Give Verlander MVP or change rule

I've had a routine this baseball season: Every fifth day, I wake up, drop to a knee for my morning prayers and profusely thank God for putting Justin Verlander on the Detroit Tigers.

He's been that good this season. He leads the American League in strikeouts, opponent's batting average, wins, ERA, WHIP, and innings pitched. He's unquestionably winning the honor of AL Cy Young. But JV's dominance has forced baseball fans to have a serious discussion concerning the postseason awards – that is, should a starting pitcher be allowed to win the MVP?

After the voting concludes at the end of the season, I sincerely believe that Major League Baseball is going to have to resolve this situation, because if a starter is in fact allowed to win the accolade, then Verlander deserves the MVP trophy. But I also believe that the writers will probably make the wrong choice and not give JV the award because they think  a starting pitcher does not contribute enough to their team on a day-to-day basis.

So what we get are confused writers who all have different convictions on what it truly means to be the Most Valuable Player.

Although ESPN analysts all make up their own lists of criteria for being the MVP, the only guideline the MLB gives the Baseball Writers Association of America is that the award is not given to the "best player," but instead it should go to the "most valuable." Thanks, baseball! That really clears things up.

But let's play the game: Is Verlander really the "most valuable" even though he only plays every fifth day? The answer is unequivocally yes. The man has been on a mission and by far the most dominant player in both leagues the entire season. His last loss came on the annual "Hungover Classic," which is also known as the first game after the All-Star Break. His attitude has been infectious to this year's Tigers team. The franchise has had talent for years, but this season Tiger hitters have been feeding off of JV's intensity, focus and execution, which has given the team a swagger that is unparalleled during my lifetime.

Verlander is single-handedly carrying a suspect starting rotation (two words: Brad Penny), which holds the other starters accountable, because the other guys know that when Justin takes the hill, he's going to get the W, and you don't want to be the only loser in front of a Detroit crowd. The energy created from Verlander's dominance has clearly been rubbing off on Doug Fister, who has been pitching like a man possessed since he was dealt from the Emerald City to the Motor City at the July 30 trade deadline. Unfortunately, Penny is a career NL guy – and not that good a one at that – and I think history has shown how moving from the National League to the heavy-hitting American League works for guys with marginal stuff.

Let's not forget, if JV were to take home the MVP, it would not be an unprecedented move. Roger Clemens won it in 1986, and (wait for the fallacies) let's be honest, Clemens was a juicing hothead who was a questionable teammate on his good days. If a (allegedly) perjuring, 15-year-old-dating, cheater like Clemens can win it, explain to me why Verlander is automatically disqualified from taking home the award again?

Also, it's not like any other player in the American League is really running away with the award this year. All of the everyday players who are being considered all have pretty serious flaws: Curtis Granderson is fifth in strikeouts. Jose Bautista has fallen off significantly since the All-Star Break. Adrian Gonzalez, although a beast, will split votes with teammate Jacoby Ellsbury, and if you were to replace Gonzalez with any one of the big-hitting AL first-basemen (Mark Teixeira, Miguel Cabrera, Paul Konerko, etc.) would the BoSox really be that worse off for it?

I realize by writing this column my Tigers will inevitably lose their last 20 games, miss the playoffs and most likely trade JV to the White Sox, but it's time to decide once and for all: Should pitchers be considered for the MVP award? We don't want another situation like in 1999, when Pedro Martinez, despite getting the most first-place votes, didn't get the honor because two writers left him off their ballot entirely just to make a point.

At the end of the day, I think we can all agree on one thing: Sports writers are just the worst.