southsider2k5 Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 QUOTE (ewokpelts @ Nov 16, 2012 -> 11:18 AM) 1987 Andrew Dawson and 2002 Alex Rodriguez QUOTE (JoeCoolMan24 @ Nov 16, 2012 -> 11:19 AM) "almost always" So in 25 years, or 50 MVPs, that is two off of bad teams. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrimsonWeltall Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 16, 2012 -> 06:16 PM) Except where your team finishes has almost always been a factor in the discussion. That doesn't mean it should be. Why should Cabrera be rewarded for playing in the weakest division in baseball? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iwritecode Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 16, 2012 -> 11:16 AM) Except where your team finishes has almost always been a factor in the discussion. It is a huge deal when the person isn't on a first place team. The Tigers wouldn't be a first place team in any other division. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 QUOTE (CrimsonWeltall @ Nov 16, 2012 -> 11:29 AM) That doesn't mean it should be. Why should Cabrera be rewarded for playing in the weakest division in baseball? Or ... Why should Cabrera be reward for playing for the team that won the pennant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewokpelts Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 QUOTE (YASNY @ Nov 16, 2012 -> 12:37 PM) Or ... Why should Cabrera be reward for playing for the team that won the pennant.The MVP votes are cast BEFORE the postseason starts. The Tigers could have been swept in the ALDS and Cabrera still gets the MVP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleHurt05 Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 QUOTE (Iwritecode @ Nov 16, 2012 -> 10:38 AM) To me MVP = best player no matter what team they are on or how they finished in the standings. If Trout was on a last place team and put up the same numbers he would still be the best player in the league. That's the issue with baseball's MVP as opposed to the other major sports. One player can only have so much effect on a team's success. If Cabrera has a similar year for the Astros, they still would be lucky to sniff 70 wins. Put LeBron on the Pistons, that would make them at least a playoff team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kitekrazy Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 15, 2012 -> 06:56 PM) That is right about where the Tigers would have finished too. Looking at the standings I didn't realize 3rd place fell off that far, but the point remains that the Tigers don't win s*** without Miguel Look how both players fared the last two months. Cabrera hands down. I also think most writers shy away from voting a rookie as MVP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 QUOTE (ewokpelts @ Nov 16, 2012 -> 12:38 PM) The MVP votes are cast BEFORE the postseason starts. The Tigers could have been swept in the ALDS and Cabrera still gets the MVP. Good point. But they did actually win the pennant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 The standards for MVP voting. I did not know games played was actually a standard. 1. Actual value of a player to his team, that is, strength of offense and defense. 2. Number of games played. 3. General character, disposition, loyalty and effort. 4. Former winners are eligible. 5. Members of the committee may vote for more than one member of a team.” Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iwritecode Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 QUOTE (kitekrazy @ Nov 16, 2012 -> 12:51 PM) Look how both players fared the last two months. Cabrera hands down. Why just the last 2 months? The award is for the whole season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiliIrishHammock24 Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 QUOTE (Iwritecode @ Nov 16, 2012 -> 02:44 PM) Why just the last 2 months? The award is for the whole season. And again, defense is ignored. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewokpelts Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 QUOTE (YASNY @ Nov 16, 2012 -> 12:58 PM) Good point. But they did actually win the pennant.again, dosent mean s*** when looking at mvp voting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iwritecode Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 16, 2012 -> 01:08 PM) The standards for MVP voting. I did not know games played was actually a standard. Just looking at #1 alone Trout should have won. I think the voters were wowed by the Triple Crown and ignored the fact that the Tigers would have actually won more games with somebody else playing third base on defense only. Kind of like a designated 3rd baseman. Cabrera would still get to hit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 QUOTE (Iwritecode @ Nov 16, 2012 -> 01:51 PM) Just looking at #1 alone Trout should have won. I think the voters were wowed by the Triple Crown and ignored the fact that the Tigers would have actually won more games with somebody else playing third base on defense only. Kind of like a designated 3rd baseman. Cabrera would still get to hit. Except Trout missed the first month of the season or so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 QUOTE (ewokpelts @ Nov 16, 2012 -> 01:47 PM) again, dosent mean s*** when looking at mvp voting. I wasn't looking at the voting. I was looking at the MVP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 There are plausible arguments for Cabrera, but Mitch Albom did not make them. It's times like these I really miss FJM. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrimsonWeltall Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 QUOTE (YASNY @ Nov 16, 2012 -> 09:09 PM) I wasn't looking at the voting. I was looking at the MVP. Does that mean we get to include his .265 batting average in the playoffs, including going 3-13 (.230) in the World Series? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iwritecode Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 16, 2012 -> 02:59 PM) Except Trout missed the first month of the season or so. Exactly. His numbers could have been even better had he been called up sooner. Plus the Angels might have made the playoffs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 QUOTE (CrimsonWeltall @ Nov 16, 2012 -> 03:30 PM) Does that mean we get to include his .265 batting average in the playoffs, including going 3-13 (.230) in the World Series? Just for the sake of getting out of this discussion that doesn't make a damn bit of difference one way or the other, I yeild. You guys win. Carry on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 At the end of the day, there is no wrong answer. I happen to disagree with it, but it's not like I'm upset. This isn't Bartolo Colon winning the Cy Young in 2005. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 QUOTE (Iwritecode @ Nov 16, 2012 -> 03:45 PM) Exactly. His numbers could have been even better had he been called up sooner. Plus the Angels might have made the playoffs. Except when you look at what to consider, it works the opposite of that in the voting guidelines. You don't get to fill in the blanks, in fact the opposite, because it is supposed to hurt you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knightni Posted November 17, 2012 Share Posted November 17, 2012 Terry Pendleton over Barry Bonds and Howard Johnson in '91 disproves that MVP is entirely stats driven. Unless you're a monster like A-Rod. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chw42 Posted November 17, 2012 Author Share Posted November 17, 2012 QUOTE (knightni @ Nov 16, 2012 -> 10:50 PM) Terry Pendleton over Barry Bonds and Howard Johnson in '91 disproves that MVP is entirely stats driven. Unless you're a monster like A-Rod. The problem is that the award has always been driven by the wrong stats. Nobody is asking these writers to vote based on WAR, that's boring. All we're asking is that these writers look at stats that tell you a bit more about the player himself. Not his RBI, not the amount of runs he scored, and definitely not how many games his team won. Dave Cameron put this in perspective the other day. The uproar over this decision has little to do with WAR. It has nothing to do with stats vs. scouts. It has everything to do with how the writers value runs batted in and the playoff status of a player's team. If you can't even get passed the fact that RBI isn't a good determining factor in the offensive value of a player and that a player has almost no control over how the rest of his team plays, then there's a long ways to go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chw42 Posted November 17, 2012 Author Share Posted November 17, 2012 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 16, 2012 -> 01:08 PM) The standards for MVP voting. I did not know games played was actually a standard. Hamilton won two years back even though he played something like 130 games. In this case, the fact that Trout missed a month is actually a strength in the argument for Trout. Trout was so good that if he did play for a full season, you could easily assume that he hits 35-40 home runs and maybe steals 60-65 bases. Plus, the Trout actually out-WAR'd Cabrera or any other AL player by at least 3 wins...despite playing in 20 less games. That speaks volumes to how good he really was. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleHurt05 Posted November 17, 2012 Share Posted November 17, 2012 QUOTE (chw42 @ Nov 17, 2012 -> 01:41 AM) Hamilton won two years back even though he played something like 130 games. In this case, the fact that Trout missed a month is actually a strength in the argument for Trout. Trout was so good that if he did play for a full season, you could easily assume that he hits 35-40 home runs and maybe steals 60-65 bases. Plus, the Trout actually out-WAR'd Cabrera or any other AL player by at least 3 wins...despite playing in 20 less games. That speaks volumes to how good he really was. And considering that the Angels went 6-14 before he got there, you could assume they may have made the playoffs had played the whole year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.