Skip to content

Pouliot’s postseason award picks: American League

Oct 1, 2013, 2:18 AM EDT

Mike Trout Getty Images

Evan Longoria made his case for moving up the MVP ballot with his big game Monday, but while it’s safe to say the Rays wouldn’t have reached the postseason without him, he was still no better than the AL’s third best third baseman. It was, in fact, the year of the third baseman in the AL MVP balloting, with five cracking my top 10.


1. Mike Trout
2. Miguel Cabrera
3. Chris Davis
4. Josh Donaldson
5. Robinson Cano
6. Evan Longoria
7. Jason Kipnis
8. Adrian Beltre
9. Manny Machado
10. Carlos Santana

Five months into the season, one didn’t necessarily need to rely on the postseason argument to pick Cabrera over Trout. And then September happened: a banged up Cabrera hit .278/.395/.333 with one homer and seven RBI in 72 at-bats. Trout was pretty much his usual self, hitting .281/.455/.494 with four homers and 15 RBI in 89 at-bats.

Of course, the Tigers didn’t need Cabrera in September (though home-field advantage would have been nice). And Trout’s team was an also-ran all season long. So, the MVP discussion again comes down to how one wants to define value, a subject that lost my interest years ago. Trout was the better player, so he’s the MVP as far as I’m concerned. YMMV.

After those two, I flip-flopped on Davis and Donaldson a couple of times. WAR prefers Donaldson, but Davis led the circuit in WPA, with Cabrera second, Donaldson third and Trout fourth. WPA (Win Probably Added) can be a pretty sketchy stat, but there’s no denying that Davis came up big in a number of situations this year. He ended up hitting .318/.392/.694 with runners on and .343/.433/.759 with RISP.

After the big four — and it will be a crime if Donaldson finishes lower than fourth — the rest is a jumble. Cano looks like the fifth best player; he never seems to fall any lower than that. It’s odd not having any Red Sox in the top 10 after they finished with the league’s best record, but their two best players — Shane Victorino and Jacoby Ellsbury — played in 122 and 134 games, respectively. They would dominate the 11-20 range on the ballot with those two, David Ortiz and Dustin Pedroia.

AL Cy Young

I still need to work this one out. In my mind, there are seven possibilities for the five spots on the ballot: Bartolo Colon, Yu Darvish, Felix Hernandez, Hisashi Iwakuma, Chris Sale, Anibal Sanchez and Max Scherzer. Nicely enough, those happen to be our seven ERA leaders as well. Here’s how they rank according to several stats.

ERA: Sanchez, Colon, Iwakuma, Darvish, Scherzer, Hernandez, Sale
Innings: Iwakuma, Sale/Scherzer, Darvish, Hernandez, Colon, Sanchez
rWAR: Iwakuma, Sale, Scherzer, Sanchez, Darvish, Hernandez, Colon
fWAR: Scherzer, Sanchez, Hernandez, Sale, Darvish, Iwakuma, Colon
K/9 IP: Darvish, Scherzer, Sanchez, Hernandez, Sale, Iwakuma, Colon
SOS: Hernandez, Iwakuma, Colon, Darvish/Sale, Scherzer, Sanchez

Strength of schedule being the OPS of opponents faced. That penalizes Sale a bit, since a lot of good lefties sat against him.

So, let’s try adding up all six categories; seven points for the top spot, down to one point for the bottom.

Colon: 16
Darvish: 24.5
Hernandez: 23
Iwakuma: 29
Sale: 23
Sanchez: 24
Scherzer: 28.5

Is that anything close to a perfect method? Of course not. But I don’t think there’s any one method that’s going to convince me one of these guys was clearly better than the rest.

A month ago, I thought Hernandez had been the league’s best pitcher. And he still might have been, but those three missed starts in September weigh heavily here. In the end, his own teammate, Iwakuma, pitched 15 more innings with an ERA about two-fifths of a run better. FIP still argues for Hernandez — only Sanchez in his 182 innings had a better FIP — but the fact is that Iwakuma pitched in front of the same defense as Hernandez and allowed five fewer runs while making two additional starts.

Sale was terrific and, unlike Scherzer and Sanchez, he actually had to face the Tigrrs, going 3-1 with a 1.83 ERA in five starts against them. But then he made only 30 starts altogether, and he gave up more earned runs and unearned runs than anyone else here.

Darvish should probably get bonus points for leading the league in strikeouts by a whopping 37 over Scherzer. But he also issued the most walks and gave up the most homers of the group.

Sanchez had the quality, but not the quantity.

Colon finished second in ERA and tied for the league lead with three shutouts, but he was helped by pitching in Oakland and he got to make five of his 30 starts against the Astros.

It seems like it really is Iwakuma and Scherzer WARring it out for the top spot. Iwakuma had the tougher assignment of the two, getting the more difficult schedule and pitching for a poor team. Scherzer definitely had run support on his side.

But Scherzer does have 55 strikeouts on Iwakuma, and while there was plenty of luck involved in his 21-3 record, there wasn’t any in his 2.90 ERA. FIP puts him at 2.74, compared to 3.44 for Iwakuma. If I had to pick either to start a game for my team, I’d take Scherzer and his strikeouts. I’m still not certain he’s been the better pitcher, but I haven’t found a good reason to rank anyone over him.

1. Max Scherzer
2. Hisashi Iwakuma
3. Yu Darvish
4. Felix Hernandez
5. Chris Sale

AL Rookie of the Year

1. Jose Iglesias
2. Wil Myers
3. Chris Archer
4. Martin Perez
5. David Lough

Iglesias versus Myers comes down to how one rates Iglesias’ glove. The defensive numbers at both Baseball-Reference and Fangraphs weren’t overly charitable. I view him as an elite defender, and that propels him over Myers in my picks. Obviously, he was a nice surprise offensively as well, finishing up at .303/.349/.386 in 350 at-bats. Myers hit .293/.354/.478 in his 335 at-bats.

NL picks

  1. papacrick - Oct 1, 2013 at 2:37 AM

    Good picks indeed. It’s hard to argue with your logic. I can’t remember the last time the CY had so many legit contenders

  2. jre80 - Oct 1, 2013 at 2:41 AM

    People actually picking Trout over Miggy again this year??? Absurd

    • cohnjusack - Oct 1, 2013 at 3:13 AM


      Cabrera, 148 games, 103 runs, 26 doubles, 1 triple 44 HR, 137 RBI, .348/.442/.636, 3 stolen bases, slow guy, very bad defense

      Trout: 157 games, 109 runs, 39 doubles, 9 triples, 27 HR, 97 RBI, .323/.432/.557, 33 stolen bases, great baserunner, good defender

      Sorry, how is that choice absurd?

      Look at it another way.

      Cabrera was better at: Hitting home runs, hitting for average, getting on base
      Trout was batter at: defense, base running, hitting doubles, hitting triples, fielding

      So, you have a great hitter, and another who is almost as great of a hitter, but a much better defender and base runner. Again I ask, how is it absurd to say Trout is better?

      • blacksables - Oct 1, 2013 at 7:03 AM

        It’s the Most ‘Valuable’ Player.

        Not the Most ‘Best’ Player.

        See, MVP is not the same as MBP. Not even close.

      • dondada10 - Oct 1, 2013 at 7:20 AM

        Most best? Well, that’s superlative.

      • paperlions - Oct 1, 2013 at 7:40 AM

        As soon as someone can come up with a legitimate argument for how “best” does not equal “most valuable”, I’ll listen…so far it is just a bunch of arm waving and justification while willfully ignoring what the word value actually means.

        To use the common analogy, suppose two people are interested in bidding on an item at an auction. One person has a $50 bill, and five ones; the other has two twenties and 3 tens. Consequently, person two wins the auction. Which of the bills is most valuable?

        Giving credit to a player for the quality of his team mates for an individual award is some combination of stupidity and disingenuity.

      • Francisco (FC) - Oct 1, 2013 at 8:11 AM

        The most valuable bill is the the second ten dollar bill. It had the Will to Win!

      • Jeremy T - Oct 1, 2013 at 10:54 AM

        Posnanski relayed a Bill James argument a few days ago that compared it to the Ace of Spades vs the Seven of Diamonds. There might be situations where the 7 wins the hand for you, but in and of themselves, the ace is always the more valuable card.

      • pbastille - Oct 1, 2013 at 11:26 AM

        I thought it was “Most Bestest”

      • moogro - Oct 1, 2013 at 2:20 PM

        Unfortunately, the MVP memo states “valuable to the team,” not best player. So we’re stuck on controversy-land forever, probably the way the voting writers prefer.

      • Jeremy T - Oct 1, 2013 at 3:56 PM

        It says “valuable to the team”, but then it clarifies “that is, strength of offense and defense”. Sounds pretty straightforward to me.

  3. jre80 - Oct 1, 2013 at 4:37 AM

    Cabrera fielding pct was .958 to Trout .990. Hardly terrible. Hasn’t cost Detroit many games. Trout definitely runner up MVP. Cabrera is the best hitter in the majors and not killing his team defensively. Didn’t know u had to be a gold glove winner to be MVP

    • cohnjusack - Oct 1, 2013 at 4:50 AM

      Yes, because fielding percentage is how we best gauge defensive value…

      Cabrera is the best hitter in the majors, yes. Trout is among the best hitters in the majors. Trout is also better at fielding by a lot. He is also better at baserunning by a lot. These things help close the gap on hitting.

      • quintjs - Oct 1, 2013 at 6:29 AM

        So the Tigers have brought in Iglesias to SS. A move I am guess probably wouldn’t have been made without Cabrera at third for 2 reasons. Wouldn’t need a great SS if Cabrera was average, and couldn’t stomach Iglesias hitting if Cabrera was an average hitter.

        So Cabrera does all the hitting from the left side of the infield, Iglesias all the fielding – does that mean Cabrera’s totals get halved?

      • quintjs - Oct 1, 2013 at 6:35 AM

        Sorry should make that clear – the point follows on from above post – if you have to make entire roster decisions based on other players – doesn’t that diminish your value somewhat?

        If both Cabrera and Trout got wrist injuries during a playoff series what would happen? Cabrera would go on the DL, Trout might, but he could also stay on the Roster as a pinch runner – another component of value has to be versatility?

        Cabrera is a great great player, but Trout is simply more valuable as he brings such a unique skillset to the park each day – he is a great player at everything he does. Cabrera is the game’s best hitter, but that is all he brings.

      • philliesblow - Oct 1, 2013 at 7:56 AM

        The Tigers acquiring Iglesias was less a response to Cabrera’s defensive limitations as it was a response to the impending suspension of Jhonny Peralta for this season and Peralta’s upcoming free agency after the season. Iglesias is a superior glove, but also a budget friendly contract for a few years.

    • cohnjusack - Oct 1, 2013 at 4:57 AM

      Fun fact, did you know Michael Young was just as good of a fielder as Mark Belanger? It’s true! They have an identical .9767 fielding percentage at shortstop in their careers! Jre80 says that fielding percentage is a good statistic to cite for defensive value and who am I to question him.

      And, as Cardinals fans, it sure is no surprise to see that David Eckstein is just as good as Ozzie Smith at shortstop. Man, does fielding percentage do an amazing job of evaluating fielding performance or what!

      • yahmule - Oct 1, 2013 at 10:01 AM

        Garry Maddox played 1687 games in the outfield and he made 78 errors.
        Brian Downing played 777 games in the outfield and he made seven errors.

  4. jre80 - Oct 1, 2013 at 6:19 AM

    You got way too much time on your hands my friend with those insights. Cabrera was in running for triple crown for 2nd yr in a row!! Until the underachieving angels start winning, Trout needs to get used to MVP runner ups while Miggy puts up these kinda #’s.

    • paperlions - Oct 1, 2013 at 7:46 AM

      …because base running and defense don’t matter?

      • moogro - Oct 1, 2013 at 2:23 PM

        They don’t matter somehow because they weren’t printed in box score of the paper for over a hundred years.

    • zzalapski - Oct 1, 2013 at 9:26 AM

      So when people offer an argument that goes beyond team performance and — *giggle* — fielding percentage, they have “way too much time on [their] hands”? Nice.

      Another way to say it could be that your argument lacks substance, and should be regarded as flimsy and superficial.

      • normcash - Oct 1, 2013 at 1:19 PM

        No, zzalapski, because most of the sabremetric arguments consist of a series of
        bald assumptions piled on top of one another divided—or sometimes multiplied—
        by pseudo algorithms…Honestly, reading this stuff is like watching scenes from
        The Big Bang Theory….nerds playing with themselves…like the show, it’s
        pretty funny…

      • churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged - Oct 1, 2013 at 1:43 PM

        No, zzalapski, because most of the sabremetric arguments consist of a series of
        bald assumptions piled on top of one another divided

        [citation needed]

      • normcash - Oct 1, 2013 at 2:10 PM

        Citation needed? OK, fine…I cite every comment made on this site by a sabremetric fan…

    • deaninajijic - Oct 1, 2013 at 7:00 PM

      Where would the Tigers be without Miggy, probably 2nd place. Where would the Angels be without Trout, probably behind the Astros for gods sake. Miggy’s .958 fielding is not great especially for a guy who doesn’t get to a lot of balls, guys like Machado etc get to. Trout is a damn good outfielder with an excellent arm. All I’m saying is it’s real friggin close, not a runaway in VALUE as you seem to think!

  5. grumpyoleman - Oct 1, 2013 at 6:52 AM

    You guys all act like every ball hit to Miggy gets past him and he can’t make a throw to first. He ain’t no brooks Robinson but the big fella who should be at first base makes plenty of plays at third if you ever bother to watch a game instead if spewing crap you read over and over

    • paperlions - Oct 1, 2013 at 7:50 AM

      Not only do we watch games, but the people that calculate advanced defensive metrics watch every play of every game…and those people that watch every play of every game (and the data derived from that activity) show that Cabrera is a statue at 3B. Every time someone sends me a clip of Cabrera making a “diving play”, his feet never move and he catches the ball about waist high while falling….while nice that he made the play, those are balls that average 3B turn into outs without leaving their feet or making the play look hard.

      The amazing thing here is that the same people that ignore base running and defense when discussing value are the same people that always decry a failure by modern players to “play the game the right way” and “give 100%” and “do the little things to help teams win”….so those things have value (e.g. base running, defense) apparently only have value depending on the narrative of the day.

      • historiophiliac - Oct 1, 2013 at 8:02 AM

        How many Tigers games (or “Tigrrs” per Matthew — which I kinda like) have you watched this year?

      • yahmule - Oct 1, 2013 at 10:06 AM

        Base running and defense have value up until someone tries to actually quantify or measure them beyond stolen bases and Gold Gloves. Then people seem to freak out.

      • paperlions - Oct 1, 2013 at 10:09 AM

        Obviously the best measure of defensive value is EBT-OTISHMTOGP (eye ball test – one time I saw him make this one great play)….I mean, people that sit and watch video of every baseball play to measure defense can’t possible top that.

      • detroitr1 - Oct 1, 2013 at 10:14 AM

        Invent a narrative (or fallacy)—>

        “…are the same people that always decry a failure by modern players to “play the game the right way” and “give 100%” and “do the little things to help teams win”….

        and then decry about people who create narratives–>

        “apparently only have value depending on the narrative of the day.”

      • grumpyoleman - Oct 1, 2013 at 1:22 PM

        you should judge dancing with the stars, they complain about feer leaving the ground all of the time too.

  6. jarathen - Oct 1, 2013 at 8:23 AM

    Trout had a great May-Sep. If his April had been better I could see the argument being that Cabrera doesn’t deserve it, but I understand how these thing work, and a 2 or 3 finish in MVP is something Mike Trout has probably already accepted. Cabrera had a great year at the plate and while the Angels would have been putrid without Trout (and I mean putrid), I wonder if the Tigers would have fallen behind in the Central and WC without Miggy.

    They’re all great players, of course, and Mike Trout plays for my favorite team, but you can’t complain too much. The MVP voters don’t care how complete a package a player provides. They see a .340 BA and 44 dingers and they stop it right there.

  7. grumpyoleman - Oct 1, 2013 at 8:25 AM

    Who is discounting speed and defense? Also it could be argued that Miggy shows his value by agreeing to move over to third so the team could sign prince.

    • jarathen - Oct 1, 2013 at 11:09 AM

      He agreed to move over to a position where he is no longer qualified and Jim Leyland supported it.

      Either Fielder or Cabrera should be at DH every single night. Cabrera’s bWAR this year would be 9.0 instead of 7.6 if he had stayed OFF the field. So his ego may be in check, but he doesn’t belong at the hot corner.

      • grumpyoleman - Oct 1, 2013 at 11:53 AM

        so you would suggest taking a .300 hitter like vmart out of the lineup

  8. nbjays - Oct 1, 2013 at 8:31 AM

    I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: Mike Trout is the best 5-tool player in the game today, while Miguel Cabrera is hands-down the best 2-tool player. It’s not like Cabrera put the Tigers on his back and carried them to the postseason like last year. He had a horrible September and they still cruised to the AL Central title, although a 10-0 finish by Cleveland made it close. But Miggy is not the only reason for their team success.

    Before people say that when Miggy struggles, so does the team, and when he rakes, so do the Tigers, consider the following:

    In September, clearly his worst month, Miggy struggled, only hitting .278 with 1 HR and 7 RBI and an OPS of .729 and the Tigers only went 13-13 for a .500 record.

    Whereas in May, far and away his best month all year, Cabrera clearly raked, hitting 12 HR, 33 RBI, .379/.455./.767 for an OPS of 1.222. And his team? 14-14 for a .500 record.

    When your team has an identical record during your worst month and your best month, you are not necessarily the only reason for their success (or lack thereof) – the definition of MVP for those who think being on a winning team matters.

  9. grumpyoleman - Oct 1, 2013 at 8:51 AM

    So using Nbs logic trouts value was helping his team play under .500 ball for the year

    • nbjays - Oct 1, 2013 at 1:28 PM

      I was merely debunking the myth that Miggy is the sole reason for the Tigers’ success (or failure) and that because his team is going to the playoffs, he is the reason why and should be the MVP because of it. But you go ahead and read into it what you will.

      • grumpyoleman - Oct 1, 2013 at 3:03 PM

        Actually most people know the Tigers have a very good pitching staff. They also know without Miggy they also lose a lot of 2-1 type of games.

    • DJ MC - Oct 1, 2013 at 6:03 PM

      More like he was helping his team play ABOVE .440 ball, since if you replace him with an average player they probably end up much closer to 70 wins than 80.

  10. scoutsaysweitersisabust - Oct 1, 2013 at 8:59 AM

    I said it yesterday, and I’ll say it again. Davis and Cabrera lead Trout in almost every category last year, and I’ll never understand the obsession with him. It’s almost as if people are still pissed about last year and are unfairly inflating him this year in an attempt to “make up” for past transgressions.

    Yes, Trout is speedier and has better defense than Davis and Miggy. (Davis actually outperformed Trout in many defensive categories by the way.) But their offense FAR out-surpassed Trout this year. And I’m sorry, WAR is nice and all, but it’s not the be-all end-all stat people seem to want to think it is.

    Yes I place value on speed and defense. But I place MORE value on producing runs. It’s about degrees here, and Trout simply did not do enough to surpass Davis and Miggy in my opinion.

    • churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged - Oct 1, 2013 at 9:10 AM

      But their offense FAR out-surpassed Trout this year.

      Cabrera – .455
      Trout – .423
      Davis – .421

      But see that’s unadjusted, and Trout plays in a much tougher hitting environment than the other two, so let’s factor that in:

      Cabrera – .192
      Trout – 176
      Davis – 167

      And I’m sorry, WAR is nice and all, but it’s not the be-all end-all stat people seem to want to think it is.

      No one says it’s the be-all end-all, but keep pushing that argument. It’s not a lie if you believe it, right?

      • scoutsaysweitersisabust - Oct 1, 2013 at 9:16 AM

        Trout faced the Mariners and Astros most of the season in what is by far the WORST division in baseball and you are going to tell me he was in a tougher hitting environment?

      • zzalapski - Oct 1, 2013 at 9:42 AM

        Angel Stadium has a park factor of .968, while Comerica Park is much more hitter-friendly with a park factor of 1.139.

        As for their division opponents:

        AL West [park factor, home WHIP]
        Astros: 1.074, 1.51
        Mariners: .991, 1.28
        Rangers: .985, 1.28
        A’s: .889, 1.19

        AL Central [park factor, home WHIP]
        White Sox: .998, 1.29
        Twins: 1.020, 1.37
        Royals: 1.082, 1.29
        Indians: .933, 1.28

        As bad as the Astros’s pitching was, the Twins’ was pretty terrible too, and the A’s home WHIP was the second-best in the AL. Coupled with how Cabrera hits more often in hitter-friendly parks, I think one can say that Trout was indeed in a tougher hitting environment.

      • vintage1496 - Oct 1, 2013 at 9:55 AM

        I think by “environment,” he means the stadium, not the opponent.

      • vintage1496 - Oct 1, 2013 at 9:56 AM

        Wow. ZZ’s post was infinitely better than mine.

      • scoutsaysweitersisabust - Oct 1, 2013 at 12:42 PM

        Relating park factor to hitting is almost almost as terrible as relating wins to pitching. Park Factor relies too heavily on the rest of the lineup, which in the Angel’s case dramatically underperformed last year. Take a look at Camden Yards. It’s Park Factor fluctuates year to year, dependant on the quality of the Orioles lineup this year. This year people jumped up and down and hollered that it’s was a hitter’s park. Yet, two years ago, when the Orioles were not hitting so many home runs, people weren’t saying anything. Park Factor is a flawed statistic and should be taken with a grain of salt.
        I also have a major problem with a statistic where in the description of how they arrived at the statistic the following sentence is uttered: ” These weights seem arbitrary, but maybe he had a good study to base them on.”

      • scoutsaysweitersisabust - Oct 1, 2013 at 12:48 PM

        In addition, if Park Factor is so important, than why is Trout’s home/away splits almost identical? While on the road, Trout hit for 7 points higher average, 1 more homerun, 37 more ab, 25 ops, 2 less walks, 9 more doubles, 19 more rbi, 14 less on base.

        So just from that alone, I would say Anaheim seems to be slightly less doubles friendly. That’s about it.

      • churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged - Oct 1, 2013 at 1:46 PM

        Take a look at Camden Yards. It’s Park Factor fluctuates year to year, dependant on the quality of the Orioles lineup this year.

        It also takes into account the opposing team. And things like hot warm/cold the seasons are, was it a wet or dry year, humid or not factor into the differences in parks. Why is this a bad thing?

        And even if you wanted to remove park factors, I posted wOBA which doesn’t take them into account, and I still showed that Trout > Davis.

    • Reflex - Oct 1, 2013 at 12:17 PM

      Question: Why do you insist on comparing Trout to a hypothetical Davis/Cabrera combined player? Neither of those guys would be ‘better’ in everything than a combined Davis/Trout or Cabrera/Trout either. To be most valuable does not mean “leads in every single stat” it means that on balance they produced the most value in the league.

      I find it odd that you picked two other players and combined their stats for a hypothetical ‘best of’ player using Cabrera’s stats where convenient and Davis’ where convenient. Of course Trout isn’t better than that. Neither would either of the other two guys if you changed the mix.

      Also, preventing a run is every bit as valuable as producing a run. Which is why defense matters.

      • scoutsaysweitersisabust - Oct 1, 2013 at 12:34 PM

        *sigh* This is the problem with most people Pro-Trout. People keep putting words into my mouth, instead of discussing the actual argument. I NEVER said I was combining Davis and Cabrera. And I didn’t exactly pick those two players out of a hat. I said BOTH of them INDIVIDUALLY had a better year than Trout.

        And again. I never said defense doesn’t matter. I said both Davis and Cabrera’s offense far out-surpassed Trout’s defense. Trout’s defense, which, was not so much better than Davis and Cabrera as people would like to have you believe.

      • grumpyoleman - Oct 1, 2013 at 1:16 PM

        Most teams have good outfileders to chase down balls to prevent runs, what’s your point.

  11. cocheese000 - Oct 1, 2013 at 9:29 AM

    If Davis had a better September and the orioles made the playoffs, he would have won MVP.

    • zzalapski - Oct 1, 2013 at 9:46 AM

      That’s like saying if Aaron Hernandez had the sense God gave a rabbit, he wouldn’t be in deep shit for being a wannabe gangsta.

      • yahmule - Oct 1, 2013 at 10:17 AM

        Was he a wannabe gangster? Seems to me anyone with that many bodies on him qualifies as an authentic gangster.

      • zzalapski - Oct 1, 2013 at 10:24 AM

        Authentic gangsters don’t dabble in professional sports five months out of the year. It’s a 24/7/365 gig, man.

  12. yahmule - Oct 1, 2013 at 10:16 AM

    The reason I love Mike Trout so much is that he cares about who wins the AL MVP way less than most of his fans. I think Trout understands that he and Cabrera are both great players having great seasons. He has always been somewhat deferential to veterans, so I can see him accepting Cabrera getting the benefit of the doubt in a close race. I also think he knows there is plenty of hardware in his future.

    If I have one regret about this season, it’s that I didn’t watch Mike Trout play more baseball. I won’t complain if Cabrera wins MVP, but I hope it goes to Trout.

  13. littlesexyfire - Oct 1, 2013 at 12:27 PM

    I have to say that the RoY was well called, but whats with the MVP voting? Who was really most valuable? Why isn’t the actual MVP being mentioned? Lets face it, without Iglesias, the Tigers would have had to play with only 8 guys on the field. He basically saved their season! And he hit better than half the team in the process. But even more importantly: He saved *two* playoff teams seasons. People seem to forget that Stephen Drew and Wil Middlebrooks both missed significant time for the Red Sox. And who stepped up? Why yes, Iglesias. And with panache, flair and style to boot!

    Then, after the Red Sox recovered, Iglesias being the magnanimous guy he is, noticed the Tigers with a serious situation, an impending suspension and a hole at short as a result. Now does he stick with the team that he knows is going to the playoffs, or does he assume all the risk and engineer a trade to where he is most needed? Of course the latter. And then he almost single-handedly saves their season!

    Come on, why stop with RoY? If Ichiro can slap hit his way to a RoY and MVP in his first season, surely Jose deserves the same. How many players can claim to have saved not one, but two teams playoff hopes in a single season?

  14. xjokerz - Oct 1, 2013 at 1:59 PM

    Of course nbc garbage would pick a non playoff team like trout bc he can steal bases over the MVP and would be triple crown winner if he stayed healthy miggy.

    Matt isa joke and a well known tigers hater

    MVP- miggy
    Al cy- scherZer
    Al Roy- Iglesias

    All tigers baby

    • Reflex - Oct 1, 2013 at 3:13 PM

      AL MVP = Trout
      AL Cy = Iwakurma or Darvish
      AL RoY = Archer

      Yeah the Tigers are good, but I don’t think any of their players are the best picks for the hardware. Even in the Cy contest I think Sanchez is better than Scherzer, although its close.

      • historiophiliac - Oct 1, 2013 at 4:38 PM

        Hey! >:(

  15. pitt4059 - Oct 1, 2013 at 3:46 PM

    Awards like these are for losers. The only thing that matters is who wins the World Series in the end. And that of course will be the Red Sox.

  16. grumpyoleman - Oct 1, 2013 at 6:48 PM

    I bet all those guys sitting watching every defensive play can tell exactly how every ball comes off the bat

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. C. Correa (2550)
  2. G. Stanton (2498)
  3. H. Ramirez (2483)
  4. G. Springer (2480)
  5. B. Crawford (2298)
  1. M. Teixeira (2280)
  2. H. Pence (2206)
  3. J. Baez (2203)
  4. J. Hamilton (2160)
  5. Y. Puig (2104)