2012 MLB Thread (Cabrera Gets Triple Crown, first since Yaz 1967)

[DougW]

The Trout vs. Cabrera for MVP is really nonsense. Cabrera has already won the award, it just hasn't been made official.

But, I see what's happening. The SABR fans wish to further their stats popularity, and this is an ideal situation to do so. We have a triple crown winner, and a guy with a good bunch of the SABR stats that make him "better" than the crown guy. Discussing these comparisons, when talking about the MVP award, brings light to the statistics themselves. It generates interest in "their cause".

Many years ago, some of the statistics we talk about regularly now weren't popular. I'm sure the SABR folks hope the same will happen again. And who knows maybe in twenty years, every time a batter steps up, the announcers will tell us what his WAR is or what his Hoopy la Doopy stats are - like they do now with AVG., HR, and RBI.

But, it ain't twenty years from now, so Cabrera wins the MVP. The discussion does help to generate SABR interest though.

**Obviously, this is a big picture opinion, and isn't the case for everyone, or possibly not even consciously for some.

[ISiddiqui]

Or, you know, SABR folk actually wish to sway the debate as happened when Felix Hernandez won the Cy Young even though he was only 13-12 in Win Loss Record (which would have been unbelievable even 10 years earlier). Though it's going to be really difficult to beat a Triple Crown winner.

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by DougW

The Trout vs. Cabrera for MVP is really nonsense. Cabrera has already won the award, it just hasn't been made official.

But, I see what's happening. The SABR fans wish to further their stats popularity, and this is an ideal situation to do so. We have a triple crown winner, and a guy with a good bunch of the SABR stats that make him "better" than the crown guy. Discussing these comparisons, when talking about the MVP award, brings light to the statistics themselves. It generates interest in "their cause".

Many years ago, some of the statistics we talk about regularly now weren't popular. I'm sure the SABR folks hope the same will happen again. And who knows maybe in twenty years, every time a batter steps up, the announcers will tell us what his WAR is or what his Hoopy la Doopy stats are - like they do now with AVG., HR, and RBI.

But, it ain't twenty years from now, so Cabrera wins the MVP. The discussion does help to generate SABR interest though.

**Obviously, this is a big picture opinion, and isn't the case for everyone, or possibly not even consciously for some.

Yes, it's the Sabermetric Agenda. We took over the Cy Young with Felix in 2010 and now we're coming for the MVP.

[Arles]

Originally Posted by DanGarion

Which is exactly what this article that was already pointed out addresses...
Trout Versus Cabrera: Offense Only, Context Included | FanGraphs Baseball

Again, this goes on how it theoretically impacted runs using a fairly arbitrary baseline. We know that Cabrera had better OBP and OPS numbers in nearly every men on base situation (as cited above). Trout didn't have many opportunities in these situations and therefore didn't take the big hits that his numbers would have dictated. Cabrera had a .405 OBP, .993 OPS, 0.34 RBI/PA and a 12% strike out rate in 333 PA with men on base. Trout had a .383 OBP, .917 OPS, .25 RBI/PA and 20.6% strike out rate in 214 PA with men on base. Trout also had a .393 OBP and 22% strike out rate with runners in scoring position compared to Cabrera who had a .424 OBP and 11% strike out rate with runners in scoring position. In those 135 PAs, Trout had 51 RBI. In Cabrera's 174 PAs, he had 90 RBI.

I'm guessing the fact that Cabrera struck out half as much as trout is why he had a much higher rate of RBI. Then again, not striking out also means some double plays. Still, Cabrera had a higher OBP, higher rate of driving in runs and significantly lower strike out rate in all situations where men were on base. The problem was that Trout didn't have the number of chances that Cabrera did to let his poorer numbers negatively impact his RE24 stat.

With no one on base, Trout had a .407 OBP and .985 OPS for 425 PAs. Cabrera had a .385 OBP and 1.004 OPS for 360 PAs with no one on base. Trout went from .407 to .383 in OBP and .985 to .917 OPS when men were on base. Cabrera went from .382 to .405 OBP , stayed at a 1.000 OPS and his K rate went down (15% to 12%) when men were on base. But, because he had so many more ABs (and so many more chances for failure), his numbers got impacted.

The end result of this is that (for most players), hitting with men on base is a lot harder because of the stress of the situation. Yet, for Cabrera, he actually had better numbers when the stress increased the most. Sounds like decent justification for an MVP.

[oykib]

Originally Posted by Arles

The idea that every at bat is equal is fairly silly. Striking out with no one on and down 7 in the 9th inning is not the same as striking out down a run in the ninth, one out and a man at 3B.

This is the fallacy that many stat-centric people get into. When trying to predict outcomes or show how talented a player is - every AB can be equal. When looking back to see the outcome on games (ie, to determine who wins an award based on value to their team), every AB is certainly not equal.

The point is that if you look at the entire season's stats, you've already taken all that into account. Cabrera lead the league in RBIs, and Trout led the league in runs. There was a negligible difference in AVG, with Cabrera ahead. The same is true with OBP, with Trout ahead. The best any reasonable look can say is that it's a coin flip between these two at the plate.

An AB when you've got a guy on 2nd is higher -leverage than one with the bases empty. But a run in the 2nd inning is just as valuable as a run in the seventh. A win in April is just as valuable as a win in September.

You have to totally discount defense and baserunning to come up with Cabrera being more valuable.

Originally Posted by Arles

2. Performance in the final 3 innings + extras.

Cabrera - 212 PA: .421 OBP, 1.095 OPS, 38 R, 17 HR, 43 RBI, 26 Ks
Trout - 179 PA: .360 OBP, .837 OPS, 28 R, 8 HR, 18 RBI, 53 Ks

3. Performance in the 7th or later with the batting team tied, ahead by one, or the tying run at least on deck.

Cabrera - 102 PA: .422 OBP, 1.040 OPS, 17 R, 23 RBI, 13 Ks
Trout - 79 PA: .338 OBP, .784 OPS, 9 R, 11 RBI, 20 Ks

Your other problem with these moving endpoints arguments is double counting. You've already taken what Cabrera did in #3, in #2. Repeating it doesn't mean he did that in 300 PAs. Those are the same 200 PAs.

The other 500 or so PAs count as well.

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by Arles

Basically, the best numbers I can see are that Trout saved about 13 runs in CF while Cabrera cost about 4 runs at 3B. I'm not sure that's enough to swing this debate.

Trout is also credited for creating 8.7 runs on the bases while Cabrera cost his team 5.5. That's a total of 31 runs difference between the two players between baserunning and defense. That's a massive difference.

Not to mention the 21 extra outs Cabrera created by grounding into double plays.

[spleen1015]

BUT TROUT ONLY HAD 60% OF THE ARE BEE EYES THAT CABRERA HAD!!!!

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Atocep

Trout is also credited for creating 8.7 runs on the bases while Cabrera cost his team 5.5.

Out of curiosity, in which game did Trout score that 7/10ths of a run? I'd love to take a look at that boxscore.

[bhlloy]

So... Josh Hamilton, do you give him a mega contract? Personally I'd have to say no for the same reason I hope the Angels won't throw too much money at Greinke, but I understand people are going to go nuts over his talent.

Who are the frontrunners? Red Sox, trying to start over with a new star?

[Arles]

Originally Posted by oykib

The point is that if you look at the entire season's stats, you've already taken all that into account. Cabrera lead the league in RBIs, and Trout led the league in runs. There was a negligible difference in AVG, with Cabrera ahead. The same is true with OBP, with Trout ahead. The best any reasonable look can say is that it's a coin flip between these two at the plate.

Trout let by .03 in OBP, scored 20 more runs and had 45 more SB. Cabrera had 23 more hits, 41 fewer Ks, 36 points higher in SLG, 14 more HR and 56 more RBI. I'm not sure that SBs are enough to tip the scales. IMO, Cabrera had the better offensive season while Trout was the better defender. When you throw in how Cabrera hit in key plate appearances, that his team made the playoffs and that he won the triple crown - I think that's enough to earn him the MVP.

Your other problem with these moving endpoints arguments is double counting. You've already taken what Cabrera did in #3, in #2. Repeating it doesn't mean he did that in 300 PAs. Those are the same 200 PAs.

The other 500 or so PAs count as well.

The point was to show that when the situation increased in pressure to be within 1 run, Cabrera did even better while Trout's numbers decreased. Again, it's a close call but potential runs scored aren't as good as situations that actually impacted games won or lost in 2012. And, in those situations, Cabrera was better.

[EagleFan]

Give it to Trout!!!!

Though I may be a little biased as he is from my home town...

[JonInMiddleGA]

WSB-TV reporter ‏@ZachKleinWSB tweets

Photo: I'm standing at spot in outfield where "infield fly" rule was called

[oykib]

Originally Posted by Arles

Trout let by .03 in OBP, scored 20 more runs and had 45 more SB. Cabrera had 23 more hits, 41 fewer Ks, 36 points higher in SLG, 14 more HR and 56 more RBI. I'm not sure that SBs are enough to tip the scales. IMO, Cabrera had the better offensive season while Trout was the better defender. When you throw in how Cabrera hit in key plate appearances, that his team made the playoffs and that he won the triple crown - I think that's enough to earn him the MVP.

His team played in a shitty division and still only had the 7th-best record. Since Trout was called up, the Angels had the best record in the league. Trout's team was better, and it had to face much better competition.

Cabrera also eliminated (rally-killed) 21 extra baserunners with GDPs than Trout.

Originally Posted by Arles

The point was to show that when the situation increased in pressure to be within 1 run, Cabrera did even better while Trout's numbers decreased. Again, it's a close call but potential runs scored aren't as good as situations that actually impacted games won or lost in 2012. And, in those situations, Cabrera was better.

I'll give you that Cabrera was more productive at the plate in the late innings. But they don't start keeping score in the seventh inning. Trout was the more productive offensive player overall. Even if we concede that Cabrera was better at the plate and give him bonus points for hitting in the clutch, there's no way it makes up for the significant difference in defensive value.

[Vince, Pt. II]

Originally Posted by oykib

...there's no way it makes up for the significant difference in defensive value.

Or on the basepaths.

[M GO BLUE!!!]

Ouch...

The 20 most depressing 2012 Pirates facts - Sports Fans, Teams, Stadiums, Page 2 - Fandom Blog - ESPN Playbook - ESPN

[Chubby]

And yet Miggy will still win the MVP in a landslide

[JediKooter]

Former major leaguer Champ Summers dies in Florida - Yahoo! Sports

Damn. I actually liked him even though he wasn't a star player. Maybe it's because he tried to take on the whole Atlanta Braves team one time.