Jacoby Ellsbury, Craig Finn and Roy Halladay, oh my!

I feel like I can go on quite a rant about Justin Verlander winning the AL MVP award today, but I have other items to discuss after said rant. So, am I surprised that Verlander won the AL MVP award? No, not really. I think that what upsets me more is not so much that Verlander won it, but that Jacoby Ellsbury did not. I'm not going to dispute Verlander's stellar season and his numbers. We all know what those are. But can we talk about Ellsbury's numbers for a minute? 321 average, 32 home runs, 119 runs, 105 RBIs. Is it seeming at least a bit more ridiculous that he didn't win now? I also think that the team you play for has to be considered. The same reason I'm upset about Ellsbury not winning the AL MVP award is the same reason I'm upset that Pablo Sandoval didn't win the Gold Glove award for third baseman.

I know it seems stupid that I would ever compare the Red Sox with the Giants, but I have my reasons. At the same time that the Tigers were running away with their division (which was for a pretty long time), the Red Sox were anything but consistent. And with the Giants' collapse in their division at the end of the regular season, maybe it's not on the same level as the Red Sox, but there are some similarities. My point being this: the pressure of doing well on a team that, by and large, is not is pretty major, if not intense. Ellsbury came through for the Red Sox, and in the end, he was one of the few bright spots on that team. Pablo Sandoval was the same way for the Giants. He had a fantastic year amid some major disappointments and stumbling blocks. Players like that simply stand out. How many games did Verlander pitch this season? Not even 40 games in a season that has over 120. So, he doesn't play half the season and wins the AL MVP award. Wait, what? Here's the thing: instead of putting down Verlander, I simply want to point out how overlooked Ellsbury was this season and how much more sense his winning the AL MVP award would have made. Anyhow. Onto other matters...

Now, I'm not a person who believes in jinxing a person, or that jinxing even exists, but have I just jinxed poor Joe Nathan? Not even a week after posting his picture in this blog, he signs with the Rangers. Say it ain't so, Joe! It also gives me the perfect opportunity to mention one of my favorite musicians, who is probably as miffed as I am about it.

Oh yes, I went there. I had to mention Craig Finn (of the Hold Steady, for those woefully unfamiliar), perhaps one of music's biggest Twins fans. When you talk about the Twins being in the playoffs for a full paragraph in your band's liner notes, obviously you are a fan. And he doesn't just talk about loving the Twins. He's practically the Twins' musical endorser (as indicated in the picture), wearing Twins gear whenever he has the chance. I also have to love a guy who is quoted as saying that going to baseball games alone is one of life's great pleasures. Additionally I discovered, via Twitter, that he is following the Twitter accounts of potentially every player for the Twins that tweets. This is obviously a guy I could talk to, and about more than our mutual love of The Replacements and Pavement. But I digress. Joe Nathan becoming a Ranger just saddens and disappoints me. And that's that. Although, if I can figure out a way to mention Craig Finn again, I definitely will. Any excuse is a good one to me! *swoons* Moving along...

Watching MLB Network as religiously as I do, I found the topic of Clayton Kershaw beating Roy Halladay for the NL Cy Young award an interesting one. One of my favorite shows on MLB Network is Clubhouse Confidential, which is all about baseball statistics. Now normally, I hate statistics. It involves math, so it is usually evil to me. However, I am pretty fascinated by baseball statistics. According to the statistical experts on this show, Roy Halladay should have won the Cy Young over Clayton Kershaw. One of the categories they mentioned, however, had little to do (I think) with statistics themselves: the schedule that a pitcher has, including the opposing pitchers he faces and how many times he's faced certain teams.

What this show pointed out was, if you simply compare Halladay and Kershaw's schedules, it is pretty obvious that Halladay has faced tougher opposing pitchers and tougher teams overall. Also, Halladay has pitched more innings than Kershaw and several complete games (which for an NL pitcher is impressive). On the flip side, both pitchers have similar stats when it comes to ERA, WHIP and strikeouts. Both Kershaw and Halladay were almost unbeatable at home this season. As much as I think Kershaw deserved it (Halladay has already won it anyway), I can't say that it wasn't a close call this year.   Then again, despite Tim Lincecum's somewhat-off year, he remained in the top 4 in strikeouts among NL pitchers all season. Like a lot of things, it's a double-edged sword, for sure. But wow. This is longer than I thought I could go on about guys who pitch for the Dodgers and the Phillies! What does that say about me? No, wait. I won't answer that.

However, I will say, the best thing about having a baseball blog is that I can say my constant watching of MLB Network is "research". What could be better than that?