2012 MLB Thread

[tower912]

I was getting ready to bust out...."WAR, huh, good God, what is it good for?..Absolutely nothing say it again...."    Triple crown trumped a lot as did stats over the last 5 weeks.    Trout will get his...helluva player.

[ChicosBailBonds]

I was getting ready to bust out...."WAR, huh, good God, what is it good for?..Absolutely nothing say it again...."    Triple crown trumped a lot as did stats over the last 5 weeks.    Trout will get his...helluva player.

Hopefully, but no guarantees in life.  Marino still looking for his Super Bowl ring.

[ChuckyChip]

Yup, he did.  I disagree, ESPN did as well with their experts but such is life.  I didn't understand "made the postseason" argument because the Halos had a better record than the Tigers but played in the AL's best division.  The Tigers would have finished in 4th place in the AL West, but some people put a lot of credence into that.  Again, such is life.

Trout was on another planet in June and July, but only hit .284 in August and .257 in September - either he wore down or the pitchers started to figure him out.  Cabrera was consistently excellent throughout the season.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Trout was on another planet in June and July, but only hit .284 in August and .257 in September - either he wore down or the pitchers started to figure him out.  Cabrera was consistently excellent throughout the season.

There is an award for best hitter, called Silver Slugger.

Let's also not forget down the stretch who each player had to go against.  Trout had to face mostly the AL West staffs down the stretch....Oakland #2 in AL pitching, Seattle #4, Texas #7.  The AL Central...well the worst two pitching staffs in the entire league were in the AL Central.  Different pitching staffs.  KC and Chicago were also in the bottom half at #9 and #10...so four of the 6 worst pitching staffs in the AL were in the AL Central.  That's living large on some weaker pitching.

I guess I look at it as even down the stretch, who was out there stealing bases, scoring runs at a record pace, taking away runs on defense and leading his team to a better record?  It is about all around player, not just best hitter, which Miguel clearly was this year....but it helps to know what kind of pitching they faced, the type of competition (the AL Central was not very good), the ballpark you play in (Angel stadium rated 27th while Comerica was rated 9th), etc, etc.  

http://espn.go.com/mlb/stats/parkfactor

We'll never know, but I would love to see what Trout would have done all year long playing as many games in the AL Central and playing at Comerica and vice versa what  Miguel would have done in the AL West and having to play in Anaheim or even on the west coast.  A great article by MLB a few months ago about how much harder it is to hit on the west coast because of the marine layer and such.  Albert was saying as much in a few interviews this year...balls he hit that normally flew out in St. Louis are warning track power here on the coast.

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20120617&content_id=33487892&vkey=news_la&c_id=la

I think most voters don't factor that stuff in.

[ChuckyChip]

There is an award for best hitter, called Silver Slugger.

Let's also not forget down the stretch who each player had to go against.  Trout had to face mostly the AL West staffs down the stretch....Oakland #2 in AL pitching, Seattle #4, Texas #7.  The AL Central...well the worst two pitching staffs in the entire league were in the AL Central.  Different pitching staffs.  KC and Chicago were also in the bottom half at #9 and #10...so four of the 6 worst pitching staffs in the AL were in the AL Central.  That's living large on some weaker pitching.

I don't know about that - the Angels had the highest team batting average in the American League for August and September, so either they were crushing the ball or the pitching that they were facing wasn't that great.

[CTWarrior]

Agree with Chico's that Trout deserved it, but Cabrera also a deserving recipient.  The Triple Crown is hard to overlook, but it's odd that if Josh Hamilton hit two more HRs there's a good chance that Trout may have won the MVP.  Cabrera was arguably better the last two seasons.  Guy is a great, great hitter.

[buckchuckler]

Agree with Chico's that Trout deserved it, but Cabrera also a deserving recipient.  The Triple Crown is hard to overlook, but it's odd that if Josh Hamilton hit two more HRs there's a good chance that Trout may have won the MVP.  Cabrera was arguably better the last two seasons.  Guy is a great, great hitter.

I think the correct player won the award.  Cabrera was just ridiculous.  He had an OPS over 1.000 each of the season's last 3 months.  Trout had one month all season with an OPS over 1.000.  Not only did Cabrera win the triple crown, but he had more doubles that Trout had doubles and triples combined (obviously Cabrera had 0 triples).  Cabrera also, despite being a "power hitter" and winning the triple crown, struck out 41 fewer times than Trout did. 

I was all on board for Trout winning the MVP in August, and even early September.  But Cabrera went crazy.  He propelled his team from a deficit to the playoffs.  He out did Trout in all of the most important offensive categories.  (H, HR, RBI, BA, 2B, SLG, OPS, TB -- even if you add all Trout's steals into his TB, Cabrera is still ahead).  Trout was amazing.  He was the best player in baseball through the first 5 months of the season.  But by the end, Cabrera had surpassed him. 

In my opinion, Cabrera was the best player in the league by the conclusion of the season.  The dominance of his offensive performance was just too much.

[tower912]

In 2010, Cabrera had better numbers than Hamilton, but the Rangers made the postseason and the Tigers did a second half death spiral.   Also, IIRC, no AL player has won the MVP from a non-playoff team in the last 9 years.    Finally, little known fact.    The year that Ted Williams won the triple crown but finished second (by one point) to DiMaggio, one of the NY beat writers failed to put Williams in his top 10, as he thought Ted was a jerk.  

[buckchuckler]

"Let's also not forget down the stretch who each player had to go against.  Trout had to face mostly the AL West staffs down the stretch....Oakland #2 in AL pitching, Seattle #4, Texas #7.  The AL Central...well the worst two pitching staffs in the entire league were in the AL Central.  Different pitching staffs.  KC and Chicago were also in the bottom half at #9 and #10...so four of the 6 worst pitching staffs in the AL were in the AL Central.  That's living large on some weaker pitching."



I think that is a little deceiving.  Cabrera faced the AL Central yes, which his team resides in, and made the World Series from, and they weren't the best team in that division for most of the season.  It took an epic collapse' by the White Sox to get the Tigers into the playoffs, where they then proceeded to destroy teams from "better" divisions.  

You also fail to mention that Trout faced the White Sox later in the season than the Tigers did.  The Angels also played the Royals in the last month of the season.  While the Tigers also faced 2 AL West teams in September, Anaheim and Oakland.  

You also say the Rangers are a better staff, and the White Sox a lesser staff.  Did you know there was a difference of .03 runs between their ERAs?  That doesn't seem to be a significant difference.  The White Sox were tied for 8th, and the Rangers were 7th.  

Did you know the Sox had 2 of the 5 or 6 best pitchers in the AL this season?  Sale pitched against the Tigers 3 times, and Peavy 6 times.  That is half the games the Tigers played against the Sox with Cabrera facing a better starting pitcher than anyone that Trout would have faced regularly from the AL West, except Felix (5 times-- he was basically statistically equal to Sale).  Looking at the team numbers doesn't tell the entire story.

And while Seattle has great numbers for a pitching staff, they have 1 great pitcher, and a great pitchers park.  They don't exactly have a killer staff.  Felix, Vargas, a decent pen, but Safeco is their next best pitcher. 

Over the course of an entire season. I think all this pretty much evens out.  Cabrera was better and more valuable to his team.  If Cabrera were on the Angels, they would have been a playoff team.  If he wasn't on the Tigers, they wouldn't have been.  

[jmayer1]

It's a joke that Cabrera won.

Cabrera was just a little bit better hitter than Trout (admittedly the most important phase)
Trout is a better baserunner and it's not even close.
Trout is a better defender and it's not even close.

[ChicosBailBonds]

I don't know about that - the Angels had the highest team batting average in the American League for August and September, so either they were crushing the ball or the pitching that they were facing wasn't that great.

Ironically, the teams the Angels played in September

Chicago White Sox
Detroit Tigers
Kansas City Royals

Halos record 8-1

In August, a steady diet of Indians, Tigers, White Sox, Red Sox.  That also helps the batting average.

For me, it was pretty simple.

Trout played one month less than Cabrera and put up numbers that no one in the history of baseball had ever done. NO ONE.  He played exceptional defense, exceptional base running and finished as the 2nd best hitter.  The Halos were dead in the water when he got there, 6-14..worst record in their history.  They played in the toughest division in baseball, finished with a better record than the Tigers, had to face MUCH better pitching, plays in a pitchers ballpark, etc.

Cabrera...fantastic hitter, best in the game.  Not a great defensive player, not a threat at all on the bases, faced easier pitching staffs, played in a horrible division, etc.  But, they made the playoffs and he won the triple crown.

[🏀]

You can break it down anyway you want, the problem will be Cabrera won the Triple Crown. Even though the Triple Corwn may be antiquated, the BBWAA was not going to give it Trout as soon as that happened.

I thought Trout should have won it.

However, I am awfully suspicious of him and some of the BBWAA were as well.

[MerrittsMustache]

The award is Most Valuable Player, as in the most valuable to his team.

Detroit won their division. Replace Cabrera with an average 3B and they miss the playoffs.

LAofA finished 3rd in their division. Replace Trout with an average CF and they finish 3rd in their division.

Cabrera was the MVP without a doubt.

[buckchuckler]

How is the Triple Crown antiquated?  He had the best BA, most RBI, and most HR in the league.  He was the most productive offensive player in the league, which is who typically gets the award.

Trout is much better on D, but you know what, Ozzie Smith never won an MVP.  Brooks Robinson won 1 MVP, in a great offensive season.  Defense has never been a major factor in deciding the MVP, not nearly the factor that offense is, not saying it is right, just historical.

As for the baserunning, if you add all Trout's steals into his total bases, he still comes up short of what Cabrera did. 

[🏀]

How is the Triple Crown antiquated?  He had the best BA, most RBI, and most HR in the league.  He was the most productive offensive player in the league, which is who typically gets the award.

Trout is much better on D, but you know what, Ozzie Smith never won an MVP.  Brooks Robinson won 1 MVP, in a great offensive season.  Defense has never been a major factor in deciding the MVP, not nearly the factor that offense is, not saying it is right, just historical.

As for the baserunning, if you add all Trout's steals into his total bases, he still comes up short of what Cabrera did. 

RBIs are not a good judgment of offensive production and AVG is the antiquated version of OBP or OPS.

[GGGG]

The award is Most Valuable Player, as in the most valuable to his team.

That's not what it means.  It means who has the best season.  I have never quite understood all the word-smithing over "most valuable."  It means who has the best season.  Always has.

How is the Triple Crown antiquated?  He had the best BA, most RBI, and most HR in the league.  He was the most productive offensive player in the league, which is who typically gets the award.

Because people will argue that BA isn't as important as OPS.  (Which Cabrera won anyway.)  And RBIs are too dependent on who is in front of you.

[MerrittsMustache]

That's not what it means.  It means who has the best season.  I have never quite understood all the word-smithing over "most valuable."  It means who has the best season.  Always has.

To me, most valuable means most valuable. That's the problem. There's no true definition as to what people are voting for. Some people vote for the best player, some vote for best player on the best team, some vote for most valuable. If the award always went to the guy who had the best season, there would be alot more players from non-contenders with MVP awards.

[wadesworld]

That's not what it means.  It means who has the best season.  I have never quite understood all the word-smithing over "most valuable."  It means who has the best season.  Always has.

Then Ryan Braun would have won the NL MVP and it wouldn't have even been close.

[🏀]

Then Ryan Braun would have won the NL MVP and it wouldn't have even been close.

Agree and Matt Kemp would have won in 2011.

Everyone realizes that Braun will have to have a Triple Crown season where he is head and shoulders above the competition before he wins another MVP, right?

[MerrittsMustache]

Agree and Matt Kemp would have won in 2011.

Everyone realizes that Braun will have to have a Triple Crown season where he is head and shoulders above the competition before he wins another MVP, right?

Exactly. Switch Braun with Cabrera and Mike Trout is your AL MVP this season.

OK, not the best analogy but you know what I mean.

[ChicosBailBonds]

You can break it down anyway you want, the problem will be Cabrera won the Triple Crown. Even though the Triple Corwn may be antiquated, the BBWAA was not going to give it Trout as soon as that happened.

I thought Trout should have won it.

However, I am awfully suspicious of him and some of the BBWAA were as well.

Suspicion is out there for a lot of guys, including Cabrera, Pujols, Braun, etc.  You can't be good anymore without the antenna going up which is sad in many ways, but totally understandable. The previous era has tainted a lot of things.  The ridiculous testing methods of MLB don't help bring any confidence either.

We agree.

[buckchuckler]

RBIs are not a good judgment of offensive production and AVG is the antiquated version of OBP or OPS.

I love when people say that.  Historically speaking, it just isn't true.  RBIs are a good judge of offensive production.  It is also typically accompanied by someone championing the merits of some bogus stat like park adjusted OPS. 

The guys that get RBIs are typically hitting in a particular spot in the order.  The reason they are there, is because they are the best hitters.  They also typically hit for power and extra base hits and thrive with runners on base. 

For example Cabrera hit .356 with RISP, he had an OBP of .424 and slugged .580.

Compared with Trout's line of .324/.393/.559

Cabrera was better across the board with runners on base. 

Cabrera also led Trout in SLG% and OPS.  Trout had a very slim lead in OBP.

[🏀]

I love when people say that.  Historically speaking, it just isn't true.  RBIs are a good judge of offensive production.  It is also typically accompanied by someone championing the merits of some bogus stat like park adjusted OPS. 

The guys that get RBIs are typically hitting in a particular spot in the order.  The reason they are there, is because they are the best hitters.  They also typically hit for power and extra base hits and thrive with runners on base. 

For example Cabrera hit .356 with RISP, he had an OBP of .424 and slugged .580.

Compared with Trout's line of .324/.393/.559

Cabrera was better across the board with runners on base. 

Cabrera also led Trout in SLG% and OPS.  Trout had a very slim lead in OBP.

I love when people say RBIs are a great indicator of offensive production and then have to justify their significance with other stats.

[buckchuckler]

The other stats are there to prove that the RBIs aren't a fluke. 

[🏀]

The other stats are there to prove that the RBIs aren't a fluke. 

Yeah, but they are independent to a hitter's production.