PDA

View Full Version : Bill Madden declares War against WAR



thefeckcampaign
10-01-2012, 10:16 PM
If SABR geeks stiff R.A. Dickey and Miguel Cabrera in NL Cy Young and AL MVP voting, respectively ...THIS MEANS WAR!
Here's the biggest problem with the wins against replacement argument: Even the people who invented the 'stat' can't agree on how to calculate it!

Maybe I’m missing something here. Or maybe I just don’t have enough seams in my head.

I’m very perplexed with a lot of my baseball writing brethren. Miguel Cabrera and R.A. Dickey have each respectively had phenomenal seasons, MVP and Cy Young-worthy seasons — seasons we should be celebrating. But instead many scribes and bloggers across the country have taken to disparaging them, especially Cabrera who has fallen victim to that nebulous (I would say ludicrous) new-age sabermetric stat called WAR. I’ll get to that in a minute, but when it comes to Dickey I have to wonder if the stigma of being an unconventional 37-year-old knuckleballer is going to deprive him of winning the National League Cy Young Award, when his winning should be a no-brainer. How else do you explain why so many people seem to be desperately looking for someone else to vote for?


As it is, Dickey is leading the NL in strikeouts, shutouts, innings pitched, complete games, and second (by a decimal point) in ERA to the Dodgers’ Clayton Kershaw, and in wins to Washington’s Gio Gonzalez by a single victory. With one more start, Dickey conceivably could win the Triple Crown of pitching, but the very fact he’s this close to it ought to be case enough for him. Dickey’s 4.11 strikeouts-to-walks ratio is also fourth in the majors. But, of course, the one stat that should separate him from all of the rest is his 20 wins for a team that was 11 games under .500 heading into Saturday night's game in Atlanta, giving him 28% of the Mets’ wins. The last two pitchers to win 20 games for under-.500 teams were Brad Radke, who won 20 games for the 68-94 Twins, accounting for 29% of Minnesota’s wins and Roger Clemens, who accounted for 28% of the last-place 76-86 Toronto Blue Jays’ wins in 1997 in winning both the Triple Crown of pitching and the Cy Young.

Recently, the Dickey alternative-seekers have grudgingly acknowledged his three primary competitors for the Cy, Kershaw, Gonzalez and Johnny Cueto probably can’t measure up. Despite his league-leading 21 wins and .206 opponents batting average, Gonzalez is not even the acknowledged best starter on his own team — Stephen Strasburg is — and he’s sixth in ERA and fourth in strikeouts, and not even in the top 10 in innings pitched. A better case could probably be made for Kershaw, whose bid was hindered when he missed two starts in September with a hip injury. Belying his 13-9 record, the Dodgers ace has the lowest WHIP in the NL (1.03 to No. 2 Dickey’s 1.05), is second in strikeouts and opponents batting average (.213 to No. 4 Dickey’s .225), and third in innings pitched.


Then last week there came yet another Dickey alternative being proposed: Atlanta Braves unhittable closer Craig Kimbrel, who is admittedly having a season for the ages with a league-leading 40 saves, a 1.04 ERA, with a strikeouts per nine (16.6) and strikeouts-to hit (111/26, 4.3) ratios that are the best in history. But the problem with Kimbrel, great as he’s been, he’s a closer, with a body of work of just 60-1/3 innings through Friday. It is for that reason only nine closers have ever won the Cy Young, usually winning in the absence of a standout season by a starter. The last closer to win the Cy Young was the Dodgers’ Eric Gagne in 2003 and he had to go a perfect 55-for-55 in saves, on performance-enhancers, to do it.

Much as Dickey has seemingly been disrespected, however, the seamhead assault on Cabrera has been nothing short of mind-boggling. Here’s a guy having one of the greatest offensive seasons in history, on the cusp of being the first Triple Crown winner since Carl Yastrzemski in 1967, and yet there is this clamor from the sabermetrics gallery that Cabrera must be penalized for his slowness afoot and supposed defensive shortcomings. To hear them tell it, if Cabrera winds up leading the league in batting, homers, RBI, slugging and total bases, and being second in hits and runs, it will still pale in comparison to L.A. Angels super rookie Mike Trout leading the league in runs, stolen bases and . . . WAR.

I certainly get that Trout’s speed is an important component in this debate. But this growing infatuation with WAR (wins above replacement) is, in my opinion, turning baseball into an inhuman board game. This is a stat that even its inventors can’t agree on an established formula, other than when all of these various factors of offense and defense are put into a blender and shaken well, out comes the player’s value to a team in wins above and beyond the “replacement” value of a player taken off the waiver wire for nothing. In other words, one big hypothetical. According to one blogger last week, Trout’s superior WAR demonstrates that “he has helped his team win roughly three to four more games than Cabrera has helped his.” Don’t ask how that conclusion is reached. Much of this, presumably, is based on Trout’s superior defense and speed. But again, all of this is hypothetical, and how do you vote on a stat nobody knows how to calculate? If you want concrete evidence of Trout’s value, I would present the Angels’ 6-14 record, nine games out on April 28, the day he was recalled from the minors, and their 81-56 record since. And as for Cabrera’s defense, I would also submit the fact that he willingly moved from first base (where he’d become a fairly accomplished defender) to third so Detroit could sign Prince Fielder — and, as long as we’re going to deal in hypotheticals here, how many extra wins did that give the Tigers? Lastly, it now looks like the Tigers might win the AL Central while Trout’s Angels need a strong finish and a collapse by the Oakland A’s to secure the second wild-card spot. That, too, should be worth big points for Cabrera, although for the sabermatricians that’s probably much too tangible. When it comes to their almighty WAR, I agree with soul man Edwin Starr: “War, huh, yeah. What is it good for? Absolutely nothing. Uh-huh.”

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/sabr-geeks-stiff-a-dickey-miguel-cabrera-nl-cy-young-al-mvp-voting-means-war-article-1.1171008#ixzz286V9wRly


http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/sabr-geeks-stiff-a-dickey-miguel-cabrera-nl-cy-young-al-mvp-voting-means-war-article-1.1171008

I must admit, as much light you all have shined on me with some Saber stats such as OPS+, WAR has always left me empty.

jej
10-01-2012, 10:21 PM
Stopped reading when he starting mentioning wins.

WAR is not a be all end all stat. I honestly dont know where people get that idea. The traditional guys are the ones that say that, not us.

Trout wins because of his defense, baserunning, and just as good offense. Not because of WAR

flea
10-01-2012, 10:24 PM
WAR is problematic mostly because of the various defensive metrics and the sample size issue that all of them present, which is why anyone using WAR as a side-by-side comparison for single seasons is on tenuous ground.

jej
10-01-2012, 10:30 PM
I agree, but with Trout and Cabby its pretty obvious who is better defensively. You can never look at just WAR

Buckwheat
10-01-2012, 10:34 PM
I'm tired of hearing about this.

metswon69
10-01-2012, 10:35 PM
Trout 172 wRC+ .419 wOBA
Cabrera 163 wRC+ .413 wOBA

Trout is the better offensive player as well, it's not just the defense in CF and the SBs.

Twitchy
10-01-2012, 10:51 PM
I don't see a problem with Dickey winning the NL Cy. Don't know who is complaining about that one.

I do get a kick out of the fact that the Tigers making the playoffs is a point in Cabrera's favour. Because the counterpoint to that is Trout and the Angels have a better record then Cabrera and the Tigers lol. So if you want to make that argument, Trout has therefore led the Angels to more wins then Cabrera has for the Tigers.

Not that I think it's a good argument to begin with, just pointing out how flawed that particular point is.

It's beyond obvious that he wrote that article just to get hits on his site cause the traditional stats people will be like "Yeah! WAR SUX" whereas the saber people will be all "WTF YOU CRAZY HOMES!".

bosox3431
10-01-2012, 11:02 PM
The most laughable part is that Cabrera shoulda get credit towards the mvp because he moved to third to make room for fielder. What a dumbass.

Oldmantrash
10-01-2012, 11:26 PM
Mr Madden
:clap:

I hate WAR
ERA, WINS,K's, Average against.
That's all I care about with a pitcher

Cabrera deserves MVP, and it's not even close.

sexicano31
10-01-2012, 11:28 PM
Mr Madden
:clap:

I hate WAR
ERA, WINS,K's, Average against.
That's all I care about with a pitcher
Because wins tell you soooo much. AmIright?

Victimize
10-01-2012, 11:32 PM
Mr Madden
:clap:

I hate WAR
ERA, WINS,K's, Average against.
That's all I care about with a pitcher

Cabrera deserves MVP, and it's not even close.

Wins show a pitchers ability? :facepalm:

Halopower31
10-01-2012, 11:32 PM
I thought the main argument everyone used last year for Verlander winning MVP was WAR?

sexicano31
10-01-2012, 11:33 PM
Mr Madden
:clap:

I hate WAR
ERA, WINS,K's, Average against.
That's all I care about with a pitcher

Cabrera deserves MVP, and it's not even close.

And it is close. Actually no. Trout should win MVP and its not close.

Buckwheat
10-01-2012, 11:35 PM
Mr Madden
:clap:

I hate WAR
ERA, WINS,K's, Average against.
That's all I care about with a pitcher

Cabrera deserves MVP, and it's not even close.

It's not even close... lolz.

DodgerB24
10-01-2012, 11:36 PM
Cabrera deserves MVP, and it's not even close.

lol?

FortDetroit
10-01-2012, 11:40 PM
I thought the main argument everyone used last year for Verlander winning MVP was WAR?

Or it could have been his league leading innings pitched, strikeouts, wins, WHIP, and ERA. Maybe that.

Oldmantrash
10-01-2012, 11:41 PM
Cabrera put his team on his back in September and won them the division.

He deserves it hands down.

I love trout, but his MVP should come another year

sexicano31
10-01-2012, 11:41 PM
Or it could have been his league leading innings pitched, strikeouts, wins, WHIP, and ERA. Maybe that.

It was mostly WAR because he had a down year in K/9 and BB/9. So yah. WAR. Lol wins

sexicano31
10-01-2012, 11:42 PM
Cabrera put his team on his back in September and won them the division.

He deserves it hands down.

I love trout, but his MVP should come another year

Angels have more wins this year than the Tigers.

But thats stupid to mention since team performance shouldnt even be a factor in an individual award

VenezuelanMet
10-01-2012, 11:43 PM
I don't agree with Madden at all, but I have to say about this discussion in general, something that annoys me a lot is that people are somehow talking as if a dude who is going to end with 7 WAR season and who thus far is a surefire HOF winning an award would be some unspeakable travesty. Come on, this is not Jim Rice getting into HOF or Zito winning Cy over Pedro.

I love WAR as much as everyone else but people acting as if it makes this choice black and white are missing the point of WAR and turning into mini Joe Morgans. I'm very disappointed at the Sabermetrician community in this debate, I thought they were better at debating.

And I think Trout deserves it, fwiw.

FortDetroit
10-01-2012, 11:46 PM
It was mostly WAR because he had a down year in K/9 and BB/9. So yah. WAR. Lol wins

The only one who had to use WAR for Verlander last year was you. It was pretty obvious he was the best pitcher in the AL last year just by looking at his traditional numbers. But i'm sure those numbers are below you and don't count.

sexicano31
10-01-2012, 11:49 PM
The only one who had to use WAR for Verlander last year was you. It was pretty obvious he was the best pitcher in the AL last year just by looking at his traditional numbers. But i'm sure those numbers are below you and don't count.

I dont think I even talked much about the AL MVP that much. Those numbers are below me? Lol what? All I said was he had a down year in K/9 and a higher BB/9. And then I laughed at wins because thats stupid. You seem to be very sensitive about this whole issue

JLynn943
10-02-2012, 12:11 AM
Not sure that this is thread-worthy, so here goes:

I will freely admit that I am not well-versed in sabermatrics, yet I do understand the severe limitations of some traditional stats such as RBIs and wins. However, I'm curious about what people think about factoring in wins for a potential Cy Young for Dickey. Wins obviously take more than just good pitching to earn (and they obviously don't even require that), but when Dickey has 20 wins on a team that is below .500, that seems to indicate something to me. It didn't seem like run support was significantly better for him (if at all) over the other Mets pitchers, but his dominant pitching earned those wins. So, do sabr-users value this at all?

tp13baby
10-02-2012, 12:44 AM
Stopped reading when he starting mentioning wins.

WAR is not a be all end all stat. I honestly dont know where people get that idea. The traditional guys are the ones that say that, not us.

Trout wins because of his defense, baserunning, and just as good offense. Not because of WAR

So let me ask was Tulo robbed NL ROY when Braun won it? Im being serious.

canefandynasty
10-02-2012, 12:58 AM
So let me ask was Tulo robbed NL ROY when Braun won it? Im being serious.

They like the gaudy HR/RBI stats. They don't look at all-around play. Same situation with Utley/Howard for 4-5 years, and Trout/Miggy Cabs now

papipapsmanny
10-02-2012, 01:00 AM
Im not sure if WAR factors it in like this, but I hate how people say a run saved on defense is the same as a run scored on offense. That simply is not true.

sexicano31
10-02-2012, 01:02 AM
Im not sure if WAR factors it in like this, but I hate how people say a run saved on defense is the same as a run scored on offense. That simply is not true.

How is it not?

papipapsmanny
10-02-2012, 01:03 AM
How is it not?

Because I would argue it is much easier to save a run than score one

sexicano31
10-02-2012, 01:04 AM
Because I would argue it is much easier to save a run than score one

What does ease have to do with anything? Saving a run is the same as creating a run. A run is a run

papipapsmanny
10-02-2012, 01:07 AM
What does ease have to do with anything? Saving a run is the same as creating a run. A run is a run

what does ease have to do with anything? How can you ask that, if it is more difficult to score a run, than to save one. Wouldn't logic therefore say it is more valuable to score a run than to save one?

floater
10-02-2012, 01:08 AM
Because I would argue it is much easier to save a run than score one

shouldn't the argument be about the value of each, not the ease?

1903
10-02-2012, 01:11 AM
what does ease have to do with anything? How can you ask that, if it is more difficult to score a run, than to save one. Wouldn't logic therefore say it is more valuable to score a run than to save one?

Which process is more difficult is not what determines value. It's the end result which determines the value. Scoring a run and saving a run is just a run.

Jeffy25
10-02-2012, 01:17 AM
You don't need WAR to know that Trout deserves the AL MVP

floater
10-02-2012, 01:19 AM
GREAT READ

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/mike-trout-miguel-cabrera-and-measuring-value/



...That’s why, despite Cabrera’s chance at the triple crown, any decent measure of total offensive production will say that Cabrera hasn’t produced any more runs for the Tigers than Trout has for the Angels despite the three week head start. If you just look at Trout and Cabrera’s Batting plus Baserunning in the value section, you’ll note that Trout’s offensive performance has been +57.6 runs better than an average offensive performer this year, while Cabrera checks in at +50.3 runs.

And, look, this isn’t voodoo magic that deals with theoretical replacement levels – this is simply the result of adding up all the positive and negative offensive events that both Trout and Cabrera have produced this year. Even with the 21 fewer games played, Trout has produced more runs this season. The only way to come to a different conclusion is to selectively choose the kinds of runs you want to measure. By objective metrics that include all aspects of offensive value, Mike Trout has been a better offensive performer than Cabrera this year.

If you think that the MVP should be only based on offensive performance with no consideration to defense or position played, then the evidence would lead you to believe that Trout has a narrow edge over Cabrera. Of course, position scarcity and defensive contributions absolutely should be a factor, and both of those point to Trout by laughably large margins, so the only way to make a case for Cabrera is to pretend that we shouldn’t measure those things. And, in actuality, to further that case, we actually have to obscure the truth...




Look, even here at FanGraphs, we don’t think the MVP award should just be the WAR of the Year award. We’ve said repeatedly that WAR is a useful tool for identifying groups of players who have had similar years, and it takes a precision that WAR is not capable of providing to determine the differences between guys who are within the same overall range of value. The problem with the argument surrounding Trout and Cabrera is that they’re not in the overall same range of value. Mike Trout is a group unto himself this year – a fantastic defensive center fielder who also happens to be the best baserunner in baseball and who has hit nearly as well as anyone else alive.

You don’t have to buy into WAR as the be-all, end-all statistic to know that Trout has been the AL’s best player by a country mile this year. Simply look at all the facts, and not just the three that were treated as important 100 years ago. Morosi is right about one thing – whether Miguel Cabrera wins the triple crown or not should be irrelevant. The AL MVP is obvious. It’s just not Miguel Cabrera.

Jeffy25
10-02-2012, 01:38 AM
^very good

Halladay
10-02-2012, 05:55 AM
Another guy who's stuck on the dinosaur stats. The fact that Cabreras so awful defensively, and the people who think he's the MVP ignore this, is hilarious to me. Trout is having the better year. I mean, it's not even just about one specific stat. Offensively it's close, defensively it's Trout by a landslide. This shouldn't even be a debate. There is so much foolishness in this article...

How else do you explain why so many people seem to be desperately looking for someone else to vote for?
lol what? right off the bat he's talking out of his ***.

Despite his league-leading 21 wins
dear mother of god

there is this clamor from the sabermetrics gallery that Cabrera must be penalized for his slowness afoot and supposed defensive shortcomings
So speed shouldn't even hold value? when did Cabrera have "supposed shortcomings" on defense? isn't it well known that he's pretty bad defensively? which is, ya know, half the damn game. But no, defense means nothing. Stolen bases means nothing. Right.

Here’s a guy having one of the greatest offensive seasons in history
LOL one of the greatest in history? wtf? he is?

as for Cabrera’s defense, I would also submit the fact that he willingly moved from first base (where he’d become a fairly accomplished defender) to third so Detroit could sign Prince Fielder — and, as long as we’re going to deal in hypotheticals here, how many extra wins did that give the Tigers?
seriously, a professional writer says this?

it now looks like the Tigers might win the AL Central while Trout’s Angels need a strong finish and a collapse by the Oakland A’s to secure the second wild-card spot. That, too, should be worth big points for Cabrera, although for the sabermatricians that’s probably much too tangible.
how does a writer not even look at the standings? One click of the mouse and it's right there. The Angels have more wins than the Tigers, this is just embarrassing. I didn't even quote all the stupid things said here. There is a much better way to argue against war, this isn't how you do it.

thefeckcampaign
10-02-2012, 06:17 AM
Angels have more wins this year than the Tigers.

But thats stupid to mention since team performance shouldnt even be a factor in an individual award Disagree. The award is not the Most Outstanding Player.

thefeckcampaign
10-02-2012, 06:26 AM
Not sure that this is thread-worthy, so here goes:

I will freely admit that I am not well-versed in sabermatrics, yet I do understand the severe limitations of some traditional stats such as RBIs and wins. However, I'm curious about what people think about factoring in wins for a potential Cy Young for Dickey. Wins obviously take more than just good pitching to earn (and they obviously don't even require that), but when Dickey has 20 wins on a team that is below .500, that seems to indicate something to me. It didn't seem like run support was significantly better for him (if at all) over the other Mets pitchers, but his dominant pitching earned those wins. So, do sabr-users value this at all? This is one more reason Carlton's '72 season is even that more impressive.

I hope the lack of respect for the win is applied towards the save as well.

bagwell368
10-02-2012, 06:27 AM
The empire strikes back!

With ill advised screeds like this Sabermetrics must be much further ahead than I thought.

Halladay
10-02-2012, 06:27 AM
Disagree. The award is not the Most Outstanding Player.

MVP,Cy Young and ROY are individual awards. Why people factor in where there team is in the standings is ridiculous. If a lesser player is on a playoff team does that make them more valuable? of course not.

VenezuelanMet
10-02-2012, 07:03 AM
I repeat, I think Trout should win easily but something from yesterday I found funny.

Miggy goes 4 for 5 and no one says a thing.
Trout goes 4 for 5 and everyone's panties just fell off on spot.

And yet, Internet people complain about narrative.

Maybe I need to follow more traditionalists, lol.

Halladay
10-02-2012, 07:30 AM
I repeat, I think Trout should win easily but something from yesterday I found funny.

Miggy goes 4 for 5 and no one says a thing.
Trout goes 4 for 5 and everyone's panties just fell off on spot.

And yet, Internet people complain about narrative.

Maybe I need to follow more traditionalists, lol.

Maybe because Miggys winning a race he probably shouldn't be winning?

Twitchy
10-02-2012, 07:41 AM
I repeat, I think Trout should win easily but something from yesterday I found funny.

Miggy goes 4 for 5 and no one says a thing.
Trout goes 4 for 5 and everyone's panties just fell off on spot.

And yet, Internet people complain about narrative.

Maybe I need to follow more traditionalists, lol.

My Toronto paper had an article from the New York Times about Miguel Cabrera's 4/5 night and it was bigger than the information for the Jays game. They had a whole page just dedicated to the 4/5 game, what it meant for the Triple Crown and how the Triple Crown = Cabrera winning MVP.

So I don't know what you're talking about with the Miggy/Trout thing. If anything, based on what I read it was the complete opposite.

Pinstripe pride
10-02-2012, 08:41 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bX7V6FAoTLc

jej
10-02-2012, 09:31 AM
Disagree. The award is not the Most Outstanding Player.

A players value does not change based on what team he is on.

champion23
10-02-2012, 10:11 AM
What I'm confused on is how nearly every Manager/Player seem to think that Cabrera should win, yet most fans think otherwise. Am I missing something?

koreancabbage
10-02-2012, 10:33 AM
i don't mind either winning but tradition is tradition. If Cabby wins the triple crown, it really is an important thing and baseball is a sport based on tradition and what players have achieved and based on traditional important stats like homeruns, rbis totals etc.

Trout is my winner based on stats and everything exciting about baseball.

I want Cabby to win it this year based on something that hasn't been done in the last 60? years. This is something truly special and will be remembered for the ages. The casual fan will not take WAR into consideration and b/c of that, Cabby should take it.

but if Trout wins it, I believe the whole stats thing will reach out to more casual fans on why he won it other than the peripheral stats.

But as of right now, i'm going with tradition and letting Cabby win it due to the game's historical background and honouring tradition.

ahoda
10-02-2012, 10:52 AM
What I'm confused on is how nearly every Manager/Player seem to think that Cabrera should win, yet most fans think otherwise. Am I missing something?


Last year the players/managers said JV should win and everyone else scoffed at the notion. You really can't go wrong with either guy and I'm hoping for a split MVP if that's possible.

thawv
10-02-2012, 11:06 AM
I'm not gonna say one way or another which one deserves to win it. But the fact still remains, that this is not "the best player in the league award." This is the MVP. I don't want to look it up, but my memory tells me that if a player on a playoff team has an unbelievable year, he wins. Period. For this reason, I think it's gonna be Miggy.

There have been only 5 MVP winners to play on a losing team. (Yes, I know the Angels are not a losing team. But they are not a playoff team.) And that's only because no player on those playoff teams had a good enough year to win in those years. In this case there is.

Miggy wins the "MVP", and Trout wins, "Sporting News Player Of The Year"

thawv
10-02-2012, 11:10 AM
A players value does not change based on what team he is on.

His actual value doesn't change. But the voter's opinion of his team value does.

albo23
10-02-2012, 11:38 AM
What I'm confused on is how nearly every Manager/Player seem to think that Cabrera should win, yet most fans think otherwise. Am I missing something?
The only people who oppose Cabrera winning are the people who don't watch the games and only use sabermetrics. Most coaches AND fans think Cabrera should win. Proof: http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/fp/flashPollResultsState?sportIndex=frontpage&pollId=3209083

champion23
10-02-2012, 11:51 AM
The only people who oppose Cabrera winning are the people who don't watch the games and only use sabermetrics. Most coaches AND fans think Cabrera should win. Proof: http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/fp/flashPollResultsState?sportIndex=frontpage&pollId=3209083

I didn't realize that.. It seems like everything I read on here, and a lot of articles online are on the Trout bandwagon. I was just confused as of why fans can't see what the people who know the game best (managers/players) see.

otatop
10-02-2012, 11:55 AM
I hope the lack of respect for the win is applied towards the save as well.
Saves are also a fairly meh stat, but at least they're actually controlled by what the pitcher does.

JLynn943
10-02-2012, 12:01 PM
Saves are also a fairly meh stat, but at least they're actually controlled by what the pitcher does.

Sort of. They have no control over getting a save opportunity (getting to that point in a game where one is possible). Plus, you can come in and suck (read: give up 2 runs) yet still earn a save.

chi-townlove1
10-02-2012, 12:07 PM
I'm going to be honest. I think Cabrera deserves the MVP. By a good margin actually. But that's not the point. The point is, this website, psd, has made me despise Michael trout. Psd, please stop pushing trout down people's throats and forcing us to accept him. Yes, he was phenomenal. MVP worthy even. But he is a rookie. We must live with him for 10+ more years. Lets see how he plays. I'm begging, for his sake, stop making me hate him and hope that he does not win these awards.

Nomar
10-02-2012, 12:08 PM
Say what you want but WAR is a far more sophisticated and complete stat that OPS. The MLB has devalued defense with the MVP award.

As you guys have stated, Utley was a way better player than Howard and yet Howard wins an MVP.

WAR has become more popular this season for whatever reason, and now is on the main stats page of ESPN for example. I think its a good thing for the game. It tells younger kids that plate discipline and defense are important as ever, and that to become a great player it helps substantially to be good in every aspect of the game, not just hitting.

2009mvp
10-02-2012, 12:12 PM
This debate is crazy boring, but this:

I agree with soul man Edwin Starr: “War, huh, yeah. What is it good for? Absolutely nothing. Uh-huh.”
my friends, is the absolute pinnacle of hacky sportswriting.

gaughan333
10-02-2012, 01:12 PM
I'm going to be honest. I think Cabrera deserves the MVP. By a good margin actually. But that's not the point. The point is, this website, psd, has made me despise Michael trout. Psd, please stop pushing trout down people's throats and forcing us to accept him. Yes, he was phenomenal. MVP worthy even. But he is a rookie. We must live with him for 10+ more years. Lets see how he plays. I'm begging, for his sake, stop making me hate him and hope that he does not win these awards.

So he shouldn't win the MVP solely because he's a rookie?

You don't want to see him win because you have to see him for 10 more years? So any player who comes in and does well initially, should not be recognized because you do not want to hear about them when they will remain in the league? Yeah...great post

VenezuelanMet
10-02-2012, 01:18 PM
Maybe because Miggys winning a race he probably shouldn't be winning?
Which race? There's no MVP race, just one day of voting and I'm pretty sure Trout will win.
If you mean Triple Crown, then lol. Why shouldn't he?



My Toronto paper had an article from the New York Times about Miguel Cabrera's 4/5 night and it was bigger than the information for the Jays game. They had a whole page just dedicated to the 4/5 game, what it meant for the Triple Crown and how the Triple Crown = Cabrera winning MVP.

So I don't know what you're talking about with the Miggy/Trout thing. If anything, based on what I read it was the complete opposite.

Well, I did say Internet people, which by that I mean the sort of people who read fangraphs everyday and the like. Thought it was a bit hypocritical.

Jeffy25
10-02-2012, 01:45 PM
My Toronto paper had an article from the New York Times about Miguel Cabrera's 4/5 night and it was bigger than the information for the Jays game. They had a whole page just dedicated to the 4/5 game, what it meant for the Triple Crown and how the Triple Crown = Cabrera winning MVP.

So I don't know what you're talking about with the Miggy/Trout thing. If anything, based on what I read it was the complete opposite.

Absolutely

Do a Google Search

Miguel Cabrera MVP
And then
Mike Trout MVP


See which one has more 'News' results

Cabrera is going to get this MVP

1903
10-02-2012, 01:54 PM
Absolutely

Do a Google Search

Miguel Cabrera MVP
And then
Mike Trout MVP


See which one has more 'News' results

Cabrera is going to get this MVP

If Cabrera does not win then the average fan and the clueless sportswriter is going to say "how can someone get the triple crown and not win MVP?" If Trout does not win the questions will come from a smaller community and the average fan and sportswriter will not ask "how could someone lead in WAR, wOBA, wRC+, have elite speed and defense and not win MVP?"

Jeffy25
10-02-2012, 02:10 PM
And they love to make the playoffs argument, which is completely, 100% stupidity.

You should not be a sports writer, and have an MVP vote if that is all the critical thinking you can muster.

thawv
10-02-2012, 02:18 PM
This may or may not interest you guys. But the oddsmakers at The Greek sports book have put a line out on this. As of September 21st, Miggy was -250, and Trout was +175.

Miggy is the clear favorite as far as betting is concerned.

chi-townlove1
10-02-2012, 02:34 PM
I'm going to be honest. I think Cabrera deserves the MVP. By a good margin actually. But that's not the point. The point is, this website, psd, has made me despise Michael trout. Psd, please stop pushing trout down people's throats and forcing us to accept him. Yes, he was phenomenal. MVP worthy even. But he is a rookie. We must live with him for 10+ more years. Lets see how he plays. I'm begging, for his sake, stop making me hate him and hope that he does not win these awards.

So he shouldn't win the MVP solely because he's a rookie?

You don't want to see him win because you have to see him for 10 more years? So any player who comes in and does well initially, should not be recognized because you do not want to hear about them when they will remain in the league? Yeah...great postt

Not even going to respond to that, your so immature. Only pointing the negatives. Obviously when that's not what I was getting at at all. I love watching him play. I stated that he was tremendous. But I am sick of being forced to accept him as the league MVP because of war. And because he is a rookie phenom people think he is obligated to the MVP because he has played so well.

1903
10-02-2012, 02:37 PM
t

Not even going to respond to that, your so immature. Only pointing the negatives. Obviously when that's not what I was getting at at all. I love watching him play. I stated that he was tremendous. But I am sick of being forced to accept him as the league MVP because of war. And because he is a rookie phenom people think he is obligated to the MVP because he has played so well.

If you believe that Trout supporters think he deserves to win just because of WAR then you haven't been paying attention.

Twitchy
10-02-2012, 03:21 PM
Well, I did say Internet people, which by that I mean the sort of people who read fangraphs everyday and the like. Thought it was a bit hypocritical.

I hate to break it to you, but there's a significant portion of "internet people" who are strongly in favour of Cabrera and tell the world every time he gets a base hit. And not only when he gets a base hit, but that it's going to be the first time in 40 years someone gets a Triple Crown, and that winning a Triple Crown = winning the MVP. So I have to disagree with your statement.

Essentially what you're saying is that you're surprised that people who don't prioritize RBI/BA/ERA/wins aren't in favour of Miguel Cabrera winning the MVP award when virtually every other statistic is in favour of Trout? That's not hypocritical bud. People who don't believe Cabrera is the MVP aren't going to trumpet every time he gets a hit. Although, to be honest, I haven't seen anybody get excited over Trout going 4/5 on a daily basis like I do with the Cabrera fans reminding us of the potential for a Triple Crown winner. Not that I mind it, I'm just saying we shouldn't pretend that there's only one side telling their story like you're arguing.

You can acknowledge that Cabrera is having a fantastic season while arguing that he doesn't deserve to be MVP. That's what I do.

Like I said in another thread, the only reason Cabrera is getting any recognition here is because of the Triple Crown. He was a much better hitter last year but nobody cared because it didn't fit into a nice narrative. Everybody was too focused on Verlander's win/loss record to realize that the best player on the Tigers was, and still is, Miguel Cabrera, and not Verlander.

ShinobiNYC
10-02-2012, 03:52 PM
All I know is that if Trout doesn't win MVP it would be like Mantle not winning in '61(lost to Roger Marris)....not a tragedy but sad.

Derek Brink
10-02-2012, 03:56 PM
RA Dickey is by no means the clear winner for cy Young. Kershaw has a better ERA, ERA+, WHIP,and FIP.

The only two areas Dickey has an advantage in are K's(by a whopping 1 strikeout) and wins.

If anything Dickey shouldn't even win. He's basically going to win because his team played better behind him than Kershaw did.

SenorGato
10-02-2012, 03:57 PM
I do find it funny how every couple of years there is a new, hot addition to the baseball numbers game that is treated as the be all end all for a while.

VORP...Win Shares...RC...the many DIPs numbers...Mostly my issue is with how they're used rather than that they exist. It's made FanGraphs Scouting a monster on the Internet.

Jeffy25
10-02-2012, 04:23 PM
Anyone smart enough to understand advanced statistics, is smart enough to never treat any statistics as a be-all, end-all

thefeckcampaign
10-02-2012, 04:26 PM
MVP,Cy Young and ROY are individual awards. Why people factor in where there team is in the standings is ridiculous. If a lesser player is on a playoff team does that make them more valuable? of course not.Yes it does.

BSplaya2121
10-02-2012, 04:31 PM
Miggy = Hank Aaron Award
Trout = MVP

Even if you dont look at sabremetrics, the Angels were 6-14, and 83-57 after that. Trout woke up that entire team and they played great after that. So i think he covers the intangables as well.

thefeckcampaign
10-02-2012, 04:34 PM
Anyone smart enough to understand advanced statistics, is smart enough to never treat any statistics as a be-all, end-allThe problem is many on this site alone do.

GasMan
10-02-2012, 05:04 PM
Yes it does.

You can't judge Trout and Cabrera on their unequal RBI results when they did not have equal RBI opportunity. There would be no parity in your argument.

GasMan
10-02-2012, 05:09 PM
The problem is many on this site alone do.

When? People on both sides of this argument use different statistics to argue a point which is what they're for. The goal should be to get rid of bad statistics (RBI's, wins, VORP?) and replace them with better ones, which is what the SABR crowd are trying to do.

thefeckcampaign
10-02-2012, 05:32 PM
When? People on both sides of this argument use different statistics to argue a point which is what they're for. The goal should be to get rid of bad statistics (RBI's, wins, VORP?) and replace them with better ones, which is what the SABR crowd are trying to do.First off, VORP was thrown around like crazy when I first came here. I've also seen plenty around here thrown around WAR like it is all you have to look at.

thefeckcampaign
10-02-2012, 05:33 PM
You can't judge Trout and Cabrera on their unequal RBI results when they did not have equal RBI opportunity. There would be no parity in your argument.When did I bring up RBI? All I said was it is MVP not MOP.

Jeffy25
10-02-2012, 05:34 PM
I can not attest to every poster on PSD that posts a players WAR

But often times, WAR is used as a quick snap-shot to show the difference in two players. I know that often times I'll say Player A's WAR, and then Player B's WAR and nothing else simply when I don't feel like re-posting all of their stats to give you the differences in each player. It's nothing but a quick snap-shot for me.

It's too inconclusive to ever be used alone and not have additional information when you are truly comparing two players.

SenorGato
10-02-2012, 06:30 PM
Anyone smart enough to understand advanced statistics, is smart enough to never treat any statistics as a be-all, end-all

True but you dont need to understand to cite and parrot. I see a lot of hack analysis on both sides...There are Kruks of the numbers world, but they get less crap for it because who doesn't love numbers? They're much easier to believe than almost anything else.

GasMan
10-02-2012, 06:30 PM
When did I bring up RBI? All I said was it is MVP not MOP.

That was parody of your line about parity. Damn, guess it was wasted.

Black Betsy
10-02-2012, 07:17 PM
I wouldn't hand over the Mvp because of WAR.

albo23
10-02-2012, 07:35 PM
I am glad I never see these sabermetrics while watching the game on TV or in attendance; not necessarily because they are confusing, but because the people who care about them are very pretentious and condescending.

The SF Giant
10-02-2012, 07:37 PM
I am glad I never see these sabermetrics while watching the game on TV or in attendance; not necessarily because they are confusing, but because the people who care about them are very pretentious and condescending.

People with facts tend to do that.

albo23
10-02-2012, 07:42 PM
People with facts tend to do that.
Ha witty. Fact: RBI's, HR's, and BA are real facts. :D

There was a level of sarcasm to my post, but there is also a level of seriousness when I say quite a few of you act like 15 year olds trying to debate.

Yankees90.
10-02-2012, 08:10 PM
Ha witty. Fact: RBI's, HR's, and BA are real facts. :D

There was a level of sarcasm to my post, but there is also a level of seriousness when I say quite a few of you act like 15 year olds trying to debate.

Ku je ooooo shqipe :D

Mir se vjen ne PSD :)

bagwell368
10-02-2012, 08:15 PM
When King Felix won the Cy a couple of years ago, it seemed like first major win for the Sabr crowd.

If Miggy wins the Triple Crown then he's going to win the MVP. So the traditional stats take it back.

We're in the transition phase it seems, each side will stake its claims.

Oh good....

IceHawk-181
10-02-2012, 08:18 PM
The difficulty with arguments based in Saber-Metrics is simple:

It is difficult to moderate one's tone when you are attempting to substitute quantitative analysis with a statistical base within a discussion in which your opponents rationalize opinion and tradition as equally valuable.

WAR is not a final valuation of a player...it is however an objective statistical representation of a player's value based on known variables.

Yes, the Triple Crown is a nice statistical anomaly.
It describes exactly one thing: A power hitter who has maintained a high batting average and enjoyed greater numbers of runners on base when he came to the plate.

Cabrera's season has been amazing offensively, and he should win the Hank Aaron Award and the Silver Slugger.

But who among us would argue that they would DH David Wright, or Adrian Beltre, or Lawrie in order to keep Cabrera's glove in the field? Or pinch run Cabrera over Harper, or Gardner, or Austin Jackson?

And who among us would ever pull Mike Trout in the same situtations?



Most Valuable Player

I have always taken that to mean the most valuable player in baseball.

Not the best offensive player on a team making the post-season.

WAR notwithstanding my vote for MVP would be for the player who is the best all around offensive, defensive, fielding, base running, and "intangible team loyalty and energy," kind of guy.

Jeffy25
10-02-2012, 08:24 PM
Ice Hawk and his occasional posts are always amazing.

Halladay
10-02-2012, 08:26 PM
Which race? There's no MVP race, just one day of voting and I'm pretty sure Trout will win.
If you mean Triple Crown, then lol. Why shouldn't he?


Trout won't win if Miggy gets the triple crown. Absolutely no way. Several of us have posted why, go back and read the thread.


Yes it does.

Then you're out to lunch. Teams win pennants, teams win the WS, individuals win individual awards. It's mind boggling that the tipping point for fans and writers alike is to say well, player X's team made the playoffs so yeah, he's definitely the MVP. What's more ridiculous is that Trouts team has more wins so, if anything, Trout is the MVP. That doesn't pass the sniff test though because those who use the whole playoff argument only use it because it's convenient. If individual awards are only for those on playoff teams then they should re-name the awards. The Cy Young award for most outstanding pitcher who's team made the playoffs. The most valuable player who's team made the playoffs. The most outstanding rookie who's team made the playoffs.

bagwell368
10-02-2012, 08:27 PM
The difficulty with arguments based in Saber-Metrics is simple:

It is difficult to moderate one's tone when you are attempting to substitute quantitative analysis with a statistical base within a discussion in which your opponents rationalize opinion and tradition as equally valuable.

WAR is not a final valuation of a player...it is however an objective statistical representation of a player's value based on known variables.


Classic.

Halladay
10-02-2012, 08:31 PM
The difficulty with arguments based in Saber-Metrics is simple:

It is difficult to moderate one's tone when you are attempting to substitute quantitative analysis with a statistical base within a discussion in which your opponents rationalize opinion and tradition as equally valuable.

WAR is not a final valuation of a player...it is however an objective statistical representation of a player's value based on known variables.

Yes, the Triple Crown is a nice statistical anomaly.
It describes exactly one thing: A power hitter who has maintained a high batting average and enjoyed greater numbers of runners on base when he came to the plate.

Cabrera's season has been amazing offensively, and he should win the Hank Aaron Award and the Silver Slugger.

But who among us would argue that they would DH David Wright, or Adrian Beltre, or Lawrie in order to keep Cabrera's glove in the field? Or pinch run Cabrera over Harper, or Gardner, or Austin Jackson?

And who among us would ever pull Mike Trout in the same situtations?



Most Valuable Player

I have always taken that to mean the most valuable player in baseball.

Not the best offensive player on a team making the post-season.

WAR notwithstanding my vote for MVP would be for the player who is the best all around offensive, defensive, fielding, base running, and "intangible team loyalty and energy," kind of guy.
:clap:

thefeckcampaign
10-02-2012, 08:49 PM
Then you're out to lunch. Teams win pennants, teams win the WS, individuals win individual awards. It's mind boggling that the tipping point for fans and writers alike is to say well, player X's team made the playoffs so yeah, he's definitely the MVP. What's more ridiculous is that Trouts team has more wins so, if anything, Trout is the MVP. That doesn't pass the sniff test though because those who use the whole playoff argument only use it because it's convenient. If individual awards are only for those on playoff teams then they should re-name the awards. The Cy Young award for most outstanding pitcher who's team made the playoffs. The most valuable player who's team made the playoffs. The most outstanding rookie who's team made the playoffs.Most VALUABLE Player, not Most OUTSTANDING Player.

If a player's role does not greatly affect the team, then they are not valuable.

PS I never said the team has to make the play-offs. Outside of his contribution statistically, Trout is valuable to me because once he joined the team, the whole club turned around.

Halladay
10-02-2012, 08:51 PM
Most VALUABLE Player, not Most OUTSTANDING Player.

If a player's role does not greatly affect the team, then they are not valuable.

My god...

Jeffy25
10-02-2012, 08:52 PM
Most VALUABLE Player, not Most OUTSTANDING Player.

If a player's role does not greatly affect the team, then they are not valuable.

Trout - 5.61 WPA (1st in baseball)
Cabrera - 4.40 WPA (12th in baseball)

Angels 81-56 with Mike Trout (.591)
Tigers 86-73 with Miguel Cabrera (.540)

What the hell else is the kid supposed to do to help his team win?


Other than play in the AL Central

thefeckcampaign
10-02-2012, 08:56 PM
Trout - 5.61 WPA (1st in baseball)
Cabrera - 4.40 WPA (12th in baseball)

Angels 81-56 with Mike Trout (.591)
Tigers 86-73 with Miguel Cabrera (.540)

What the hell else is the kid supposed to do to help his team win?


Other than play in the AL CentralYou're not convincing me any. I know how valuable to his team he was. I told you, I do not care who wins. I am just stating what I believe the award means to me.

Buckwheat
10-02-2012, 08:58 PM
Ummm, the Angels have a better winning percentage with Trout than the Tigers do with Cabrera.

That basically pissed on your whole argument. But, of course, you aren't convinced.

thefeckcampaign
10-02-2012, 08:59 PM
Ummm, the Angels have a better winning percentage with Trout than the Tigers do with Cabrera.

That basically pissed on your whole argument. But, of course, you aren't convinced.My argument? I have no argument.

Halladay
10-02-2012, 09:01 PM
You're not convincing me any. I know how valuable to his team he was. I told you, I do not care who wins. I am just stating what I believe the award means to me.

You're contradicting yourself here though. Trouts team has more wins than Cabreras. So, if you wanna use that as the base of an argument, is Trout not more valuable to you? Cabrera is less valuable because his team lost more. This is just a weak argument altogether but do you not see my point? I find it completely irrelevant.

Buckwheat
10-02-2012, 09:06 PM
My argument? I have no argument.

We know.

dtmagnet
10-02-2012, 09:08 PM
I say that if Secretariat wins the Triple Crown then he should get the MVP.

Fly
10-02-2012, 09:14 PM
We know.

:nod:

bagwell368
10-02-2012, 09:20 PM
Amongst the traditional types, don't they value the notion of "5 tool player"?


Name BA OBP SLG wRC+ SB CS RField UZR/150

Miggy: .329 .393 .608 166 04 1 -04 -10.6

Trout: .325 .398 .564 175 48 4 +22 +13.5

So, wRC+ which is a more accurate reading of what a hitter has done irrespective of superior or inferior OBP in front of him than RBI - has Trout as better then Miggy, and that's on 22 less games then Miggy.

So, Trout has the edge in OBP, the more important stat then BA, and Trout only trails Miggy .004 in BA.

The only stat Miggy has a notable lead is SLG. However at .043 it's not a wipe out.

So, Trout destroys Miggy in base running

So, Trout destroys Miggy in fielding (either FG or BR)

Neither one has a great arm BTW.

So, Miggy is a lesser player across the board in an old fashioned notion such as "5 tool player". Problem is, what I just showed above is more revealing than the "Triple Crown".

Miggy loses in sabr stats as well.

It's plain wrong for Miggy to win the MVP, but it looks like that is what will happen.

thefeckcampaign
10-02-2012, 09:26 PM
You're contradicting yourself here though. Trouts team has more wins than Cabreras. So, if you wanna use that as the base of an argument, is Trout not more valuable to you? Cabrera is less valuable because his team lost more. This is just a weak argument altogether but do you not see my point? I find it completely irrelevant.


We know.


:nod:What are you all talking about?

I do not care who wins the MVP. In fact, your recent point for Trout is a great one. If you look back, I stated that before/same time Jeffy did. Regardless, I am not arguing for one player or the other.

All I stated was MVP does not mean MOP. That is it.

Halladay
10-02-2012, 09:27 PM
Amongst the traditional types, don't they value the notion of "5 tool player"?


Name BA OBP SLG wRC+ SB CS RField UZR/150

Miggy: .329 .393 .608 166 04 1 -04 -10.6

Trout: .325 .398 .564 175 48 4 +22 +13.5

So, wRC+ which is a more accurate reading of what a hitter has done irrespective of superior or inferior OBP in front of him than RBI - has Trout as better then Miggy, and that's on 22 less games then Miggy.

So, Trout has the edge in OBP, the more important stat then BA, and Trout only trails Miggy .004 in BA.

The only stat Miggy has a notable lead is SLG. However at .043 it's not a wipe out.

So, Trout destroys Miggy in base running

So, Trout destroys Miggy in fielding (either FG or BR)

Neither one has a great arm BTW.

So, Miggy is a lesser player across the board in an old fashioned notion such as "5 tool player". Problem is, what I just showed above is more revealing than the "Triple Crown".

Miggy loses in sabr stats as well.

It's plain wrong for Miggy to win the MVP, but it looks like that is what will happen.

Did you read the article the Tigers writer had the other day? Defense and stolen bases mean nothing! NOTHING.

Buckwheat
10-02-2012, 09:28 PM
What are you all talking about?

I do not care who wins the MVP. In fact, your recent point for Trout is a great one. If you look back, I stated that before/same time Jeffy did. Regardless, I am not arguing for one player or the other.

All I stated was MVP does not mean MOP. That is it.

And it seems like you were trying to clarify as to why Cabrera should be considered the MVP and not Trout. But your clarification is definitely flawed. Trout is the MVP, MOP, hell.. he's down with OPP. Whatever you want to call it, he's it.

xnick5757
10-02-2012, 09:29 PM
Mike Trout vs Miguel Cabrera, a comparison:

"traditional" stats

Cabrera:

692 PA
203 H
44 HR
109 R
137 RBI
4 SB

.329/.393/.608


Trout:

630 PA
179 H
30 HR
129 R
83 RBI
48 SB

.325/.398/.564



"Sabermetric" stats

Cabrera:

.417 wOBA
166 wRC+

Fld: -9.2
BsR: -2.3

fWAR: 7.1
rWAR: 6.8


Trout:

.423 wOBA
175 wRC+

Fld: 13.3
BsR: 6.8

fWAR: 10.3
rWAR: 10.7



Net Difference

PA: Cabrera +62
H: Cabrera +24
HR: Cabrera +14
RBI: Cabrera +54
SB: Trout +44

AVG: Cabrera +.004
OBP: Trout +.006
SLG: Cabrera +.044


wOBA: Trout +.006
wRC+: Trout +9

Fld: Trout +22.5
BsR: Trout +9.1

fWAR: Trout +3.2
rWAR: Trout +3.9



Summary: Cabrera has the advantage in the traditional counting stats; RBIs, HRs, etc. The RBI difference between him and Trout can be explained by their different teammates and the fact that Trout hits leadoff. Trout is the overall better batter by a smidge (higher OBP, wOBA, and wRC+). Trout's legs provide a huge boost for him as shown in his SB, Fld, and BsR numbers. Cabrera is a below average defensive third baseman and costs his team runs while Trout is an excellent defensive center fielder, as shown in the comparison of their Fld stats. Trout has also managed to put up these numbers while appearing in 22 less games than Cabrera has.

Now all the facts are on the table. Who would you vote for?

jej
10-02-2012, 09:29 PM
I would really like 5 examples of people using WAR as a be-all-end-all stat. I dont believe I have ever done it (Im not a huge WAR fan anyway in its present form, but I do use it sometimes), and I cant really recall anyone doing it, at least not often.

It seems like the traditional guys are the ones that say that. Just because it combines other stats to determine value, doesnt mean its the only thing that matters, or that you can use it on its own.

bagwell368
10-02-2012, 09:31 PM
Did you read the article the Tigers writer had the other day? Defense and stolen bases mean nothing! NOTHING.

Nope, missed that gem.

Well steals are way behind OBP and SLG in importance - so he's got a bit truth there.

D at 3B and CF are actually just about as important as each other, and are quite important overall. He should take a look at at how much value Rolen and Beltre gathered from playing 3B over the years.

Heck, let's just have the guys hit in a cage with the pitchers behind a screen, and dispense with the rest of it.

7chuck7
10-02-2012, 09:31 PM
Don't ever trust anyone who uses the word, 'metrics' regarding sports. They are dangerous people.

thefeckcampaign
10-02-2012, 09:35 PM
And it seems like you were trying to clarify as to why Cabrera should be considered the MVP and not Trout. But your clarification is definitely flawed. Trout is the MVP, MOP, hell.. he's down with OPP. Whatever you want to call it, he's it.Then here's to Trout! :clap:

Just follow the whole conversation next time.

atl_braves_fan
10-02-2012, 09:36 PM
Disagree. The award is not the Most Outstanding Player.

Of course the award should go to the most outstanding player ... what could be more valuable (i.e. create more value) than being the best player in the league?

Buckwheat
10-02-2012, 09:37 PM
Then here's to Trout! :clap:

Just follow the whole conversation next time.

http://tinypic.com/r/2j3s7xh/7

WOwolfOL
10-02-2012, 09:41 PM
I don't like the idea that a slow person basically has no chance to be an MVP anymore.

Jeffy25
10-02-2012, 09:43 PM
They can, they just have to be amazing at other things to be worthy of really earning it.

Namely, be a pitcher, or be an awesome hitter.


Many of the most deserving MVP's in baseball history were guys that just hit so awesome that it doesn't matter.

But if you are equal offensively, and behind in base running and defense? How can you be more valuable?

GasMan
10-02-2012, 09:44 PM
Ha witty. Fact: RBI's, HR's, and BA are real facts. :D

There was a level of sarcasm to my post, but there is also a level of seriousness when I say quite a few of you act like 15 year olds trying to debate.

Nobody is debating whether they are real facts, just that they (RBI and BA) don't tell us anything important. You could count the number of sunflower seeds they chew a year, put it on the back of the baseball cards, and include it in some contrived accolade (I'm calling it the Holy Trinity: most sunflower seeds chewed, most batting gloves worn, and most RBI's) and it still won't tell you if the player is any good or deserving of the MVP.

Buckwheat
10-02-2012, 09:44 PM
Joey Votto isn't very fast...

Pretty sure no one has an issue with him being the reigning MVP.

xnick5757
10-02-2012, 09:48 PM
They can, they just have to be amazing at other things to be worthy of really earning it.

Namely, be a pitcher, or be an awesome hitter.


Many of the most deserving MVP's in baseball history were guys that just hit so awesome that it doesn't matter.

But if you are equal offensively, and behind in base running and defense? How can you be more valuable?

plus trout is actually better offensively than miggy

WOwolfOL
10-02-2012, 09:55 PM
Joey Votto isn't very fast...

Pretty sure no one has an issue with him being the reigning MVP.

That's true...

xnick5757
10-02-2012, 09:56 PM
2011 miggy > 2012 miggy

Miguel Cabrera, 2011: 161 G, .344/.448/.586, 30 HR, 149 runs created, 405 outs
Miguel Cabrera, 2012: 158 G, .325/.390/.601, 43 HR, 135 runs created, 448 outs

albo23
10-02-2012, 10:02 PM
Ku je ooooo shqipe :D

Mir se vjen ne PSD :)
E po ti ku je, mire se u gjetme. I'm not sure Albanian is the official language of PSD haha :D

GasMan
10-02-2012, 10:05 PM
Love your pic WOwolfOL, Duck Soup is great but I think Animal Crackers was the best movie they made.

"Why a four year old child could understand this.
Run out and get me a four year old child,
I can't make head or tail out of it."

WOwolfOL
10-02-2012, 10:14 PM
I wish more people recognized the Marx Bros. contribution to comedy and wordplay. I love that movie also, of course. And 'The Cocoanuts', I can go on and on.

champion23
10-02-2012, 11:20 PM
I may be repeating myself from an earlier post, but once again this thread has been taken over by the saber heads. Speaking seriously, I want to know from the saber metric fans point of view why do they think every manager/player thinks Cabrera should win? I understand and get your point of view, and would even consider Trout over Cabrera for MVP. But is there something you're missing if some of the smartest minds in baseball (managers) would pick Cabrera over Trout? On another note, I think that since we've made leaps and bounds in considering the saber side for King Felix, why can't we make a huge leap and have CO MVP's? It's a shame that two players can have historic seasons like this and can't share MVP honors. It would be a huge step in modernizing the game, yet keeping old tradition if they both won.. Never will happen though..

jej
10-02-2012, 11:27 PM
I may be repeating myself from an earlier post, but once again this thread has been taken over by the saber heads. Speaking seriously, I want to know from the saber metric fans point of view why do they think every manager/player thinks Cabrera should win? I understand and get your point of view, and would even consider Trout over Cabrera for MVP. But is there something you're missing if some of the smartest minds in baseball (managers) would pick Cabrera over Trout? On another note, I think that since we've made leaps and bounds in considering the saber side for King Felix, why can't we make a huge leap and have CO MVP's? It's a shame that two players can have historic seasons like this and can't share MVP honors. It would be a huge step in modernizing the game, yet keeping old tradition if they both won.. Never will happen though..

Managers are old, and most think like you/other traditional.

champion23
10-02-2012, 11:37 PM
I'm torn.. A part of me loves the quickness and excitement of Trout. He so physically gifted he's impossible not to love as a baseball player. But a part of me loves the huge numbers that Miggy is putting up.. I know homers, RBI's, and average don't mean what they use to, but I still respect and love the huge traditional stat line.

IceHawk-181
10-02-2012, 11:55 PM
I was not aware that Baseball Managers had a unified voice in the selection of Cabrera as MVP (or that they represented the greatest minds in baseball for that matter).

This issue with the co-MVP argument is the false assumption that power numbers (Avg, HR, RBI, Wins, SVs, ERA) immediately equate to the best.

Wins-Above-Replacement is a counting stat.
At the moment Trout's 2012 is the 20th highest WAR total in Baseball history.

Imagine for a moment that Mike Trout performed as he has this entire season for 159 total games.

He would have a ~12 WAR, basically meaning only BABE RUTH would have recorded a more valuable season....ever. :speechless:


Miguel Cabrera is the third most valuable player, by WAR, in the American League.
He trails both Trout and Cano at this moment (tonight might update that to second place tie).

The Triple Crown is a statistical anomaly much like a +20 Win Season.
It has as much to do with the team around the player as it does the player themselves.

Sorry, the only argument for Cabrera winning the MVP is that he managed to keep a high average and hit 1 more home run that Josh Hamilton, with more men on-base in front of him.

Whereas Trout has dominated every aspect of the game consistently and has produced more value in 22 less games than anyone in baseball....and is Top 20 in Baseball History for Single-Season WAR.

Is it likely that Cabrera will be given the MVP because the Triple Crown is cool and Home Runs are awesome?

Probably...

Does that mean its right?

No.

Jeffy25
10-03-2012, 12:49 AM
:nod:

Jeffy25
10-03-2012, 12:53 AM
I may be repeating myself from an earlier post, but once again this thread has been taken over by the saber heads. Speaking seriously, I want to know from the saber metric fans point of view why do they think every manager/player thinks Cabrera should win? I understand and get your point of view, and would even consider Trout over Cabrera for MVP. But is there something you're missing if some of the smartest minds in baseball (managers) would pick Cabrera over Trout? On another note, I think that since we've made leaps and bounds in considering the saber side for King Felix, why can't we make a huge leap and have CO MVP's? It's a shame that two players can have historic seasons like this and can't share MVP honors. It would be a huge step in modernizing the game, yet keeping old tradition if they both won.. Never will happen though..

Most players and managers think traditionally.

Most front office types and online people think in the sabr-fashion

Most managers are not managers because they are great baseball minds. But rather because they can lead 25 baseball players with high ego's and keep them together and happy for 8 months.

Players are certainly not the greatest baseball minds, far from it. They are gifted athletes, paid to play and developed in a specific manner.


If you could get front office executives to openly speak on the topic, you would see a strong leaning to Trout for MVP. It's probably 3 to 1 (random guess) of sabr-driven front offices.

thawv
10-03-2012, 09:23 AM
At the end of the day......Vegas has Miggiy as a pretty prohibitive favorite.

bagwell368
10-03-2012, 09:30 AM
At the end of the day......Vegas has Miggiy as a pretty prohibitive favorite.

That's what will happen. It's not as ridiculous as Derek Jeter winning 4 out of 5 of his Gold Gloves. Each one of those was about 12x more ridiculous. It's about equal with Jeter winning the GG in 2009. It wasn't correct, but it wasn't a complete freaking joke either.

Yankees90.
10-03-2012, 11:08 AM
E po ti ku je, mire se u gjetme. I'm not sure Albanian is the official language of PSD haha :D

hahaha.

It's ok, just figured I'd give you a proper, albanian welcome.

Super.
10-03-2012, 01:14 PM
Stopped reading when he starting mentioning wins.

WAR is not a be all end all stat. I honestly dont know where people get that idea. The traditional guys are the ones that say that, not us.

Trout wins because of his defense, baserunning, and just as good offense. Not because of WAR

This is exactly what I was coming here to post. Bravo sir

Nomar
10-03-2012, 04:01 PM
If Cabrera just played average defense this wouldnt even be a question. I know he moved positions for the betterment of the team but he wasnt much better at 1B and really should be a DH.

jej
10-03-2012, 05:46 PM
I thought this was a great analogy from one of the guys that writes for the same site I do:

Suppose Guy A is walking down the sidewalk and he find a $20 bill lying on the ground. On the other side of the street, Guy B finds a $5 bill. If we asked, "Which is the most valuable bill?", obviously we would say the $20 bill. However, it turns out that Guy A is Bill Gates and Guy B is a homeless man. Now the previous question becomes more interesting. When we ask, "Which bill is more valuable?", we could mean one of two things. One, we could mean, "Which bill is worth the most objectively/which bill would the average person want?". Or we could ask, "Which bill helps its owner more/which bill would hurt its owner more if lost?"

By the first question, the most valuable bill is obviously the $20. But by the second, it's obviously the $5. But which question is closer to what is meant in the MVP voting criteria or the spirit of the award? I think it's the first. When I think of value, I think of objective worth - that is, the most valuable thing is that which one would rather have. Rather than compare the bill to other bills in the owner's wallet, shouldn't we instead compare the bills to each other? Obviously the homeless man is helped more than Bill Gates, but if either the homeless man or Gates were to say, "Which bill would I rather have?", both would choose the $20.

Jeffy25
10-03-2012, 06:59 PM
That's a good analogy for value.