Depends on your application. If you haunt museums, where normal policy is minimal light even by human eye standards, tripods and flash are nearly always prohibited, polarizers are often useful, and where subjects typically don't move much if at all, VR might well be viewed as critical, even for a wide angle. On the other hand, if you use your WA to shoot, for example, skateboarding, I seriously doubt that you'll ever get the shutter speed down low enough for VR to come into play even if you're panning. In that case it would be more of a hindrance than help, let alone critical.
One thing to remember is that apparent camera motion is magnified - or, in this case, minimized - by the magnification of the lens. Wide angles minimize it, as reflected in the 1/focal length-ish rules of thumb. Clearly 1/16 is more achievable than, say, the 1/500 required for a big telephoto.
And at least in my opinion - I know many think this is not true - VR just doesn't help much below about 1/5th, no matter how short the focal length. VR-II claims four stops improvement, which in theory says 1/15 -> 1/8 -> 1/4 -> 1/2 -> 1 sec, but I seriously doubt that almost any 1 sec hand-held shots are going to be critically usable, even with VR-II. So VR is really only going to get one or maybe two stops at the wide end of this lens, even if VR would have been helpful in the other senses (eg non-moving subjects).
_____ Brian... a bicoastal Nikonian and Team Member
My gallery is online. Comments and critique welcomed any time!