No of course not! I won't believe that you're the only wrong person on the planet. In fact, I find myself disagreeing with sports writers all the time.
I don't know how you can say I'm wrong with something that entirely opinion based? All of sports is subjective. But go ahead and think I'm wrong, there's no way a generic opinion of some kid on the internet is any better or worse then some other generic opinion of some kid on the internet.
Thanks, Captain Obvious. The success of a team should not weigh into the discussion of whether or not a player is the MVP or not.
Yes it should, if you are truly the most valuable player in the league then you must have done extraordinary things for your team, which typically means winning. If only one guy is good, that's not making a cohesive team, there no value in that. A truly valuable player will inspire the team and be a leader that generates results. I don't think a pitcher can do that since he's not out there every game or even every innings.
I think you need better arguements than telling me to relax or pointing to sports writers who agree with you. I'm not angry, tense, or any other iteration of upset. This is called passion.
You sure? You countered my points with a stupid Jackie Chan picture and saying I'm wrong. That doesn't really come across as a better argument to me.
What you fail to realize about an MVP-caliber pitcher is that they pick up an entire ballclub. Take a pitcher like Roy Halladay - he comes in and throws a complete game shutout one day, then doesn't pitch again for 5 days. Well that shutout took pressure off of his teams offense. The hitters didn't have to try to force through their at-bats and they can be confident that even if they make a mistake at the plate or on defense, their pitcher will be able to bail them out with that clutch strikeout. Well let's say they have a weak bullpen. Guess what? That bullpen just got a day off - they get to come into the next game more fresh then they otherwise would've been so when the number 2 starter gets himself into a jam - they can come in fresh and rested because they got the previous day off.
It's a snowball effect. When a team can look at a calendar and see that Justin Verlander is going to start on a given day, they can show up confident that they'll be able to win that game. Baseball is an almost-everyday game and what happens one day can and will spill over into the next days' game.
So what I'm getting from this is that you're saying a good pitcher makes an entire ball club lazy?
Putting all your chips on one man is the worse thing you can do as a sports team, it's how one little injury can change your entire season for the worse. Or let's just say that pitcher is having an off day, he starts strong but by the 4th inning he bombs it. That leaves the rest of your team over confident and susceptible to errors. Not a good thing.
But to further my point here Verlander played 34 games this season out of 162 games. That means he only played in 21% of the games, I just don't think that's enough play time swing the club's moral dramatically or even have the biggest impact. The most valuable player should be the one that's out there a majority of the games making plays, getting runs and winning games.
Could have been much worse though...
