Miguel Cabrera wins the Triple Crown

[pogokat]

31- cabrera

 

who's the better player? Trout

 

Who had the better year? Trout

 

Who decides the MVP? ESPN

 

winner? Cabrera

[gregmag]

44, Trout. The only factor that makes it less than a complete and utter blowout for me is that Cabrera did play more. But if you backfill Trout's stat line with extra replacement-level production, you still get the best player in baseball.

 

Of all the arguments I've seen here, the hardest for me to understand is that defense and baserunning don't count and/or shouldn't count in MVP voting. We aren't in 1987 anymore, and thank goodness for that. Defensive value is hard to measure accurately over a short run, but that doesn't mean the difference between elite defense and poor defense is invisible. Baserunning isn't hard to measure at all.

 

I love that Cabrera won the triple crown. The last one happened just before I was born, and I've always wanted to see one. But I don't see how the fact of winning the triple crown has anything to do with anybody's version of what a MVP is supposed to be. Best player in the league? Best player on a winning team? Player who does the best in key situations? A triple-crown winner is more likely to be any of those things than a random non-triple-crown winner, but that doesn't mean he IS any of those things; you have to look harder at what he actually did. Saying that a guy who wins the triple crown should automatically win the MVP makes no more sense than saying that a guy who hits for the cycle should automatically win player of the game.

[markedman5]

It looks to me like most of you are picking who you think should win and not who will win.

 

Does anybody really think Trout is going to win by a "landslide"?

 

As I said earlier......I think Cabrera will win fairly easily.

 

 

I'm 54

[LouisEly]

39 - Cabrera, but it is very close.

 

This isn't the MTOPIB Award (Most Talented Overall Player in Baseball). It's the Most Valuable Player. I think Cabrera was more valuable to his team than Trout was to his. Yes, wins in June & July count the same as wins in August & September, but when everyone gets tired in August & September Cabrera stayed consistent where Trout wilted and it showed - the Angels finished 12-10 and Detroit finished 15-7. Yes, the Angels played in a supposedly tougher division but Detroit is still playing and the Angels are out on the golf course. To me, that gives the edge - a very slight edge - to Cabrera.

 

The word "valuable" is by its definition arbitrary. So is this award.

[The stache]

I'm 41. Mike Trout should, and will win the MVP.

 

The Triple Crown has never been an automatic MVP. It's impressive, especially now, but it does not make one automatically the most valuable player in the league. Most valuable hitter, maybe, but the MVP does not only consider hitting.

 

If Miguel Cabrera hit two less home runs, and lost the Triple Crown, is he more or less valuable? Of course not. He's still the same incredible hitter. But that is all he provides. His abilities at the plate.

 

Let's look at it this way. Compare Trout's numbers projected over a 162 game season to what Cabrera ended with. Trout played in 139 games. 85% of the season. Augment his numbers by 15%:

 

148 runs

200 hits

35 home runs

95 RBI

56 stolen bases

 

....as a leadoff hitter. He's nearly a 40 40 player as a 20 year old leadoff hitter. Now, this is a hypothetical obviously, but if Trout plays the entire season, Cabrera's only edge over Trout is 8 home runs, and 44 RBI. And the disparity in RBI is a product only of where Trout and Cabrera hit in their lineups.

 

If I told you as the owner of a MLB franchise you could have a triple crown hitter, or a Gold Glove center fielder that would steal 50 bases, in addition to the second highest OPS in the entire league, who would you choose? Trout in a heartbeat, because he provides far greater value. Hitting is only half the game, and when not at the plate, Cabrera offers no value.

 

Let's look at the sabermetrics:

Runs created per 27 outs:

Mike Trout 8.85 (#1 in MLB)

Ryan Braun 8.46 (#2 in MLB)

Miguel Cabrera 7.98 (#4 in MLB)

 

Runs created:

Ryan Braun 135.0 (#1 in MLB)

Miguel Cabrera 133.6 (#2 in MLB)

Mike Trout 129.8 (#3 in MLB even though he didn't play in the first 20 games of the Angel's season)

 

Trout destroys him in the field.

Trout destroys him on the bases.

Trout is nearly his equal at the plate.

 

You can completely negate Miguel Cabrera's impact in a game if you choose to walk him. You cannot negate Trout's impact in a game. He does too many things besides hit the ball well.

 

Cabrera should win the Hank Aaron award as the best offensive player in the American League. But Mike Trout is clearly the AL MVP, and it shouldn't be close.

[reillymcshane]

I think Miggy will win it, but Trout deserves it more.

 

The Triple Crown thing will go along way for Cabrera, plus the fact his team made the playoffs (that probably was the deciding factor for Braun's win last year over Kemp). I also don't think you can discount age for a handful of people. Trout's so young. He can easily get better. He's got a lot of years before him. Miggy is only 29, but he's got a few years of peak play left in him, compared to a dozen for Trout. So they'll throw him a bone now. The fact that Miggy played 161 games (compared to 139 for Trout) may sway a few voters as well.

 

All of that will add up to a Cabrera win.

[Ennder]

Not only did Cabrera make the playoffs, he was the hot bat that got them there. I think the odds of Trout winning it are under 10%. Just like there is no way Braun will win it.

[JohnBriggs12]

161 games to 139 is the deciding factor for me as well. Trout had zero value for 23 games. I gave the edge last year to Fielder over Braun based on Braun missing a dozen or so games. Not many consider that but it's something to factor in.

[StearnsFTW]

I don't understand the games played thing whatsoever. Its not as if trout was hurt. Makes no sense to me.

[zzzmanwitz]

161 games to 139 is the deciding factor for me as well. Trout had zero value for 23 games. I gave the edge last year to Fielder over Braun based on Braun missing a dozen or so games. Not many consider that but it's something to factor in.

 

But WAR isn't an average stat over a season, its a cumulative stat. His wins added over 139 games was greater than Cabrera's over 161.

[Fear The Chorizo]

32, Cabrera, and final results of the voting won't be as close as they should because Miggy carried the Tigers to the playoffs despite the Angels winning one more game this year.

 

I don't think people are blaming Trout for not playing the first 23 games of the major league season and counting that against him as a player, just for the MVP award. The MVP award is for the most valuable player in the league during the entire season, and games played should play a role. Blame the Angels for being dumb enough to keep a 10+ WAR player in the minors for more than 10% of their season and miss out on the playoffs by a few games.

 

I posted earlier in this thread, if either of Cabrera's or Trout's seasons happened in either league during any given season, they win the MVP every time. The fact they both play in the AL means one of them doesn't get the award.

[Ennder]

Yeah, discounting Trout because of games played isn't rational.

[MJLiverock]

But WAR isn't an average stat over a season, its a cumulative stat. His wins added over 139 games was greater than Cabrera's over 161.

 

If you want to make the argument that WAR really tells us precisely how many wins a player is worth vs. another player then why does the cumulative WAR of hitting, pitching, and fielding for the Angels indicate they should have won 14 more games than the Tigers despite only winning 1 more game? Maybe WAR really doesn't precisely tell us that 1 WAR is 1 Win when comparing players.

[Baldkin]

Maybe WAR really doesn't precisely tell us that 1 WAR is 1 Win when comparing players.

 

No, maybe it doesn't tell you that. But it sure can tell you that Trout has been worth 20% more than Cabrera this season.

 

WAR is calculated on the RUNS level, then switched to WINS based on a league wide average.

 

Variance will happen on a team by team basis, the same way some teams will drastically out perform it's wins/losses based on runs scored/runs allowed in a given year. If you use baseball-reference WAR (and not fangraphs) the pitching side of things will be more accurate because they use ERA and not FIP.

 

http://www.insidethebook.com/ee/index.php/site/comments/correlating_war_to_same_season_wins/

[Ennder]

Regardless of whether you like WAR or not you shouldn't use games played as a negative for counting stats. If Trout has 150 runs, 60 HR and 150 RBI but only played 81 games and leads baseball in WAR, RC+ and all other 'counting stats' he shouldn't get dinged for only playing 81 games. It is like when people talk about the greatest QBs of all time in football and their number 1 criteria is number of Super Bowl's they won, just makes no sense at all.

[RockCoCougars]

Regardless of whether you like WAR or not you shouldn't use games played as a negative for counting stats. If Trout has 150 runs, 60 HR and 150 RBI but only played 81 games and leads baseball in WAR, RC+ and all other 'counting stats' he shouldn't get dinged for only playing 81 games. It is like when people talk about the greatest QBs of all time in football and their number 1 criteria is number of Super Bowl's they won, just makes no sense at all.

 

I agree, but Cabrera has the advantage over Trout in all the important 'counting stats' except for runs, triples and steals. I still don't get how RBI's are dismissed by so many people while runs are not. Unless you are hitting a homer, both are dependent on the players around you in the lineup. If Trout played for the Astros, he wouldn't have scored nearly as many runs as he did hitting in front of Hunter, Pujols, Trumbo, etc.

[Funketown]

I think most people who don't like RBI's feel about the same way about runs, no?

[Ennder]

I think most people who don't like RBI's feel about the same way about runs, no?

 

Yeah I don't like either of them a ton but I don't see why you would rate RBI highly and ignore R which is what most people do. Even in fantasy baseball they do that.

[The stache]

The game is won and lost on runs scored, so it's never made sense to me to discount RBI or runs scored. And I think both stats should be equally weighed. But they don't tell the whole story.

 

If Trout singles, steals second and third, and another hitter gets a single to drive him in, the other hitter gets credit for that RBI, but it was really Trout's speed that got him into scoring position. And therein lies the problem with focusing so much on the Triple Crown stats. They in and of themselves do not tell the whole story.

 

Ender, I think your comment that Trout has a 10% chance to win the MVP is way, way off. We'll see soon, but I think you are grossly underestimating his chances. This is supposedly Cabrera's greatest offensive season ever, and his OPS was only about 30 points higher than a 20 year old leadoff hitter. So while he has a slight edge in offense, again, when it comes to defense (and base running), there really is no competition. If you weight everything, Trout was the better player in 2012.

[Oxy]

I think most people who don't like RBI's feel about the same way about runs, no?

 

Yeah I don't like either of them a ton but I don't see why you would rate RBI highly and ignore R which is what most people do. Even in fantasy baseball they do that.

 

Reason #1:

 

[DuWayne Steurer]

The game is won and lost on runs scored, so it's never made sense to me to discount RBI or runs scored. And I think both stats should be equally weighed. But they don't tell the whole story.

 

If Trout singles, steals second and third, and another hitter gets a single to drive him in, the other hitter gets credit for that RBI, but it was really Trout's speed that got him into scoring position. And therein lies the problem with focusing so much on the Triple Crown stats. They in and of themselves do not tell the whole story.

 

.

 

Consider this hypothetical scenario.

 

Batter A leads off with a single.

Batter B grounds into a fielders choice out, and is now on first.

Batter C doubles, putting men on 2nd and 3rd.

Batter D hits a weak grounder to 2nd, scoring the runner on 3rd.

 

Clearly the key item in this sequence is the double, and that batter is credited with neither an RBI or a run. The 2nd most important item in the sequence is the single, and likewise, that batter is credited with neither an RBI or a run.

 

Now I'll grant that this isn't going to happen often, but it's certainly one reason the sabre crowd is dismissive of stats like RBI and runs. They're both largely a product of placement in the batting order, and who you have batting around you. ANYONE who can put up a slash line of even .325/.475/.800 hitting cleanup will drive in 100, if he's got a 1-2-3 in front of him that gets on base at a league average clip.

[Ennder]

 

Ender, I think your comment that Trout has a 10% chance to win the MVP is way, way off. We'll see soon, but I think you are grossly underestimating his chances. This is supposedly Cabrera's greatest offensive season ever, and his OPS was only about 30 points higher than a 20 year old leadoff hitter. So while he has a slight edge in offense, again, when it comes to defense (and base running), there really is no competition. If you weight everything, Trout was the better player in 2012.

 

I agree completely but the voters just aren't very likely to agree. The playoffs mean a ton for MVP as does late season performance. It is silly that it works that way but that is just how it goes. It was a shock last year when Felix won CY with so few wins so maybe the voters are getting smarter in general but I still will be blown away surprised if the voters get this one right.

 

It will almost certainly be Posey and Cabrera.

[lcbj68c]

For all the talk of Trout's defense, he's not even the best defender at his position in his league. (According to the writers giving the gold glove to Adam Jones). I think Cabrera now more than ever wins the MVP.

[trwi7]

For all the talk of Trout's defense, he's not even the best defender at his position in his league. (According to the writers giving the gold glove to Adam Jones). I think Cabrera now more than ever wins the MVP.

 

Please tell me this is blue font. I'm begging someone, just tell me this is blue font, even if you have to lie to me.

[Ennder]

Trout isn't the best defensive CF in the AL, Bourjus is who plays on the same team. Adam Jones beating him out for GG is just voters being dumb though, but that isn't anything new for GG.