AL mvp....

[Bumstead]

Triple Crown = MVP. Regardless of the saber stat guys objections. I still like Josh Hamilton in that race. It's nice to lead a stat that nobody can compute and Trout is a great player, but the MVP should be won by someone that puts stats on the board that are essential to baseball and have been historically. I have never heard anyone say, "wow, your WAR was really helpful that game!" Not that I don't think it is some indication of how good a player is. But winning the Triple Crown? C'mon, that's what every hitter in baseball dreams of. Ask Trout if he would rather lead the league in WAR or win the Triple Crown. Go ahead.

Bum

[Patrick Bateman]

Originally Posted by Wonderful Monds

I think it's pretty simple.

If Cabrera wins the Triple Crown, he's the MVP. If not, it's Trout.

So he's the MVP if he happens to hit an extra homer than Hamilton the rest of the way?

Seems kind of arbitrary at this point. He's either been more valuable than Trout or he hasn't.

He simply has not been, and it's not particularly close.

[RedsManRick]

Originally Posted by Wonderful Monds

It also hasn't been over 40 years since someone hit for the cycle.

Rarity and value are not the same thing.

[Bumstead]

Originally Posted by Patrick Bateman

He simply has not been, and it's not particularly close.

This is not a fact, this is your opinion based one stat that is computed by computers not fans or baseball players. It's not even a definitive stat as it is somewhat arbitrary in determining the starting point.

Bum

[oneupper]

Originally Posted by PuffyPig

Except even in the the old school era, winning the triple crown certainly didn't guarantee winning the MVP.

Which is where the team performance comes in.
Ted Williams, of course, famously lost the MVP in 1942 and 1947 (to Joe Gordon and Joe Dimaggio of the pennant-winning Yankees in each case), despite triple crown years.
He also lost in his .406 season to Dimaggio who had that 56 game hit streak with the, you guessed it, pennant winning Yankees.

Tigers have a shot at the division. Angels, don't.

[RedsManRick]

Originally Posted by Bumstead

Triple Crown = MVP. Regardless of the saber stat guys objections. I still like Josh Hamilton in that race. It's nice to lead a stat that nobody can compute and Trout is a great player, but the MVP should be won by someone that puts stats on the board that are essential to baseball and have been historically. I have never heard anyone say, "wow, your WAR was really helpful that game!" Not that I don't think it is some indication of how good a player is. But winning the Triple Crown? C'mon, that's what every hitter in baseball dreams of. Ask Trout if he would rather lead the league in WAR or win the Triple Crown. Go ahead.

Bum

Talking to Cabrera: "Wow, your bat was really helpful that game".
Talking to Trout; "Wow, your bat, glove and baserunning was really helpful that game".

Ask Cabrera if he would like to steal bases and win a gold glove. This focus on the triple crown stats is so hypocritical of people who hate on sabermetrics. Defense matters. Baserunning matters. Miguel Cabrera outright sucks at both of those things while Mike Trout is among the best in baseball at them. Ignoring that because Cabrera has performed well in a subset of hitting stats just boggles my mind.

Miguel Cabrera is hitting .333/.398/.613. That's awesome. But Trout is hitting .324/.392/.551. That's awesome too. Cabrera has been a bit better at the plate. But Trout absolutely blows him out of the water everywhere else. Since when did Most Valuable Player become Most Valuable Batter? You don't need WAR to know which guy has done more to help his team win.

As for the whole playoffs thing, the Angels are 81-69. The Tigers are 79-70. Don't tell me Cabrera is more deserving of MVP because the A's are a better team than the White Sox.

[Patrick Bateman]

Originally Posted by Bumstead

This is not a fact, this is your opinion based one stat that is computed by computers not fans or baseball players. It's not even a definitive stat as it is somewhat arbitrary in determining the starting point.

Bum

Where did I even mention WAR?

Look, you came in this thread looking to throw some crap on WAR, including using the normal ant stats counter arguments. It just really looks obvious what your agenda is.

I find it incredulous that Trout, a guy who has comparable offensive stats to just about everyone, plays a premium position, and plays it incredibly well (based on both stats AND the opinions of basically everyone who has watched him this year) would be deemed less valuable than Cabrera, for the sole reason that he has better counting stats, which I think at this point, most people are comfortable with the fact that there is way too much noise in counting stats to deem them a particularly good indicator of value determination.

But please, continue your rant on WAR, and more specifically, my "mis-usage" WAR.

[Bumstead]

Originally Posted by Patrick Bateman

Where did I even mention WAR?

Look, you came in this thread looking to throw some crap on WAR, including using the normal ant stats counter arguments. It just really looks obvious what your agenda is.

I find it incredulous that Trout, a guy who has comparable offensive stats to just about everyone, plays a premium position, and plays it incredibly well (based on both stats AND the opinions of basically everyone who has watched him this year) would be deemed less valuable than Cabrera, for the sole reason that he has better counting stats, which I think at this point, most people are comfortable with the fact that there is way too much noise in counting stats to deem them a particularly good indicator of value determination.

But please, continue your rant on WAR, and more specifically, my "mis-usage" WAR.

Here we go...don't lecture me on what your perception of my "agenda" is. But thanks for the predictable response. Is Trout on a Division contender? No. I love Trout and I think he is a better player, or will be, than Cabrera but he isn't compiling the stats that Cabrera is on a pennant contender. WAR is the only argument for Trout, period. MVP has never been about "value determination" anyway. That's for the guys in the basements! Kidding, just threw that in cause you would predict that I would...carry on.

Bum

[Bumstead]

Originally Posted by RedsManRick

Talking to Cabrera: "Wow, your bat was really helpful that game".
Talking to Trout; "Wow, your bat, glove and baserunning was really helpful that game".

Ask Cabrera if he would like to steal bases and win a gold glove. This focus on the triple crown stats is so hypocritical of people who hate on sabermetrics. Defense matters. Baserunning matters. Miguel Cabrera outright sucks at both of those things while Mike Trout is among the best in baseball at them. Ignoring that because Cabrera has performed well in a subset of hitting stats just boggles my mind.

Miguel Cabrera is hitting .333/.398/.613. That's awesome. But Trout is hitting .324/.392/.551. That's awesome too. Cabrera has been a bit better at the plate. But Trout absolutely blows him out of the water everywhere else. Since when did Most Valuable Player become Most Valuable Batter? You don't need WAR to know which guy has done more to help his team win.

As for the whole playoffs thing, the Angels are 81-69. The Tigers are 79-70. Don't tell me Cabrera is more deserving of MVP because the A's are a better team than the White Sox.

They are both awesome, but regardless of comparing records, one is on a division contender and one is not. I love Trout, but I would reward Cabrera or Hamilton for their great seasons on playoff teams.

Bum

[Patrick Bateman]

Originally Posted by Bumstead

Here we go...don't lecture me on what your perception of my "agenda" is. But thanks for the predictable response. Is Trout on a Division contender? No. I love Trout and I think he is a better player, or will be, than Cabrera but he isn't compiling the stats that Cabrera is on a pennant contender. WAR is the only argument for Trout, period. MVP has never been about "value determination" anyway. That's for the guys in the basements! Kidding, just threw that in cause you would predict that I would...carry on.

Bum

Well it is called Most "Valuable" player. So one would think that determining value in some kind of systematic manner would be useful in determining value of different players.

I think you are right in the fact that the voters very well might select Cabrera for the fact that he does have the counting stats, and he plays on a team that might scratch into the playoffs.

But that is a completely different point than discussing which player has actually provided more value to their team.

[Bumstead]

Originally Posted by Patrick Bateman

Well it is called Most "Valuable" player. So one would think that determining value in some kind of systematic manner would be useful in determining value of different players.

I think you are right in the fact that the voters very well might select Cabrera for the fact that he does have the counting stats, and he plays on a team that might scratch into the playoffs.

But that is a completely different point than discussing which player has actually provided more value to their team.

Willie Hernandez won the Most "Valuable" Player award...Trout may very well have been more valuable, but to win the Triple Crown on a playoff contender? That's awesome! Even if he doesn't win it, his numbers are staggering; his willingness to "play" 3B so the Tigers could sign Fielder has also been pretty "valuable" to the Tigers this season. IMHO

Bum

[AtomicDumpling]

I think Mike Trout was the best player in the AL this season. Hamilton and Cabrera were awesome too.

How often does the best player actually win the MVP Award in baseball history? Not too often really. Usually the sportswriters like to quote twisted meanings of the word "Valuable" as an excuse for voting to give the award to a lesser player.

[PuffyPig]

Originally Posted by Bumstead

T But winning the Triple Crown? C'mon, that's what every hitter in baseball dreams of. Ask Trout if he would rather lead the league in WAR or win the Triple Crown. Go ahead.

Leading the league in WAR means that you are the best player in the league when you factor in hitting, defense running etc. Winning the triple crown means you lead the league in BA, HR's and RBI's. Maybe if it was close, but Trout is posting unbelievable type numbers.

If you ask Trout whether he'd rather be a hitter like Cabrera or an all around stud like himself, you know how he'd answer. And so would every GM.

Maybe it's what every "hitter" draems of, as that is what Cabrera is, a "hitter". But Trout is a ballplayer. And the world's best one at that.

[Bumstead]

Originally Posted by PuffyPig

Leading the league in WAR means that you are the best player in the league when you factor in hitting, defense running etc.

This is your opinion stated as a fact. I don't agree that WAR is the determining factor on who the best player is. Used to be VORP? What happened to that one? Statements like this is what sours me on these types of discussions. It's just not factual.

Bum

[RedsManRick]

Originally Posted by Bumstead

Willie Hernandez won the Most "Valuable" Player award...Trout may very well have been more valuable, but to win the Triple Crown on a playoff contender? That's awesome! Even if he doesn't win it, his numbers are staggering; his willingness to "play" 3B so the Tigers could sign Fielder has also been pretty "valuable" to the Tigers this season. IMHO

Bum

His willingness to play 3B poorly just so that the Tigers could use Delmon Young and his .270/.302/.419 bat at DH made the Tigers better?

The Tigers could easily have signed Fielder, put one of those two at DH, given 3B or SS to somebody who knows how to use a glove and been just as well off.

I think we all agree Cabrera's offensive numbers are impressive. But being the best all around player in baseball on a playoff contender is pretty awesome to. To put this in a different context, would Joey Votto be more valuable if he moved from 1B to RF and pushed Bruce to CF so that the Reds could play Miguel Cairo every day at 1B? Because that's approximately what the Tigers did.