Nobody gonna say anything about Cabrera (the other one)?

[El Supremo]

Beating out Trout for the AL MVP?

You say the votes was taken before the post-season? But Posey and Cabrera won?

Posey?

[1gobluedem]

1. This Tiger fan is thrilled!

Yay, Miggy!

[joeybee12]

2. I agree with the vote for Cabrera...I can't believe some "experts" said it would be close...

Last edited Fri Nov 16, 2012, 02:14 PM - Edit history (1)

He got the triple crown...first time in 45 years...how do you NOT vote for someone who does that???

[Auggie]

3. I was thinking the same thing

[Upton]

4. Ask Nate Silver...

Like most of Nate's stuff, it lengthy..but he makes a good case that statistically Trout should have been the AL MVP..

Trout was actually slightly more valuable than Cabrera as an offensive player, considering the timing of his contributions. Add in his defense and base running, and it isn’t all that close a call.

It may seem hard to argue against a player who won the triple crown. But Cabrera’s numbers, while worthy of an M.V.P. award in many seasons, weren’t historically great. His batting average, R.B.I. and home run totals would also have qualified for the American League’s triple crown in 2008. Before that, however, you would have to go back to 1972 to find a year in which his numbers were good enough to lead the league in all three categories.

------

Perhaps 10 or 20 years ago, when evaluations of base running, defense and clutch hitting were murkier, stat geeks would have argued that Cabrera deserved the M.V.P. on the basis of the hard evidence.

Now that some of the “intangibles” have become measurable, we know that Trout did more of the little things to help his team win. It’s the traditionalists who are using statistics in a way that misses the forest for the trees.

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/11/14/the-statistical-case-against-cabrera-for-m-v-p/

[1gobluedem]

5. Ask Mitch Albom

Who thinks that there is a limit to this endless crunching of stats: http://www.freep.com/article/20121116/COL01/311160108/Mitch-Albom-Miggy-s-award-a-win-for-fans-defeat-for-stats-geeks

[Upton]

8. I know...lets ask Keith Olbermann..

who too makes an argument against Cabrera.

http://keitholbermann.mlblogs.com/2012/11/15/the-non-sabrmetric-argument-against-miguel-cabrera/

I have no dog in this fight, both were deserving. Though living on the West Coast I've seen a whole lot more of Trout. What I have seen of Cabrera was mostly in the World Series and I was not impressed. I understand Cabera's struggles were mostly a product of Giants pitching, but I'll tell you one thing..if I were starting a team, and leaving aside the difference in their ages, I'd choose Trout over Cabrera every single time..

And Mitch Albom ought to stick to his sensitive guy books and routine. His sports writing on this topic sounds like he's living back in the dark ages..

[1gobluedem]

9. Can't base it only on the post season

Especially since Trout didn't have one. If you went by that, Trout wouldn't even be eligible.

The triple crown and the position switch were huge.

But, since I've never seen you say anything positive about a Detroit athlete, Upton, I wouldn't expect you to agree Cabrera deserved the MVP even if Detroit hadn't struggled in the WS. After all you were the one who thought Verlander didn't deserve the Cy Young last year. Probably the only one.

[Upton]

10. Now, wait just a minute..

I never said Verlander didn't deserve the Cy Young...at the time, I questioned his inability to come through in the post season. Here, review the thread for yourself:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=215x191024

Seems as if you're in there as well also misrepresenting my views on Detroit. You've got a big time inferiority complex going about the place..

[1gobluedem]

11. I remember the thread well

Detroit fans rejoicing over a unanimous vote and your coming in to remind us of some post season struggles that didn't have anything to do with it; something we can always count on you for whenever anything positive happens with a Detroit sports team.

Inferiority complex? Me? Detroit is consistently ranked as one of the top sports cities in the country and deservedly so. I'm damn proud to have Detroit roots for reasons that go far beyond sports. I think the one with the inferiority complex is YOU since you are so eager to disparage anything positive that ever happens to Detroit teams.

[JonLP24]

12. He seems to be critcizing

these newer stats while the #1 argument for Cabrera is that he won the triple crown, which to win you have to lead in RBIs which is an incredibly flawed and overrated stat. It may not be overrated as everyone knows a high RBI total is more indicative of the quality of the lineup and where the player bats in the order. It is overrated in the sense that it is a part of the triple crown.

The batting average is fine, the reason OBP is superior is because BA doesn't address the walk. Home runs are fine as well.

I don't think there is any harm in finding new ways to rate players, especially is a sport like baseball where extremely flawed statistics are go-to stats for judging players such as Wins for pitchers.

[joeybee12]

6. I repeat...45 years...

I think you can make an argument for Torut, but again, the Triple Crown is so rare is overshadows everything else.

[caraher]

7. Either way, this was going to be fodder for debate

I don't think you can go with a purely statistical case. It's also worth noting that Cabrera contributed beyond what went into the stats by moving to 3rd base for Fielder. Both Trout and Cabrera had stellar stats, but it makes sense that something easily understood with a history behind it like the Triple Crown will loom larger for voters than arguably superior quantitative measures of a player's "value."

If we want to make an award based on statistics there shouldn't be voters. But that makes me wonder...

how would a stats-only MVP award work in a world where we have pitchers? Do any of the numbers gurus have formulas that would allow starting pitchers, reliever and everyone else to be evaluated on an equal basis? (In principle they should, in the sense that every team needs to make such evaluations in the same dollars paid to every player regardless of position... Moneyball?) It's a lot easier to go to stats when comparing offensive performance than when you need to consider defense, pitching (is a lights-out closer more or less valuable than a dominating starter), and clubhouse morale.