RealGM

Cabera a triple crown candidate with below average defense, Trout leads the league in runs scored while playing stellar offense/defense and leads the league in WAR . Encarnacion because he plays for Toronto and went from the nicknames E5 to E3 to EE.Who is your pick for MVP?

Discuss.

If the league can't vote for Jose Bautista last year ro the year before.. why should Mike Trout win?

Trout is putting up the best season in baseball since Bonds was mashing in his best years. There's no question it's him. You have to take elite offense, defense, and baserunning every time over just elite offense.

It's not the "who has the best WAR" competition. Cabrera is going to win the triple crown and he's the leader of a playoff team. For the historical context- I give it to Cabrera.

baulderdash77 wrote:It's not the "who has the best WAR" competition. Cabrera is going to win the triple crown and he's the leader of a playoff team. For the historical context- I give it to Cabrera.

No, but it is an award for who is the best and most valuable player in the AL. And that is unquestionably Mike Trout.

altho Trout is the better all around player, Cabrera and his team are going to the playoffs. that always have some weight in MVP talk

Who should win? I agree with Randle, Trout should win. But given what Miggy is on the verge of accomplishing, and where his team is, I'm confident he will win. And I don't think it's a massive injustice if he does win. He's having a fantastic season obviously and on the brink of accomplishing something that hasn't been done for 45ish or so years. Like it or not, that holds weight.

Absolutely Trout, and it's not even remotely close
The triple crown is neat from a historical perspective, but basing MVP on average, homeruns and RBI's and ignoring everything else is ridiculous.

Trout has arguably had a better offensive season, is one of the most dangerous base runners in baseball and is an elite defender at one of the most important defensive positions. He has had as complete a season as anyone possibly could.

And his team will finish with a better record in an infinitely tougher division ( for those who use the playoffs card )

All of which is why i was floored to hear AA say Cabrera on PTS today, because of triple crown and playoffs.

Cabrera without a doubt.

There There wrote:Absolutely Trout, and it's not even remotely close
The triple crown is neat from a historical perspective, but basing MVP on average, homeruns and RBI's and ignoring everything else is ridiculous.

Trout has arguably had a better offensive season, is one of the most dangerous base runners in baseball and is an elite defender at one of the most important defensive positions. He has had as complete a season as anyone possibly could.

And his team will finish with a better record in an infinitely tougher division ( for those who use the playoffs card )

All of which is why i was floored to hear AA say Cabrera on PTS today, because of triple crown and playoffs.

How did Trout have a better offensive season then Miggy?

Miguel hit 44 home runs compared to Trout's 30
139 RBI's compared to 83(although this is compltely skewed since trout is leadoff)
4 points higher batting average
Mike Trout struck out 41 more times and played 22 less games

During the last full two months of the season, Miguel hit .357 and .308
Trout hit .284 in August and .257 in Sept(YIKES!) after pitchers figured him out

Yes I agree Trout is by far the better all around baseball player, but Miguel's offensive numbers are one for the ages. It's hard for me to consider a guy for MVP when he had his two worst months in the most important stretch of the season

I think there's a clear cut case that Trout's season was better. 50 points of slugging and bad defense vs. 50 steals and plus defense seems pretty clear.

That being said, the TC is historic, we've just started the move towards better stats (not new, better), but every single part of tradition (and while I prefer the way things are headed, I think tradition does count for something in baseball) has this as Miggy's year. When has the argument for MVP ever been about speed and defense? Farking never is when. Should it have been? Absolutely. But is hasn't yet and I don't see the year a guy hits for the TC to be the year they change it up to give the MVP to a rookie, no matter how great his speed and defense were.

Not to mention the perennial contender/non-contender debate that for once actually has some merit for the frontrunners. Two guys on teams with legitimate championship aspirations when the season began. One guy made his push in Aug and Sept and brought a team from behind in the standings to make the playoffs (albeit in a crap division catching a crap team), while the other tailed off in Aug and Sept and his team failed to make it into the postseason. I never like it when they factor in the played for a playoff team, but there's something valid about that argument this year because the performance, result, and expectations are both similar and divergent to maximum outcome.

What disturbs me is the small chance that Trout could win anyway. Again, I think he had the better year, but I don't think the voters see it that way. If he does win it'll be because the statheads give them an out so they can not vote for a gigantic douchehole like Cabrera.

I know my argument is kind of mental, but so be it. Trout had a better year. Playoff team or not shouldn't matter. Cabrera is a dick. Cabrera should win MVP (not just will, I'm saying should in my opinion). QE....whaa?

Trout should win MVP.

- If you want to base it on historical context.... a 30 HR / 50 SB is even more rare than a triple crown (I know Trout was off by 1 SB).

- In terms of team performance, LAA had a better team record even after the horrendous start when Trout was in the minors.

- Statistically, Trout crushes Cabrera in terms of WAR.

Sadly though Cabrera will win it and I would guess by a large margin.

Trout may be ahead in advanced stats, but baseball writers probably don't care about that. They will most likely give it to Cabrera based on the triple crown.

Geddy wrote:Trout may be ahead in advanced stats, but baseball writers probably don't care about that. They will most likely give it to Cabrera based on the triple crown.

Exactly, most of the voters have no clue what WAR even is. It's likely the best way to judge a players worth to a team, but most of them could care less

Who I hope will win? Trout.

Who I think will win? Cabrera. Tigers are in the playoffs (which holds a lot of bearing in these talks), and the Triple Crown. Though I think Trout is a better all-around player, and I think it would be awesome for him to get it as a rook, I'm not so sure about it.

Gibby wrote:
How did Trout have a better offensive season then Miggy?

Miguel hit 44 home runs compared to Trout's 30
139 RBI's compared to 83(although this is compltely skewed since trout is leadoff)
4 points higher batting average
Mike Trout struck out 41 more times and played 22 less games

During the last full two months of the season, Miguel hit .357 and .308
Trout hit .284 in August and .257 in Sept(YIKES!) after pitchers figured him out

Yes I agree Trout is by far the better all around baseball player, but Miguel's offensive numbers are one for the ages. It's hard for me to consider a guy for MVP when he had his two worst months in the most important stretch of the season

The problem with comparing home runs is it's a counting stat and Trout didn't play in April... sure Cabrera still would have finished ahead of him, but most likely not anywhere near 14 ahead of him.

RBIs are useless. Put Cabrera on a team that doesn't have Austin Jackson getting on base 38% of the time, and Cabrera doesn't sniff 139.

Cabrera finished a few points ahead in batting average but Trout finished ahead in OBP.

What Trout batted in August and September has no meaning; games in May, June and July are just as important. And besides, he hit .289 in Sept/Oct and his OBP was .400. Nobody figured him out.

Trout finished with a higher wOBA and wRC+.

And for Trout, remember that roughly two thirds of his games were played either at home, or in Seattle and Oakland. Those are all pitcher friendly parks.

Trout led the majors in steals and gives you significant value as a baserunner even over and above steals. Cabrera is a base clogger.

There is a case to be made that Trout had the better offensive season and that's all I said. It can be argued either way.

So if the offensive side is debatable, and the defensive certainly is no where close to debatable, and Trout's team outperformed Cabrera's team ( for those who still think this matters in MVP discussions ), then there really is no case that can be made for Cabrera being the league's most valuable player.

The triple crown is neat from a historical perspective, but it has no bearing on a player's overall value for that season. If Cabrera had gone hitless in his last series and Trout had passed him in batting average, would Cabrera's season look somehow less valuable because he didn't win the triple crown ?

This wasn't a season for the ages either. Bonds routinely had significantly better offensive seasons. His career wOBA and wRC+ were better than Cabrera's was this season. Baustista's last couple of seasons were equal or better. Statistically, Cabrera's season last year was better than this season. If you went back and looked, you could probably find examples in just about every year that were equal or better than Cabrera's season.

So i'm glad for him that he won it, because it does have historical meaning, but it's really not a season where based on the numbers alone, anyone would notice it in the context of truly great offensive seasons. It will stand out in a historical context only because of the triple crown factor.

if both trout and cabrera were to have the exact same performance next year, who would i want on my team for the one year? I'd say trout. And hence that's why he's my mvp vote.