Whether it's your first Bonnaroo or you’re a music festival veteran, we welcome you to Inforoo.
Here you'll find info about artists, rumors, camping tips, and the infamous Roo Clues. Have a look around then create an account and join in the fun. See you at Bonnaroo!!
Really great to see the Coliseum filled and going nuts.
What a likable buncha misfits.
The A's have been my favorite AL team since the Tejada-Giambi-Dye-Chavez (aka rampant steroid use) era but I haven't payed too much attention to them the past couple years. I'll have to bust out my Zito jersey and I'll sure be rooting for them.
Also, I've had Brett Anderson on seemingly every one of my fantasy teams since '09 since I keep falsely believing he'll get past his injury problems. Plus Brandon McCarthy seems like a legitimately funny and cool dude and continues to make light of the fact he was almost killed a month ago. So there's that I guess.
So, Glenn, do you think that the player with the highest WAR should win MVP every year?
Eh, not necessarily. Even people who cite defensive statistics like UZR and whatnot are pretty steadfast in saying one year's worth of data isn't really enough to determine a player's defensive value. There was actually a really interesting article on Brett Lawrie back in June that I'm too lazy to look up that goes over why his dWAR was like 2.1 after less than two months, which is pretty much ridiculous and probably not the best indicator (that was quite the sentence.) I mean, if there are two guys at like 8.6 and 8.4 for WAR I don't think it's necessarily that cut and dried, if that answers your question. Just that in this particular instance, I believe Trout's close enough offensively to Miggy where his defense and baserunning make him the clear choice IMO.
Eh, not necessarily. Even people who cite defensive statistics like UZR and whatnot are pretty steadfast in saying one year's worth of data isn't really enough to determine a player's defensive value. There was actually a really interesting article on Brett Lawrie back in June that I'm too lazy to look up that goes over why his dWAR was like 2.1 after less than two months, which is pretty much ridiculous and probably not the best indicator (that was quite the sentence.) I mean, if there are two guys at like 8.6 and 8.4 for WAR I don't think it's necessarily that cut and dried, if that answers your question. Just that in this particular instance, I believe Trout's close enough offensively to Miggy where his defense and baserunning make him the clear choice IMO.
Cool, I agree. Awards should have some subjectivity to them.
EDIT: I don't agree that Trout should be MVP over Miggy though, just to be clear.
Post by Longtime and Frequent Poster on Oct 3, 2012 19:24:35 GMT -5
Here's my problem with the whole Triple Crown/MVP thing: This is just a guess on my part, but I'm thinking most of the people who will reward Cabrera with an MVP vote due to his Triple Crown would also believe you shouldn't vote for players on bad teams, because of the whole "how can they be the most valuable when their team sucks?" argument. I don't agree with that, but certainly understand. Now, since they're voting on the player most valuable to their team, it doesn't matter that nobody has hit more home runs or RBI's than Cabrera. Hypothetically if Adam Dunn stayed a bit healthier, he could've reasonably hit another HR or two more than Miggy. In no way would that make Cabrera less valuable to his team simply because another player barely beat him out in one of the Triple Crown categories. It's the contradiction with the voters that kind of irks me I guess.
And that Braun will probably have a zero percent chance of winning even though literally no one with the exception of Braun knows if he actually cheated last year, and now that he's undoubtedly clean he's had possibly the best numbers of his career.
Unrelated: There's only two teams in the playoffs I hate. That's just about unfathomably low for me.
Post by Delicious Meatball Sub on Oct 3, 2012 19:40:56 GMT -5
Lots of commentators are making cringe-worthy defenses of Miguel's MVPness. Then again so are a lot of people in the Trout camp. I think deserves it based on his numbers alone, and it doesn't do team Miguel any favors to deride people who disagree as nerds with laptops. I think it's insane the way Trout supporters are dismissing RBIs outright when Miguel hits the way he does with RISP. I think for every category Trout beats Miguel in there's another where Miguel beats Trout, people just need to be honest about which statistics they find most valuable.
How dare you dis the Yanquis? Glennron please tell me that you are a Yankee-hater. What small market fan couldn't be?
That's be correct, quacker. The only teams I really dislike are the Cards/Cubs and Yankees/Red Sox/Angels, and seemingly 3-4 of them are in the playoffs every year the past several years. Well except the Cubs since '08.
Lots of commentators are making cringe-worthy defenses of Miguel's MVPness. Then again so are a lot of people in the Trout camp. I think deserves it based on his numbers alone, and it doesn't do team Miguel any favors to deride people who disagree as nerds with laptops. I think it's insane the way Trout supporters are dismissing RBIs outright when Miguel hits the way he does with RISP. I think for every category Trout beats Miguel in there's another where Miguel beats Trout, people just need to be honest about which statistics they find most valuable.
Your last sentence is exactly right, which is why it's pretty much pointless to continue this debate. I just want to point out one quick thing though-I don't think Trout supporters are necessarily dismissing RBIs outright more than pointing out Cabrera has had a much larger number of RBI opportunities. Cabrera has knocked in 31% of baserunners to Trout's 28%. Just like Trout's lead in runs scored is kind of pointless to cite because he's batting leadoff as opposed to third. But yeah, different strokes etc. etc.
Maybe I'm still bitter that the Brewers don't have Trout because the f*ckhead Yankees had to sign Texieria in addition to Sabathia, so the comp pick the Brewers would've gotten went to the Angels cause Tex was the ONLY free agent rated higher, who in turn selected Trout with that pick. Yay.
How dare you dis the Yanquis? Glennron please tell me that you are a Yankee-hater. What small market fan couldn't be?
That's be correct, quacker. The only teams I really dislike are the Cards/Cubs and Yankees/Red Sox/Angels, and seemingly 3-4 of them are in the playoffs every year the past several years. Well except the Cubs since '08.
Yeah I'm mostly a Yankees/Red Sox and Braves/Phillies disliker.
Screw Trout, that fat alcoholic should win MVP. The last time someone did what he did the Jets had just drafted Joe Willie Namath. There will be another 30/45 season light years before another triple crown. Plus the Tigers are in the playoffs (and save the "but they were a game worse than the Angels" stuff because the Angels blew their chance to sneak in at the end of the season).
Post by Alberto Balsalm on Oct 4, 2012 16:33:37 GMT -5
Let's go through the arguments that people are making for Cabrera to be the MVP. And I'll do it on hard-mode by not even mentioning WAR one time.
"He won the Triple Crown! That hasn't happened in so long! He must be better than Trout!"
Well, that's nice. I understand it's rarity and difficulty, but the Triple Crown is just an arbitrary, seemingly random, collection of 3 stats. One of which tells you nothing about individual effectiveness and is completely opportunity-based (RBI) and one of which is very misleading and again tells you very little about individual effectiveness (.AVG). If you want to pull the Triple Crown card, though, Trout had a collection of 3 random stats that were even rarer than Cabrera's (30 HR, 45 SB, 125 R, which has never been done in the history of the MLB). Winning the Triple Crown does not automatically equate someone to be being the best offensive player that year.
"Well he leads the league in OPS! That includes all the aspects of hitting. His OPS is over 1!"
While an OPS of 1+ is very impressive, OPS is kind of a flawed stat in the sense that it treats OBP and SLG as the same importance, when in reality each point of OBP is worth more in terms of creating runs than each point of SLG.
A better stat to look at is wOBA (weighted on-base average), which is similar to OPS but weighs every individual offensive outcome (1B, 2B, 3B, HR, SB, CS, BB, HBP) based on their true run value. SLG assumes that a double is worth twice as much as a single, which is actually false as a single is worth about .44 runs to a double's .77. 2 singles are better than 1 double. This year Trout posted a league-high .421 wOBA to Cabrera's .417.
"But he had so many RBI! He had 50 more than Trout! He's such a better run producer!"
While the RBI totals would tell you Cabrera is better at driving in runners, it's a lot closer than the numbers suggest. See, RBI is the most flawed and useless stat that constantly gets thrown around when comparing player performance. What resulted in his misleading RBI total was a league-high 444 runners on-base during his plate appearances. In terms of actual effectiveness of knocking runners in, they were close to equal. Cabrera this year drove in 31% of his runners on base to Trout's 28%, a lot closer than the 50 RBI margin would have you think. In addition, Miguel batting 3rd meant most of the time his baserunners were Austin Jackson and Quintin Berry, the two fastest players in Detroit's lineup, making them easier to drive in. Since Trout hits leadoff, his baserunners were slower bottom of the order hitters like Chris Ianetta and Vernon Wells.
But if you want to play the RBI (opportunity) game, you must also consider the other side to having the most opportunities with men on base, with the fact that Cabrera grounded into more double plays (28) than any other player in baseball this year.
So you can either ignore the gross difference in opportunities and give Cabrera credit for driving in many more runs while also penalizing him for creating many more outs, or adjust for opportunity and realize that Cabrera hasn’t actually been that much better than Trout at bringing his teammates home once they get on base.
"OK, well maybe his offensive numbers aren't any better, but Miggy is so clutch! He gets the big hits when it really matters and carried his team down the stretch!"
Although "clutchness" is hard to quantify, WPA (win-probability added) does a pretty good job of it. It uses win probability, which takes into account baserunners, outs, and what inning it is -- all the things people used to describe "clutch" -- and measures the win probability before and after each player's at-bat, crediting them with the difference in win probability that resulted from their at-bat. It essentially measure's how much each individual player contributed to their team's win (or loss). For example, the highest single-game postseason WPA of all-time was David Freese in Game 6 of last year's World Series. I don't think anyone would deny that he was as clutch as they came in that game.
So let's look at Trout and Cabrera's season WPA this year:
Trout - 5.67 (1st in AL) Cabrera - 4.55 (4th in AL, behind teammate Prince Fielder and Edwin Encarnacion)
So Trout actually contributed (offensively) to more wins, even taking into account context-based (clutch) situations for his team than Miggy this year.
WPA by month Trout -0.08 - April 0.89 - May 1.63 - June 1.42 - July 1.45 - August 0.36 - Sept/Oct
Cabrera 0.86 - April 0.83 - May -0.28 - June 0.99 - July 1.05 - August 1.11 - Sept/Oct
So yes, while Cabrera was more clutch and effective over the last month, does it really make up for the previous 4 months[/u] that Trout consistently beat Cabrera? After all, a win in June is worth just as much as a win in September at the end of the year.
So now we've come to the conclusion that they were virtually equal in runs created for their team, with the slight edge to Trout, they were virtually equal in driving in baserunners, with the slight edge to Cabrera, and Trout was consistently more clutch throughout the course of the season, with the edge going to Cabrera in the final month. I think it's safe to say they were virtually equal offensive contributors for their teams, you really can't give an edge to either one.
But wait, there's more! (to the game of baseball than just offense). You have to play defense too. And while we couldn't really decide upon who has the advantage offensively, I don't think anyone would really debate that Trout has a MASSIVE advantage over Cabrera defensively, while playing the hardest position in the game. (Although I'm not a huge fan of defensive stats in baseball - and you don't really need them in this situation for it to be clear who the advantage goes to - the defensive numbers are there to support Trout pretty soundly as well).
One more thing to consider is Trout's obvious, and again MASSIVE, speed advantage over Cabrera. Yes, we already included this earlier as SB and CS are included in wOBA, but let's even take steals out of the picture. Trout added so much more value to his team by all the times he used his speed to go from 1st to 3rd, scoring from 2nd on singles and taking extra bases by just being faster and better base runner. This is something that Cabrera simply cannot offer to his team, and frankly, he hurts his team (takes away value) by his deficiency in this facet of the game.
So how can Trout not be the Most Valuable Player this season?
"Well Cabrera's team is in the playoffs! And Trout's isn't! Ha! See? Cabrera is MVP!"
Well, the Angels winning percentage when Trout was in the lineup (.582) was the better than the Tigers with Miggy in the lineup (.543), plus they had a better record overall than the Tigers. So Cabrera should win the MVP because he plays in a weaker division than Trout and his teammates are better? What else did Trout have to do to make up for his team's shortcomings and his stronger division? Should he have played the other 7 positions and pitched like Justin Verlander?
He added more value to his team than Cabrera, plain and simple. Player value to me does not change based on what team you are on. That implies that your team has something to do with an individual award, and that's not the case. It's not the "Most Valuable Player plus other valuable players around you" award, it's just "Most Valuable Player". And Trout was the Most Valuable Player to his team in the entire MLB this year
Cabrera had an incredible season, no doubt, and I'm glad he won the Triple Crown (for both my fantasy team and my wallet, not to mention the sport of baseball), but he was not the Most Valuable Player to his team this year.
Post by Delicious Meatball Sub on Oct 4, 2012 16:46:29 GMT -5
Serious question though, to what extent does WPA factor the teams overall record in? If Miguel was dropped into the three spot of the Reds lineup, everything else the same would his WPA rise?
Serious question though, to what extent does WPA factor the teams overall record in? If Miguel was dropped into the three spot of the Reds lineup, everything else the same would his WPA rise?
None, I don't believe. At the beginning of each game, each team has a 50% win probability based on the fact that no events have occurred yet to give either team an advantage in win probability in that game. It is strictly context/situational-based from that point forward after each play in the game.
The last time someone did what Trout did (30 HR, 45 SB, 125 R) was...... never.
And which will happen again first? I vote 30/45/125. Easily.
Mike Trout is a SoCal wussbag.
lol, ok. That's a nice, opinionated, baseless projection that goes against the history of the game. But do you have reasonable arguments backed by facts and numbers to why Miguel Cabrera was more valuable than Mike Trout that I didn't already provide (and disprove) above? I'd love to hear them.
My comment was obviously a joke, Mike Trout would detach my head from my body if I pissed him off enough.
And look, I get the thinking behind Trout being MVP. He's a better fielder and base runner, which is indisputable. Miggy switched a position, so even though he wasn't that good he should get some bonus points for playing a new position and not killing his team.
But my vote goes to Miggy for two reasons (mostly).
1- Miggy played some of his best baseball when it mattered most while Trout played some of his worst and I think that should count for something. MVP isn't solely a statistical award and when the Tigers were in a race for the division title Miggy's bat started booming. And the Tigers kept winning. Trout is capable of making an impact in the field, which helps when his production dips, but Miggy doesn't dip. He's 24/7 mashed potatoes.
2- The triple crown. I know you dismiss the fact I think that a 30/45/125 season will happen before another triple crown, but that season is a product of players becoming bigger, stronger and faster. There will be more and more players that are huge and fast like Trout, and some of them will have some pop in their bats. I realize that Trout is a special talent, but the likelihood that a big, strong, fast athlete with generationally exception hand-eye coordination that can go 30/45/125 is more likely to me than someone hitting for the triple crown. The talent pool gets better together, so it's (obviously) incredibly hard to be the best in all three categories in a single year. People thought a 40/40 season was something that would never happen, then something that would never happen again. But athletes got bigger and faster and there have been a few guys that have done it. Eventually we'll see someone have a 50/50 season. It could even be Trout, who knows, but that will raise the bar again.
And then there's this. A-rod went 42/46/123 in 1998. Eric Davis had a 37/50/120 season in '87. Bobby Bonds missed it by 5 runs in '69, 4 HR's in '70, and 2 SB's in '73. Carlos Beltran went 38/42/121 in 2004. Soriano went 39/41/128 in 2002. And there are more, I personally think Jacoby Ellsbury if he's healthy for 162 games has a great chance at a 30/45/125 season.
Since the 60's and the decision by many hitters to specialize as either power or average hitters it's become much less common for guys to hit for both power and average on a level to win the triple crown. This is obviously an opinion, but at least you know I'm not just blowing smoke now.
Just for lulz: Jose Conseco in a juice-filled '88 went 42/40/120 with 124 RBI's and won MVP. Tee hee.