactly what I was going to say. MVP is for the best overall player, not just hitters and if a pitcher happens to be the best overall player that particular year so be it.

 

[BBCgalaxee]

Silver slugger? Really?

That award (started in the early 80s as marketing ploy) is given to 18 players annually....including pitchers!

Cy: best pitcher
Mvp: best hitter

Plain and simple.

 

[joey12508]

Whom ever is the leauge mvp is should win. Pitchers or every day players.


Sent from my iPhone using Freedom Card Board mobile app

 

[MansGame]

Hitters have Silver Slugger Awards for offense, pitchers have the Cy Young Award for pitching, everyone has Gold Glove Awards for defense. I believe the MVP is for the most valuable all-around player, be it hitter or pitcher.

This is pretty much my train of thought but I'm starting to think that maybe Cy Young should be the MVP for pitchers.

 

[Topnotchsy]

Consider that a starting pitcher faces more batters in his 30ish starts than the average hitter has times at bat over a season in 162 games.

Despite the fact they play only once in 5 games, it could easily be argued that their impact is more than an every day player over the course of a season.

 

[onionring9]

I can't justify being an MVP of an entire league if you only play 1/5 the season. That award is meant for someone who excels 6-7 days a week, not 1, rarely 2 times per week.

The Cy Young is sufficient in my mind. Give the MVP to someone who has to prove themsleves to be the best over 100+ games and not 20+.

 

[jaydub]

Consider that a starting pitcher faces more batters in his 30ish starts than the average hitter has times at bat over a season in 162 games.

Despite the fact they play only once in 5 games, it could easily be argued that their impact is more than an every day player over the course of a season.

This is an argument I can get behind. A batter gets avg of 4 plate appearances a game, pitcher say goes 6 innings facing 4 batters per inning has 24 plate appearances. Over 5 game period that puts batters and pitchers about equal in terms of at bats. We tend to judge position players -primarily- by what they do in the batters box over the course of a season. Pitchers over whole season have as many of those situations as a position player, just from the opposite side.

 

[rsmath]

Considering I don't feel there is a strong hitter candidate for NL MVP:

beyond the pitching stats, the Dodgers are 20-4 (16 games over .500) when Kershaw starts and just 3 games over .500 when he doesn't. Says to me how valuable he is to his team's success even when on the mound every 5th-6th day.

 

[Austin]

Consider that a starting pitcher faces more batters in his 30ish starts than the average hitter has times at bat over a season in 162 games.

Despite the fact they play only once in 5 games, it could easily be argued that their impact is more than an every day player over the course of a season.

Exactly. Hitters bat only four times and field a few balls a game. A pitcher throws 100 times and is involved with every play.

Stanton is having an excellent season, but it's nothing extraordinary like Kershaw's season.
He's on pace for around a .290 avg. with 40 homers and 120 rbi. That happens all the time, usually often several times a season, even during the non-PED eras.

But what Kershaw is doing is extremely rare and compares to the upper tier of Hall of Fame pitchers.

And it's called the Most Valuable Player Award, not Most Valuable Hitter.

 

[Topnotchsy]

I can't justify being an MVP of an entire league if you only play 1/5 the season. That award is meant for someone who excels 6-7 days a week, not 1, rarely 2 times per week.

The Cy Young is sufficient in my mind. Give the MVP to someone who has to prove themsleves to be the best over 100+ games and not 20+.

A hitter only hits 1/9 of the time, so the equivalent of 18 games or so.

And to say a hitter excels 6-7 days a week IMO is a gross overstatement. The difference between a .250 hitter an .300 hitter over 600 at-bats is 30 hits, so that means that he has one extra hit roughly every 5 games. So in one game out of 5 he's around 1 hit better than average and in the other 4 he's basically average. Obviously there's other hitting stats but the impact of a hitter on any specific game is usually minimal while the pitcher plays a central role with every batter he faces.

 

[onionring9]

A hitter only hits 1/9 of the time, so the equivalent of 18 games or so.

And to say a hitter excels 6-7 days a week IMO is a gross overstatement. The difference between a .250 hitter an .300 hitter over 600 at-bats is 30 hits, so that means that he has one extra hit roughly every 5 games. So in one game out of 5 he's around 1 hit better than average and in the other 4 he's basically average. Obviously there's other hitting stats but the impact of a hitter on any specific game is usually minimal while the pitcher plays a central role with every batter he faces.

If you are going that route, you are making an even weaker argument because you do not include that non-pitchers also play defense 140ish pitches every game along with batting 4 times a game, as well as on the base paths for some of the other at-bats and has to do that day-in and day-out 6-7 times a week. A pitcher throws 100ish pitches once every 5 days so even in those games, he doesn't even play the whole game. You do not take into account half of the MVP argument.

The stats are extremely lopsided, hence the reason I do not feel you have a strong argument. I'm not saying you are wrong but I think the argument as a pitcher for MVP is very weak, especially since there is an award specifically for them, the Cy Young. I do feel though your argument is absolutely warranted because of the season Kershaw is having, however I do not agree with you at all.

In the end, you are entitled to your opinion

 

[Brewer Andy]

5 times in the last 40 years is about right, meaning it's gotta be a pretty special season and there's a lot of factors. I think there's a good case this year

 

[Hendersonfan]

That's why they have a Cy Young award. Hitter can't win that, why can a pitcher win MVP?