[QUOTE=molds13;321077]And everyone is still doing worse than him![/QUOTE]
He is the best hitter in baseball. I don't think anyone will dispute that. He isn't the best and most valuable player in the AL this season though. His defense is bad, and is base running is comical at best.
I can keep going:
Slugging percentage: .608 (2nd best in career)
On base + slugging percentage: 1.002 (3rd best in career)
Total bases: 377 (best in career)
[QUOTE=molds13;321083]I actually have no idea where you're coming from on this one.
Hits: 205 (best in career)
RBI: 139 (2nd best in career)
Batting average: .330 (3rd best in career)
Home runs: 44 (best in career)[/QUOTE]
OPS is at .999. Last year his OPS was 1.033 and the year before that it was 1.042. His WAR this year was 6.9, last year it was 7.3.
Should the triple crown winner get the MVP? Probably.
But if Teddy Ballgame didn't then I guess it doesn't really matter. Besides, I think the votes might be swayed for Trout after the travesty of giving a damn pitcher the award last season.
[QUOTE=TheFeedMachi;321088][B]OPS is at .999. Last year his OPS was 1.033 and the year before that it was 1.042. [/B]His WAR this year was 6.9, last year it was 7.3.[/QUOTE]
You do know Miguel Cabrera has been in the major leagues since 2003, right? This isn't his third year in the show.
[QUOTE=TheFeedMachi;321086]He is the best hitter in baseball. I don't think anyone will dispute that. He isn't the best and most valuable player in the AL this season though. His defense is bad, and is base running is comical at best.[/QUOTE]
He moved to 3rd to allow Prince to play first. He's slow but not a poor baserunner.
I mean, who else is the MVP. Trout has a solid case but his team failed to make the playoffs. You win a triple crown you win the MVP--case closed IMO.
[QUOTE=TheFeedMachi;321088]OPS is at .999. Last year his OPS was 1.033 and the year before that it was 1.042. His WAR this year was 6.9, last year it was 7.3.[/QUOTE]
OPS matters
WAR is absolutely useless IMO. No WAR is calculated the same. And the difference between 6.9 and 7.3 is minimal at best.
[QUOTE=kvm1977;321092]He moved to 3rd to allow Prince to play first. He's slow but not a poor baserunner.
I mean, who else is the MVP. Trout has a solid case but his team failed to make the playoffs. You win a triple crown you win the MVP--case closed IMO.[/QUOTE]
The Angels failed to make the playoffs, but not because of Trout. If the Angels were in the AL Central, they would have made the playoffs and not the Tigers, and that is without accounting for the easier schedule with fewer games against Oakland and Texas and more games against the Royals, Indians, and Twins, who are all worse than the Mariners.
[QUOTE=TheFeedMachi;321095]The Angels failed to make the playoffs, but not because of Trout. If the Angels were in the AL Central, they would have made the playoffs and not the Tigers, and that is without accounting for the easier schedule with fewer games against Oakland and Texas and more games against the Royals, Indians, and Twins, who are all worse than the Mariners.[/QUOTE]
Whine, whine, whine. They made the playoffs, and the Angels didn't even with golden boy Mike Trout playing. We can do the "x would have made the playoffs if y", but when it comes down to it, that's not how this game works.
It comes down to a GM standpoint as well. Dombrowski did what he needed to do to make the Tigers better. Dipoto failed miserably.
[QUOTE=TheFeedMachi;321095]The Angels failed to make the playoffs, but not because of Trout. If the Angels were in the AL Central, they would have made the playoffs and not the Tigers, and that is without accounting for the easier schedule with fewer games against Oakland and Texas and more games against the Royals, Indians, and Twins, who are all worse than the Mariners.[/QUOTE]
I understand all of that but let's not pretend that "making the playoffs" instead something voters consider. There's exceptions to the rule (see Andre Dawson on a last place team) but Miggy has a great case.
Trout will deservedly get votes, Cano will get some votes but Miggy will most likely win it.
If I had a vote, I'd give it to Billy Beane. If pitchers are in the running, why not a division winning GM with a payroll that is about the same as Detroit's infield corners?
[QUOTE=molds13;321100]What was Mike Trout's OPR?[/QUOTE]
His OPS is lower at, .963, but that is only 1 aspect of the game. Once you factor in base running and defense, Mike Trout surpasses Miguel Cabrera. I have said already that Cabrera is the best hitter in baseball, but Mike Trout is the better all around player.
[QUOTE=TheFeedMachi;321102]His OPS is lower at, .963, but that is only 1 aspect of the game. Once you factor in base running and defense, Mike Trout surpasses Miguel Cabrera. I have said already that Cabrera is the best hitter in baseball, but Mike Trout is the better all around player.[/QUOTE]
But what about once you factor in RBIs, home runs, and batting average?
Miguel Cabrera has never been known for his baserunning. But for being a power hitter, he's not bad.
[QUOTE=Bacchus;321101]If I had a vote, I'd give it to Billy Beane.[/QUOTE]
It is amazing that the A's were was good as they were. They traded Gio Gonzalez (potential Cy Young award winner this season) for 4 prospects, and somehow improved in the immediate future.
[QUOTE=molds13;321103]
Miguel Cabrera has never been known for his baserunning. But for being a power hitter, he's not bad.[/QUOTE]
Agreed--I'm not getting this "Miggy's an awful baserunner" thing. He lacks speed but is a good baserunner. Hell, at 240 pounds he stole 4 bases in 5 attempts. That's not bad at all.
For example, as a Pirates fan (sad) I watch Andrew McCutchen constantly who has elite speed but is one of the worst baserunners I've ever seen.
[QUOTE=molds13;321103]But what about once you factor in RBIs, home runs, and batting average?
Miguel Cabrera has never been known for his baserunning. But for being a power hitter, he's not bad.[/QUOTE]
RBIs are irrelevant (as are Runs Scored) as they are a product of who is batting ahead of you (or behind you in the case of Runs Scored). Home Runs and Batting Average are both already factored into OPS. I have already said that he is the best hitter in baseball. I am not sure why you keep bringing up stats about his hitting ability. He isn't the MVP because he hasn't been the best, most valuable player this season while Mike Trout has been.
If only the general public decided...
[url=http://vevmo.com/vbimghost.php?do=displayimg&imgid=14768][img]http://vevmo.com/imagehosting/1550506d08329720b.png[/img][/url]
[QUOTE=TheFeedMachi;321110]RBIs are irrelevant (as are Runs Scored) as they are a product of who is batting ahead of you (or behind you in the case of Runs Scored). Home Runs and Batting Average are both already factored into OPS. I have already said that he is the best hitter in baseball. I am not sure why you keep bringing up stats about his hitting ability. He isn't the MVP because he hasn't been the best, most valuable player this season while Mike Trout has been.[/QUOTE]
Honestly, because the MVP typically goes to the "best hitter". It just what it is.
Trout will win ROY and Miggy will win the MVP. That's just reality
[QUOTE=molds13;321111]If only the general public decided...
[/QUOTE]
It is okay. Baseball writers will vote for Miguel Cabrera because baseball writers still think RBIs are an important stat.
[QUOTE=TheFeedMachi;321115]It is okay. Baseball writers will vote for Miguel Cabrera because baseball writers still think RBIs are an important stat.[/QUOTE]
So, what exactly are you arguing? You're basically saying that we're right--Miggy will win the MVP
[QUOTE=kvm1977;321116]So, what exactly are you arguing? You're basically saying that we're right--Miggy will win the MVP[/QUOTE]
I am saying Miggy will win the MVP, but he shouldn't.
[QUOTE=TheFeedMachi;321117]I am saying Miggy will win the MVP, but he shouldn't.[/QUOTE]
But based on how MLB has always worked he should win. I mean, you're trying to say the voters need to vote based on your criteria. They don't.
Trout had an amazing season but Miggy had a historically amazing season on a playoff team. You're just lacking an argument--sorry.
[QUOTE=TheFeedMachi;321110]RBIs are irrelevant (as are Runs Scored) as they are a product of who is batting ahead of you (or behind you in the case of Runs Scored). Home Runs and Batting Average are both already factored into OPS. I have already said that he is the best hitter in baseball. I am not sure why you keep bringing up stats about his hitting ability. He isn't the MVP because he hasn't been the best, most valuable player this season while Mike Trout has.[/QUOTE]
RBIs are about as irrelevant as WAR.
It is clear we are not going to agree on this. It's clear we both value baseball, but possibly for different reasons. It's also clear that, regardless of our opinions, the decision of who the 2012 MVP is is going to change voting procedures in the future.
Both have very good claims for MVP. But personally, I cannot fathom a Triple Crown winner not winning MVP. Look at the history for Triple Crown winners:
1967 AL MVP - Carl Yastrzemski
1966 AL MVP - Frank Robinson
1956 AL MVP - Mickey Mantle
1937 NL MVP - Joe Medwick
In 1947, DiMaggio beat Williams for unknown reasons (with a lower # of ABs, Williams had him beat on every category except stolen bases).
In 1942, Joe Gordon beat Williams for unknown reasons (with a lower # of ABs, Williams had him beat on every category except stolen bases).
In 1934, Lou Gehrig finished 5th (!!!!) even though he crushed everyone.
[QUOTE=TheFeedMachi;321115]It is okay. Baseball writers will vote for Miguel Cabrera because baseball writers still think RBIs are an important stat.[/QUOTE]
RBIs are an important stat. It's called "Hits when they actually matter"
[QUOTE=TheFeedMachi;321115]It is okay. Baseball writers will vote for Miguel Cabrera because baseball writers still think RBIs are an important stat.[/QUOTE]
Doesn't a team typically have to score and drive in runs in order ultimately win ball games?
[QUOTE=MF41590;317021]Unfortunately B, I don't think anything could be compared to the Red Sox collapse last year in September.[/QUOTE]
Maybe there wasn't when you posted your response, but there is now...
[B][url=http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/blog/danny-knobler/20467836/another-amazing-orioles-win-makes-the-rangers-stunning-collapse-complete]Another amazing Orioles win makes the Rangers' stunning collapse complete[/url][/B]
At one point the Rangers had the best record in baseball and a 13 game lead. A little over a week ago they had the best record in the AL. They then proceeded to blow a 5 game lead, losing 4 straight to close the season, choking away the division. They only scored 1 run in the play in game whilst giving up 5 to complete their epic collapse.
On the upside for the American League, at least this belly laugh inducing Ranger's choke job wasn't in the World Series for the third straight year.
Interestingly enough, had the playoffs not been expanded the O's v. Rangers game would have still taken place to decide who would go to the ALDS. Had there been an extra wild card last season, the Red Sox would have had the opportunity to play the Rays to decide who would go to the ALDS. So the idea that this collapse was not historic because they made the playoffs is only because of a technicality that only applies to this year (i.e. the extra wild card) and no previous season in baseball history (although there will be a play in games in the future.) Honestly, if you don't make the NLDS/ALDS, you didn't make the playoffs. The one game wild card is gimmicky at best because at the very heart of baseball is the idea that you need to play a series of games in order to decide which team is better.
The Rangers collapse was bad, but I wouldn't say it was anywhere close to the Red Sox collapse. I think it was more of Oakland being the best team in the AL in the 2nd half of the season. After getting swept by Arizona on June 10th, Oakland went 68-33 for the rest of the season. They were on a 122 win pace for more than half the season.
[QUOTE=TheFeedMachi;321382]The Rangers collapse was bad, but I wouldn't say it was anywhere close to the Red Sox collapse.[/quote]
It was actually just as bad if not worse. They were the back to back AL representative to the World Series with a 13 game lead and the best record in baseball. With through the roof expectations, they lost 8 of 10, culminating a historic choke last night in which the lowly O's extinguished their flame.
It doesn't matter what the A's did as the Rangers could not even beat the O's when it came down to it.
The Red Sox were a slow motion collapse. We saw the writing on the wall and slowly suffered over the course of a month. The Rangers collapsed so fast that there are probably Ranger fans out there that don't know what hit them and just last week were stocking up on chips and salsa for ALDS parties.
[I]Here is the CBS take:[/I]
[QUOTE]By now, we expect this from the Orioles.
Or we should.
We don't expect it from the Rangers. We can't.
We should be talking about the shocking team that won the American League's first-ever wild-card game.
But we can't stop thinking about the team that lost.
Sorry, Orioles, because you deserve more attention than this. Sorry, Joe Saunders and Adam Jones and Nate McLouth and the rest of you. We'll make it up to you in the days that come, because you'll still be around.
Rangers won't. Josh Hamilton won't.
And that's absolutely stunning[B]. This is the 2011 Red Sox, except it happened much faster.[/B]
[SIZE="4"][B]Ten days ago, the Rangers had the best record in the American League. Today, their season is over.[/B][/SIZE]
[/QUOTE]
[url=http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/blog/danny-knobler/20468466/as-the-amazing-orioles-move-on,-we-can't-stop-thinking-about-the-team-that-lost]As the amazing Orioles move on, we can't stop thinking about the team that lost [/url]
Don't worry, The Rangers [I]will[/I] be included in the same breath for all posterity with the 2011 Red Sox, 2011 Braves and 1978 Red Sox. There is no way to escape that mold. This collapse [I]was [/I]historic.
10 days ago, they had the best record in the AL but were also only 3 games up from the 2nd wildcard spot. I wouldn't say their collapse was on the same level as the Red Sox. They were facing 2 playoff caliber teams fighting for playoff spots. The Red Sox went 7-20 down the stretch with 13 of those games coming against teams .500 or worse and 7 of the final 11 coming against the 4th worst team in baseball.
If Oakland wins the WS, or even the AL, it won't be seen as a Rangers collapse but instead a surge by Oakland.
Pages