Nov 14, 2012, 10:47 AM EDT
Before he was a household name in the political world Nate Silver wrote about baseball and used his projection skills for batting averages and ERAs instead of electoral college votes.
Now that the election is over Silver took a break from politics to analyze the American League MVP race between Miguel Cabrera and Mike Trout, and in a lengthy, well-written, numbers-driven piece for the New York Times he argues that Trout should win the award.
Silver presents most of the same numbers and makes most of the same arguments that various other sabermetrically inclined writers have been doing for the past month, but the words probably carry a little more weight coming from him and I’d be curious to find out how many readers were swayed by his article when they might otherwise have brushed aside the same ideas from someone without so much cachet.
- Carlos Gomez diagnosed with sprained wrist 3
- Michael Wacha to start Thursday for the Cardinals 4
- We’re not going to pretend that Bo Porter had no idea what he was getting into, are we? 51
- And That Happened: Monday’s scores and highlights 50
- The Cardinals have moved ahead of the Brewers for first place in the National League Central 37
- No-hitter! Four Phillies pitchers combine to blank the Braves 61
- Bo Porter fired by the Astros 56
- Settling the Score: Sunday’s results — and a reminder of what Labor Day is all about 48
- Could women play major league baseball? Sure. Right now, though, the deck is stacked against them. (221)
- Albert Pujols plays the “you never played the game!” card (104)
- Great Moments in Drug Testing and Punishment: The NFL Edition (101)
- Baseball is dying, you guys, because no one would recognize Mike Trout in a bar (76)
- And That Happened: Thursday’s scores and highlights (75)