Ripping off ESPN -> Trout vs Cabrera MVP Topic

trsnoke
Posts: 263 (0)
Hall of Famer
124 92
Prospect
Posted by MikeT23 on 10/4/2012 1:39:00 PM (view original):
Posted by trsnoke on 10/4/2012 1:37:00 PM (view original):
Tampa Bay had a better record, too.  Tigers are in the playoffs because of the division they play in.  Congrats to them, but I don't see why that would be an argument for Cabrera over Trout or anyone else.  I think Cabrera is the first triple crown winner to not lead his league in WAR, which is interesting.
Perhaps WAR is flawed?

Perhaps there are ways to add value besides just Batting Average, HR, and RBI?

10/4/2012 1:47 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
Posted by trsnoke on 10/4/2012 1:47:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 10/4/2012 1:39:00 PM (view original):
Posted by trsnoke on 10/4/2012 1:37:00 PM (view original):
Tampa Bay had a better record, too.  Tigers are in the playoffs because of the division they play in.  Congrats to them, but I don't see why that would be an argument for Cabrera over Trout or anyone else.  I think Cabrera is the first triple crown winner to not lead his league in WAR, which is interesting.
Perhaps WAR is flawed?

Perhaps there are ways to add value besides just Batting Average, HR, and RBI?

Without question.

But that doesn't address my question, does it?
10/4/2012 1:49 PM
bad_luck
Posts: 21761 (0)
Hall of Famer
48 1 10
Prospect
I'm not relying on WAR. It's a good quick measure of each player's season, but we can look at other stats too. This entire thread I've focused on two points.
1) That Trout was better than Cabrera this year. By a lot.
2) Arguments that Cabrera should get the MVP anyway because the Tigers made the playoffs or because the rest of the Tigers weren't very good ARE ******* RETARDED ******* ARGUMENTS

10/4/2012 1:49 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
1) No, he did not.
2) No, baseball is individuals playing a team game with a team goal.   One player was on a team that achieved that goal, the other team did not.   Only a fool refuses to recognize these simple facts.

When you were a kid playing baseball and your team got smoked 9-0 did you say "I don't care.  I went 2-2 with a walk.  My WAR is awesome"?
10/4/2012 1:53 PM
bad_luck
Posts: 21761 (0)
Hall of Famer
48 1 10
Prospect
Posted by MikeT23 on 10/4/2012 1:53:00 PM (view original):
1) No, he did not.
2) No, baseball is individuals playing a team game with a team goal.   One player was on a team that achieved that goal, the other team did not.   Only a fool refuses to recognize these simple facts.

When you were a kid playing baseball and your team got smoked 9-0 did you say "I don't care.  I went 2-2 with a walk.  My WAR is awesome"?
We aren't arguing what the goal of baseball is. We are arguing who the most valuable player should be. Trout was more valuable, based on what he did on the field, than Cabrera.
10/4/2012 1:57 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
R-T
H-C
2B-C
3B-T
HR-C
RBI-C
AVG-C
OBP-T
SLG-C
SB-T
CS-C
TB-C
BB-T
K-C

Lots of C in there.
10/4/2012 2:00 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
Posted by bad_luck on 10/4/2012 1:57:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 10/4/2012 1:53:00 PM (view original):
1) No, he did not.
2) No, baseball is individuals playing a team game with a team goal.   One player was on a team that achieved that goal, the other team did not.   Only a fool refuses to recognize these simple facts.

When you were a kid playing baseball and your team got smoked 9-0 did you say "I don't care.  I went 2-2 with a walk.  My WAR is awesome"?
We aren't arguing what the goal of baseball is. We are arguing who the most valuable player should be. Trout was more valuable, based on what he did on the field, than Cabrera.

Valuable players contribute to the team goal.   Others rack up stats.

This is like your "all outs are shtty outs" argument which you quickly backtracked on.

10/4/2012 2:02 PM
bad_luck
Posts: 21761 (0)
Hall of Famer
48 1 10
Prospect
Trout
30 HR; .326/.399/.564; 171 OPS+; 49 sb; 13.5 UZR/150; 6.8 fangraphs base runs

Cabrera
44 HR;  .330/.393/.606; 166 OPS+; 4 sb; -10.6 UZR/150; -2.3 fangraphs base runs

Arguably tied on offense and not even close on defense and base running. Like I said 23 pages ago.
10/4/2012 2:06 PM
tecwrg
Posts: 18995 (1)
Hall of Famer
4 1 152 32 129
Prospect
Posted by MikeT23 on 10/4/2012 1:35:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 10/4/2012 1:08:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 10/4/2012 12:51:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 10/4/2012 12:21:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 10/4/2012 11:52:00 AM (view original):
Now, to put that into the context of this discussion, the MVP is given to the Most VALUABLE Player not the player with the best stats.   Maybe they're the same guy, maybe they aren't.
Isn't WAR intended to be an objective way of assessing a player's value to his team?

Mike Trout's value is 10.7 wins above a replacement level CF.
Miguel Cabrera's value is 6.9 wins above a replacement level 3B.

Isn't 10.7 greater than 6.9?
WAR is a stat.    Please see:   "the MVP is given to the Most VALUABLE Player not the player with the best stats"
WAR is a stat that objectively quantifies value.  With VALUE being the root of the world VALUABLE.
Did you have an issue with dWAR earlier?  

Are you saying you're completely comfortable with WAR despite that?
I am questioning the value of dWAR.  You are correct.

Going strictly with oWAR, it's still Trout by an 8.6 to 7.5 margin.

8.6 is greater than 7.5 still, isn't it?  Or have the rules of mathematics changed and I didn't get the memo?
10/4/2012 2:07 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
I can find fast guys who play good D all day long.  

And hardly "tied" on offense. 
10/4/2012 2:08 PM
loudawg10
Posts: 1178 (0)
Hall of Famer
117 1 3 137 161 11
Rookie
the point of WAR is to be a tool, not a be all end all statistic to determine a players "value".  

Fun with WAR part 2: TEAM WARS!

Houston 55 wins - team WAR 7.6.  -  a team of "replacement" Houston Astros wins 47-48 games
Chi Cubs 61 wins - team WAR 11. - a team of "replacement" Cubs wins 50 games
Wash Nats 98 wins - team WAR 41 - "replacement" Nats win 57 games
NYY 95 wins - team WAR 48 - "replacement" Yanks win 47 games
SF 94 wins - team WAR 35 - "replacement" Giants win 59 game

so the Yanks win 1 more game than the Giants with "real players", but if each team is stocked with "replacements" the Giants win 12 more games than the Yanks?


10/4/2012 2:08 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
Posted by tecwrg on 10/4/2012 2:07:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 10/4/2012 1:35:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 10/4/2012 1:08:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 10/4/2012 12:51:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 10/4/2012 12:21:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 10/4/2012 11:52:00 AM (view original):
Now, to put that into the context of this discussion, the MVP is given to the Most VALUABLE Player not the player with the best stats.   Maybe they're the same guy, maybe they aren't.
Isn't WAR intended to be an objective way of assessing a player's value to his team?

Mike Trout's value is 10.7 wins above a replacement level CF.
Miguel Cabrera's value is 6.9 wins above a replacement level 3B.

Isn't 10.7 greater than 6.9?
WAR is a stat.    Please see:   "the MVP is given to the Most VALUABLE Player not the player with the best stats"
WAR is a stat that objectively quantifies value.  With VALUE being the root of the world VALUABLE.
Did you have an issue with dWAR earlier?  

Are you saying you're completely comfortable with WAR despite that?
I am questioning the value of dWAR.  You are correct.

Going strictly with oWAR, it's still Trout by an 8.6 to 7.5 margin.

8.6 is greater than 7.5 still, isn't it?  Or have the rules of mathematics changed and I didn't get the memo?
So, despite thinking dWAR is flawed, you blindly accept oWAR?

OK then.
10/4/2012 2:09 PM
trsnoke
Posts: 263 (0)
Hall of Famer
124 92
Prospect
Posted by MikeT23 on 10/4/2012 1:49:00 PM (view original):
Posted by trsnoke on 10/4/2012 1:47:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 10/4/2012 1:39:00 PM (view original):
Posted by trsnoke on 10/4/2012 1:37:00 PM (view original):
Tampa Bay had a better record, too.  Tigers are in the playoffs because of the division they play in.  Congrats to them, but I don't see why that would be an argument for Cabrera over Trout or anyone else.  I think Cabrera is the first triple crown winner to not lead his league in WAR, which is interesting.
Perhaps WAR is flawed?

Perhaps there are ways to add value besides just Batting Average, HR, and RBI?

Without question.

But that doesn't address my question, does it?
I think it does, since your comment implied that if WAR and triple crown aren't aligned that WAR must be flawed.  I'd take Trout in this argument but I expect Miggy will get the award.  It doesn't bother me since he is clearly one of the very best players in the game.  I do think that the "his team made the playoffs" argument is ridiculous when there are three divisions, though.  Tigers had 7th best record in league.  In/out of playoffs is a function of Tigers bein in the "right" division and the Angels and Rays being in the "wrong" divisions.  No one should get extra credit or demerits for that.
10/4/2012 2:10 PM
burnsy483
Posts: 6848 (0)
Veteran
1 1 26
Prospect
Mike has also disqualified the UZR stat, so that won't help your argument with him.  He shouldn't deny that Trout is a much better center fielder than Cabrera is a 3rd baseman, though.

Again, who's most valuable in a vacuum, all things equal? Trout.  But all things aren't equal.  Cabrera has meant more to the Tigers than Trout has to the Angels.  That's all I'm saying - and there are many people who look at this information when deciding who should be the MVP, whether you think it's right or wrong.  And since the MVP award doesn't have a definition, or ANY guidelines, I can't argue with people who do.  Or "******* ******* RETARDED."
10/4/2012 2:10 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
Posted by MikeT23 on 10/4/2012 2:08:00 PM (view original):
I can find fast guys who play good D all day long.  

And hardly "tied" on offense. 
Hell, there is some speculation that Brett Gardner will be on the Yankees post-season roster because he's fast.   I don't think he can even play D right now.
10/4/2012 2:11 PM
◂ Prev 1...22|23|24|25|26...42 Next ▸
Ripping off ESPN -> Trout vs Cabrera MVP Topic
△Top△Bottom

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2024 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.