I think Trout deserves it, but Cabrera will win it and it won't be that close.

 

The Triple Crown will clinch it for too many voters, and I think to an extent, a lot of voters will rationalize it by thinking, "Trout is so good that he'll probably win it some other year where he's played a full season on a playoff team in a year where there wasn't a Triple Crown."

 

If there are 28 voters, I'm predicting 18-10 in favor of Cabrera.

 

Well said, my thoughts as well.

Trout, because well, he's just more valuable. Much better fielder in a much more important position and produces way more runs on the bases than Miggy.

A lot of anti Tiger bias here. Triple Crown winner, played in every game but one, I give it to Cabrera because of the Triple Crown. That is so tough to do these days.

Edited November 15, 201213 yr by kitekrazy

A lot of anti Tiger bias here. Triple Crown winner, played in every game but one, I give it to Cabrera because of the Triple Crown. That is so tough to do these days.

 

Just for the record, my Trout pick has nothing to do with "anti-Tiger" bias. Not one bit.

Just for the record, my Trout pick has nothing to do with "anti-Tiger" bias. Not one bit.

 

I picked Cabrera and I f***ing hate the Tigers.

Just for the record, my Trout pick has nothing to do with "anti-Tiger" bias. Not one bit.

 

Same here, because I think Verlander should have been Cy Young.

A lot of anti Tiger bias here. Triple Crown winner, played in every game but one, I give it to Cabrera because of the Triple Crown. That is so tough to do these days.

 

Triple crown = best hitter.

 

The award is for the most valuable player.

It's unfortunate for Trout that he had the year he did, when he did. He'll have to make do with ROY- not too shabby by any means. He'll have plenty of time to work on an MVP in a year that Cabrera doesn't scare the piss out of anyone who has ever pitched a baseball (including ceremonial first pitch).

It's Miguel Cabrera. You reach a level of excellence at which the numbers simply don't tell the entire story. Miguel Cabrera was an absolutely fearsome player that changed the way everyone on the field approached the game. Trout had a great year, but compared to Miguel Cabrera I don't think he was feared at all. As a matter of fact, I don't think he was the most feared hitter in his lineup. Cabrera was so good that he'd burn you when you tried to walk him.

 

 

The overvaluing of Triple Crown is really hard to believe. It's just a set of 3 arbitrary stats that someone decided upon decades ago. It doesn't even account for 3 different set of skills. AVG/HR/SB or OBP/HR/SB would have been a better representation of a complete hitter. Contact/Power/Speed or OnBase/Power/Speed.

 

RBI is too largely dependent on teammates, and they go to closely with HR, IMO.

 

Oh, and, of course the whole DEFENSIVE thing too.

It's Miguel Cabrera. You reach a level of excellence at which the numbers simply don't tell the entire story. Miguel Cabrera was an absolutely fearsome player that changed the way everyone on the field approached the game. Trout had a great year, but compared to Miguel Cabrera I don't think he was feared at all. As a matter of fact, I don't think he was the most feared hitter in his lineup. Cabrera was so good that he'd burn you when you tried to walk him.

 

You think anyone on the other side of the field was saying "s***, I hope I don't hit the ball down to 3B, Cabrera is a vacuum down there." No.

The overvaluing of Triple Crown is really hard to believe. It's just a set of 3 arbitrary stats that someone decided upon decades ago. It doesn't even account for 3 different set of skills. AVG/HR/SB or OBP/HR/SB would have been a better representation of a complete hitter. Contact/Power/Speed or OnBase/Power/Speed.

 

RBI is too largely dependent on teammates, and they go to closely with HR, IMO.

 

Oh, and, of course the whole DEFENSIVE thing too.

+1

Nate Silver makes the stats case for Trout

 

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2...ADCFC814371494F

Oh, and, of course the whole DEFENSIVE thing too.

 

Cabrera was serviceable at 3B. Coming down the stretch run of the season (30 games) while Detroit was in the process of overtaking the AL Central lead, he had 1 error. You always heard people whining about how the opposition should just bunt towards 3B, yet it never happened.

 

It shouldn't be lost on anyone that he was willing to slide over to 3B in order to accommodate Fielder at 1B. That was a pretty valuable thing to do in itself.

Cabrera was serviceable at 3B. Coming down the stretch run of the season (30 games) while Detroit was in the process of overtaking the AL Central lead, he had 1 error. You always heard people whining about how the opposition should just bunt towards 3B, yet it never happened.

 

It shouldn't be lost on anyone that he was willing to slide over to 3B in order to accommodate Fielder at 1B. That was a pretty valuable thing to do in itself.

 

I still don't understand why that's such a big deal. It was a position he had played before, and it's not like he switched to catcher. If he wasn't capable of playing it, they wouldn't have asked.

M Cab.

He was terrible defensively, costing the Tigers an entire win because of his defense. He can get away with it because he's so good offensively (worth 67.9 runs above replacement this year, even with the -10 UZR he cost on defense). You can't use the "not bad" defense against Miguel Cabrera though, because he was the worst defensive 3Bman in the game this year. He might not be bad (or even good) compared to me, but compared to his peers, he was terrible.

Cabrera was serviceable at 3B. Coming down the stretch run of the season (30 games) while Detroit was in the process of overtaking the AL Central lead, he had 1 error. You always heard people whining about how the opposition should just bunt towards 3B, yet it never happened.

 

It shouldn't be lost on anyone that he was willing to slide over to 3B in order to accommodate Fielder at 1B. That was a pretty valuable thing to do in itself.

 

Cabrera was a bad 1B. The reason he switched to 1B was because he was awful at 3B. And he was awful at 3B this year. He also played the position with one leg for like two weeks. Remember when KW got pissed that Robin didn't bunt at Cabrera more?

It's Miguel Cabrera. You reach a level of excellence at which the numbers simply don't tell the entire story. Miguel Cabrera was an absolutely fearsome player that changed the way everyone on the field approached the game. Trout had a great year, but compared to Miguel Cabrera I don't think he was feared at all. As a matter of fact, I don't think he was the most feared hitter in his lineup. Cabrera was so good that he'd burn you when you tried to walk him.

 

Everybody sure feared Albert Pujols when he was hitting .170 for the first two months of the year.

 

Keep this in mind: if Trout doesn't come up in late April and give the Angels a spark, that team might not have finished above .500. Mike Trout turned their season around.

Edited November 15, 201213 yr by chw42

They made the right choice.

 

 

 

Butthurt White Sox fans be damned.

Everybody sure feared Albert Pujols when he was hitting .170 for the first two months of the year.

 

Keep this in mind: if Trout doesn't come up in late April and give the Angels a spark, that team might not have finished above .500. Mike Trout turned their season around.

 

And if Cabrera isn't on the Tigers, they probably finish 3rd.

They made the right choice.

 

 

 

Butthurt White Sox fans be damned.

 

I think the majority of people here who thought Trout should win didn't base it around their hatred of Miguel Cabrera.

 

Now I'm just wondering how close it was...

Wow...Trout with only 6 first place votes. BBWAA is still stuck in 2003.

 

And somebody put Trout THIRD. Some writers don't deserve the right to vote.

Edited November 15, 201213 yr by chw42

And if Cabrera isn't on the Tigers, they probably finish 3rd.

 

Behind the Indians? Really?

 

Without Cabrera, they probably finish 2nd.

 

But without Trout, the Angels probably finish with something like 78-79 wins.

Behind the Indians? Really?

 

Without Cabrera, they probably finish 2nd.

 

But without Trout, the Angels probably finish with something like 78-79 wins.

 

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