You're saying that the Angels didn't make the playoffs with Trout so they could have just not made the playoffs without him too. The Angels also would not have made the playoffs with Cabrera. Each player's value is EXACTLY the same regardless of the team his is on.

Posted by bad_luck on 10/3/2012 7:24:00 PM (view original):
The Angels wouldn't have made the playoffs with Cabrera. They would have finished further back in the standings.

Crystal ball WAR?

Posted by masterdebate on 10/3/2012 3:54:00 PM (view original):
do trout's stolen bases get counted twice, at least somewhat? i.e. he steals second and scores on a single. without the steal, he may not score on the single. does that factor in, or is it somehow excluded?

Runs and RBIs don't factor into WAR whatsoever.  It's a more probabilistic statistic - the guy with such and so a batting line could be reasonably expected to contribute some number of runs above replacement level (on an average team).  The reality is that the overall impact on the offensive output tends to be a little above RAR in an above-average offense and a little below in a below-average offense, but that's really something that's probably more good than bad.  Are some guys - Miguel Cabrera in that group - good at making contact when they need to, hitting the ball in the air when they need to, and generally doing what it takes to drive in runs?  Yes.  But for the most part it's also a reasonably fair point that RBIs and runs are highly team-dependent.  Miguel Cabrera would not have driven in nearly as many runs playing for the Mariners.  If he played in Seattle he wouldn't be contending for a triple crown because his HRs would be well down, likely his average would be depressed, and consequently his RBIs would suffer as well.  But even if he played with the rest of the Seattle roster with home games in Detroit I still highly doubt he'd be close to the RBI lead.  I'm not saying you TOTALLY ignore RBIs as a stat, but I would basically ignore runs (your entire contribution to scoring runs can be 99.9% captured by your batting and baserunning stats) and look at RBIs from the perspective that they contain much less info than rate stats.

Posted by bad_luck on 10/3/2012 7:27:00 PM (view original):
You're saying that the Angels didn't make the playoffs with Trout so they could have just not made the playoffs without him too. The Angels also would not have made the playoffs with Cabrera. Each player's value is EXACTLY the same regardless of the team his is on.

If Cabrera were on the Angels rather than Trout, he'd likely be less valuable to them than he is to the Tigers.

I see people are still having trouble differentiating between value and worth.

$1000 is worth more than $100. But I guarantee you $100 is more valuable to me than $1000 is to Bill Gates.

Posted by bad_luck on 10/3/2012 4:58:00 PM (view original):

Posted by loudawg10 on 10/3/2012 4:58:00 PM (view original):
FUN WITH WAR!!

Per B-R (for position players only):
Cabrera's WAR (O+D) is 6.9.  His team total WAR is 14.5.  Meaning Cabrera's WAR is 47.6% of his team's total level.
Trout's WAR (O+D) is 10.7.  His team total WAR is 38.2.  Trout's WAR is 28% of his team's total.

Who is more valuable to their team?

Trout had better teammates. Makes sense since the Angels won more games and were a better team. Should Trout be punished for this fact?

actually in terms of value to his team...yes.   in terms of performance no.

lets try an analogy.
In one pot you have $382; in another you have $145.  If you take $107 away from Jar 1, you still have $275.  If you take $69 dollars away from jar 2, you have only $76. 

The $107 is a higher number, but the $69 is more important to the overall contents of its jar.

I haven't read this entire thread, but I haven't yet seen anyone mention the fact that Cabrera led the majors in HRs and is putting up huge offensive numbers in a  monster pitcher's park.

Apparently LA is more of a pitchers' park, because Trout has a higher park-adjusted OPS+ despite lower raw numbers. I would not have guessed that, as I think of LA as 'fairly neutral' and think of DET as a place with deeep gaps (more 2b/less hr).

Indeed. Comerica is slightly favorable to hitters, while Angel Stadium is one of the worst for hitters.

Is Comerica less favorable for HR though?

ESPN gives Angel Stadium a 0.754 HR factor, and Comerica 1.013 for 2012

2011: 0.789 to 0.987
2010: 0.825 to 0.922
2009: 1.22 to 0.974
2008: 0.933 to 1.188

WIS park ratings are full of sh*t, man

Small sample size, but surprising nonetheless.

Five seasons isn't really a small sample size, given the number of PA/AB/G involved. It is enough information. But if you like:

2007: 0.89 to 1.14
2006: 0.801 to 0.806
2005: 0.906 to 0.941
2004: 1.062 to 0.871
2003: 0.789 to 0.871
2002: 0.612 to 0.749
2001: 1.117 to 0.679

That's as far back as ESPN goes. The differences aren't consistent, but that is to be expected. Average it out, though, and Angel Stadium clearly dampens home runs more.

Triple Crown + Playoff spot for Tigers = case closed for Cabrera.