Originally Posted by Carlota69
Well, Regardless of sarcasm or not, I dont think Hamilton has anything to do with it, really. Yes, if he hit 2 HRs tonight and Miggy none, then no Triple Crown,and then more than likely, Trout gets MVP. But I dont think Miggy should be judged one way or the other based on lack of HR. The MVP should be based on the player, and the individual player only and another players performance should have no bearing on the subject.
That's twice now in this thread that you've shown a complete lack of understanding regarding what the MVP is based on. First, you mentioned that Trout was only 20 years old when the season started as one of your supporting arguments for him, as if that has ANYTHING to do with qualifications for MVP. To your credit, you didn't try to stick with that after I slapped you around for it.
But now you're completely misunderstanding that MVP is a relative term, not an absolute one. Another player's performance sure as hell DOES have bearing on whether or not a specific player is the MVP. The "M" in MVP stands for MOST valuable player. A player could put up identical numbers in back to back years and be the MVP one year but not the next. What other players do ABSOLUTELY affects any player's chance to be MVP.
Hey, we get it. You're an Angels fan and a Mike Trout fan, and you'd absolutely love to see Mike Trout win the MVP award. But as DJ's Left Nut so eloquently pointed out, Mike Trout is only slightly better than Jacoby Ellsbury was last year. He just makes a few more spectacular plays, plays in a bigger media market, and gets on the Sportscenter highlights on a regular basis. That doesn't make him the MVP. Sorry.