AL MVP- Trout or Cabrera

[xbignick]

Originally Posted by gamboooler

Does anyone else get life tilted when people make arguments based on fairy tales? If you think Trout under-performed due to added pressure, Cabrera decided to step it up in September, or a win in May is worth less than a win in September, please either take a statistics class or leave society.

Apparently wins and losses are weighted differently based on time of year....

[burke23]

Originally Posted by hoopster3977

Cabrera, for sure. He could be the first legitmate Triple Crown winner since Frank Robinson in 1966. I don't count Yaz's in 1967 due to being tied in Hr's with Killebrew in 1967.

And if he lost the triple crown by a hr or rbi, is his argument less worthy? Triple Crown is a cool feat, but by itself does not make a statement about how good ones season was (although you can assume it was very good).

Bonds didn't win the triple crown in his steroid heyday because he was walked all the time (so no RBI). I guess cabreras season is/was better than Bonds?

[zonacats8]

And we have your MVP winner.......

According to research by the Tigers' public relations staff, Cabrera has 17 home runs and 43 RBIs in the seventh inning or later, leading the majors in both categories.

In addition, Cabrera's 27 RBIs in September are the most since Hank Greenberg had 39 in Sept. 1946.

[alwayson22]

Originally Posted by kordell1

As I stated before, a sample size that included the Angels trying to make the playoffs. If you want to be an MVP, you need to perform when your team in trying to make the playoffs. I am not saying one guy makes it or breaks it, but his performance last night was with the playoffs pretty much out of the picture and all the sudden he hits great. You don't get that?

The Angels were 6-14 when they called up Trout and have the best record in baseball since. You're basically penalizing Trout because (1) he didn't play the first 20 games of the season, and (2) the Angels play in the AL West. Heck, the Tigers just finished 4th in the AL West.

Even using your sample size of September, Trout hit .257 /.380 /.455 with 5hr, 6sb, and 21r over 100 AB, which still puts him on a 30hr-36sb-126r pace for a full season. He hardly "sucked" or was "lousy" during that stretch. Clearly, though, Miguel Cabrera was more impressive at the plate over the last 100 at bats. No argument there. However, the MVP should go to the player who provided the most value to his team over the six month season, and (IMO) that is Trout.

[burke23]

Originally Posted by zonacats8

And we have your MVP winner.......

Man - didn't realize the first six innings were so pointless.

[zonacats8]

Originally Posted by xbignick

Apparently wins and losses are weighted differently based on time of year....

dumbest argument ever

I really don't understand this argument

Yes, obviously a win in April counts exactly the same as a win in September in your final record.

But what does the win or loss in April have to do with how well or how poorly you play in the final month of the season when AT THAT TIME you are in a playoff race and THOSE GAMES AT THAT TIME are the only thing that matters as to who does or doesn't make the playoffs?

What happened in April is history, all it did was set up this final month of the season, it put them in a position to have a shot at the playoffs, and both Cabrera and Trout helped put their teams in a position to have a shot.

But in the end, when it came down to it, when the chips were all on the table and one had to perform better to make that final few feet in the race, Cabrera played better, and that is what should be the tie breaker in what was a great season for both players

[gamboooler]

Originally Posted by burke23

Man - didn't realize the first six innings were so pointless.

Whoever tries the hardest and is the most clutch in late innings is the best player, duh. Trout should have been more focused in late game situations. He's the next A-Rod.

[uberfatty]

Originally Posted by zonacats8

And we have your MVP winner.......

According to research by the Tigers' public relations staff, Cabrera has 17 home runs and 43 RBIs in the seventh inning or later, leading the majors in both categories.

In addition, Cabrera's 27 RBIs in September are the most since Hank Greenberg had 39 in Sept. 1946.


7th inning+ home run's don't matter much in blowouts, not to mention there are tons of other possible outcomes of an at bat that need to be taken into consideration, leading to...

...how do you explain the fact that Trout leads Cabrera in WPA (5.61 to 4.40)? WPA is deisgned to take the context of a player's each and every at bat into account and determine how it affected their team's chances of winning the particular game. Trout beats Cabrera in this stat which, once again, takes into account the entire season's effect on a team's winning percentage based on the context of each and every at bat!

[zonacats8]

Originally Posted by burke23

Man - didn't realize the first six innings were so pointless.

and again, as with my post just previous

It's not that the early games/innings are pointless, it's that all that those early games/innings do is set you up to have a chance to win/make the playoffs

But it's what you do in the clutch situations that define your legacy in the end

[burke23]

Originally Posted by zonacats8

dumbest argument ever

I really don't understand this argument

Yes, obviously a win in April counts exactly the same as a win in September in your final record.

But what does the win or loss in April have to do with how well or how poorly you play in the final month of the season when AT THAT TIME you are in a playoff race and THOSE GAMES AT THAT TIME are the only thing that matters as to who does or doesn't make the playoffs?

What happened in April is history, all it did was set up this final month of the season, it put them in a position to have a shot at the playoffs, and both Cabrera and Trout helped put their teams in a position to have a shot.

But in the end, when it came down to it, when the chips were all on the table and one had to perform better to make that final few feet in the race, Cabrera played better, and that is what should be the tie breaker in what was a great season for both players

Being totally serious here...if they ended up with the same stats as they have now, BUT Cabrera and the Tigers missed the playoffs AND he had a 'lesser' september (ie .280/.380/500), you would be more inclined to vote for Trouts wull body of work on the season? Or better yet, if they had the same september numbers (good or bad) and both teams made the playoffs, what would you say?

[kordell1]

Originally Posted by zonacats8

dumbest argument ever

I really don't understand this argument

Yes, obviously a win in April counts exactly the same as a win in September in your final record.

But what does the win or loss in April have to do with how well or how poorly you play in the final month of the season when AT THAT TIME you are in a playoff race and THOSE GAMES AT THAT TIME are the only thing that matters as to who does or doesn't make the playoffs?

What happened in April is history, all it did was set up this final month of the season, it put them in a position to have a shot at the playoffs, and both Cabrera and Trout helped put their teams in a position to have a shot.

But in the end, when it came down to it, when the chips were all on the table and one had to perform better to make that final few feet in the race, Cabrera played better, and that is what should be the tie breaker in what was a great season for both players

Yes, by his logic, I guess the guy who bolted out of the gates in the 400 meter should get to tie the guy who passed him in the final 100 and won the race.

[zonacats8]

Originally Posted by burke23

Being totally serious here...if they ended up with the same stats as they have now, BUT Cabrera and the Tigers missed the playoffs AND he had a 'lesser' september (ie .280/.380/500), you would be more inclined to vote for Trouts wull body of work on the season?

100% YES, without a doubt

But the fact remains that Cabrera and Trout both had OUTSTANDING seasons, historic in fact, BOTH OF THEM

And that's what makes this such a great debate

But the fact also remains that only one of them had an unbelievable September and only one of them is making the playoffs

That is the tiebreaker, and it's no knock on Trout, what he's done is incredible, as I said before, HISTORIC, but Cabrera has also had a pretty historic season in his own right, so you need to break the tie somewhere.

To me, that somewhere just has to be which player played the best down the stretch. If Cabrera put up the numbers Trout had during this last month, the Tigers miss the playoffs, for sure. And at the same time, if Trout put up the numbers Cabrera had this month, there's a decently good chance that the Angels are in the playoffs.

[kordell1]

Originally Posted by burke23

Being totally serious here...if they ended up with the same stats as they have now, BUT Cabrera and the Tigers missed the playoffs AND he had a 'lesser' september (ie .280/.380/500), you would be more inclined to vote for Trouts wull body of work on the season? Or better yet, if they had the same september numbers (good or bad) and both teams made the playoffs, what would you say?

If Trout had a monster September(whether the Angels made the playoffs or not) and Cabrera batted .260 with 6 RBI's(he would not have a shot at the Triple Crown), this poll would not even be on here and I don't think anyone would argue that Trout was the MVP.

[chansen10]

Trouts defense was outstanding this year... But what does it for me and why i voted trout is hes the most VALUABLE player in the league. theres no argument for it he has a war of 10.7..

[zonacats8]

Originally Posted by kordell1

Yes, by his logic, I guess the guy who bolted out of the gates in the 400 meter should get to tie the guy who passed him in the final 100 and won the race.

I can't tell if this is supporting or against my arguments, but it came up with the analogy that I've been trying to think of this whole time and couldn't.

All the start of the race (season) did was set you up to win the race (make the playoffs) but what really matters in the end, is how well you finish. And frankly, Cabrera was Bolt, he took those long strides down the stretch and won, while Trout clipped his own heel a bit and stumbled into the finish line a disappointing second by the slimmest of margins.

[kordell1]

Originally Posted by zonacats8

I can't tell if this is supporting or against my arguments, but it came up with the analogy that I've been trying to think of this whole time and couldn't.

All the start of the race (season) did was set you up to win the race (make the playoffs) but what really matters in the end, is how well you finish. And frankly, Cabrera was Bolt, he took those long strides down the stretch and won, while Trout clipped his own heel a bit and stumbled into the finish line a disappointing second by the slimmest of margins.

Don't worry. I was with you on that one.

[kordell1]

Originally Posted by zonacats8

I can't tell if this is supporting or against my arguments, but it came up with the analogy that I've been trying to think of this whole time and couldn't.

All the start of the race (season) did was set you up to win the race (make the playoffs) but what really matters in the end, is how well you finish. And frankly, Cabrera was Bolt, he took those long strides down the stretch and won, while Trout clipped his own heel a bit and stumbled into the finish line a disappointing second by the slimmest of margins.

I got another one for you. Did it really matter if Jordan made or missed those shots in the first quarter, as long as hit the game winner at the buzzer?

[zonacats8]

Originally Posted by kordell1

I got another one for you. Did it really matter if Jordan made or missed those shots in the first quarter, as long as hit the game winner at the buzzer?

ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

someone with some common sense

[uberfatty]

Originally Posted by zonacats8

I can't tell if this is supporting or against my arguments, but it came up with the analogy that I've been trying to think of this whole time and couldn't.

All the start of the race (season) did was set you up to win the race (make the playoffs) but what really matters in the end, is how well you finish. And frankly, Cabrera was Bolt, he took those long strides down the stretch and won, while Trout clipped his own heel a bit and stumbled into the finish line a disappointing second by the slimmest of margins.

Can you please respond to my two posts citing WPA and how that affects your opinion of their respective seasons?

In my view, your analogy is flawed. You assume that Cabrera has somehow "passed" Trout in the footrace, except you haven't responded to posts which show actual statistical evidence using WPA that Trout is still well ahead of Cabrera even when taking context of at bats into account, which is your main argument against using WAR. If your argument against using WAR is debunked then what you are using to annoint Cabrera basically boils down to OMG GUYZ TEH SEPTEMBER TRIPLE CROWNZ AEWSOMR.

[alwayson22]

Originally Posted by kordell1

I got another one for you. Did it really matter if Jordan made or missed those shots in the first quarter, as long as hit the game winner at the buzzer?

By that logic, Jordan could go 0-for-30 from the floor through 47 minutes, hit the game winning shot, and be determined the most "valuable" player.

[uberfatty]

Originally Posted by zonacats8

I stopped reading this after this sentence



Because if you actually read what I said, I didn't say just in the 9th inning, I said in a tie game in the 9th inning, and if you don't think an RBI hit in a tie game in the ninth inning gives you a better chance at winning than any RBI hit in the first inning, then you are literally the dumbest person I've ever had the unfortunate pleasure of coming across.

Oh c'mon, you didn't stop reading. You read the whole thing, decided that I made a good point, and then resorted to putting words into my mouth that I clearly didn't say and completely avoided the point of my post showing that Trout leads Cabrera in WPA, which measures all at bats including 9th inning tie ball game HR's.

[zonacats8]

Originally Posted by alwayson22

By that logic, Jordan could go 0-for-30 from the floor through 47 minutes, hit the game winning shot, and be determined the most "valuable" player.

his argument never said anything about Jordan being the most valuable player, just that the last shot is what mattered the most in the end

[uberfatty]

Please please please just give a coherent rebuttal to this, which counters your narrative of Cabrera adding more wins to his team when taking context into account:

You know what does take into account context of each at bat? Win percentage Added (WPA). WPA takes each at bat for a player's season and determine's their team's winning percentage before the at bat and after the at bat, and credits the player for increasing the winning percentage or discredits them for decreasing their team's winning percentage (GIDP would be a big negative, for example). So in essence, a player with a WPA of 6.00 made their team more likely to win a total of six games during the year, just counting what happened during each at bat. No SB, no defense, no position adjustment, no baserunning is accounted for in WPA to my knowledge.

And you know who leads the AL in WPA? Mike Trout (5.61). Cabrera is at 4.40 for the year.

Which basically means when looking at the context of each player's at bats, Trout made his team more likely to win games this season than Cabrera did(perhaps Cabrera hit his HR's when his team was already way ahead or behind?).

[ninjacookies]

As I said a month ago, it would come down to who finished the season stronger, and MORE IMPORTANTLY, who got their team into the playoffs.

Migg did both of those, while Trout did neither. And Migg still has a shot at the triple crown on top of that.

Not even a question...Migg should and will win it.

Trout will have 10+ years in his career to get some (no doubt in my mind he will), but as of 2012, he was simply outplayed by a veteran when all was said and done.

[zonacats8]

Originally Posted by uberfatty

Can you please respond to my two posts citing WPA and how that affects your opinion of their respective seasons?

In my view, your analogy is flawed. You assume that Cabrera has somehow "passed" Trout in the footrace, except you haven't responded to posts which show actual statistical evidence using WPA that Trout is still well ahead of Cabrera even when taking context of at bats into account, which is your main argument against using WAR. If your argument against using WAR is debunked then what you are using to annoint Cabrera basically boils down to OMG GUYZ TEH SEPTEMBER TRIPLE CROWNZ AEWSOMR.

because the stat to me is just as useless as the WAR

It's calculated based on how every other team has done when in the situation that they are in when they make a certain player

Who gives two craps about what other teams have done in those situations

I don't know why everyone is so intent on using stats that compare one player to another in the actual calculation of the stat. In a sport like basketball or hockey, where the dimensions/conditions of every game are generally the exact same, then maybe, but not in baseball.

There are too many factors in baseball that make the general stats themselves hard to compare 1 to 1 to each other. So when you're then using those stats, to combine into other stats, and then have a computer come up with more calculations to offset and standardize the original factors and stats it becomes too diluted to be worth the weight people put behind them.

And if that statement was a bit too confusing to read, it was done on purpose.......