Originally Posted by defender
Right or wrong, a lot of MVP votes are going to be based on the voter's idea that they know an MVP when they see one. More feeling than analysis. That is the nature of the award.
I think this is obviously true. RBI in particular seem to carry a ton of weight in people's MVP votes historically.
But if a person wants to vote for Cabrera because he just feels like an MVP to them, just come out and say that. And if they want to vote for him because they think the 3 triple crown stats actually are the best measure of value from an analytical perspective, come out and say that and be willing to defend it against other analysts.
Just don't try to make the "well, the Triple Crown is rare" case and then get upset when a different combination of stats that is just as defensible (or indefensible as the case may be) shows that Trout has done something even rarer. Don't cite Cabrera's intangibles while completely ignoring the intangibles of Trout (or any other candidate). Don't tell me that he added value to his team by being willing to be a poor defender (Ask Justin Verlander how he liked have Cabrera at 3B -- it may cost him a 2nd Cy Young). You get the point.
I know people will disagree with the set of criteria I use. I just want them to be honest and consistent about theirs.