2011/12 Toronto Blue Jays Off-Season

[calculoso]

Originally Posted by flambers

If a pitcher is going to win the MVP, then I say they should get rid of the Cy Young award.

If a hitter is going to win the MVP, then I say they should get rid of the Hank Aaron Award.

History of the Hank Aaron Award
This coveted honor is awarded annually to the best overall offensive performer in both the American League and National League. Originally introduced in 1999 to honor the 25th anniversary of Hank Aaron breaking Babe Ruth's all-time home run record, the Hank Aaron Award was the first major award to be introduced in 30 years.

[flambers]

Originally Posted by calculoso

If a hitter is going to win the MVP, then I say they should get rid of the Hank Aaron Award.

History of the Hank Aaron Award
This coveted honor is awarded annually to the best overall offensive performer in both the American League and National League. Originally introduced in 1999 to honor the 25th anniversary of Hank Aaron breaking Babe Ruth's all-time home run record, the Hank Aaron Award was the first major award to be introduced in 30 years.

Agreed, toss them both.

[calculoso]

Originally Posted by flambers

Agreed, toss them both.

Or, how about we keep them both and allow the MVP trophy to be won by anyone?

In my view, a starting pitcher does have a huge impact on his team. I've heard the "not participating in 79% of the games" viewpoint, which has a certain amount of validity. The difference for me is how involved starting pitchers are during the other "21%" of games.

Verlander participated in 969 Plate Appearances during the season. Take the top batter in the AL (Pedroia) who participated in 731, or Bautista who participated in 655. There is a significant difference.

Taking fielding into account, Verlander had 50 chances to make a fielding play (Putouts + Assists + Errors), whereas Bautista had 333 chances, between outfield and 3b.

Taking Verlander's impact (969 + 50 = 1019) and Bautista's impact (655 + 333 = 988), we see that Verlander had more of an opportunity to make an impact.

(Note: Statistics can be used to prove anything.. the above shows that in spades)

[flambers]

Originally Posted by calculoso

Or, how about we keep them both and allow the MVP trophy to be won by anyone?

In my view, a starting pitcher does have a huge impact on his team. I've heard the "not participating in 79% of the games" viewpoint, which has a certain amount of validity. The difference for me is how involved starting pitchers are during the other "21%" of games.

Verlander participated in 969 Plate Appearances during the season. Take the top batter in the AL (Pedroia) who participated in 731, or Bautista who participated in 655. There is a significant difference.

Taking fielding into account, Verlander had 50 chances to make a fielding play (Putouts + Assists + Errors), whereas Bautista had 333 chances, between outfield and 3b.

Taking Verlander's impact (969 + 50 = 1019) and Bautista's impact (655 + 333 = 988), we see that Verlander had more of an opportunity to make an impact.

(Note: Statistics can be used to prove anything.. the above shows that in spades)

Verlander also played 80% less than the fellow who finished in 2nd place.

Impact numbers are bogus. That stat would make any pitcher look good.

There were voters who left Verlander off their sheet.

[zukes]

I have no problem with Verlander winning the MVP. He was the most valuable player to his team.

Consider, Detroit finished 95-67, good for .586 winning %.

In games that Verlander pitched, Detroit was 25-9, .735 winning %

In games that Verlander did not pitch, 70-58, .549 winning %

In games where Verlander did not get a decision he left with a lead once, they lost, left tied once and they lost, left losing 3 times, all only by one run and they went 1-2.

Line: 9IP, 6H, 2R 2ER, 1BB, 4K
Line: 7.2IP, 7H, 1R, 1ER, 2BB, 8K

Those are two of his five losses above.

He threw a near perfect game against the Jays, his only blemish a 12 pitch walk.

His last loss was July 15th.

That to me, says MVP.

[calculoso]

Originally Posted by flambers

Verlander also played 80% less than the fellow who finished in 2nd place.

"Played" is completely meaningless. The only time it matters if it is them or someone else is when they are involved. Otherwise, they're just standing there.

[troutman]

There are a lot of pitchers who are the best/most valuable players on the team: ex. Verlander, Kershaw, Lincecum.

[JayP]

Originally Posted by zukes

I have no problem with Verlander winning the MVP. He was the most valuable player to his team.

Consider, Detroit finished 95-67, good for .586 winning %.

In games that Verlander pitched, Detroit was 25-9, .735 winning %

In games that Verlander did not pitch, 70-58, .549 winning %

In games where Verlander did not get a decision he left with a lead once, they lost, left tied once and they lost, left losing 3 times, all only by one run and they went 1-2.

Line: 9IP, 6H, 2R 2ER, 1BB, 4K
Line: 7.2IP, 7H, 1R, 1ER, 2BB, 8K

Those are two of his five losses above.

He threw a near perfect game against the Jays, his only blemish a 12 pitch walk.

His last loss was July 15th.

That to me, says MVP.

Using W-L record to judge an individual player is ridiculous. Either way, that terrible .549 winning% the non-Verlander starters put up still would've won the 89 games.

Kershaw, Lee, and Halladay all had better seasons than Verlander in terms of actually getting players out, but Verlander is more important to his team because his team put up more runs in the games he pitched. That's essentially what you say when you bring up his W-L record.

If Verlander wins the MVP this year then why doesn't a pitcher win it every year?

[Caged Great]

With the modifications to the CBA, Kelly Johnson will not be returning to the jays under any circumstance.

The signing team if they are in the 11-30 position, will give up nothing. The Jays will receive a 10th overall pick to a 29th overall pick (one higher than what the team signing him will have) in addition to a supplemental 1st as well. If the team that signs him is one of the 10 worst teams, then we'll get one pick better than their second rounder and a supplemental 1st.

[ricoFlame]

Originally Posted by troutman

There are a lot of pitchers who are the best/most valuable players on the team: ex. Verlander, Kershaw, Lincecum.

I'm not convinced Verlander is the mvp of the tigers...take Cabrera out of that lineup last year and see what kinda team they have.

[flames_fan_down_under]

Originally Posted by calculoso

Verlander participated in 969 Plate Appearances during the season. Take the top batter in the AL (Pedroia) who participated in 731, or Bautista who participated in 655. There is a significant difference.

Taking fielding into account, Verlander had 50 chances to make a fielding play (Putouts + Assists + Errors), whereas Bautista had 333 chances, between outfield and 3b.

Taking Verlander's impact (969 + 50 = 1019) and Bautista's impact (655 + 333 = 988), we see that Verlander had more of an opportunity to make an impact.

I completely understand your argument Calculoso. I just feel that this was not the foundation of which the BBWAA used to formulate their decision making.

If we look at any starting infielder, most notably SS, 2B and 1B, their PA's combined with fielding chances all eclipse that of a starting pitcher or outfielder. For example Dustin Pedroia as you mentioned had 731 PA and had 722 fielding chances, giving him 1453 "opportunities to impact the game". However the BBWAA gave 2nd place, 3rd place and 4th place vote to outfielders.

I don't disagree with your argument calculoso I think that these voters are all live on antiquated ideas of BA or "triple crown stats" and win count rather than taking into account things like strength of opposition or ball parks playing in etc.

[Caged Great]

The draft cap for slotted picks in the first round has been increased from 133 million to 200 million (133 was what the total was for slot recommended contracts for all the picks in the top 10 rounds)

Based off the upgraded slot recommendations, only 6 teams would've been over by more than 15% (losing two 1sts) so it's not quite as bad as originally thought (20 teams would've been over had the figures been at 133 mil instead)

So compensation will be decreased by a bit, but not a huge amount. All teams spent 231 million in the first 10 rounds last year, so a 31 mil decrease isn't that huge.

[calculoso]

Originally Posted by flames_fan_down_under

I completely understand your argument Calculoso. I just feel that this was not the foundation of which the BBWAA used to formulate their decision making.

If we look at any starting infielder, most notably SS, 2B and 1B, their PA's combined with fielding chances all eclipse that of a starting pitcher or outfielder. For example Dustin Pedroia as you mentioned had 731 PA and had 722 fielding chances, giving him 1453 "opportunities to impact the game". However the BBWAA gave 2nd place, 3rd place and 4th place vote to outfielders.

I don't disagree with your argument calculoso I think that these voters are all live on antiquated ideas of BA or "triple crown stats" and win count rather than taking into account things like strength of opposition or ball parks playing in etc.

I totally agree with you. There is a lot to factor that most don't even consider (whether they should consider all the stats is also up for debate). All I was trying to show is that the "Pitchers cannot be MVP" / "Pitchers don't have a large impact on the game" argument is much less clear and less sound than it was seeming to be presented.

[flambers]

Originally Posted by calculoso

I totally agree with you. There is a lot to factor that most don't even consider (whether they should consider all the stats is also up for debate). All I was trying to show is that the "Pitchers cannot be MVP" / "Pitchers don't have a large impact on the game" argument is much less clear and less sound than it was seeming to be presented.

Challenge with the stats you have shown, many Starting Pitchers in the league are going to end up with a high number especially Starters who are the 1st or 2nd Pitcher in the rotation.

---- Verlander participated in 969 Plate Appearances during the season.

-----(Most Starters are going to have a high number)


------ Taking fielding into account, Verlander had 50 chances to a make fielding play

--------(Most Starters make Fielding plays)


I understand some folks believe SP should be an MVP others don't....

[dustyanddaflames]

Originally Posted by ricoFlame

I'm not convinced Verlander is the mvp of the tigers...take Cabrera out of that lineup last year and see what kinda team they have.

A team without a criminal record? For the record, I agree on Cabrera, without him, they wouldn't have taken the Central. Guy makes the players hitting behind/ahead of him so much better just by being in the line up.

[calculoso]

Originally Posted by flambers

Challenge with the stats you have shown, many Starting Pitchers in the league are going to end up with a high number especially Starters who are the 1st or 2nd Pitcher in the rotation.

While Starting Pitchers will have a high number, it is only the elite of the elite that would be in consideration for the MVP. Same goes for Batters and Fielders - lots of every day players have a large number of plate appearances and chances to make fielding plays, but only the elite of the elite are in consideration for MVP.

I understand some folks believe SP should be an MVP others don't....

A lot of this comes down to the perceived worth of a pitcher. I get it that some consider pitchers to have less 'worth' than batters... and totally disagree.

[JayP]

Originally Posted by dustyanddaflames

A team without a criminal record? For the record, I agree on Cabrera, without him, they wouldn't have taken the Central. Guy makes the players hitting behind/ahead of him so much better just by being in the line up.

It's more that the guy was pretty much on par with Bautista as the best hitter in the league than some aura of making players around him better.

[JayP]

Originally Posted by calculoso

A lot of this comes down to the perceived worth of a pitcher. I get it that some consider pitchers to have less 'worth' than batters... and totally disagree.

The big issue is why Justin Verlander? He had a great season, but this was a pretty typical season for the best pitcher in the AL. He wasn't putting up Pedro Martinez type numbers.

If Verlander is so worthy of the AL MVP then why isn't anyone up in arms that Halladay finished 9th NL MVP voting and Kershaw wasn't even in the top 10? Those guys each had better seasons than Verlander (when you look at real numbers and not wins/losses) so why is isn't it a big deal that they didn't get any consideration?

I could understand if Halladay/Kershaw were both very high, but didn't win because people voting for a pitcher split their votes between the two (and the opposite happened in the AL where Ellsbury/Bautista split votes allowing Verlander to sneak in and win). But that didn't happen. Verlander was the unanimous choice for AL MVP and Halladay/Kershaw weren't even considered for NL MVP. Why isn't this a big deal?

It just goes to show that MVP voting is a joke (like pretty much any award voted on by members of the media) and really isn't worth our time.

[Gozer]

MVP sure looked like a post-season award to me.

[Caged Great]

Johnson Molina, Rauch and Francisco were offered arbitration Camp was not.