Posted by MikeT23 on 10/3/2012 1:07:00 PM (view original):
Cabrera again.  http://www.baseball-reference.com/leaders/wpa_li_bat_top_ten.shtml

I'm not a huge fan of WPA, but again the margin between him and Trout on offense is small. And it completely goes away when defense and base running are considered. You're helping the argument for Trout.

I think you're overvaluing defense and baserunning.    Gigantically.

FWIW, I don't care that you think Trout is the MVP.   He's definitely worthy.

I just think you're being ridiculously retarded for saying "Not even close".     

Since you say it's not homerism, which I could understand a little better, I think think you're just being dumb.

I'm not assigning value to defense and base running, just using the values already assigned by Fangraphs. The two players are essentially tied offensively. Breaking the tie with defense and base running makes a whole hell of a lot more sense than "well, uh, the Tigers got into the  playoffs and the Angels didn't even though they won more games."

I think there are retarded aspects to both of your arguments.

So there.

Makes more sense to you because you're a statnerd.   Playoffs makes more sense to me because I'm a team-oriented guy.  If you're not contributing to a common goal, or you fail in reaching that common goal, you're less valuable.

The knock on A-Roid was always how he comes up big when it doesn't matter.   A stat-compiler.  

I'll say it again, Trout had a fine season.  Not a historical season.   Since he's not going to be on the TV in October, no one will remember his season in a few years.  If Cabrera comes up big, or stinks out loud, in October, people will recall his Triple Crown or his near TC. 

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/3/2012 1:24:00 PM (view original):
Makes more sense to you because you're a statnerd.   Playoffs makes more sense to me because I'm a team-oriented guy.  If you're not contributing to a common goal, or you fail in reaching that common goal, you're less valuable.

The knock on A-Roid was always how he comes up big when it doesn't matter.   A stat-compiler.  

I'll say it again, Trout had a fine season.  Not a historical season.   Since he's not going to be on the TV in October, no one will remember his season in a few years.  If Cabrera comes up big, or stinks out loud, in October, people will recall his Triple Crown or his near TC. 

The team goal is to win games. The Angels won more games than the Tigers.

I think the team goal is to make the playoffs.    Everybody wins games.   Only 10 make the playoffs. 

Ok, then the team goal is to win the World Series. 10 teams make the playoffs, only one wins the series.

If the Yankees win the WS, should Cano be the MVP?

I don't think winning the WS is the team goal until you reach the playoffs.    As you know, playoff stats don't count towards the regular season MVP. 

I also don't think 40 SB = 7 runs.    But you don't want to hear that.

You don't understand how base running stats are calculated.

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/3/2012 1:24:00 PM (view original):
Makes more sense to you because you're a statnerd.   Playoffs makes more sense to me because I'm a team-oriented guy.  If you're not contributing to a common goal, or you fail in reaching that common goal, you're less valuable.

The knock on A-Roid was always how he comes up big when it doesn't matter.   A stat-compiler.  

I'll say it again, Trout had a fine season.  Not a historical season.   Since he's not going to be on the TV in October, no one will remember his season in a few years.  If Cabrera comes up big, or stinks out loud, in October, people will recall his Triple Crown or his near TC. 

You're still downplaying Trout's performance by saying it's "not a historical season".

From baseball-reference.com, I'm only counting seven players in the past 40 years who have posted a higher season WAR than Trout has this season.  And two of those are Barry Bonds' 'roided-up 2001-2002 seasons, so I'd throw them out.

FYI . . .

Joe Morgan (1975) - 10.8
Dwight Gooden (1985) - 13.0
Cal Ripken (1991) - 11.3
Roger Clemens (1997) - 11.8
Pedro Martinez (2000) - 11.4

For a position player, one can use these numbers to argue that Trout has had one of the three best seasons (again, discounting Bonds) of any position player over the past 40 years.

That can be considered somewhat historical.

I think some people still don't trust new stats. I can tell you with precision how many homers, hits, SBs, etc a guy gets. When it comes to defense, how exact is dWAR, range factor, etc? Ill admit I'm not up on all the saber metric stats, but a lot of them seem retroactive. What I mean by that is "regular" stats are used to measure how good a guy is, but saber metric stats are used to validate how good a guy is after you've already decided he's good.

Posted by bad_luck on 10/3/2012 1:39:00 PM (view original):
You don't understand how base running stats are calculated.

I somehow doubt a runner "creates" an extra 7 runs on the basepaths via the SB and taking the extra base.

What tecwrg said. This piece on The Big Lead shows that seasons like Trout's are more rare than season's like Cabrera's.

http://www.thebiglead.com/index.php/2012/10/03/miguel-cabrera-vs-mike-trout-for-al-mvp-what-does-history-say/