ChiefsPlanet
Page 1 of 3 1 23
Show 80 post(s) from this thread on one page

ChiefsPlanet (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)
-   Nzoner's Game Room (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=1)
-   -   Royals Do you want to see Miguel Cabrera win MLBs Triple Crown? (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=264491)

Deberg_1990 10-01-2012 07:43 AM
Do you want to see Miguel Cabrera win MLBs Triple Crown?
 
Could be the first Triple Crown since 1967


Ironically, the Royals will have a say in the race, since he plays against them the last 3 games.

Discuss....


http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/spo...race-heats-up/



Miguel Cabrera is slowly inching towards achieving the first Triple Crown since 1967.

With a line drive home run in the eighth inning against Minnesota on Saturday night, Cabrera moved into a tie with Texas star Josh Hamilton for the AL lead.

Cabrera's blast in the eighth inning off Casey Fien was his 43rd home run for the year. He also leads the AL in batting average (.327) and RBIs (136) as he looks to become the first player since 1967 to lead the league in all three categories.

"It's unbelievable what he's done this year," pitcher Justin Verlander said, the reigning AL MVP who was wearing a dark blue t-shirt with the message "Keep the MVP in the D" and Cabrera's name on the front.

"It's amazing to me how he keeps getting better. He's already the best hitter in the game and he keeps taking it to another level."

While it was Cabrera and his home run that gave the Tigers the five-run cushion they would end up needing in a 6-4 victory over the Twins that gave them a two-game lead in the AL Central, the Triple Crown hopeful deferred the attention away from himself.


It's unbelievable what he's done this year.- Justin Verlander


"I want to talk about the team," Cabrera said respectfully. "There's too many distractions right now and been talking too much about triple crowns. I pull too much attention. I don't want to do that. I want to go out there and play my game."

Cabrera entered the day leading Joe Mauer by five points in the batting race, Hamilton by eight in the RBI race, but trailing Hamilton by one in homers.

So will he be watching Hamilton down the stretch?

"I'll let you guys keep Hamilton in your eyes," Cabrera said. "I'll go to the hotel and get some breakfast tomorrow and try to win tomorrow."

The bigger prize, of course, is the division title. Neither the Tigers nor the Sox will qualify for one of two wild cards in the American League, so their only way in is through the division door.

"The last couple weeks, there's too much attention right now," Cabrera said of the triple crown. "I don't like too much of that stuff. But it's always good. You've got to feel comfortable with that. You've got to feel positive and be ready to play."

Jenson71 10-01-2012 07:45 AM
Yeah, but I still want the series win. And more importantly, I want the White Sox to lose.

RedDread 10-01-2012 07:45 AM
For sure. By all accounts Cabrera is a good guy and I'd like to see one in my lifetime.

Al Bundy 10-01-2012 07:46 AM
Yes.. and I hope clinches it against the Royals... and I mean bomb their asses.

stonedstooge 10-01-2012 07:57 AM
HELL NO. Bring down one of the icons in baseball that I actually got to see play once in Kansas City. Yaz was awesome

noa 10-01-2012 08:00 AM
Definitely want to see it, and what's amazing is people are actually debating whether he'll even win the AL MVP if he gets the triple crown.
Posted via Mobile Device

MIAdragon 10-01-2012 08:04 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by stonedstooge (Post 8966251)
HELL NO. Bring down one of the icons in baseball that I actually got to see play once in Kansas City. Yaz was awesome
One TC will NOT bring down Yaz.

MIAdragon 10-01-2012 08:04 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by noa (Post 8966261)
Definitely want to see it, and what's amazing is people are actually debating whether he'll even win the AL MVP if he gets the triple crown.
Posted via Mobile Device
Trout is having an unreal season, it should be debated.

Jenson71 10-01-2012 08:06 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by stonedstooge (Post 8966251)
HELL NO. Bring down one of the icons in baseball that I actually got to see play once in Kansas City. Yaz was awesome
Yeah, there's definitely that thorny issue of history forgetting prior Triple Crown winners.

stonedstooge 10-01-2012 08:11 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Literature (Post 8966271)
Yeah, there's definitely that thorny issue of history forgetting prior Triple Crown winners.
Wait till you get to be an older fart like me. You try to hang on to the icons of your youth. It keeps alive the illusion that your youth was all rainbows,chocolate chip cookies and fairy tales

Dr. Johnny Fever 10-01-2012 08:12 AM
I'd like to see him do it. You just don't see that kind of stuff very often and Cabrera is a pretty good guy. Hope he gets the triple crown and MVP and the Royals sweep the series while the Sox get swept and miss the playoffs after 117 days in first place this year. Suck it Hawk.

noa 10-01-2012 08:30 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MIAdragon (Post 8966269)
Trout is having an unreal season, it should be debated.
Absolutely agree, iust saying what a crazy season it is.
Posted via Mobile Device

Marco Polo 10-01-2012 08:51 AM
Yes, its history in the making. And if you get the triple crown, there should be NO discussion of any other HITTER getting the MVP over him. Yes, Trout is having a great year but not a triple crown year. Give him ROY and have him try again next year.

Reaper16 10-01-2012 09:10 AM
I would not like to see him win it, because I don't want the OBVIOUS ****ING MVP, Mike Trout, to get his MVP award stolen from him by a bunch of old farts (or old-hearted voters) who think RBIs are a good measure of a player's value.

Paniero 10-01-2012 09:25 AM
Royals should troll and intentionally walk him every time.

Saul Good 10-01-2012 09:41 AM
Gordon stole a HR from him the last time we played. That could end up being the difference.

duncan_idaho 10-01-2012 10:02 AM
It should be Trout regardless of whether Cabrera wins the TC or not, but it probably won't, either way.

Trout is more valuable all-around, by quite a lot. But the traditional power stats swing it Cabrera's way, IMO.

It would be cool to see someone win the TC, though.

BWillie 10-01-2012 10:03 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedDread (Post 8966224)
For sure. By all accounts Cabrera is a good guy and I'd like to see one in my lifetime.
He's a good guy? You mean not including his alcoholism, domestic abuse towards his wife, and threatening innocent ppl with a gun?

Reaper16 10-01-2012 02:58 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff Passan
Here's how we're going to do this: I know you have questions. For each, I promise an answer – a good one that relies on reality rather than perception, on the present instead of the past, on facts above conveniences. It is best to approach this from a purely stoic place; emotion is great, but it lets you fall prey to the immaterial. It's why this whole Triple Crown gambit is working so well.
I see a hand in the back. Yes, sir, you.

"What do you mean by gambit?"

The idea that Triple Crown = MVP is a strictly emotional play with no foundation in logic. It takes a mythical title given to a player based on a very important category (home runs), a marginally important one (batting average) and one that does next to nothing to denote a player's value or worth (RBIs) and merges them into a baseball Voltron.

What Miguel Cabrera has done this year is marvelous. There is no questioning that. He is the AL's best hitter. But simply because he leads the league in three categories, no matter their historical significance, does not crown him MVP. Not only is ignoring every other part of his game vis-à-vis Trout's irresponsible, but also it makes the mistake of tying this award to another person's achievements in the final three games of the season.

You're telling me that if Josh Hamilton hits a home run and Miguel Cabrera doesn't, the MVP shouldn't be his? Or that if Cabrera does and Hamilton doesn't, suddenly the award is his again? This thinking is so arbitrary, so backward, so easily blown to smithereens, I can't understand how its practitioners hold up the Triple Crown like it's the Hope Diamond without noticing the underlying failures of their argument.

OK, next. Guy with the pocket protector.
"Why are they making this about WAR?"
This is so stereotypical.
"I know. Sorry."

You know why they're making this about WAR? Because they're scared. They're scared of what they don't know and they need a villain. And so the computers and their alphabet-soup metrics have become the target, even though this MVP vote has absolutely nothing to do with WAR and everything to do with the fact that Mike Trout simply has been a better player in 2012 than Miguel Cabrera.

WAR, for the uninitiated, is Wins Above Replacement. It is the sabermetricians' attempt at a catch-all metric that includes hitting, fielding and baserunning. It has its flaws. There are two versions, Baseball-Reference.com's and Fangraphs.com's, and their numbers differ. That's confusing. They also use defensive metrics whose efficacy is highly questionable and thus affect the numbers' accuracy.

Still, nobody who is arguing Mike Trout's case with any conviction uses WAR. Just because he happens to have an enormous lead over Cabrera in the metric doesn't mean it's part of the argument. The insincerity of the Cabrera Truthers reaches its nadir when they bring up WAR like it matters.

You know what matters? Mike Trout is hitting .321/.395/.557 with 30 home runs, 48 stolen bases in 52 attempts and plays center field better than anyone in the major leagues. He beats you with his bat, with his legs and with his glove. There is no exact way to measure whether that beats Cabrera's advantage with the bat. But Trout is close enough to Cabrera – .325/.390/.601 with 43 home runs – that anybody who values the havoc Trout wreaks on the basepaths (and not just stealing bases but taking extra ones) and the enormous advantage on defense (Gold Glove-caliber center fielder to below-average third baseman) surely would believe it not only makes up for it but also exceeds it.

"There's no way the Tigers would be where they are without Cabrera, you know?"

It's true. And it's even more true for Trout. He was in the minor leagues most of April because the Angels were determined to suck for the season's first three weeks. And the Angels were dreadful. Their record when he was down: 6-14. Their record since he arrived: 82-57. With Cabrera all season, the Tigers have 86 wins. Truth is, Trout packed more into his five months than Cabrera has into six.

"And what do you have to say to the people who talk about the Tigers making the playoffs?"

It's a great achievement. Congratulations. Oh, and the Angels are two games better than the Tigers in a far tougher division. Their run differential is +28 over Detroit's. Detroit gets to play 18 games against Kansas City, Minnesota and Cleveland. The Angels had Texas and Oakland for 19, plus more against Baltimore and Tampa Bay.

"Why is Miguel Cabrera totally awesome and Triple Crown and he switched positions and Tigers going to the playoffs and Triple Crown and Trout's a weird name and September stats and Triple Crown and neeeeerrrrrdsssssssss!!!"

Security! Get him out of here!

"But Miguel Cabrera switched positions! How selfless is that?"

You know who else switched positions? Mike Trout. For 28 games this season, he started in left field – and he played there even more when the Angels chose to use Peter Bourjos in center.

And of course Miguel Cabrera switched positions. What was he going to do, say no? And force Prince Fielder or himself to designated hitter?

"The New York Times said: 'History will remember Cabrera as the standout performer of 2012.' You can't argue with history."

Know what: History can be an idiot. History looks at life through a vacuum. History does not anticipate evolution, knowledge or change. History regards the Triple Crown as the apex of offensive baseball accomplishment because before the statistical revolution, nobody knew any better. For us to sit here now, with what we know, and accept that on its face is lunacy. We know runs batted in are teammate- and lineup-dependent statistics – that Mike Trout, batting leadoff, is far less likely to get RBI opportunities than Miguel Cabrera, hitting third. And that's true: Cabrera leads the AL in at-bats with runners in scoring position, with 173. Trout has 106. And their numbers are awfully close, with Cabrera's OPS at .997 and Trout's at .939.

"Fine then. Cabrera has thrived in August and September, and Trout has slumped. Don't you give points for end-of-the-season performance?"

I know some in the Trout camp are of the mind that late-season stats don't matter. I happen to disagree. I think they are important. Games in April and September count the same in the standings, but they're different because their context is different. Game No. 60 feels different than No. 160. Then, you have the rest of the season to figure something out. Now, time is done and performance is imperative.

That said, there are two very important points to make.

First: The arbitrary-endpoint game is amazingly stupid. Just because Miguel Cabrera has done X between date Y and Z means nothing. If we want to play that game, guess what he did from games 150-156: .222/.250/.296 with zero homers and two RBIs. Not very MVP-like, is it? You can cherry-pick any sort of numbers you'd like to make a point.

Second: That's what the pro-Cabrera people seem to want to forget. Even if Trout has been human since August, he's still popping homers (his 30th Sunday), still stealing bases (his 48th) and his July was better than any month of Cabrera's this year: .392/.455/.804 with 10 homers , 23 RBIs, nine steals and 32 runs in 25 games. It was a magnificent display of baseball, the best from anyone this season.

"Jeff P., do you have a vote this year?"

If I did, I wouldn't say yes or no. We're not allowed to. I'll say this: I do know a fair number of the voters. And from our discussions in the past, and the way they view baseball, I think Miguel Cabrera is going to win the AL MVP this year. I think that's sad. And I think the New York Times was wrong. The way baseball is evolving, when history looks back on this year, it's not going to celebrate Miguel Cabrera maybe or maybe not winning the Triple Crown. It's going to wonder how the voters watched an all-time historic season and screwed up, because it's evermore obvious that the AL MVP is Mike Trout.
That about sums it up.

Consistent1 10-01-2012 03:45 PM
I'd like to see him do it. Regardless of the MVP deal, Trout and Harper should be awesome for a long time. Good for baseball IMO.

chefsos 10-01-2012 03:57 PM
Yes. Sure, why not? It's a nice little identifier that lasts a lifetime. "Triple Crown Winner John Doe" can get a free drink anywhere, anytime.

It shouldn't mean dick to the MVP vote, though. And I think the Angels' making the playoffs or not has more bearing on Trout's chances than Cabrera's potential TC.

Demonpenz 10-01-2012 04:47 PM
Dude can smash a baseball, but he runs and fields like like shit.

Seraphim 10-01-2012 06:28 PM
Yes because it's never been done in my lifetime.

Bane 10-01-2012 06:28 PM
Yes.

Sfeihc 10-01-2012 06:34 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bane (Post 8968180)
Yes.
This.

Bowser 10-01-2012 06:37 PM
Sure. It hasn't happened in over 50 years, so it would be kind of cool to see.

chefsos 10-01-2012 07:30 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bowser (Post 8968217)
Sure. It hasn't happened in over 50 years, so it would be kind of cool to see.
It's only been 45!

Seems like yesterday.

Sfeihc 10-01-2012 07:37 PM
Home Run! Cabrera! "I say I like to hit?" - Miguel Cabrera

Al Bundy 10-01-2012 07:44 PM
Bruce Chen with the ultimate screw you to the White Sox.

Sfeihc 10-01-2012 07:44 PM
I see you G Money.

Lex Luthor 10-01-2012 08:13 PM
I've heard Jeff Passan pimping Mike Trout for the MVP a couple of times this year. I respect his knowledge as a baseball writer, but I disagree with him. Trout is certainly an exciting player, and he may just be the best player in the game. I know that if I were starting a team Trout would be my #1 pick, and it's not even close. But the fact is that Cabrera put up even better numbers than Trout did this season. Many voters base their votes upon whose team won something. Well, the fact is that the Tigers won their division,and Angels couldn't even win a wildcard spot. Passan can talk all he wants about how Trout was in the minor leagues for 3 weeks and how bad the Angels were without him. But you don't give a guy the MVP for that. By that logic, Peyton Manning would have been MVP last year.

I've also seen the argument that Trout hit 30 home runs and stole 47 bases, and that combination is even rarer than winning the Triple Crown, and therefore Trout should be MVP. OK, fine. You can combine whatever stats you want to make any argument you want. I remember late in George Brett's career when KC baseball writers were constantly combining about half a dozen different stats, and the would always wind up concluding that George Brett was right up there with Babe Ruth and Willie Mays. It was bogus.

I guess I'm a traditionalist. The Poindexters of the world can point to their nerdy stats like WAR and UZR all they want. All that shows is that they have WAY too much time on their hands, and they probably never actually played the game when they were young because they were too busy getting beat up by the cool kids.

Anybody that wins the Triple Crown should be MVP. Period. I've never really cared one way or the other about Miguel Cabrera, whereas I often turn on the Angels games just to see Mike Trout bat. But you've got to give Cabrera his due. Right now he's leading in all 3 triple crown categories. He is the MVP even if Josh Hamilton hits a couple of dingers tomorrow. He's had a historic season.

Reaper16 10-01-2012 08:44 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brainiac (Post 8968542)
I've heard Jeff Passan pimping Mike Trout for the MVP a couple of times this year. I respect his knowledge as a baseball writer, but I disagree with him. Trout is certainly an exciting player, and he may just be the best player in the game. I know that if I were starting a team Trout would be my #1 pick, and it's not even close. But the fact is that Cabrera put up even better numbers than Trout did this season. Many voters base their votes upon whose team won something. Well, the fact is that the Tigers won their division,and Angels couldn't even win a wildcard spot. Passan can talk all he wants about how Trout was in the minor leagues for 3 weeks and how bad the Angels were without him. But you don't give a guy the MVP for that. By that logic, Peyton Manning would have been MVP last year.

I've also seen the argument that Trout hit 30 home runs and stole 47 bases, and that combination is even rarer than winning the Triple Crown, and therefore Trout should be MVP. OK, fine. You can combine whatever stats you want to make any argument you want. I remember late in George Brett's career when KC baseball writers were constantly combining about half a dozen different stats, and the would always wind up concluding that George Brett was right up there with Babe Ruth and Willie Mays. It was bogus.

I guess I'm a traditionalist. The Poindexters of the world can point to their nerdy stats like WAR and UZR all they want. All that shows is that they have WAY too much time on their hands, and they probably never actually played the game when they were young because they were too busy getting beat up by the cool kids.

Anybody that wins the Triple Crown should be MVP. Period. I've never really cared one way or the other about Miguel Cabrera, whereas I often turn on the Angels games just to see Mike Trout bat. But you've got to give Cabrera his due. Right now he's leading in all 3 triple crown categories. He is the MVP even if Josh Hamilton hits a couple of dingers tomorrow. He's had a historic season.
You're really bad at being smart. That penultimate paragraph is atrocious, dude. Does it irritate you that whatever MLB franchise you're a fan of is run by these guys who were getting beat up or whatever juvenile shit you can imagine? The sabermetric community being talked about as if they don't understand the game is such a tired cliche, proven incorrect ten thousand times over.

The Angels are 2 games better than the Tigers, and the Angles played a much more difficult schedule to boot.

It's ridiculous to me that Cabrera is going to win this MVP award because of goddamned ribbies.

Lex Luthor 10-01-2012 08:52 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reaper16 (Post 8968722)
You're really bad at being smart. That penultimate paragraph is atrocious, dude. Does it irritate you that whatever MLB franchise you're a fan of is run by these guys who were getting beat up or whatever juvenile shit you can imagine? The sabermetric community being talked about as if they don't understand the game is such a tired cliche, proven incorrect ten thousand times over.

The Angels are 2 games better than the Tigers, and the Angles played a much more difficult schedule to boot.

It's ridiculous to me that Cabrera is going to win this MVP award because of goddamned ribbies.
You're right. Stolen bases and spectacular defense are much more important than actually driving in runs.

Reaper16 10-01-2012 08:56 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brainiac (Post 8968765)
You're right. Stolen bases and spectacular defense are much more important than actually driving in runs.
Yes. Saving runs yourself and creating runs yourself is vastly more important than you getting credit for the work of those ahead of you in the lineup.

Al Bundy 10-01-2012 09:05 PM
Dayton Moore should be sitting in the Royals dugout watching the Tigers celebrate

Consistent1 10-01-2012 09:20 PM
Both with big nights, Miggy taking back the HR lead for now. Very interesting. Look at Fielder and Cabrera combined. That was a move that worked out pretty damn well.

Lex Luthor 10-02-2012 07:33 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reaper16 (Post 8968787)
Yes. Saving runs yourself and creating runs yourself is vastly more important than you getting credit for the work of those ahead of you in the lineup.
I get tired of hearing people say RBIs don't count or that they're not important, or that they're just the product of being in a good lineup with runners on base in front of you. Baseball is a team game. If you're going to dismiss RBIs simply because somebody else has to get on base in front of the hitter, then you also have to dismiss runs scored because somebody had to drive the runner in. While you're at it, you have to dismiss stolen bases because by itself a stolen base doesn't lead to a run. And as long as we are arbitrarily dismissing things, we might as well dismiss the great plays in center field that rob the opposing teams of home runs, because they don't directly lead to runs for the player's team, and you can't win games without scoring runs.

See how ridiculous that is?

Now that you've dismissed all of the statistics that require help from another player in order for a run to score, the only stat you're left with is home runs.

Who's leading the league in home runs again? Oh yeah, it's Miguel Cabrera.

Hey, I get it. Mike Trout is an exciting player, and he had a historically great rookie season. He's a 5-tool player with a combination of speed and power reserved for the all-time greats like Mickey Mantle and Willie Mays. About a month ago I assumed Mike Trout would be MVP, and there was no doubt in my mind he deserved it.

However, Miguel Cabrera put on a hell of a charge at the end of the season when it mattered the most. It's just Mike Trout's bad luck that he had his great rookie season the same year somebody else won the Triple Freaking Crown. When somebody wins the Triple Crown and his team wins their division, there's no way in hell you can award the MVP to someone whose team finished out of the playoffs. Mike Trout is a close #2 choice, but he's still #2.

If Mike Trout wins the MVP award, they should change the name of the award to Most Popular Player.

Deberg_1990 10-02-2012 07:49 AM
Jut compared their stats. Trout and Cabrera. The only thing Trout has over Cabrera is speed. Stolen bases and triples...

Cabrera leads in hits, .avg, HRs, doubles, slugging pct, OBP...

Trout has 30 HRs and only 83 RBIs? Does he hit alot of HRs with no one on base??

Lex Luthor 10-02-2012 07:56 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deberg_1990 (Post 8969855)
Jut compared their stats. Trout and Cabrera. The only thing Trout has over Cabrera is speed. Stolen bases and triples...

Cabrera leads in hits, .avg, HRs, doubles, slugging pct, OBP...

Trout has 30 HRs and only 83 RBIs? Does he hit alot of HRs with no one on base??
Perhaps that is why the people in the Trout camp are so quick to dismiss the importance of RBIs. Because that's the one part of his game that's really not very good.

Deberg_1990 10-02-2012 07:57 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brainiac (Post 8969869)
Perhaps that is why the people in the Trout camp are so quick to dismiss the importance of RBIs. Because that's the one part of his game that's really not very good.
He bats leadoff? Leadoff hitters typically dont get the RBI opportunities that guys batting 3-5 get obviously....

but either way, i dont see how you cant give MVP to Cabrera? Dudes had a dream season.

MoreLemonPledge 10-02-2012 08:00 AM
The only Triple Crown he's getting is one bourbon, one scotch, and one beer.

Carlota69 10-02-2012 08:08 AM
Isn't the Triple Crown an offensive accomplishment? Isn't MVP an all around award? Best Player award?

Trout wold have 100 RBIs if he played all season. He'd probably be in the 35 hr area if he played all season, and imagine his stolen bases and other stats if he began the season in the Majors.

He easily has stolen 4 hrs this season. Two of them are going to make it in the top ten plays of the year, one of them more than likely the top play of the year. He has been by far the better overall player, and as far as with the bat, barely behind Miggy who is a clean up guy, not a lead off guy. So, 80+RBIs 50 SB, 30HR and killer slugging% number OBP numbers for a lead off guy means nothing because a guy who hits 3-4 has more RBIs?

I hope Miggy gets the Triple Crown too, but to say he deserves MVP because of an offensive accomplishment when he is a far weaker player than Trout in everything else, is short sighted.

Oh, and getting the triple Crown doesn't immiately make you MVP, at least not in the past.

Carlota69 10-02-2012 08:13 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brainiac (Post 8969869)
Perhaps that is why the people in the Trout camp are so quick to dismiss the importance of RBIs. Because that's the one part of his game that's really not very good.
LMAOLMAOLMAOLMAO
Dude, he hits n the lead off spot. You know, talesetter, run scorer?
And he has murdered in that position plus it 80+RBIs and 30HR. What a ricilous thing you just said..LMAOLMAOLMAO

MIAdragon 10-02-2012 08:16 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deberg_1990 (Post 8969855)
Jut compared their stats. Trout and Cabrera. The only thing Trout has over Cabrera is speed. Stolen bases and triples...

Cabrera leads in hits, .avg, HRs, doubles, slugging pct, OBP...

Trout has 30 HRs and only 83 RBIs? Does he hit alot of HRs with no one on base??
Sure lets totally over look the other HALF of the game, defense. Trout is so far ahead of Miggy in that aspect of the game its not even close. Add in, again, how much better Trout is on the base path IMO Trout is more deserving of the MVP. To answer your RBI question, Trout has hit lead off in all but ONE AB this season so yea he's hitting with fewer people on base.

pimpchief 10-02-2012 08:22 AM
I don't want to see it. it has never been done in my lifetime, and I want to see a royal do it first.

Deberg_1990 10-02-2012 08:25 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by pimpchief (Post 8969912)
I want to see a royal do it first.
ROFL


You will be dead before you see a Royal do it.

MIAdragon 10-02-2012 08:28 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carlota69 (Post 8969899)
LMAOLMAOLMAOLMAO
Dude, he hits n the lead off spot. You know, talesetter, run scorer?
And he has murdered in that position plus it 80+RBIs and 30HR. What a ricilous thing you just said..LMAOLMAOLMAO
what is this talesetter you speak of?

Carlota69 10-02-2012 09:17 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MIAdragon (Post 8969925)
what is this talesetter you speak of?
LMAO..tablesetter...Talesetter is usually a typo queen.;)

Dr. Johnny Fever 10-02-2012 09:18 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deberg_1990 (Post 8969918)
ROFL


You will be dead before you see a Royal do it.
Keep ****ing doubting Irving Falu.

Lex Luthor 10-02-2012 09:29 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carlota69 (Post 8969899)
LMAOLMAOLMAOLMAO
Dude, he hits n the lead off spot. You know, talesetter, run scorer?
And he has murdered in that position plus it 80+RBIs and 30HR. What a ricilous thing you just said..LMAOLMAOLMAO
OK, I'll take my lumps for that. That wasn't a very good post on my part.

whoman69 10-02-2012 01:30 PM
It hasn't happened since 1967, 1937 in the National League. Of course I'm wanting to see that. I am not buying the arguments that someone that wins the triple crown can lose the MVP.

Valiant 10-02-2012 06:01 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brainiac (Post 8969822)
I get tired of hearing people say RBIs don't count or that they're not important, or that they're just the product of being in a good lineup with runners on base in front of you. Baseball is a team game. If you're going to dismiss RBIs simply because somebody else has to get on base in front of the hitter, then you also have to dismiss runs scored because somebody had to drive the runner in. While you're at it, you have to dismiss stolen bases because by itself a stolen base doesn't lead to a run. And as long as we are arbitrarily dismissing things, we might as well dismiss the great plays in center field that rob the opposing teams of home runs, because they don't directly lead to runs for the player's team, and you can't win games without scoring runs.

See how ridiculous that is?

Now that you've dismissed all of the statistics that require help from another player in order for a run to score, the only stat you're left with is home runs.

Who's leading the league in home runs again? Oh yeah, it's Miguel Cabrera.

Hey, I get it. Mike Trout is an exciting player, and he had a historically great rookie season. He's a 5-tool player with a combination of speed and power reserved for the all-time greats like Mickey Mantle and Willie Mays. About a month ago I assumed Mike Trout would be MVP, and there was no doubt in my mind he deserved it.

However, Miguel Cabrera put on a hell of a charge at the end of the season when it mattered the most. It's just Mike Trout's bad luck that he had his great rookie season the same year somebody else won the Triple Freaking Crown. When somebody wins the Triple Crown and his team wins their division, there's no way in hell you can award the MVP to someone whose team finished out of the playoffs. Mike Trout is a close #2 choice, but he's still #2.

If Mike Trout wins the MVP award, they should change the name of the award to Most Popular Player.
This.. I always hear in sports the MVP is for players that got their teams to excel and made the playoffs.. Cabrera took Detroit to the playoffs.. Trout did not, absolute stud though..

There should be no way Trout wins it unless the coast bias kicks in and as you say, the most popular player gets it..

NJChiefsFan 10-02-2012 06:08 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by whoman69 (Post 8970760)
It hasn't happened since 1967, 1937 in the National League. Of course I'm wanting to see that. I am not buying the arguments that someone that wins the triple crown can lose the MVP.
Ted Williams lost the MVP when he did it in 1942 and 47 per the trivia I just saw in the Yankees game. Granted, the impact of Cabrera doing it after so long is pretty powerful.

Carlota69 10-02-2012 06:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Valiant (Post 8971477)
This.. I always hear in sports the MVP is for players that got their teams to excel and made the playoffs.. Cabrera took Detroit to the playoffs.. Trout did not, absolute stud though..

There should be no way Trout wins it unless the coast bias kicks in and as you say, the most popular player gets it..
Wait...so Miggy should get it cuz Detroit is in the playoffs and the Angels aren't? Even though the Angels have a better record and play in a much tougher division?

chefsos 10-02-2012 06:16 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJChiefsFan (Post 8971489)
Ted Williams lost the MVP when he did it in 1942 and 47 per the trivia I just saw in the Yankees game. Granted, the impact of Cabrera doing it after so long is pretty powerful.
I was thinking of that, too. Pretty sure it was a big FU by the baseball writers, because Williams (who was, shall we say, prickly) just couldn't hide his contempt for them.

pimpchief 10-02-2012 06:52 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deberg_1990 (Post 8969918)
ROFL


You will be dead before you see a Royal do it.
or at least baseball will probably be irrelevant by that time. But hey! Nobody thought wed have a cy young winner. That was fun.

Lex Luthor 10-02-2012 06:58 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJChiefsFan (Post 8971489)
Ted Williams lost the MVP when he did it in 1942 and 47 per the trivia I just saw in the Yankees game. Granted, the impact of Cabrera doing it after so long is pretty powerful.
The baseball writers hated Ted Williams because he was such a prick whenever he was around them.

Bowser 10-02-2012 07:03 PM
It's not a slap in the face to Trout if he doesn't win it. What Cabrerra is doing is a rare feat in MLB, and hard to not give the MVP to the guy that achieves such a lofty status. Cabrerra will be a baseball immortal after this worthy of the MVP. Trout will push for MVP awards for years to come.

Coogs 10-02-2012 07:05 PM
2-2 (both singles) with 2 RBI's so far tonight. Average up to .331. If Hamilton doesn't go off in the last 2 days with HR's, he is looking pretty good.

Valiant 10-02-2012 07:05 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carlota69 (Post 8971493)
Wait...so Miggy should get it cuz Detroit is in the playoffs and the Angels aren't? Even though the Angels have a better record and play in a much tougher division?
What is the point of being a MVP when your team is watching on TV?? You have a guy like Hamilton who got his team in the playoffs and raping in stats not being considered compared to those two..


All 3 are MVPs for their teams.. What do you want to look at next?? Those guys that got their team into the playoffs..

Trout did great, but he went up against a guy whose team made the playoffs because of him and pulled/pulling off a triple crown..

If Trout did what he did on the Tigers/Royals,this would not even be a headline..

Reaper16 10-02-2012 07:09 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Valiant (Post 8971477)
This.. I always hear in sports the MVP is for players that got their teams to excel and made the playoffs.. Cabrera took Detroit to the playoffs.. Trout did not, absolute stud though..
Trout certainly got his team to excel. Since Trout was called up the Angles have the very best record in baseball (and remember how poor the Angles were playing before he was called up), have a better record than the Tigers, and have played a much tougher schedule. That literally makes him the player with the most value to his team.

whoman69 10-02-2012 07:36 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJChiefsFan (Post 8971489)
Ted Williams lost the MVP when he did it in 1942 and 47 per the trivia I just saw in the Yankees game. Granted, the impact of Cabrera doing it after so long is pretty powerful.
Ted Williams had a higher batting average the whole season than DiMaggio did during the streak. There was also Chuck Klein in the NL during the 30s. Klein was on a last place club in the best hitters park in the league. DiMaggio is from New York. Cabrera is on a division champ with not a lot of other tools offensively.

Demonpenz 10-02-2012 07:41 PM
Throw the stats out the window. Cabrerra wins it.

Reaper16 10-02-2012 07:45 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Demonpenz (Post 8971732)
Throw the stats out the window. Cabrerra wins it.
Awesome.

Carlota69 10-02-2012 10:37 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Valiant (Post 8971625)
What is the point of being a MVP when your team is watching on TV?? You have a guy like Hamilton who got his team in the playoffs and raping in stats not being considered compared to those two..


All 3 are MVPs for their teams.. What do you want to look at next?? Those guys that got their team into the playoffs..

Trout did great, but he went up against a guy whose team made the playoffs because of him and pulled/pulling off a triple crown..

If Trout did what he did on the Tigers/Royals,this would not even be a headline..
Um, ok....first of all, they Angels have a better record than the Tigers and play ina much tougher division, thereby a much tougher schedule. Also, the Triple Crown is an offensive feat, and a rare one for sure, but Trout is the better overall player this year, and has been the reason the Anglels have a better record than the Tigers. Also, Trout has also achieved many feats that are rare. Add the fact that he has the offensive numbers of a clean up guy, in the lead off spot, a terror in a historic way on the base paths and will surely win the gold glove in CF, it's hard to imagine someone saying he isn't the more valuable player. Yes, Miggy has killed it at the plate and mdeserves whatever offensive award available, but overall MVP? Hes Below average at his position and sucks on the base paths...but yes, he's awesome with the bat, he'd may get the triple crown. Doesn't make him the better overall most valuable player.

Lex Luthor 10-03-2012 06:47 AM
All of the Trout fans should consider this: since August 1st, Cabrera has hit .343 with 19 home runs, 52 RBI, and he's scored 42 runs. Trout has hit .284 with 12 home runs, 28 RBI, and has scored 49 runs.

Cabrera's batting average down the stretch in the pennant race was 59 points higher, he hit 7 more home runs, and his combined total for runs scored and runs batted in was 94 versus 71 for Trout.

If Trout had produced as well as Cabrera when it mattered the most, the Angels would be in the playoffs. Instead, they finished in 3rd place, which is exactly where they would have finished if Trout had never played an inning this year.

It's not even close. The vote for MVP should be unanimous.

Lex Luthor 10-03-2012 06:50 AM
Oh, and if some Poindexter wants to get out his slide rule and calculate WAR since August 1st, I'm pretty sure Cabrera would come out far ahead of Trout.

duncan_idaho 10-03-2012 08:31 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brainiac (Post 8972547)
All of the Trout fans should consider this: since August 1st, Cabrera has hit .343 with 19 home runs, 52 RBI, and he's scored 42 runs. Trout has hit .284 with 12 home runs, 28 RBI, and has scored 49 runs.

Cabrera's batting average down the stretch in the pennant race was 59 points higher, he hit 7 more home runs, and his combined total for runs scored and runs batted in was 94 versus 71 for Trout.

If Trout had produced as well as Cabrera when it mattered the most, the Angels would be in the playoffs. Instead, they finished in 3rd place, which is exactly where they would have finished if Trout had never played an inning this year.

It's not even close. The vote for MVP should be unanimous.
And the Angels are a whole half-game worse than the Tigers over that stretch. They went 32-25 since August 1. The Tigers are 33-25. The Tigers were just fortunate to play a lot of games against the shitty AL Central. That's the only reason they're in the playoffs and the Angels are missing it. Saying "Trout slumped and that's why the Angels missed the playoffs" misses the mark, IMO. For one thing, he still produced an .860 OPS during the time period you defined. For another, it doesn't account for any contributions Trout made with the glove or his legs (contributions Cabrera can't make). Trout stole 18 bases during that period (18/19) and played Gold Glove defense in CF.

BTW, Most statisticians only count HR once when calculating runs created (Since counting them for RBI and R creates an artificial number and is not statistically sound). Looking at the numbers that way, Cabrera accounts for 74 runs (42+52-19), Trout for 65 (28+49-12). That's not a very big separation in the key stats for Cabrera's case.

And RBI and R are not definitive numbers in a small sample size, IMO, since they're entirely dependent on the team around the players.

Truth is neither player is a "clear case" over the other. They're both deserving, and I won't complain regardless of who wins. I would vote for Trout, personally, because he can help you win games in any way a baseball player can possibly help a team win games. Cabrera can win them with his bat - which is tremendous - but that's about it.

duncan_idaho 10-03-2012 08:35 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brainiac (Post 8972551)
Oh, and if some Poindexter wants to get out his slide rule and calculate WAR since August 1st, I'm pretty sure Cabrera would come out far ahead of Trout.
Nope.

Trout: 3.6 (1.8 in August, 1.8 in September/October)
Cabrera: 3.1 (1.5 in August, 1.6 in September/October)

Glove+Bat+Legs still put Trout over the top in WAR.

Carlota69 10-03-2012 08:39 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by duncan_idaho (Post 8972767)
And the Angels are a whole half-game worse than the Tigers over that stretch. They went 32-25 since August 1. The Tigers are 33-25. The Tigers were just fortunate to play a lot of games against the shitty AL Central. That's the only reason they're in the playoffs and the Angels are missing it. Saying "Trout slumped and that's why the Angels missed the playoffs" misses the mark, IMO. For one thing, he still produced an .860 OPS during the time period you defined. For another, it doesn't account for any contributions Trout made with the glove or his legs (contributions Cabrera can't make). Trout stole 18 bases during that period (18/19) and played Gold Glove defense in CF.

BTW, Most statisticians only count HR once when calculating runs created (Since counting them for RBI and R creates an artificial number and is not statistically sound). Looking at the numbers that way, Cabrera accounts for 74 runs (42+52-19), Trout for 65 (28+49-16). That's not a very big separation in the key stats for Cabrera's case.

And RBI and R are not definitive numbers in a small sample size, IMO, since they're entirely dependent on the team around the players.

Truth is neither player is a "clear case" over the other. They're both deserving, and I won't complain regardless of who wins. I would vote for Trout, personally, because he can help you win games in any way a baseball player can possibly help a team win games. Cabrera can win them with his bat - which is tremendous - but that's about it.
BINGO. And lets not forget the fact that Trout has done all of these great, historic things as a 20-21 yr old player, who hits leadoff, not clean up. And dont say well then just give him ROY. If thats the arguement, we shouldnt give pitchers MVP becasue they can win the CY young award.

Carlota69 10-03-2012 08:43 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by duncan_idaho (Post 8972774)
Nope.

Trout: 3.6 (1.8 in August, 1.8 in September/October)
Cabrera: 3.1 (1.5 in August, 1.6 in September/October)

Glove+Bat+Legs still put Trout over the top in WAR.
:LOL:
Owned!

WV 10-03-2012 08:58 AM
Don't know why this is even a debate, if Cabrera wins the triple crown its game set and match. There is no argument that can trump the triple freaking crown. Trout is a great story, but I can't believe the people discounting what a HUGE accomplishment the triple crown would be.

Lex Luthor 10-03-2012 09:02 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carlota69 (Post 8972784)
BINGO. And lets not forget the fact that Trout has done all of these great, historic things as a 20-21 yr old player, who hits leadoff, not clean up. And dont say well then just give him ROY. If thats the arguement, we shouldnt give pitchers MVP becasue they can win the CY young award.
What the hell does the age of the player have to do with who should be MVP?

That's just stupid.

Saul Good 10-03-2012 09:02 AM
Cabrera should win it because 100 years ago somebody coined the term triple crown. If Cabrera was just the first player to lead the league in the three arbitrary offensive categories of BA, HRs, and RBI in decades, Trout would deserve it for being the better all-round player.

That isn't what happened, though. Cabrera will win the "triple crown", so that's more impressive than what Trout has done.

Lex Luthor 10-03-2012 09:03 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by duncan_idaho (Post 8972774)
Nope.

Trout: 3.6 (1.8 in August, 1.8 in September/October)
Cabrera: 3.1 (1.5 in August, 1.6 in September/October)

Glove+Bat+Legs still put Trout over the top in WAR.
Congratulations Poindexter. You've just shown that WAR is not the ultimate statistic.

Saul Good 10-03-2012 09:16 AM
BA, RBI, and HRs is all you need to know when evaluating a player's value. I don't understand why people even bother looking at fielding, base-running, pitching, etc. Those are negligible facets of the game and should only be considered in the event of a tie. (And even then, that would only be if you couldn't find a coin to flip.)

Lex Luthor 10-03-2012 09:19 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by duncan_idaho (Post 8972767)

BTW, Most statisticians only count HR once when calculating runs created (Since counting them for RBI and R creates an artificial number and is not statistically sound). Looking at the numbers that way, Cabrera accounts for 74 runs (42+52-19), Trout for 65 (28+49-12). That's not a very big separation in the key stats for Cabrera's case.
The "runs produced" stat has always been the most bogus stat in baseball. It penalizes a player for hitting a home run because he scores a run and drives in a run in the same at-bat. Yet virtually every time a run is scored, SOMEBODY gets credit for scoring it, and SOMEBODY gets credit for driving in the run. That's a total credit for 2 runs produced for every run that is actually scored, EXCEPT when the run scores as a result of a home run.

Adding up RBI and runs scored is a fine indicator of runs produced. Subtracting home runs doesn't give you a better idea of a player's production. All it does is add an element of complexity to a formula that is more accurate when it's kept simple.

Lex Luthor 10-03-2012 09:21 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saul Badguy (Post 8972861)
BA, RBI, and HRs is all you need to know when evaluating a player's value. I don't understand why people even bother looking at fielding, base-running, pitching, etc. Those are negligible facets of the game and should only be considered in the event of a tie. (And even then, that would only be if you couldn't find a coin to flip.)
Nicely done. You built a straw man and knocked it down. Congratulations.

duncan_idaho 10-03-2012 09:23 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brainiac (Post 8972835)
Congratulations Poindexter. You've just shown that WAR is not the ultimate statistic.
Five minutes of work. Go to fangraphs. Go to League Leaders section. Select August as a filter. Then select September/October as a filter.

Anyway, I actually don't like the overall WAR stat very much (as the defensive statistics are just too flaky/inconsistent), but offensive WAR - especially the way Baseball America calculates it - is very reliable. Cabrera would hold the edge there, I'm sure (I haven't found a site that will split out offensive and total WAR month-by-month yet), because all of his value is derived from his bat.

I'm of the mindset that statistical analysis is a nice complement to old-fashioned scouting. When the two are worked together in a way that is sound, you get great results (See the Tampa Rays). You can't go all sabermetrics, and you can't go all old-school.

In defense of offensive WAR: Here's the top 10 all-time list at Baseball America.

Babe Ruth
Ty Cobb
Barry Bonds
Willie Mays
Hank Aaron
Ted Williams
Stan Musial
Rogers Hornsby
Honus Wagner
Tris Speaker

Factor in longevity (which is what gets a guy like Speaker on there), and I think that's a pretty accurate list. 9/10 of those guys would come up when discussing "best all-time hitter."

Saul Good 10-03-2012 09:24 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by WV (Post 8972822)
Don't know why this is even a debate, if Cabrera wins the triple crown its game set and match. There is no argument that can trump the triple freaking crown. Trout is a great story, but I can't believe the people discounting what a HUGE accomplishment the triple crown would be.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brainiac (Post 8972874)
Nicely done. You built a straw man and knocked it down. Congratulations.
Tell me more about this straw man I created.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:41 AM.
Page 1 of 3 1 23
Show 80 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.