2011(and beyond!) MLB thread.

[clashcityrocker10]

About Selig reviewing the trade: the commissioner reviews pretty much every trade. Obviously this one will be under a little more scrutiny because this trade is ****ing huge. It's little more than a formality, and if he does happen to veto this one, I think he'd be gone from his post very quickly and there would be huge changes to the commissioner's job.

[SheSaidSheSaid]

Just like with the Gold Glove award Mike Trout was robbed of yet another award he deserved.

The other 29 teams' fans disagree with you this time.

[Cubecubed]

Cabrera deserved this one. He was the MVP in every meaning of the word.

[Dante1847]

that is simply not true

[Cubecubed]

Best player in Baseball- Check
Most Valuable to his team- Double Check, the Tigers are probably not even in the postseason without him.

Also, I can't give the MVP to someone whose team didn't make the playoffs, I just can't.

[bigmf]

Best player in Baseball- Check
Most Valuable to his team- Double Check, the Tigers are probably not even in the postseason without him.

Also, I can't give the MVP to someone whose team didn't make the playoffs, I just can't.

Best player in baseball is far too broad. Best batter, last year, certainly. Defensively he's in the lower half of the league. He's also a below average baserunner.

Trout's team missed the playoffs with a better record than the Tigers and in a tougher division.

That being said, either choice is fine by me. Its fun watching the fight between sabr-dorks and cranky old traditionalists.

[Cubecubed]

I'm far from a traditionalist, but I think most sabermetric stats are pretty stupid and useless.

[killer_roach]

that is simply not true

Trout is a good hitter who steals bases and makes some good plays in center.

Cabrera is the best hitter in the game, bar none.

End of the day, no comparison.

Only reason Trout had such outstanding WAR this year was because of his stolen base numbers (which really require other people to capitalize on them, not him) and the fact that the defensive component of WAR is very subjective and benefited Trout and hampered Cabrera (although by other defensive stats Cabrera was above-average at 3B and Trout wasn't the best-in-the-majors defensive CF that dWAR indicates).

Honestly, for a single player's contribution to the team, Cabrera was well above and beyond Trout. At best Trout saves you a few runs on defense and gets you a few added runs on baserunning, but loses about 40-50 runs on offense compared to Cabrera.

I'm not sure how that evens out.

Trout really, to be a legit MVP contender, needs to do some combination of a) hit well over 100 RBI, b) clearly lead the league in hitting, c) put up some bonkers baserunning numbers (70+ SB?), or d) be an unambiguously top defensive OF in the league.

This year, Trout did... none of them.

End. Of. Discussion.

[Dante1847]

ha, bigmf wants to see a fight, so Ill start one!

those in favor of picking Cabrera over Trout are simply using irrational arguments: "oh he has done something that hasn't been done in 45 years"; "his team made the playoffs", etc. its just baseball purists spoon feeding bull**** reasons to justify their job and credentials, when in fact their line of thinking is flat out outdated, illogical and ultimately wrong.

consider the fact that one of those Triple Crown categories--RBI--is a stat that is dependent on situational factors and other elements outside of a player's control. it should be ignored, for the sme reasons that Wins should be ignored when evaluating pitchers. the Triple Crown as a whole is overhyped simply because it's rare, similar to hitting for the cycle. A player who hits for the cycle is going to displace his teammate who on the same night went 4-4 with 2 doubles, a HR, and a walk. of the two, who has more "value"? people too easily throw the Triple Crown out there like it tells us a lot about a player's value, when it just doesn't. it's like saying a player is good for not hitting into double plays because he strikes out a lot. Triple Crown requires a lot of randomness that needs to go the players way. I bet if Cabrera fell short on of the categories, his MVP candidacy wouldn't have been nearly as strong. that tells us all we need to know about how much to use the Triple Crown in deciding MVPs.

exactly how are sabermetrics stupid and useless? all they do is provide objective analysis of a player's value, independent of **** like place in the lineup, who got on base before, when they got on base before you, etc.

Bigmf hit it right about how to judge "best player". Doesn't just include HR's, RBIs, and batting avg. Trout had a slightly better OBP, slightly worse SLG (his home field hurt him a little), added MUCH more value running, and was more valuable defensively playing a slightly tougher position. He was the better player.

the whole MVP argument is really an argument against tradition. that might be what bugs me the most, how the Cabrera side is using arguments that have nothing to do with how much value a player had for the team.

[SheSaidSheSaid]

loses about 40-50 runs on offense compared to Cabrera.

You're putting Cabrera 4-5 WAR ahead of Trout? Really? 10 runs = 1 win.

Trout really, to be a legit MVP contender, needs to do some combination of a) hit well over 100 RBI

Terrible metric for evaluating hitters. You mentioned above that stolen bases are only of value if someone else drives him in, but apparently you expect Trout to rack up RBI's without help? (Else why does he "need" more of them?)