AL MVP: Cabrera or Trout

[woolybug25]

Tigers won season series 5-2. Trout played in all 7 games as well.

 

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

Interesting....

Robinson Cano's WAR= 8.6
Miguel Cabrera's WAR= 6.9

Should Cano finish above Cabrera in MVP voting?

WAR isn't the only thing that matters. Cabrera has a higher BABIP, wOBA, and WPA. Trout beats Cabrera in all of those as well.

 

[woolybug25]

WAR isn't the only thing that matters. Cabrera has a higher BABIP, wOBA, and WPA. Trout beats Cabrera in all of those as well.

YOU HAVE TO CONSIDER ALL OF THE SABERMETRICS!!!

 

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

Tigers won season series 5-2. Trout played in all 7 games as well.

That's a small regular season sample size. Tigers lost the season series to Cleveland and Seattle. The Angels played a tougher schedule and still had the better record. Furthermore they were in a deep hole before Trout came and dug them out of.

 

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

YOU HAVE TO CONSIDER ALL OF THE SABERMETRICS!!!

And the sabremetricians are the reason why the low budget teams like Oakland are better than both the Tigers and Angels and why the Red Sox won two World Series in the last decade. I assumed everyone had realized how good sabremetrics are for evaluating players.

 

[clashmore_mike]

That's a small regular season sample size. Tigers lost the season series to Cleveland and Seattle. The Angels played a tougher schedule and still had the better record. Furthermore they were in a deep hole before Trout came and dug them out of.

Actually I have to admit that they went 5-5. I looked at the Tigers schedule and didn't see that they played a 3rd series against the Angels in September. Usually teams only play 2 series against teams not from their division.

Furthermore, the Angels lost the season series to the Indians and Padres

 

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

Actually I have to admit that they went 5-5. I looked at the Tigers schedule and didn't see that they played a 3rd series against the Angels in September. Usually teams only play 2 series against teams not from their division.

Furthermore, the Angels lost the season series to the Indians and Padres

I think it's obvious now that the real MVP is Shin-Soo Choo.

 

[gkautz10]

I have found in the last few days that arguing sabermetrics is like arguing why ND is still relevant, some people will just never understand my argument. Almost equally aggravating as well.

 

[Kaneyoufeelit]

I have found in the last few days that arguing sabermetrics is like arguing why ND is still relevant, some people will just never understand my argument. Almost equally aggravating as well.

Preach

 

[woolybug25]

I have found in the last few days that arguing sabermetrics is like arguing why ND is still relevant, some people will just never understand my argument. Almost equally aggravating as well.

And what is aggravating to the rest of us is those of you that act like you have some kind of superior knowledge of Sabermetrics because you fawned over Brad Pitt and read Moneyball. Guess what... so did the rest of us.

We also watch the game more than the last few weeks of the season or the highlights on sportscenter. We will also tell you that there is much more to the game than traditional metrics like stolen bases, OBP and RBI's. You get that by watching the actual games, not by looking at numbers on a spreadsheet.

Just think about it. This is the list that Beene said that he would have drafted in 2002 "in a perfect world" in Moneyball:

Jeremy Guthrie - Cleveland, #22 (1st round)
Joe Blanton - Oakland, #24 (1st round)
Jeff Francis - Colorado, #9 (1st round)
Luke Hagerty - Chicago Cubs, #32 (1st round)
Ben Fritz - Oakland, #30 (1st round)
Robert Brownlie - Chicago Cubs, #21 (1st round)
Stephen Obenchain - Oakland, #37 (1st round)
Bill Murphy - Oakland, #98 (3rd round)
Nick Swisher - Oakland, #16 (1st round)
Russ Adams - Toronto, #14 (1st round)
Khalil Greene - San Diego, #13 (1st round)
John McCurdy - Oakland, #26 (1st round)
Mark Teahen - Oakland, #39 (1st round)
Jeremy Brown - Oakland, #35 (1st round)
Steve Stanley - Oakland, #67 (2nd round)
John Baker - Oakland, #128 (4th round)
Mark Kiger - Oakland, #158 (5th round)
Brian Stavisky - Oakland, #188 (6th round)
Shaun Larkin - Cleveland, #274 (9th round)
Brant Colamarino - Oakland, #218 (7th round)

See many HOF'ers on there? Any MVP's? Guess what... many of those players have put up sick sabermetric numbers in their careers and would have most likely been a very good ballclub. Doesn't make a single one of them an MVP candidate.

 

[Kaneyoufeelit]

And what is aggravating to the rest of us is those of you that act like you have some kind of superior knowledge of Sabermetrics because you fawned over Brad Pitt and read Moneyball. Guess what... so did the rest of us.

We also watch the game more than the last few weeks of the season or the highlights on sportscenter. We will also tell you that there is much more to the game than traditional metrics like stolen bases, OBP and RBI's. You get that by watching the actual games, not by looking at numbers on a spreadsheet.

Just think about it. This is the list that Beene said that he would have drafted in 2002 "in a perfect world" in Moneyball:

Jeremy Guthrie - Cleveland, #22 (1st round)
Joe Blanton - Oakland, #24 (1st round)
Jeff Francis - Colorado, #9 (1st round)
Luke Hagerty - Chicago Cubs, #32 (1st round)
Ben Fritz - Oakland, #30 (1st round)
Robert Brownlie - Chicago Cubs, #21 (1st round)
Stephen Obenchain - Oakland, #37 (1st round)
Bill Murphy - Oakland, #98 (3rd round)
Nick Swisher - Oakland, #16 (1st round)
Russ Adams - Toronto, #14 (1st round)
Khalil Greene - San Diego, #13 (1st round)
John McCurdy - Oakland, #26 (1st round)
Mark Teahen - Oakland, #39 (1st round)
Jeremy Brown - Oakland, #35 (1st round)
Steve Stanley - Oakland, #67 (2nd round)
John Baker - Oakland, #128 (4th round)
Mark Kiger - Oakland, #158 (5th round)
Brian Stavisky - Oakland, #188 (6th round)
Shaun Larkin - Cleveland, #274 (9th round)
Brant Colamarino - Oakland, #218 (7th round)

See many HOF'ers on there? Any MVP's? Guess what... many of those players have put up sick sabermetric numbers in their careers and would have most likely been a very good ballclub. Doesn't make a single one of them an MVP candidate.

Never seen the movie or read the book. I just like facts.

I watched almost every O's game this year, a ton of Nats games, and when I was in London for 6 weeks without television I watched any game that I could. Not sure why you would assume that people who like sabarmetrics don't watch games. That is far from logical. You say there is more to baseball than stats, well kind of. The problem with your argument is that it seems like your suggesting that you can decide who is a good player/who had the best year by just watching games and that just isn't true. There are a lot of biases that we have as viewers that we don't even realize we have, for example we tend to assume "uniform all-americans" are better than guys who don't look good in the uniform.

As far as your list, there are extenuating circumstances for some of those guys. For example Khali Greene got the yips and could no longer pull the trigger at the plate. Nobody evaluating a player on any model could have predicted that. Some of those guys are very productive players. Further, if your baseline of success for a draft is whether or not there is a slew of MVP and HOF players then you're going to be disappointed by almost every draft. The guys who are MVPs and HOFs are special talents that are rarely missed by anyone using any form of evaluation. And if you want to throw around drafts like that proves something, we could look at teams who don't use sabermetrics and have terrible drafts. One year of evidence does not mean you have made a good point. I don't know why you would argue for a position which wants to ignore valuable information. You are correct to say that sabarmetrics do not end an argument but it is frustrating that you are discrediting data.

 

[woolybug25]

Never seen the movie or read the book. I just like facts.

I watched almost every O's game this year, a ton of Nats games, and when I was in London for 6 weeks without television I watched any game that I could. Not sure why you would assume that people who like sabarmetrics don't watch games. That is far from logical. You say there is more to baseball than stats, well kind of. The problem with your argument is that it seems like your suggesting that you can decide who is a good player/who had the best year by just watching games and that just isn't true. There are a lot of biases that we have as viewers that we don't even realize we have, for example we tend to assume "uniform all-americans" are better than guys who don't look good in the uniform.

As far as your list, there are extenuating circumstances for some of those guys. For example Khali Greene got the yips and could no longer pull the trigger at the plate. Nobody evaluating a player on any model could have predicted that. Some of those guys are very productive players. Further, if your baseline of success for a draft is whether or not there is a slew of MVP and HOF players then you're going to be disappointed by almost every draft. The guys who are MVPs and HOFs are special talents that are rarely missed by anyone using any form of evaluation. And if you want to throw around drafts like that proves something, we could look at teams who don't use sabermetrics and have terrible drafts. One year of evidence does mean you have made a good point. I don't know why you would argue for a position which wants to ignore valuable information. You are correct to say that sabarmetrics do not end an argument but it is frustrating that you are discrediting data.

So apparently you did nothing but read the list because no where in my post did I say that stats don't matter like you are inferring, I clearly said that they don't tell the whole story. I also never said that any of the players on Beane's list were bad players, in fact, I said many of them have sick sabermetric numbers and would have been a nice team.

What I was pointing out, was that despite many of them having great numbers, none of those guys would ever compete for an MVP.

You can get defensive if you like. But when guys like gkuatz act like the rest of us are imbeciles because we don't live and die by were players rank on spreadsheets, we have to assume that you watch the game differently than some of the rest of us.

edit - btw, shrink your damn sig pic. It's one thing to have an oversized/annoying sig pic of an ND player, but I don't see why a humongous pic of Flacco clogging every thread is necessary.

 

[Kaneyoufeelit]

Also, I think there is a categorical difference between using sabermetrics as a draft tool and using them to evaluate a year. Drafting requires more than analyzing data, such as projecting how a guy will develop, if he will grow, how he fits in an organization, the type of person he is, ect. But as far as deciding who had the better season, I don't know why you would start anywhere other than sabermetrics. Most people start with numbers when they talk about who was better in a given year, sabermetric people just think that the traditional numbers are the wrong numbers to use to evaluate a year.

 

[woolybug25]

Also, I think there is a categorical difference between using sabermetrics as a draft tool and using them to evaluate a year. Drafting requires more than analyzing data, such as projecting how a guy will develop, if he will grow, how he fits in an organization, the type of person he is, ect. But as far as deciding who had the better season, I don't know why you would start anywhere other than sabermetrics. Most people start with numbers when they talk about who was better in a given year, sabermetric people just think that the traditional numbers are the wrong numbers to use to evaluate a year.

Again, the guys listed have put up good sabermetrics in the pros. So I'm not sure what you are getting at.

Sabermetrics were never meant to be statistics that showed the quality of a player. They have always been meant as metrics that show how much a player contributes to runs, and in turn, wins. A player can be a sabermetrics all-star and not an actual all-star. Just sayin'...

Guys like Ryan Howard, Phil Hughes, Alphonso Soriano, Jamie Garcia, Jason Heyward, Robinson Cano, Jason Mott and Derek Jeter all had poor sabermetric years in 2011. Do you think that is a group that would have underperformed this year?

 

[Kaneyoufeelit]

So apparently you did nothing but read the list because no where in my post did I say that stats don't matter like you are inferring, I clearly said that they don't tell the whole story. I also never said that any of the players on Beane's list were bad players, in fact, I said many of them have sick sabermetric numbers and would have been a nice team.

What I was pointing out, was that despite many of them having great numbers, none of those guys would ever compete for an MVP.

You can get defensive if you like. But when guys like gkuatz act like the rest of us are imbeciles because we don't live and die by were players rank on spreadsheets, we have to assume that you watch the game differently than some of the rest of us.

edit - btw, shrink your damn sig pic. It's one thing to have an oversized/annoying sig pic of an ND player, but I don't see why a humongous pic of Flacco clogging every thread is necessary.

Clearly I read more than your list since my first two paragraphs were about the other things you said and I, in fact, highlighted things.

Also, I'm sorry if you think I was implying that you specifically don't think sabermetic stats matter. Your post was broad talking about sabermetric people in general and my response was meant to be equally as broad. Maybe that didn't come across.

Again, if your baseline for success is being an MVP candidate, you are going to be disappointed a lot. It's also different talking about the usefulness of sabermetric stats when it comes to drafting and when it comes to picking an MVP. They are meant to tell you how a player performed in a given year. They are designed to specifically tell you who had a better year. That is different than using them to predict how someone will do in the future against different and better competition.

And no sig even though I think you were a dick about it.

 

[Kaneyoufeelit]

Again, the guys listed have put up good sabermetrics in the pros. So I'm not sure what you are getting at.

Sabermetrics were never meant to be statistics that showed the quality of a player. They have always been meant as metrics that show how much a player contributes to runs, and in turn, wins. A player can be a sabermetrics all-star and not an actual all-star. Just sayin'...

Guys like Ryan Howard, Phil Hughes, Alphonso Soriano, Jamie Garcia, Jason Heyward, Robinson Cano, Jason Mott and Derek Jeter all had poor sabermetric years in 2011. Do you think that is a group that would have underperformed this year?

That's exactly right. I agree with this. They have some value in predicting the future but are certainly not the end of it. Maybe we are talking about different things. If we are talking about the MVP discussion, I think that they should be given a ton of weight. If we are talking about evaluating talent, I think they are less useful. Are we talking about the same thing?

 

[woolybug25]

That's exactly right. I agree with this. They have some value in predicting the future but are certainly not the end of it. Maybe we are talking about different things. If we are talking about the MVP discussion, I think that they should be given a ton of weight. If we are talking about evaluating talent, I think they are less useful. Are we talking about the same thing?

Alright, since you are being cool... I'll chill on being a dick. What I am getting at is that sabermetrics certainly have their place. They are great at predicting/evaluating how much a player contributes to runs and in turn wins. But I don't feel like they can be the end all of deciding who wins the MVP award. There are additional things that should be put into the perspective of that decision. Many sabermetricians (and people that follow them) have became jaded by statistics and spreadsheets and forget that the game is still played on the field. There is more to this game than spreadsheets and that is why I believe Cabrera had the best season in baseball and is more important to his (playoff contender) team.

Good talk.

 

[woolybug25]

One anonymous message to me wanted to see this:

But I am feeling more like this:

 

[JT_IRISH]

Definitely Cabrera. Go Tigers!!

 

[gkautz10]

So apparently you did nothing but read the list because no where in my post did I say that stats don't matter like you are inferring, I clearly said that they don't tell the whole story. I also never said that any of the players on Beane's list were bad players, in fact, I said many of them have sick sabermetric numbers and would have been a nice team.

What I was pointing out, was that despite many of them having great numbers, none of those guys would ever compete for an MVP.

You can get defensive if you like. But when guys like gkuatz act like the rest of us are imbeciles because we don't live and die by were players rank on spreadsheets, we have to assume that you watch the game differently than some of the rest of us.

edit - btw, shrink your damn sig pic. It's one thing to have an oversized/annoying sig pic of an ND player, but I don't see why a humongous pic of Flacco clogging every thread is necessary.

Again, the guys listed have put up good sabermetrics in the pros. So I'm not sure what you are getting at.

Sabermetrics were never meant to be statistics that showed the quality of a player. They have always been meant as metrics that show how much a player contributes to runs, and in turn, wins. A player can be a sabermetrics all-star and not an actual all-star. Just sayin'...

Guys like Ryan Howard, Phil Hughes, Alphonso Soriano, Jamie Garcia, Jason Heyward, Robinson Cano, Jason Mott and Derek Jeter all had poor sabermetric years in 2011. Do you think that is a group that would have underperformed this year?

Actually I am an avid baseball fan who spends my summers coach 12U baseball because I want to, not because I have a kid on the team. I also go to quite a few games a year and also played a little college ball. So yes I do watch a lot of baseball and I know a decent amount about it. Not saying I know everything. As you mentioned about Moneyball, I read that book when it came out, which was long before the movie came out. Sounds to me like you took what I said to heart. I don't disagree with you that traditional baseball stats are still a valuable tool and still very good and measuring a player, however I think sabermetrics also do a nice job. I never once criticized you for not believing in sabermetrics, I said it is frustrating when I argue them with people. I don't think they are an end all be all of baseball stats either, just aggravates me when people reject them like the Pope rejects abortions. Also, as someone else mentioned, I think your example of the 2002 draft is a little weak. I would say the A's first round pic was a pretty productive one (Nick Swisher). I also think that there were only about 3 or maybe 4 players taken above him that ended up having a better career thus far. You should have used a year such as 2003 or 2004 to make your point a little stronger. As Kaneyoufeelit pointed out, a vast majority of the players who are drafted high in the MLB draft never pan out. Let's look at the number 1 picks from 2002-today.
2002-Bryan Bullington (who??)
2003-Delmon Young (so-so)
2004-Matthew Bush (who?)
2005-Justin Upton (good career thus far, has lot's of potential) this was also a decent draft class
2006-Luke Hochevar (nothing to write home about)
2007- David Price (productive career)
2008-Tim Beckham (never heard of him)
2009-Stephen Strasburg (enough said, could be plagued by arm injuries due to his motion)
2010-Bryce Harper (awesome so far, although I think he is a cocky *******)
2011-Gerrit Cole (these last 2 years are bad examples due to the time it takes to work through the minors)
2012-Carlos Carrea
My point being here is that 4 of those guys have had a good career, the last 2 guys are unproven but they are sure not a Bryce Harper or Strasburg. So again, you are going to be disappointed alot if yout think that traditional stats are the Bible. Since you were a dick to me, I will point out why I question your knowledge of baseball for a second. Alfonso Soriano and Jaime Garcia. Two big names in baseball that you hear alot about, yet you can't spell their name. Also, unless you are some head scout for a major league ball club don't come in hear acting like you are the god of evaluating baseball talent. Wasn't trying to be a dick before by my comment, but you took it too heart. I think this debate has been useful and fun to partake in. Plus we are making someone v-rich.

 

[woolybug25]

Actually I am an avid baseball fan who spends my summers coach 12U baseball because I want to, not because I have a kid on the team. I also go to quite a few games a year and also played a little college ball. So yes I do watch a lot of baseball and I know a decent amount about it. Not saying I know everything. As you mentioned about Moneyball, I read that book when it came out, which was long before the movie came out. Sounds to me like you took what I said to heart. I don't disagree with you that traditional baseball stats are still a valuable tool and still very good and measuring a player, however I think sabermetrics also do a nice job. I never once criticized you for not believing in sabermetrics, I said it is frustrating when I argue them with people. I don't think they are an end all be all of baseball stats either, just aggravates me when people reject them like the Pope rejects abortions. Also, as someone else mentioned, I think your example of the 2002 draft is a little weak. I would say the A's first round pic was a pretty productive one (Nick Swisher). I also think that there were only about 3 or maybe 4 players taken above him that ended up having a better career thus far. You should have used a year such as 2003 or 2004 to make your point a little stronger. As Kaneyoufeelit pointed out, a vast majority of the players who are drafted high in the MLB draft never pan out. Let's look at the number 1 picks from 2002-today.
2002-Bryan Bullington (who??)
2003-Delmon Young (so-so)
2004-Matthew Bush (who?)
2005-Justin Upton (good career thus far, has lot's of potential) this was also a decent draft class
2006-Luke Hochevar (nothing to write home about)
2007- David Price (productive career)
2008-Tim Beckham (never heard of him)
2009-Stephen Strasburg (enough said, could be plagued by arm injuries due to his motion)
2010-Bryce Harper (awesome so far, although I think he is a cocky *******)
2011-Gerrit Cole (these last 2 years are bad examples due to the time it takes to work through the minors)
2012-Carlos Carrea
My point being here is that 4 of those guys have had a good career, the last 2 guys are unproven but they are sure not a Bryce Harper or Strasburg. So again, you are going to be disappointed alot if yout think that traditional stats are the Bible. Since you were a dick to me, I will point out why I question your knowledge of baseball for a second. Alfonso Soriano and Jaime Garcia. Two big names in baseball that you hear alot about, yet you can't spell their name. Also, unless you are some head scout for a major league ball club don't come in hear acting like you are the god of evaluating baseball talent. Wasn't trying to be a dick before by my comment, but you took it too heart. I think this debate has been useful and fun to partake in. Plus we are making someone v-rich.

Why don't you actually read all my comments before you come on acting like a prick. We have already discussed your point, so sorry if you spent a lot of time writing a useless post. I'm also sorry that I spelled a couple names wrong typing from the top of my head. I wasn't aware that spelling had something to do with how much of a baseball fan someone is.

 

[gkautz10]

Read all your posts before typing. Sorry you are over discussing my point I guess. Did not know we every really started. Not acting like a prick just disputing the fact that you said I made you look like an imbecile by throwing in a joke. Guess your sense of humor is done discussing also.

 

[woolybug25]

Read all your posts before typing. Sorry you are over discussing my point I guess. Did not know we every really started. Not acting like a prick just disputing the fact that you said I made you look like an imbecile by throwing in a joke. Guess your sense of humor is done discussing also.

We are over discussing a conversation that came to a conclusion and well discussed over a day ago. You obviously don't post much here, and that's fine. But don't come on here like you are hot sh!t trying to bust on me with points that have already been discussed ad nauseam.

I also never said that you "made me look like an imbecile". You would have had to actually bring up an original thought to do something like that. I said that you were acting like the rest of us didn't know anything about Sabermetrics simply because we don't put as big of an emphasis on it as you do. Which is certaintly what you implied in your original post.

Kane and I moved on, so you can keep banging your head against the wall if you like. But if you want my response just read my other comments. Your answer is in there somewhere.

 

[gkautz10]

Glad you understood what I was trying to imply in my post. I sure didn't. Last I checked, I could contribute to the conversation whether you were done arguing about it or not. From now on I will look for your post that ends all discussion in threads so I do not post after that. Thanks for the head ups as to how the discussions on this board work. Have not started banging my head on the wall, but will now after your suggestion. Have a good day sir. (You won the argument, better go and chalk that one up on your scorecard!)

 

[Irish Insanity]

Being a Tigers fan my comments are a bit bias. But MVP is decided on the field not on paper, and play an entire season before you qualify. Cabrera for MVP

 

[Kaneyoufeelit]

Miguel Cabrera draws criticism from teammate for not talking after Game 4′s loss | Big League Stew - Yahoo! Sports

Curious what people think about this? Is it a problem if a star player blows off the media after a disappointing loss? What about a coach?

 

[KPENN]

Miguel Cabrera draws criticism from teammate for not talking after Game 4′s loss | Big League Stew - Yahoo! Sports

Curious what people think about this? Is it a problem if a star player blows off the media after a disappointing loss? What about a coach?

Yes and yes.

 

[Irishnuke]

Miguel Cabrera draws criticism from teammate for not talking after Game 4′s loss | Big League Stew - Yahoo! Sports

Curious what people think about this? Is it a problem if a star player blows off the media after a disappointing loss? What about a coach?

No and No