I don't think Eric is a troll. Just misguided.How Valuable are you if your team finishes 3rd? LOL

Hey hey...each team gives its own Most Valuable Player of the the Year Award, it's announced at some nice end of the season banquet. The MVP award goes to the most Valuble Player of the League!!!! In other words, who do you want stepping onto the (end of the year) All-Star Game field first? That is Mike Trout and his 11 WAR this year. No doubt.

NO--that would be Cabera-aplayer whose team made the playoffs. Hence MOST VALUABLE

Trout is so valuable his team finished 3rd. I guess without him they finish 4th though.

I like the "Runners Up" idea... I'll go with that...

And, it's not likely an established hitter (Cabrera) who has routinely been labeled "The Greatest Hitter in The Game Today" is overtaken for a vote like MVP by a rookie when the established veteran does something as special (regardless of the perceived or calculated "values" of his stats) as win the Triple Crown. Granted Miggy has the fact that his team has the worst record of all playoff participants and Trout's Angels had a better record than Detroit (AND played in a massively more talented and powerful division), but, the veteran will generally win out. And, unless you're The Wizard of Ozzie Smith, defensive metrics carry no value in the Award. The value of a Major League is in his bat - not his glove.

Who was more valuable? Rage on. But, who'll likely win the trophy? Miguel Cabrera. It'll be a massive upset if Trout wins it.

AL MVP - Cabrera (winner), Trout, Beltre, Cano
AL CY - Price (winner), Verlander, Hernandez, Weaver, Sale, Harrison, Darvish
AL ROY - Trout (winner), Darvish, Cespedes, Parker
AL Mgr - Melvin (winner), Showalter, Ventura
AL Rolaids Relief - Johnson (winner), Rodney, Nathan, Soriano

NL MVP - Posey (winner), McCutchen, Braun, Wright
NL CY - Dickey (winner), Gonzalez, Cueto, Hamels
NL ROY - Harper (winner), Miley, Frazier, Aoki
NL Mgr - Johnson (winner), Baker, Freddie, Matheny
NL Rolaids Relief - Kimbrel (winner), Motte, Hanrahan, Chapman

The only reason I think Dicky will win the Cy over Geo is he's a "story" of determination and dedication where Gonzalez did lead his team to the best record in baseball. Trouble is Dicky was a one-man show in NY where Geo was one of 3 or 4 aces in DC even if R.A. *is* watching the playoffs on TV.

Johnson gets the nod over Rodney because of the great story going on in Baltimore and the fact he had 3 more saves. And, his team is still playing and Fernando's team ... well, they weren't going to get in as early as the week (or two) before the end of the season.

Not denying that Cabrera WILL win the award, but this thread goes to who we think is most deserving. Not even a comparison when factoring in total runs created and total runs saved. It's reflected by the fact that Trout generated about 3.0 WAR more than Miggy, both from Fangraphs and Baseball Reference.

Reality > Perception

Objective > Subjective

Trout > Cabrera

Cabera is most deserving and if dont think so then you need to take up another sport.

M O S T V A L U A B L E Without Cabrera Tigers dont make the playoffs-with Trout -the Angels miss the playoffs. Most people are smart enuf to understand that

M O S T V A L U A B L E Without Cabrera Tigers dont make the playoffs-with Trout -the Angels miss the playoffs. Most people are smart enuf to understand that.

1. The only reason the Tigers made the playoffs is because of the Al Central. For crying out loud, the Angels WON MORE GAMES THAN THE TIGERS! Geography is pretty much the only reason that the Tigers made the playoffs over the Angels.

2. Just because the sum of the parts of a team don't add up to much, does not mean that ONE PART of the team is not very valuable. Is any Baltimore starting pitcher more valuable than King Felix or David Price because Baltimore won more games? No, thats crazy. Or is Roger Bernadina worth more wins that Ryan Braun or Andrew McCutchen? No, of course not.

Trout was worth more wins to the Angels than Cabrera was to the Tigers. Thats why he should win over him.

. Just because the sum of the parts of a team don't add up to much, does not mean that ONE PART of the team is not very valuable. Is any Baltimore starting pitcher more valuable than King Felix or David Price because Baltimore won more games? No, thats crazy. No, of course not.

But you are saying Trout is more valuable because they won more games? Beginning to wonder if we have a troll.

Using the runners-up idea as well...

AL MVP - Trout (winner), Cabrera, Beltre
AL CY - Verlander (winner), Price, Weaver
AL ROY - Trout (winner), Cespedes, Darvish
AL Mgr - Showalter (winner), Melvin, Ventura
AL Rolaids Relief - Johnson (winner), Rodney, Soriano

NL MVP - Posey (winner), Braun, McCutchen
NL CY - Dickey (winner), Kimbrel, Gonzalez
NL ROY - Harper (winner), Miley, Aoki
NL Mgr - Johnson (winner), Matheny, Gonzalez
NL Rolaids Relief - Kimbrel (winner), Chapman, Motte

Even though the Angels were 3rd in their division, it seems obvious how valuable Trout was to them. The Angels' record of 83-59 after Trout was called up (April 28) was the best in the majors since that date, I believe. Of course, he is the obvious winner of ROY...and I'm not sure anyone else even deserves a first place vote.

Yeah--ur right. Trout was SO valuable he got them to a 3rd place finish. So I guess without him they finish 4th. I know that fits my definition of MVP. LOL

Trout should win the MVP. Dude was incredible at the plate, on the bases and in the field... what else is there? Cabrera is due because the Tigers played in a weak division and are in the PO's?

@BF: no rational person would come to that conclusion. That means you're either a troll or a complete idiot.

Not the "BEST" player--it's the "MOST VALUABLE PLAYER"

And Andy--if I were you--I wouldnt call anybody an idiot. I've read some of your posts.

Definition of a troll as it pertains to this site: anyone who doesn't agree with you

It appears whe Andy is losing an argument his rational is either the other person is a 'troll' or to call the other person names. It's funny you don't see this strategy more often in debates.

Pulled from an article on SI.com, thought it offered an interesting point of view:

"The crux of any argument that Mike Trout should be the American League MVP instead of Miguel Cabrera is this: The award is for most valuable player, not most valuable hitter. It's historic that Cabrera won the first Triple Crown since 1967. But becoming the answer to a trivia question did not make him a better overall player than Trout. The rookie center fielder of the Angels had excellent traditional statistics. He hit .326 with 30 home runs and 83 RBIs as a leadoff hitter over 139 games. The Angels didn't bring him up until April 28, or he might have had a few more RBIs. Trout also was 49 of 54 stealing bases and led the AL with 129 runs scored.

"But the statistic that stands out is WAR, or Wins Above Replacement. It measures how many wins a player is worth above an average replacement. In other words, it determines how many wins Derek Jeter would be worth to the Yankees instead of Eduardo Nunez. The stat takes into account offensive production, base running and defensive abilities. The math is complicated, but the theory really isn't. It's a better way of evaluating players. Trout has a 10.0 WAR. Cabrera was third in the AL at 7.1. As good as Cabrera is at the plate, Trout helped create more runs with his legs and saved more runs with his glove. This isn't hocus-pocus. Carl Yastrzemski had a 12.1 WAR in 1967, blowing away Brooks Robinson (8.6). WAR is an excellent measure of value and when you consider it, it's hard not to pick Trout as the MVP.''

^

and this is really all that needs to be said. The Triple Crown is two-thirds based on outdated statistics. Not saying it's not an impressive accomplishment, but it doesn't measure value any more than one great play defensively equally a great fielder. As some of you have already referenced, the award should go to the most valuable player, not the most valuable hitter. As I've already mentioned, mike Trout posted a higher wRC+ and higher wOBA, so it can even be argued that Trout was a more productive hitter than Cabrera was this season.

The arguments for Cabrera are subjective. The playoffs? The fact that he switched positions? Should there be a cookie award because Miggy went from being a below average defensive first baseman to a well below average third baseman?

Listen, I get it. I think we all do. Miguel Cabrera will win the MVP, if for nothing else he did something that hasn't been done since the 60's and his team made the playoffs and he isn't a rookie. I resent two things: (1) That saber metrics has almost become a dirty word amongst mainstream media because most of the people knocking it have never taken the time to understand it, and (2) that, even though Cabrera had an historically significant season, we're not awarding Trout's more deserving historical year.

Equalling*

If you were a GM or Manager and you could have Trout next season and playing CF or Cabrera at 3B. Who would you take? No brainer.

To all those that firmly believe in their hear that Cabrera was definitely without a doubt "more Valuable" than Trout...

"Outstanding" and "Valuable", in context w/ League of 325 players, are really same. Only when you look at one's contribution to a team is when the two words may reflect some difference. But then why is the "League" giving out an award to somebody making a "team" contribution? Furthermore, who is a fan to say one player is more "valuable" to a team than an another person. That's just your damn opinion. On the other hand, numbers don't fall to subjectiveness. Trout is the MVP of the League. Cabrera, surely the MVP of the Tigers.

But you are saying Trout is more valuable because they won more games? Beginning to wonder if we have a troll.

No, I'm saying Trout is more valuable because HE IS WORTH MORE WINS. Learn to fucking read.

"If the MVP was voted on by knowledgeable baseball people, it would be a total landslide in Trout's favor."

Eric, don't really disagree with you, but statements like this are over-the-top. It basically implies that anyone who doesn't use SABRE-based evaluation methods isn't a "knowledgeable" baseball person. Will probably come as some surprise to the many, many voters who probably know as much or more than you, but don't take the same SABRE-approach you do to evaluating players.

I'm not saying they're right and you're wrong. I'm just saying that just because they come to a different conclusion than you doesn't mean they lack "baseball" knowledge.

Guys like Evan Grant get MVP votes.

I'm not one of those people that just says, "Oh, Mike Trout has a higher WAR, so he deserves the MVP." In retrospect, I agree, that statement was a little strong. I don't mean to say that everyone who's voting for the MVP is dumb. But, if Miguel Cabrera wins it, which I'm expecting him to in a landslide, then I think it's fair to question the knowledge-base and rationale of the voters.

Because, objectively, Mike Trout pretty much handily takes out Miguel Cabrera in every category. It's not even close.

Keystone:
You seem to have an anger problem. Must you curse? Some of us have kids who read this site. And I can read otherwise I wouldn't know about the tripe you put on here.

The funny thing, Cabrera isn't the most valuable player on his own team. Now, if he could play average defense, or maybe be an average baserunner, then MAYBE he'd be his team's MVP.

Angels were 23 games above 500 with Trout (81-58), 8 games BELOW 500 without him (8-15). The Tigers were 13 games above 500 with Cabrera (87-74), 1-0 without him.

I personally would rather have the league leader in WAR, OPS+, SB (& SB%), and runs scored - who also played elite level defense and led his team to a much better win percentage - than to have the league leader in BA, HR, and RBI.

The ONE thing that sets Cabrera apart - he did hit into 21 more double plays than Trout. Heck, he hit into 2 more double plays than Michael Young.

If only Michael Young had improved his BA by .009 points - then he would have been more valuable than Elvis Andrus.....