Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 65
  1. #16
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    13,312
    It's up to the voters. Lince can win it over any hitter, if the voters vote that way.

    ^^WE NEED THESE GUYS NOW.

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    4,070
    in a doqn year a pitcher could take the mvp BUT not when that guy named pujols is an mvp candidate

  3. #18
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    11,536
    Quote Originally Posted by mise View Post
    Pujols is going win it. I have never been a fan of pitchers for MVP. I think Kirby Puckett said it best the year he lost it to Eck :

    "So if I hit 350 next year with 50 bombs, do I get to win the Cy Young?"
    Haha that is pretty damn well said.

    I'm all for Lincecum winning the CY, his only real competitor is Dan Haren. Some could make a case for Matt Cain and Johan Santana.

    Highly unlikely pablo beats out pujols for the mvp unless pablo goes on a tear- it would be insane if he could top what he has done thus for the rest of the season.

  4. #19
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Richmond CA
    Posts
    3,529
    Pujols is winning MVP

  5. #20
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    California
    Posts
    70,228
    Quote Originally Posted by mise View Post
    Batting title is the equivalent of ERA title. MVP is the equivalent of Cy Young.
    Sorry mise, but that's wrong.

    The MVP isn't equivalent to anything. The Cy Young is equivalent to the Hank Aaron Award, although the voting process is different.

    Hank Aaron: Best Hitter
    Cy Young: Best Pitcher

    MVP should be the best of the two.

  6. #21
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    SF
    Posts
    1,232
    As far as perceived prestige and media attention, Kirby and mise are correct. Yes pitchers have gotten the MVP before, but I think it's been traditionally separated for a reason. Quick, name five guys who have won the Hank Aaron award ...... yeah that's what I thought.
    Perhaps it should be the best of the two, but unfortunately people don't take it for it's literal meaning. Tim would have to throw shutout baseball the rest of the way and get like 350 strikeouts to get in the conversation.

    Regarding Pablo, I'd just like him to win the batting title.

  7. #22
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    San Jose,CA
    Posts
    17
    I'll gladly exchange the CY Young and NL MVP for any post-season accolades. Not that they're mutually exclusive of course.

  8. #23
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Santa Clara, CA
    Posts
    1,635
    A starting pitcher makes one out of five starts.

    four out of the five games that the team plays in, he has zero effect on the outcome of the game.

    I'm sorry, but I simply do not agree with the notion that a pitcher should win the MVP. Maybe if the year when there is no clear cut candidate out of position player, when the best player have a line of like .313 / .348/ .450 or something then OK, you consider a 300K, 2.2 ERA pitcher for the MVP.

    When you have a player having the kind of season Pujols is having, a pitcher should not win the MVP.

    Feel free to disagree with me, but my point will never waver on this one. Until baseball go back to a 3 man rotation, a pitcher should not win the MVP.

  9. #24
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    989
    Quote Originally Posted by Slumberking View Post
    While Lincecum is having an outstanding year, there is one argument that puts pitchers winning the mvp to bed IMO.

    They play once every 5 days.

    Lincecum will win the Cy Young and may hit 300 k's, if there ever was a case to be made for a pitcher to win a MVP, this would be that case. Pujols will win MVP for sure tho
    Most Valueable Player. Without Tim the giants are a sub .500 team at least. He is worth more than once every 5 games. Without him the rest of the staff has less wins because you move them up to pitch against better pitching. take pujols away and the birds are probably just above .500. this = Tim is more valuable than is Pujols IMO.

  10. #25
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    In the hood
    Posts
    13,088
    Quote Originally Posted by BayAreaNative View Post
    As far as perceived prestige and media attention, Kirby and mise are correct. Yes pitchers have gotten the MVP before, but I think it's been traditionally separated for a reason. Quick, name five guys who have won the Hank Aaron award ...... yeah that's what I thought.
    Perhaps it should be the best of the two, but unfortunately people don't take it for it's literal meaning. Tim would have to throw shutout baseball the rest of the way and get like 350 strikeouts to get in the conversation.

    Regarding Pablo, I'd just like him to win the batting title.
    I want Pablo to win a batting title too. This year!


  11. #26
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    California
    Posts
    70,228
    Quote Originally Posted by mise View Post
    A starting pitcher makes one out of five starts.

    four out of the five games that the team plays in, he has zero effect on the outcome of the game.

    I'm sorry, but I simply do not agree with the notion that a pitcher should win the MVP. Maybe if the year when there is no clear cut candidate out of position player, when the best player have a line of like .313 / .348/ .450 or something then OK, you consider a 300K, 2.2 ERA pitcher for the MVP.

    When you have a player having the kind of season Pujols is having, a pitcher should not win the MVP.

    Feel free to disagree with me, but my point will never waver on this one. Until baseball go back to a 3 man rotation, a pitcher should not win the MVP.
    My argument is that the best pitcher has 5 times the amount of impact in his game than the best hitter does in each of his games.

  12. #27
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Santa Clara, CA
    Posts
    1,635
    Quote Originally Posted by Gigantes4Life View Post
    My argument is that the best pitcher has 5 times the amount of impact in his game than the best hitter does in each of his games.
    How effective a pitcher is over his replacement is subjective.
    The fact that he misses 130 games in a season is objective.


    Imagine a hitter that hits 3 home runs every game and drive in 10 runs for the first 30 games of the season, then misses the entire year due to injury. Is he the most valuable player?

    Because that is the impact of a SINGLE pitcher on a team. Assuming he wins 30 games in a season.

    If he wins, say 18 games in a season and the teams wins 25 games in his starts, maybe he wins some of them 6-4 or 5-3. But for arguments sake let's say 20 of those games he is dominant.


    So imagine a hitter going on a 3 week tear, driving in 5 runs every game, hitting 20 home runs in the process, then misses the rest of the year to injury.

    Is he the most valuable player?
    Last edited by mise; 08-06-2009 at 02:10 AM.

  13. #28
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    California
    Posts
    70,228
    Quote Originally Posted by mise View Post
    How effective a pitcher is over his replacement is subjective.
    The fact that he misses 130 games in a season is objective.


    Imagine a hitter that hits 3 home runs every game and drive in 10 runs for the first 30 games of the season, then misses the entire year due to injury. Is he the most valuable player?

    Because that is the impact of a SINGLE pitcher on a team. Assuming he wins 30 games in a season.

    If he wins, say 18 games in a season and the teams wins 25 games in his starts, maybe he wins some of them 6-4 or 5-3. But for arguments sake let's say 20 of those games he is dominant.


    So imagine a hitter going on a 3 week tear, driving in 5 runs every game, hitting 20 home runs in the process, then misses the rest of the year to injury.

    Is he the most valuable player?
    It depends. If other guys on his team are hitting just as well and those games are complete blowouts, he isn't the MVP. The top performances by pitchers are never matched by the top performances by the hitters, in terms of win probability. A hitter will usually be a part of 3-5 events in a game, and will fail in at least 60% of them. A pitcher is usually a part of 25+ events in a game.

  14. #29
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Santa Clara, CA
    Posts
    1,635
    That's just it though. I can make the argument that Pujols have affected the outcome positively for his team 50 times this season, and I can never ever say that about a pitcher.

    Regardless, it is a moot discussion. Albert Pujols will run away with the MVP trophy this year.

    Funny we used to have this discussion 10 years ago on other boards during the Bonds era, and the Giants fans at that time are Emphatically against pitchers winning MVP. It just goes and show you, people's opinion change depending on who they are rooting for. Your team have the most dominant pitcher in baseball? OF COURSE PITCHER SHOULD BE CONSIDERED FOR THE MVP WHAT IS THAT GUY SMOKING?

    Your team has Barry Bonds? PITCHERS SHOULD NEVER EVER WIN THE MVP WTF IS THAT GUY SMOKING.

    It's amusing, really.

  15. #30
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    California
    Posts
    70,228
    Quote Originally Posted by mise View Post
    That's just it though. I can make the argument that Pujols have affected the outcome positively for his team 50 times this season, and I can never ever say that about a pitcher.

    Regardless, it is a moot discussion. Albert Pujols will run away with the MVP trophy this year.
    Pujols could have also affected the outcome negatively 30 times.

    And even if he affected the outcome positively 50 times, they still could have lost 20 of those games.

    Funny we used to have this discussion 10 years ago on other boards during the Bonds era, and the Giants fans at that time are Emphatically against pitchers winning MVP. It just goes and show you, people's opinion change depending on who they are rooting for. Your team have the most dominant pitcher in baseball? OF COURSE PITCHER SHOULD WIN THE MVP WHAT IS THAT GUY SMOKING?

    Your team has Barry Bonds? PITCHERS SHOULD NEVER EVER WIN THE MVP WTF IS THAT GUY SMOKING.

    It's amusing, really.
    Well it's a different story, considering Bonds was having the greatest seasons in the history of the game. We're talking about a guy who was continually in the 10-13 WAR territory. Pujols will never touch that.

    And in that time, the best pitcher was Johan, and Lincecum will surpass Santana's best season this year.

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •