So what you're telling me is that Cabrera compared to a computer generated number is not as great as Trout comparedto a computer generated number. And for that reason, Trout is the MVP.
Sounds kind of silly.
By the way, WAR suggests that Chase Headley had a better season than Miguel Cabrera.
Cabrera had a batting average 44 points higher, an OPS 17 points higher, a slugging% 108 points higher, 32 more hits, 14 more runs, 24 more RBI, 20 more XBH, 59 fewer strikeouts, and WON THE TRIPLE ****ING CROWN for the first time in 45 years.
Cabrera also made three more errors.
Those three errors apparently outweigh the incredible offensive difference.
WAR is a joke.
I don't even know where to start.
This "computer generated number" is a representation of reality. It's, more or less, what a minor legaue call up would do. Establishing this is important because every team has access to these type of players, thus creating an apples to apples comparison for comparing players. But it doesn't even matter. You could scale WAR to the average MLB player, and Trout would still be ahead. It's simply a baseline. As I've shown, we can break WAR down into its components, where there's no replacement adjustments, and Trout still comes out ahead. Did you ignore those links/posts?
You should also understand that average is based on hits, and average, along with slugging %, are components of OPS. Slugging % is based on things like XBH and hits, and is highly correlated with RBIs. So by listing all these stats that account for each other you're being incredibly duplicative and redundant. I can some up with 50 overlapping and meaningless statistics where Trout is better than Cabrera. It doesn't necessarily mean anything.
Errors are also a horrendous judge of fielding ability, and I'm shocked that people today still use that as a preeminent defensive stat. Fielders with better range will get to more balls, thus creating more opportunities for themselves to create errors. The fact that Headley doesn't have more errors than Cabrera is pretty impressive. Why not use stats like +/- and UZR, that analyze EVERY ball hit into play each season and determine who the best fielders are.
It's readily apparent that you simply don't understand these statistics, so perhaps you should read up on them and understand that they correlate with and are a more better predictor of scorings runs, preventing runs, and winning than the garbage stats you utilize.
Quote:
David Wright had a better WAR than Cabrera too lmfao.
So I see we've delved into the "it doesn't seem like this player should be more valuable despite the fact I have nothing to really back it up, so WAR sucks" territory. Good analysis guys.
Last edited by Feed Me A Stray Cat: 10-05-2012 at 08:18 AM.
Dude, I'm a Mets fan. Wright SUCKED the second half of the season. I can't take WAR seriously as a stat when it tells me Wright had a better year than a guy who won a Triple Crown.
I'm sorry, but it's a crime if Cabrera doesn't win the MVP after winning the first Triple Crown in over 40 years.
Call me old fashioned, even if there were others before him who didn't win the MVP that won it, but that's quite the accomplishment. He deserves that distinction. Give Trout the rookie of the year and call it a day.
Dude, I'm a Mets fan. Wright SUCKED the second half of the season. I can't take WAR seriously as a stat when it tells me Wright had a better year than a guy who won a Triple Crown.
Wright definitely didn't suck this season. He had a .391 OBP and impressive offensive statistics across the board. Wright's big WAR jump came from his UZR (fielding), which indicated he saved 15 runs this season. Considering Wright was a bad fielder according to UZR the past three seasons, I'm willing to bet that his UZR was overstated this year and that yes, his WAR was inflated (UZR can be a bit volatile year to year). When it comes to someone like Trout, this isn't as much of a concern, because his fielding dominance is confirmed in every circle (the different fielding metrics, scouts, the fans, etc.).
WAR does have its flaws. It's not precise enough to say that someone with a 8.0 WAR was definitively better than someone with a 7.5 WAR, or even a 7.0 WAR. Most of this variation comes from the fielding component, while the batting component is very precise.
However, Trout was 3.2 wins better than Cabrera this season according to WAR. 44% better. We're not even in the same stratosphere. Even if you heavily discount Trout's fielding, he stills comes out well on top.
I'm sorry, but it's a crime if Cabrera doesn't win the MVP after winning the first Triple Crown in over 40 years.
Call me old fashioned, even if there were others before him who didn't win the MVP that won it, but that's quite the accomplishment. He deserves that distinction. Give Trout the rookie of the year and call it a day.
The triple crown is great and everything, but consider this: the MVP is the most valuable player. Cabrera's MVP candidacy is being supported by his triple crown victory. But if Cabrera had three less hits, or two less home runs, he doesn't win the triple crown, and a large cadre of his MVP supporters go away. But was he any less valuable to his team? Not really.
Meanwhile, knock three hits and two home runs off of Trout's stats, and he still has all his supporters. His season looks just as impressive. His candidacy is much stronger.
so if someone won the Triple Crown last year, that would effect Cabrera's season how? he still had the same season.
if Cabrera had the same exact numbers he did this year LAST year, he would not have won the triple crown (wouldn't have won the average with a .330 average).
so if someone won the Triple Crown last year, that would effect Cabrera's season how? he still had the same season.
if Cabrera had the same exact numbers he did this year LAST year, he would not have won the triple crown (wouldn't have won the average with a .330 average).
Exactly. Additionally, if Josh Hamilton hit 45 home runs this year, how does that change Cabrera's season and his value to the Tigers?
If's and buts is all I'm going to say. The fact is none of those events you're suggesting happened. No one hit more home runs, no one had a higher average. He finished at the top.
Take Trout off of the Angels non playoff bound team this entire season and take Cabrera off of the Tigers playoff bound lineup the entire season
Which team misses the respective player more?
Most Valuable Player 101
Writers are also going to look at how he moved positions with no issue to make room for a better player and also will take into account the off field problems he over came to have the year he did
Think like a writer, writers aren't going to use a stat that suggests David Wright was better than Cabrera this season - what is the point of writers even watching the games if all they need to do is look at a stat at the end of the year to tell them which player should win an award?
I'll take the hard numbers anyday. 100 RBIs is 100 RBIs. A 10 WAR is ridiculously subjective and honestly doesn't prove anything than what might happen if said player missed games.
If's and buts is all I'm going to say. The fact is none of those events you're suggesting happened. No one hit more home runs, no one had a higher average. He finished at the top.
This is simply my opinion and I'm sticking to it.
Except MVP refers to the most valuable player. The value of the player doesn't come through some arbitrary designation, it comes through his effect on the field and helping his team win. Supporting MVP candidacy for someone simply because they won the triple crown is asinine because it really doesn't measure value. If Josh Hamilton hit two more home runs, Cabrera would have been no less valuable to the Tigers. Yet, if Josh Hamilton hit two more home runs, Cabrera's MVP votes would probably go down by half.
Take Trout off of the Angels non playoff bound team this entire season and take Cabrera off of the Tigers playoff bound lineup the entire season
Which team misses the respective player more?
Most Valuable Player 101
Writers are also going to look at how he moved positions with no issue to make room for a better player and also will take into account the off field problems he over came to have the year he did
Think like a writer, writers aren't going to use a stat that suggests David Wright was better than Cabrera this season - what is the point of writers even watching the games if all they need to do is look at a stat at the end of the year to tell them which player should win an award?
This is stupid. Take Fielder off the Tigers and they don't make the playoffs either. What are you proving, exactly? Should Fielder finish ahead of Trout on the MVP voting?
I'll take the hard numbers anyday. 100 RBIs is 100 RBIs. A 10 WAR is ridiculously subjective and honestly doesn't prove anything than what might happen if said player missed games.
Unlike with context-neutral statistics like wRC+, RE24 takes the number of outs and number of baserunners into account. It does not assume that all home runs are equal, nor does it treat a strikeout with a man on third base and one out as just another out. The rewards for performing with men on base are higher, and the blame for failing in those same situations is steeper as well. This is a metric that essentially quantifies the total offensive value of a player based on the situations that he actually faced. This is not a theoretical metric. If you hit a three run home run, you get more credit than if you hit a solo home run. If you are consistently getting hits with two outs to drive in runs, you get more credit than if those hits come with no outs and the bases empty. And, of course, it’s only an offensive metric, so there’s no defensive component, no position adjustments, and no replacement level. This is just straight up offense, adjusted for the context of the situations that they faced.
Here’s the AL leaderboard for this season. If you don’t want to click the link, I’ll just reproduce the top five here.
1. Mike Trout: +56.52 runs
2. Edwin Encarnacion: +54.44 runs
3. Prince Fielder: +48.12 runs
4. Joe Mauer: +46.51 runs
5. Miguel Cabrera: +45.18 runs
I know they say that there's no such thing as clutch, but that stat looks to be quantifying the concept of clutch pretty well, and it says that Trout was more clutch than anybody else this season.
I think if Cabrera wins the MVP this season, people are going to look back in the future and wonder how on earth the voters got it so wrong.
Unlike with context-neutral statistics like wRC+, RE24 takes the number of outs and number of baserunners into account. It does not assume that all home runs are equal, nor does it treat a strikeout with a man on third base and one out as just another out. The rewards for performing with men on base are higher, and the blame for failing in those same situations is steeper as well. This is a metric that essentially quantifies the total offensive value of a player based on the situations that he actually faced. This is not a theoretical metric. If you hit a three run home run, you get more credit than if you hit a solo home run. If you are consistently getting hits with two outs to drive in runs, you get more credit than if those hits come with no outs and the bases empty. And, of course, it’s only an offensive metric, so there’s no defensive component, no position adjustments, and no replacement level. This is just straight up offense, adjusted for the context of the situations that they faced.
Here’s the AL leaderboard for this season. If you don’t want to click the link, I’ll just reproduce the top five here.
1. Mike Trout: +56.52 runs
2. Edwin Encarnacion: +54.44 runs
3. Prince Fielder: +48.12 runs
4. Joe Mauer: +46.51 runs
5. Miguel Cabrera: +45.18 runs
Offense only. Context Included. Trout is #1
I don't care what the numbers say. They are all hypothetical. Nobody knows what exactly the replacement player does because it never actually happened
I don't care what the numbers say. They are all hypothetical. Nobody knows what exactly the replacement player does because it never actually happened
It's a baseline. If you don't like that stat, you can compare both of them to the average MLB player, and you get the same relative difference between them, with Trout clearly coming out ahead by any sensible metrics.
I don't care what the numbers say. They are all hypothetical. Nobody knows what exactly the replacement player does because it never actually happened
You didn't read the paragraph, or the link.
Those numbers are not hypothetical. They're not based on any replacement level. They quantify exactly what occurred on the field. We know the exact run value of every single type of play in baseball (home run with a runner on 2nd and 2 outs, steal second with no outs and no other runners on base, sacrifice fly to move a runner over to 2nd with one out, double play with the bases loaded and one out, etc.). That is a strict detailing of how many runs each player contributed.
It's a baseline. If you don't like that stat, you can compare both of them to the average MLB player, and you get the same relative difference between them, with Trout clearly coming out ahead by any sensible metrics.
Or I can compare them to each other and see Cabrera had more RBIs, runs and home runs while having a higher batting average.
Take Fielder off the Tigers and they don't make the playoffs either. What are you proving, exactly? Should Fielder finish ahead of Trout on the MVP voting?
What does Fielder have to do with anything? Is he in contention to win the MVP?
The term value relates to how much value one brings to their team, hence if you were to remove a player in contention for the Most Valuable Player award from their respective team and analyze how much that team would suffer or not when without that player, it helps determine the value of the player
For example, if we were to remove Delmon Young from the Tigers, would it hurt? To an extent yes, but would it impact the results of the team that significantly if they were to lose him versus losing Cabrera?
Or I can compare them to each other and see Cabrera had more RBIs, runs and home runs while having a higher batting average.
Ok, but those are not the stats that correlate most strongly with team wins, which is what I think should be most heavily considered when deciding the MVP award. RBIs are strongly dependent on the guys hitting in front of the MVP candidate. Runs are dependent on the guys hitting behind him. Their averages are very close, as are their OPSs. But Trout has almost 50 stolen bases and far superior fielding.
