Most "Valuable" Player

Why can't pitchers win the MVP award?  I hear the same answer every time, how can somebody who plays once every five days win the award.  I thought of a way to compare their impact though. I took Justin Verlander, who has averaged 7 1/3 innings a game allowing 7 base runners a game, do the math, he faces 29 batters per start.  Then I looked at Jacoby Ellsbury, leadoff hitter for the Red Sox, the best position player in my opinion.  He averages 4.5 at bats per game, multiply that by 5, the same ratio as pitchers, round and you get 23 at bats.  I realize that I calculated only at bats, and they also play in field.  But when you consider who normally wins the MVP, the players defense is rarely a big portion of the debate.

I feel position players should win the award most of the time, but Verlander has the been the most dominate and valuable player this year.  He has 24 wins, which is crazy, hardly anybody wins 20 games anymore.  His ERA is 2.40 and has a WHIP of .92 which is really impressive as well.  Coach Toot also brought a good point to me.  If the there was a fantasy draft and all of the players were available, Verlander would be the consensus number one pick.

Now for the National League MVP Award, different situation, same use of the word "valuable."  The top two candidates are outfielders Ryan Braun and Matt Kemp.  Braun has led Milwaukee to its first division title since 1982.  He leads the league in batting, fourth in RBI's, and is second in runs.  Kemp has led his Los Angeles Dodgers to a third place finish in a less than stellar NL West division.  He has an outside chance at the triple crown, leading in home runs and RBI's, but his stats aren't so dominant that he deserves the MVP.  Until they change the award to Most Outstanding Player they have to give the award to a player who's team was at least in the playoff chase.

Random Things That Didn't Need a Paragraph

The Dodgers have the best pitcher Clayton Kershaw, who is likely to win the Cy Young and they have Matt Kemp the best position player, yet they are 12.5 games back in their division.

The Only Reason Notre Dame is still relevant is because ESPN feels Lou Holtz has to talk about them.  No other analyst talks about their former team as much as he does.

For the Chiefs... I am not going to write about them until they appear to care again.