My soul just died a little. That said, he gets my vote because of where he ranked in a number of stats including QS, k/bb (the walk rate was superb), IP, and hr/9.Wins uber alles.
It's not like this is the NL Cy race; there are a bunch of deserving candidates over there. In the AL, it's more a process of elimination: well, this guy wasn't great, this guy was pretty good, who led the league in FIP/ERA? Ok, fuck it - Porcello and his 22 wins (plus all the other very good, if not league-leading marks).My soul just died a little. That said, he gets my vote because of where he ranked in a number of stats including QS, k/bb (the walk rate was superb), IP, and hr/9.
He threw a ton of innings, rarely made mistakes and always gave his team a chance to win.
Voting for all regular season awards is based on regular season performances only, and ballots are due the morning of the first Wild Card game - so voting has already taken place and no postseason results will have any bearing on the outcome. (Which is too bad for Madison Bumgarner - amirite?)Has the voting already taken place? If not, Porcello's playoff start may have a bad impression on some voters despite the fact that playoffs are not part of the Cy Young period.
I agree that wins don't mean what they used to, but it is awfully hard to overlook a 22-4 record for a division-winning team. Especially when his other numbers (era, whip, innings pitched...all but Ks really) are right in line with the league leaders.I think Verlander should get it. Among the top 10 qualified ERA leaders he is 1 in IP, 1 in K, 1 in K/9 , 1 in WHIP, 2nd in ERA, 1 in No of starts, 1 in QS, 1 in QS%, 2nd lowest OPS despite allowing 30 HR (most in this group), 1 in lowest BA against. I'd probably have Kluber number 2 and Britton/Porcello tied for 3rd. Once upon a time the W's probably get Rick more votes, but writers have learned to look past W's I think.
I suppose if you consider park and having to face the Jays and Orioles offense 8 times, a better case can be made.I agree that wins don't mean what they used to, but it is awfully hard to overlook a 22-4 record for a division-winning team. Especially when his other numbers (era, whip, innings pitched...all but Ks really) are right in line with the league leaders.
Top three vote-getters to boost interest. It's an open ballot and they only vote once (before the post-season starts).(I guess that brings up a related question to Green Monster's above...are these "Finalists" really just the top three vote getters for each award, and just released in advance of the final results, to just drum up interest/debate?)
I think "gave his team chance to win" is a meaningful, albeit hard-to-quantify, measurement. With that in mind:My soul just died a little. That said, he gets my vote because of where he ranked in a number of stats including QS, k/bb (the walk rate was superb), IP, and hr/9.
He threw a ton of innings, rarely made mistakes and always gave his team a chance to win.
Yes, 8 1sts to Verlanders 18. Was left off both Tampa writers and lost because of it.Sounds like very few first place votes, but Verlander was completely left off of several ballots, which was the difference.
yupSounds like very few first place votes, but Verlander was completely left off of several ballots, which was the difference.
MLB Network is doing these live.Link? I'm not seeing anything on MLB.com, espn.com, si.com...
Perhaps there was some confusion as to whether they were voting for Justin or his brother "Jason?"yup
KateUpton
Sorry Rick but you didn't get any 1st place votes? you didn't win. #ByeFelicia @MLB keep up with the times and fire those writers
11/16/16, 3:57 PM
KateUpton
Hey @MLB I thought I was the only person allowed to fuck @JustinVerlander ?! What 2 writers didn't have him on their ballot?
11/16/16, 3:55 PM
Somebody grab that for a sig......KateUpton
Hey @MLB I thought I was the only person allowed to fuck @JustinVerlander ?! What 2 writers didn't have him on their ballot?
11/16/16, 3:55 PM
Verlander also pitched almost 60% of his innings in a park where offense goes to die though.I think "gave his team chance to win" is a meaningful, albeit hard-to-quantify, measurement. With that in mind:
Verlander allowed two-or-fewer runs in 23 of his 33 starts. Kluber did so in 18 of 32, Sale in 17 of 32, Porcello in 15 of 33.
Of the four, Verlander had the fewest outings in which he allowed four-or-more runs.
He struck out many men. That's gonna be worth 5-8 first place votes alone.wait what, I just glanced at the table thinking Kluber was going to win, admiring it was that close, and it's fucking Verlander in 2nd? The guy who had a balloon ERA for most of hte first half?
it would have been complete bullshit if Verlander won
How much bearing do you think a half season ERA split should have on a season award?wait what, I just glanced at the table thinking Kluber was going to win, admiring it was that close, and it's fucking Verlander in 2nd? The guy who had a balloon ERA for most of hte first half?
it would have been complete bullshit if Verlander won
it would have been complete bullshit if Verlander won
Did the Red Sox beat writer vote count for two?Scott Lauber ESPN Staff Writer
Rick Porcello's eight first-place votes came from one Red Sox beat writer, one LA-based national writer, two Yankees beat writers, one Mariners beat writer and two Tampa Bay-based writers.
Also one TEX writer.Did the Red Sox beat writer vote count for two?
Baseball writers not great at math, or getting the right info?Did the Red Sox beat writer vote count for two?
Perhaps that's because they didn't know who "Jason Verlander" was.Neither of the TB voters voted for Verlander.
Forced to eat Skyline Chili? I believe it was George King who left Pedro off his MVP ballot.Verlander got Peter King'd.
Well 65 Ks is nothing to sneeze at and if you look at the run support differential i think their records look a lot closer. At the very least he shouldn't have been completely left off two ballots. Which is kinda the point since it would have won it for him.Verlander would have been an OK choice but that graphic.....honestly,,,,,,,,led in starts by one, in WHIP by .01, in innings by four....who the fuck cares?
Not really. Had the 2 guys voted him 3rd and 5th, he still would have lost.Sounds like very few first place votes, but Verlander was completely left off of several ballots, which was the difference.
The difference was 26/30 for Porcello were top 2.