Baseball fans are a finicky bunch. They have a certain set of beliefs and they stick to them, with groups lining up on both sides of the line to voice their opinions. Some like the designated hitter, while others despise it. Some look forward to interleague play, while others still want to see it go away.
And that says nothing about the lines of thought of whether a pitcher should be eligible to win the Most Valuable Player award, which Justin Verlander won on Monday afternoon.
Obviously, the battle lines are being drawn here due to the performance of the Tigersí Verlander and whether or not a pitcher should be eligible to win the MVP. There is a strong contingent of people who feel that Verlander should win the award over Bostonís Jacoby Ellsbury because he is eligible and due to his outstanding, and Cy Young award-winning, season. There is also a large group that feels that due to pitchers not only having their own award, but also only having a say in the outcome of a portion of the seasonís games, that they should not be eligible for the award. That said I believe the direction of the argument alone is proof of the need for separation of the awards and the players eligible to be considered.
More so, if Verlander is deserving of the award, as the voters have now shown, then why are we not making the same argument for Clayton Kershaw?