Comments on: Mike Trout, baseball’s best player, is denied MVP award

By: cpkerr

cpkerr — Tue, 20 Nov 2012 02:06:36 +0000

It’s not insane; it’s the truth.

From Buster Olney’s blog: “I haven’t kept notes each time I’ve talked with players, managers and front-office types in the past month about the American League Most Valuable Player vote, and I can’t tell you exactly how many have addressed the question of whom they would pick, Miguel Cabrera or Mike Trout. Probably about 50.

“But the conversations have been so strikingly similar that I can say, for sure, that all but a very small handful of uniformed personnel — by small handful, I mean two — have told me they would pick Cabrera. And all but a very small handful of front-office types — as in, one — have told me they would pick Trout.”

“A response from an executive, which is typical of many responses I’ve heard: ‘Why is there even a conversation?’ In other words, this executive views Trout as so much the superior player overall — with his peerless baserunning, extraordinary defense and exceptional offensive skills — that he doesn’t view them as close.

“‘We’re seeing a combination of talents we’ve never seen before,’ said one highly ranked NL official. ‘He does everything. He’s among the best hitters in the game right now; he is the best baserunner; and he might be the best defender [in the outfield]. It’s actually hard to put into words how good he is.’

“The advanced metrics do it for them. Some executives don’t use WAR, viewing it as something of a junk stat, but virtually every team uses some form of metrics to provide a summary of a player’s overall value, and Trout has dominated those, in that way that Tiger Woods once dominated in golf.

“Those advanced metrics are used now more than ever to pick players, to build teams, to structure decisions made in games every day. The Cabrera-Trout debate is falling along the lines of red states and blue states, and it is just the latest clue about how much players, coaches and managers remain skeptical about the numbers that are crunched all around them.”

By: kev86

kev86 — Tue, 20 Nov 2012 00:05:28 +0000

I would have voted for Miggy because he won the triple crown and it wouldn’t have taken me long to vote ( I’m not a Tigers fan or an AL fan).

By: marshallnbrown

marshallnbrown — Mon, 19 Nov 2012 23:13:54 +0000

For crying out loud. The award is for Most VALUABLE Player, not BEST PLAYER. Sabremetrics (sp?) will never be able to determine the value of a player to his team, the league or the game. It’s a very subjective issue, not statistical. Period. If you want to reward the best player, I also suggest you make it for a three year average, not one year, although Mr. Trout is a very impressive player… so far.

By: temporarilyexiled

temporarilyexiled — Sat, 17 Nov 2012 17:55:00 +0000

If your beef is with the BBWAA, fine. Unfortunately, they’ve turned down all of my requests to join them. Yes, that was sarcasm. Save your shock and dismay. I really don’t know how the writers would vote, but I do know that the MVP award has always rubbed me the wrong way. It’s not unprecedented to have major sports that have both an MVP and a Best Player award. Sometimes, they’re the same person. Sometimes, they’re not. Doesn’t seem so awkward to me.

By: temporarilyexiled

temporarilyexiled — Sat, 17 Nov 2012 17:51:02 +0000

You mean like taking themselves too seriously, placing statistical analysis ahead of common sense, and forming conclusions that make more sense in the realm of fantasy baseball than art and science of putting together a winner? Guilty as charged. Yes, I ascribe the above traits to many, but not all sabremetricians. And, while I’m not a sabermetrician, I’m only a non-sabremetrician if the definition of that turns out to be someone who’s amused by the swing of the pendulum. Just because I criticize statheads (just using this word guarantees plenty of thumbs down and avoidance of anything I have to say) doesn’t mean I think the new generation of statistics isn’t a really cool addition to our discussions. When folks from both sides and the middle can truly come together and quantify a player’s value to his team’s chances of winning the World Series, then all of this much ado about nothing will calm down. Until then, we’re left with the fact that it’s just as hard to be truly accurate in how we value various statistics as it is to be truly accurate in the conclusions drawn by our eyes.

By: xjokerz

xjokerz — Sat, 17 Nov 2012 08:39:56 +0000

Still front page on MLB headlines ? You make me sick Matthew

By: pricejustin24

pricejustin24 — Sat, 17 Nov 2012 08:10:23 +0000

I wish Canadians would just stop watching baseball. Die like the expos you losers and definitely stop writing about Americas pastime.

By: Greg

Greg — Sat, 17 Nov 2012 04:40:30 +0000

No matter what the “old school” numbers say or the “sabermetrics” numbers say or the “guys who play and manage the game” say, there is no way to prove one way of the other who the MVP is. It is simply an argument of opinion that can never be solved definitively. In Michigan, Tiger fans are about 95 percent sure Cabrera is the MVP. They don’t base it on anything other than “He won the Triple Crown, they went to the playoffs, and I am a Tigers fan.” They will never be convinced otherwise and can’t be, because there is no real answer to this debate. It cannot be solved by science nor by “the eyeball test.” Both are valuable to their teams. Both teams are probably not as good without their guy, but determining who was really most valuable is really just a matter of opinion and will never be proven. They were both great. That’s good enough for me.

By: beelza

beelza — Sat, 17 Nov 2012 03:10:50 +0000

Brilliant and creative contribution, you maricone mother fucker.

By: drewsylvania

drewsylvania — Fri, 16 Nov 2012 23:13:52 +0000

The problem with non-sabremetricians is that they too often try to ascribe traits to sabremetricians that don’t exist.

By: adm272012

adm272012 — Fri, 16 Nov 2012 22:11:00 +0000

I just want to know do half of the people on this site even watch baseball or do they just form there opinions from studying advanced stats on there computers in there moms basement?

By: drewsylvania

drewsylvania — Fri, 16 Nov 2012 22:07:38 +0000

There’s no beating Detroit homers, it seems.

By: drewsylvania

drewsylvania — Fri, 16 Nov 2012 22:07:01 +0000

Yes. But thanks for attempting a bet that can’t possibly be proven.

By: drewsylvania

drewsylvania — Fri, 16 Nov 2012 22:06:19 +0000

Total bullshit from start to finish.

By: drewsylvania

drewsylvania — Fri, 16 Nov 2012 22:04:16 +0000

Playoffs are supposed to mean nothing to the MVP race…

By: drewsylvania

drewsylvania — Fri, 16 Nov 2012 22:03:39 +0000

This is because the new numbers are MORE ACCURATE.

It’s like we’re speaking to children.

By: drewsylvania

drewsylvania — Fri, 16 Nov 2012 22:02:48 +0000

Don’t become a lawyer.

By: drewsylvania

drewsylvania — Fri, 16 Nov 2012 22:01:54 +0000

No?

By: drewsylvania

drewsylvania — Fri, 16 Nov 2012 22:00:48 +0000

Yeah dWAR is fairly useless. But the eyeball test can tell you that Trout is a MUCH better fielder than Miggy.

By: weaselpuppy

weaselpuppy — Fri, 16 Nov 2012 21:52:11 +0000

Until the defensive and baserunning sides of WAR get fixed, it’s a fatally flawed measurement. How is it broken? Well of the hundreds of dWAR absurdities that anyone can find without too much looking…

how about Mike Trout’s 130 games 2012 dWAR is equivalent to the entire freaking career dWAR of Al Kaline, generally considered one of the top 3-5 defensive RF in history….

horrible metric…

By: grumpyoleman

grumpyoleman — Fri, 16 Nov 2012 21:20:27 +0000

yet another subjective point being awarded that is up to interpretation. What was the +/- factor for Miggie downing a burrito special plate in the Mexicantown section of Detroit while Trout was dining on fish tacos before games.

By: drewsylvania

drewsylvania — Fri, 16 Nov 2012 20:42:13 +0000

Wrong on so many levels. But if the preceding comments didn’t sway you, why should I bother making the attempt.

By: drewsylvania

drewsylvania — Fri, 16 Nov 2012 20:41:32 +0000

And Cabreraheads are ignorant homers. Point being?

By: drpompanoduke

drpompanoduke — Fri, 16 Nov 2012 20:22:00 +0000

And trout’s numbers were on par with the CF from the pirates who was the MVP of NL. NOT. Sore loser these nerds

By: lionsplayoffs

lionsplayoffs — Fri, 16 Nov 2012 19:19:06 +0000

One thing I’ve learned for sure in this whole debate. Troutheads are sore losers.

By: kicksave1980

kicksave1980 — Fri, 16 Nov 2012 19:13:06 +0000

I hate sabermetrics and I’m a straight ticket Democrat…so don’t make assumptions.

By: drewsylvania

drewsylvania — Fri, 16 Nov 2012 18:57:33 +0000

You must have voted for Romney. Statistics worked for politics, and they work here.

Do you know anything about sabremetrics?

By: johndobelwrites

johndobelwrites — Fri, 16 Nov 2012 18:28:29 +0000

want to make a bet on that? Your supposition is insane. You really think that all baseball GM’s would take a rookie over Miggy?

By: johndobelwrites

johndobelwrites — Fri, 16 Nov 2012 18:25:09 +0000

Argument holds plenty of water….The baseball players and coaches said Cabrera was the best this year. As to the person who wrote that baseball GM’s would rather take Trout over Cabrera is a lunatic. I watch a lot of baseball. Saw most of the Tiger games this year and a lot of Angel games living in So Cal. Trout has a tremendous career ahead of him but Miggy was the most feared hitter in baseball this year. In addition he played a decent 3rd Base. He is not Brooks Robinson but he has adequate range and a great arm. When the day comes that Sabremetrics chooses who wins awards like MVP and Cy Young will be the day baseball is ruined.

By: cur68

cur68 — Fri, 16 Nov 2012 18:09:42 +0000

Nate Silver did just this. Check it out.