Do you want to see Miguel Cabrera win MLBs Triple Crown?

[Lex Luthor]

Originally Posted by Saul Badguy

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.

[Saul Good]

Originally Posted by WV

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.

Originally Posted by Brainiac

Nicely done. You built a straw man and knocked it down. Congratulations.

Tell me more about this straw man I created.

[Lex Luthor]

I still haven't heard anyone explain how Trout leading the Angels to a 3rd place finish makes him the MVP. Spare me the talk about the Angels' tough division and all the other crap. The fact is that he was leading the league in hitting on August 1st, and he didn't perform nearly as well down the stretch when the Angels were actually in the pennant race. He hit .284 after August 1st. That is not an MVP performance.

You don't decide the MVP on August 1st. You decide it after ALL of the games have been played.

[duncan_idaho]

Originally Posted by Brainiac

I still haven't heard anyone explain how Trout leading the Angels to a 3rd place finish makes him the MVP. Spare me the talk about the Angels' tough division and all the other crap. The fact is that he was leading the league in hitting on August 1st, and he didn't perform nearly as well down the stretch when the Angels were actually in the pennant race. He hit .284 after August 1st. That is not an MVP performance.

You don't decide the MVP on August 1st. You decide it after ALL of the games have been played.

How a player closes the season is important in the MVP race, no doubt about it. You're fresh/hot in the mind of voters, most importantly. But the stuff that happens early counts, too. I'll point out that despite hitting .284 after August 1, Trout still posted a sterling OBP (.377).

If the award is truly "Most Valuable Player, " it should go to the player who was the best player in the league over the course of the whole season. Not just the first four months of the season, and not just the last two months.

You can make a fine case for Miguel Cabrera. Same thing with Trout. It's not a slam dunk in either direction. Neither choice is egregiously wrong.

I've long thought that the whole "Did his team make the playoffs" thing is ridiculous. Basing an individual award on team performance is about as dumb as basing a Gold Glove on offensive performance. So OF COURSE it happens all the time.

Matt Kemp was the best player in the National League last year (that WAS a slam dunk), but didn't take home the hardware.

[Lex Luthor]

Originally Posted by duncan_idaho

I've long thought that the whole "Did his team make the playoffs" thing is ridiculous. Basing an individual award on team performance is about as dumb as basing a Gold Glove on offensive performance. So OF COURSE it happens all the time.

I completely agree with you on that, and I feel a little sheepish about even using that argument.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by Brainiac

I completely agree with you on that, and I feel a little sheepish about even using that argument.

It matters if the player was a driving force behind it, IMO.

Essentially, a playoff appearance is a force multiplier for a strong finishing kick. Cabrera destroyed the world for 2 months and as a direct result of that his team is going to make the playoffs.

That carries weight, IMO. It makes the finishing kick that much more impressive, especially since the respective teams were in very similar positions at the start of that stretch.