MLB Awards Week Thread

[TrustMeIamRight]

One of the two TB reporters who left Verlander off actually sent in his Cy Young vote a week and a half before the season ended. His response to why he left Verlander off -- I should have waited til the season was done before placing my vote. (Porcello had a 3.07 ERA, Verlander had a 3.21 ERA when he voted)

 

[Vyle203]

Verlander allowed 2 runs or fewer in 23 starts. Had more strikeouts, a better WHIP, a much better BAA, a better ERA, etc.

The only thing Porcello led Verlander was wins, which will happen when you are given an absurd 3 full runs of support more per game. So congrats to Boston's offense for winning the Cy Young.

Well then shame on the Detroit offense for not putting the bat on the ball enough to get some more wins for their ace.

 

[TrustMeIamRight]

Well then shame on the Detroit offense for not putting the bat on the ball enough to get some more wins for their ace.

Yeah, because team offense should really play a role on who the best pitcher is. Maybe you missed the part where Verlander had better stats across the board.

Let me guess. You think Mark Trumbo should be MVP because he led the AL in homeruns.

 

[Bloody Brian Burke]

Well then shame on the Detroit offense for not putting the bat on the ball enough to get some more wins for their ace.

No heart.

 

[Vyle203]

Yeah, because team offense should really play a role on who the best pitcher is. Maybe you missed the part where Verlander had better stats across the board.

Let me guess. You think Mark Trumbo should be MVP because he led the AL in homeruns.

I'm saying quit crying.

 

[Bloody Brian Burke]

One of the two TB reporters who left Verlander off actually sent in his Cy Young vote a week and a half before the season ended. His response to why he left Verlander off -- I should have waited til the season was done before placing my vote. (Porcello had a 3.07 ERA, Verlander had a 3.21 ERA when he voted)

Even if he had witnessed his final two starts, would that have been enough for both to place Verlander in 3rd (where he would've needed to be to pass Porcello in points)? Chastain would've had to have liked Verlander's final week performance which culminated with a good start against a terrible Braves team so much to move Verlander above Kluber in 3rd on his ballot. I doubt that would've been enough. Maybe Goodall places him above Happ, Britton and Sanchez but none of those 3 had a bad outing in the last week of the season. Sanchez may have pitched his best game of the season in that last series against Boston.

Verlander was never winning the Cy, and putting it on these two when there were 6 other writers who had him in 4th or 5th is pretty unfair.

 

[TrustMeIamRight]

I'm saying quit crying.

I'd be congratulated Porcello if it was deserved. I've watched him pitch since we drafted him. When the only categories you lead in for pitchers is wins and run support. It is a joke to win the Cy Young.

 

[TrustMeIamRight]

Even if he had witnessed his final two starts, would that have been enough for both to place Verlander in 3rd (where he would've needed to be to pass Porcello in points)? Chastain would've had to have liked Verlander's final week performance which culminated with a good start against a terrible Braves team so much to move Verlander above Kluber in 3rd on his ballot. I doubt that would've been enough. Maybe Goodall places him above Happ, Britton and Sanchez but none of those 3 had a bad outing in the last week of the season. Sanchez may have pitched his best game of the season in that last series against Boston.

Verlander was never winning the Cy, and putting it on these two when there were 6 other writers who had him in 4th or 5th is pretty unfair.

Explain to me how someone leads the AL in strikeouts, WHIP, BAA, WAR, WAR-P and 2nd in ERA, as well as leading the AL in starts with 2 ER or less given up with 23 is completely left off a 5 man Cy Young ballot?

It'd be like leading the league in RBI's, BA, runs scored, stolen bases and OBP, and giving someone like Mark Trumbo the MVP because he led in HR's.

 

[Bloody Brian Burke]

Explain to me how someone leads the AL in strikeouts, WHIP, BAA, WAR, WAR-P and 2nd in ERA, as well as leading the AL in starts with 2 ER or less given up with 23 is completely left off a 5 man Cy Young ballot?

It'd be like leading the league in RBI's, BA, runs scored, stolen bases and OBP, and giving someone like Mark Trumbo the MVP because he led in HR's.

I don't know? I'm just telling you how people voted.

And quit with the Trumbo thing. We get it.

 

[TrustMeIamRight]

I don't know? I'm just telling you how people voted.

And quit with the Trumbo thing. We get it.

And I'm just telling you how ridiculous it is.

 

[StanMarsh51]

Verlander allowed 2 runs or fewer in 23 starts. Had more strikeouts, a better WHIP, a much better BAA, a better ERA, etc.

The only thing Porcello led Verlander was wins, which will happen when you are given an absurd 3 full runs of support more per game. So congrats to Boston's offense for winning the Cy Young.

At the same time, it needs to be taken into account that Porcello pitches in much more of a hitters' park, and is in a division where 4 of the 5 ballparks are known to be hitters' parks. Porcello's ERA+ (which takes ballpark factors into account) was 145 compared to Verlander's 136, and it's safe to say the WHIP difference is negligible as well given the park factors.

Verlander's a fine pick for the award, but it's closer than you think.

 

[TrustMeIamRight]

At the same time, it needs to be taken into account that Porcello pitches in much more of a hitters' park, and is in a division where 4 of the 5 ballparks are known to be hitters' parks. Porcello's ERA+ (which takes ballpark factors into account) was 145 compared to Verlander's 136, and it's safe to say the WHIP difference is negligible as well given the park factors.

Verlander's a fine pick for the award, but it's closer than you think.

A 23 point difference in BAA is not negligible, neither is 65 more strikeouts or 8 more games where he allowed 2 or fewer runs. For all the advance metric fans -- WAR-P should end the debate as Verlander led all pitchers in the MLB and was the only pitcher in the top 10 (6.61) -- Porcello was 11th for pitchers and 37th overall.

 

[StanMarsh51]

A 23 point difference in BAA is not negligible, neither is 65 more strikeouts or 8 more games where he allowed 2 or fewer runs. For all the advance metric fans -- WAR-P should end the debate as Verlander led all pitchers in the MLB and was the only pitcher in the top 10 (6.61) -- Porcello was 11th for pitchers and 37th overall.

Not sure why you're so hopped up on 'games with 2 or fewer runs'....I mean, a game when he didn't pitch well weighs just as much as a game where he pitched well, no? Collectively, Verlander's ERA+ was worse than Porcello's so all those extra games with 2 or less runs didn't help much on the whole (and we're judging them on the whole season, not a portion of games). Not to mention, Porcello led the AL in K/BB (which is more important than K's).

And for pitchers, WAR imo tends to be a spotty stat...I mean, Tanner Roark had a better WAR than Jon Lester and Kyle Hendricks, and Hendricks finished 9th.

 

[mr.hockey4242]

Yeah, because team offense should really play a role on who the best pitcher is. Maybe you missed the part where Verlander had better stats across the board.

Let me guess. You think Mark Trumbo should be MVP because he led the AL in homeruns.

He does think Betts should be MVP over Trout.

So Guy is clearly missing a few screws

 

[Omar 382]

As long as Trouty is AL MVP, I'm not complaining

 

[TrustMeIamRight]

Not sure why you're so hopped up on 'games with 2 or fewer runs'....I mean, a game when he didn't pitch well weighs just as much as a game where he pitched well, no? Collectively, Verlander's ERA+ was worse than Porcello's so all those extra games with 2 or less runs didn't help much on the whole (and we're judging them on the whole season, not a portion of games). Not to mention, Porcello led the AL in K/BB (which is more important than K's).

And for pitchers, WAR imo tends to be a spotty stat...I mean, Tanner Roark had a better WAR than Jon Lester and Kyle Hendricks, and Hendricks finished 9th.

Would it be better if I said Verlander had 16 games where he gave up 1 or less, to only 9 forPorcello? Or would you rather I stick with the outdated 'quality start' where Verlander led the MLB with 27? IMO, a 4.50 ERA shouldn't be the standard for a quality start.

And leading the AL in K/BB is nice, him and Josh Tomlin should battle for many more Cy Young's.

And While advance metrics has a place in the game. In the end, it is still nothing more than an educated guess.

 

[Omar 382]

Would it be better if I said Verlander had 16 games where he gave up 1 or less, to only 9 forPorcello? Or would you rather I stick with the outdated 'quality start' where Verlander led the MLB with 27? IMO, a 4.50 ERA shouldn't be the standard for a quality start.

And leading the AL in K/BB is nice, him and Josh Tomlin should battle for many more Cy Young's.

And While advance metrics has a place in the game. In the end, it is still nothing more than an educated guess.

And regular metrics are.....

 

[Vyle203]

He does think Betts should be MVP over Trout.

So Guy is clearly missing a few screws

Yea, I don't think an MVP should come from a team that was 14 games under .500 and didn't make the playoffs.

 

[StanMarsh51]

Would it be better if I said Verlander had 16 games where he gave up 1 or less, to only 9 forPorcello? Or would you rather I stick with the outdated 'quality start' where Verlander led the MLB with 27? IMO, a 4.50 ERA shouldn't be the standard for a quality start.

Or why not just look at it over an entire season (instead of dissecting it into games where they did this and games where they did that) and adding some context where needed to that whole season?

Over the course of the season, given where they pitched, a strong case can be made that Porcello's ERA and WHIP were more impressive than Verlander's....it's that simple.

 

[StanMarsh51]

Yea, I don't think an MVP should come from a team that was 14 games under .500 and didn't make the playoffs.

Why is it Trout's fault that other 24 guys on his team sucked (on the whole) weren't good?