For those who think Trout over miggy

[broncosmitty]

Simulation league

That's what I don't understand. Is it similar to fantasy baseball? Or video game season simulation? Or something completely different? CBS was once a decent provider of fantasy sports(sportsline.com days) so we talked a lot of fantasy in various forms, but Im not familiar with simulation leagues. (I rolled with DK in a 16 team AL only league for a year. The FA pool was more than thin.)

 

[jalopy]

Stan, will save you time, TrustMe is like Dougie but uses the numbers he likes, not all the numbers, just the ones that make his point true...

But feel free and good luck, lol

I'm not sure who Dougie is but I can't believe anyone deserves to be compared to TrustMe.

For me this debate is simple. I view the MVP as the player that contributed most to his team. That would be the best player. I don't see how that can be anyone other than Trout. I understand that others see value only if the team wins. I just don't agree.

 

[dougplayer]

Miggys worse month????

what a crock! the guy was hurt!!!! 98% of the players hurt like him would have been ice bagging his bags on the bench! He tried to play through..cause his WAR replacement Don (BOOM BOOM) Kelly would have to replace him..which would have been even worse.

He should also have got a purple HEART for even limping up to the plate in the last month.
I think you WAR guys never played the game. and probably throw like girls

 

[DragonfromTO]

That's what I don't understand. Is it similar to fantasy baseball? Or video game season simulation? Or something completely different? CBS was once a decent provider of fantasy sports(sportsline.com days) so we talked a lot of fantasy in various forms, but Im not familiar with simulation leagues. (I rolled with DK in a 16 team AL only league for a year. The FA pool was more than thin.)

This gives a decent enough explanation I think. The rules regarding league structure, drafts, player retention and roster management and so on and so forth are different from league to league but that's the basic idea.

Simulation leagues put owners in complete control - USATODAY.com

The league I play in is a full 162 games, 30 teams and 43 man rosters, so almost every player that played in 2012 was on a team in 2013. And you're limited by real-life playing time (sub-140 game batters get 120% of real-life PAs and 140+ game batters get their real-life # of games, relievers get 120% of innings, sub-30 start starters get (real-life starts + 4) up to 30 and 30+ start pitchers get their real-life # of starts) and real-life defensive positions. So you can see how a guy like Don Kelly who's eligible at 6 different positions can be helpful in filling out playing time for teams no matter whether they're contending now or rebuilding.

And as a side note we finally won the World Series this year after 8 seasons of losing, mostly to ESPN fantasy employees. Which was way more exciting for me than it should have been.

 

[TrustMeIamRight]

For me this debate is simple. I view the MVP as the player that contributed most to his team. That would be the best player. I don't see how that can be anyone other than Trout. I understand that others see value only if the team wins. I just don't agree.

They last time a player from a losing team won the MVP was posted in this thread. It was 10 years ago. ARod led the league in HRs, Run Scored, Total Bases and Slug %, while winning a gold glove at SS.

Trout led the league in runs scored, but when Cabrera is 2nd in runs scored, while hitting 17 more homeruns and driving in 40 more runs, while leading the league in BA, OBP and OPS.

Trout finished exactly where he should have finished.

 

[StanMarsh51]

They last time a player from a losing team won the MVP was posted in this thread. It was 10 years ago. ARod led the league in HRs, Run Scored, Total Bases and Slug %, while winning a gold glove at SS.

Trout led the league in runs scored, but when Cabrera is 2nd in runs scored, while hitting 17 more homeruns and driving in 40 more runs, while leading the league in BA, OBP and OPS.

Trout finished exactly where he should have finished.

And A-Rod had a better season in 2002 than he did in 2003, and was much better than the winner 2002 MVP Tejada.

In other words, the voters are hypocritical at times and pick and choose the arguments convenient to their candidates. And why you're putting so much stock into their decisions thinking that a player needs to do X and Y to win, I don't know, given how we both know how inconsistent the voters are.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Just for argument sake here, The reason why the trout voters like trout over miggy is because he is a better overall player than Miggy... But what is that based on??

Offense- we all agree Miggy is the best hitter in baseball
Base running- i consider part of offense- Trout is not a better offensive player than Miggy even with the baserunning
Defense- now this is the interesting one... Miggy is arguably the worst defensive 3B in baseball, with a dWAR of -1.5, but Trout is not one of the best defensive players at his position... He might make some great plays, but that is just because he is fast... But if you look at his dWAR it is a -.8 at LF(47 games,40 Games started) and -.8 at CF(111 games, 108 games started)...

That is only .7 games better than Miggy... If you want to add one game because of difficulty of position then trout is 1.7 games better defensively than miggy... that is all... Dont make Trout out to be the best defender in baseball, he is not...

I am not a WAR guy, but i dont know any other way to show who is best at defense since there are some difficult to measure statistics... But based on dWAR Trout is not that great defensively...

I understand different positions, but we dont know how to measure importance of different positions either so it is irrelevant...

 

[element1286]

soooooo getting to the post season has nothing to do with MVP????
then whats the Most valuable mean????????????????????????

valuable to be standing on first base with a 2 out single????
so its not about winning????? just look good and get on base.
who cares if you drive in runs or drive in runs. as long as your WAR looks good??????

you guys need to put down the pipe!

Most Valuable = best, there is no way to be more valuable, and also a worse player at the same time. It's impossible.

Value != playoffs, where does the even come from?

 

[Cleaves2000]

Miggy MVP MVP MVP MVP


Maybe next year trout lovers.....but its over.....miggy IS the 2013 MVP

 

[StanMarsh51]

Just for argument sake here, The reason why the trout voters like trout over miggy is because he is a better overall player than Miggy... But what is that based on??

Offense- we all agree Miggy is the best hitter in baseball
Base running- i consider part of offense- Trout is not a better offensive player than Miggy even with the baserunning
Defense- now this is the interesting one... Miggy is arguably the worst defensive 3B in baseball, with a dWAR of -1.5, but Trout is not one of the best defensive players at his position... He might make some great plays, but that is just because he is fast... But if you look at his dWAR it is a -.8 at LF(47 games,40 Games started) and -.8 at CF(111 games, 108 games started)...

That is only .7 games better than Miggy... If you want to add one game because of difficulty of position then trout is 1.7 games better defensively than miggy... that is all... Dont make Trout out to be the best defender in baseball, he is not...

I am not a WAR guy, but i dont know any other way to show who is best at defense since there are some difficult to measure statistics... But based on dWAR Trout is not that great defensively...

I understand different positions, but we dont know how to measure importance of different positions eitherso it is irrelevant...

How big is the gap though in offense (if we're including baserunning as offense)? If Cabrera's a 9.8 on offense for example, what's Trout? 9.4? 9.0? 8.5?

And to say that positions are irrelevant just b/c we 'don't know how to measure importance of positions' is a major cop out. So if we were to compare Yadier Molina to Adrian Gonzalez, you wouldn't take position into account by any means?

 

[navamind]

How big is the gap though in offense (if we're including baserunning as offense)? If Cabrera's a 9.8 on offense for example, what's Trout? 9.4? 9.0? 8.5?

And to say that positions are irrelevant just b/c we 'don't know how to measure importance of positions' is a major cop out. So if we were to compare Yadier Molina to Adrian Gonzalez, you wouldn't take position into account by any means?

So Mo Vaughn wasn't more valuable than John Valentin 1995????

 

[element1286]

So Mo Vaughn wasn't more valuable than John Valentin 1995????

Stats say no, Valentin had a better year fairly easily, even offensively they had essentially the same impact.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

How big is the gap though in offense (if we're including baserunning as offense)? If Cabrera's a 9.8 on offense for example, what's Trout? 9.4? 9.0? 8.5?

And to say that positions are irrelevant just b/c we 'don't know how to measure importance of positions' is a major cop out. So if we were to compare Yadier Molina to Adrian Gonzalez, you wouldn't take position into account by any means?

Irrelevant was the wrong word... what i meant is that since it is hard to know what the true value between a 3B and a CF, we can only measure them at their position and where they rank there... We can add what ever position value, but it is separate to how good a player is at that position...

to explain what i mean, if you compare defensively between Miggy and Trout... Trout's dWAR is -.8, while miggy is -1.5... THey play 2 different positions so the replacement player is different... But Trout was only .7 games better... You can add a defensive postion factor, but that should be the same for all players not just the ones in comparison... And since it is impossible to actually find that value it will be different in all evaluations...

I am not sure if that clears anything up...

I feel like people who look at the advanced statistics forget about using the old fassioned statistics... I think RBIs, Runs, And HRs is just as important as RC27, WAR, OPS+...

I use a mathematic formula to get my MVPs, I had Miggy 2 points higher than Trout... Where i give all players who made the playoffs an extra 3 points... So what that shows is that it was very close to begin with, and Trout would have won if either he made the playoffs or if Miggy did not...

I actually had Votto beating out McCutchen, but it was by less than .04...

 

[navamind]

Stats say no, Valentin had a better year fairly easily, even offensively they had essentially the same impact.

It was tongue-in-cheek.

Vaughn had a fine year, but he had no business winning MVP. Valentin had arguably one of the best seasons by a shortstop in recent memory. 138 OPS+ and he was very good defensively. One of the most underrated Sox players. I'm not even sure he had a better season than Tim Naehring. It's not like you can say Vaughn was the best hitter in the AL that year either.

1995 Awards Voting - Baseball-Reference.com

 

[TrustMeIamRight]

And A-Rod had a better season in 2002 than he did in 2003, and was much better than the winner 2002 MVP Tejada.

In other words, the voters are hypocritical at times and pick and choose the arguments convenient to their candidates. And why you're putting so much stock into their decisions thinking that a player needs to do X and Y to win, I don't know, given how we both know how inconsistent the voters are.

I think it is quite simple why Tejada got the nod in 2002 -- Oakland finished 31 games in front of Texas in the standings and Tejada was red hot at the end of year driving in 72 runs after the all-star break.

In 2003 -- there wasn't a comparable player from a division winning team. The other player who put up numbers comparable to ARod was Carlos Delgado, whose team also didn't make the playoffs.

I don't see how difficult this is? The only way a player is going to win MVP from a losing team is if they are head and shoulders better than any player from a division winner. You will have random MVPs thrown in now and then, like Verlander, who personally, I don't believe deserved the MVP, but no one had a monster year in 2011.

Unfortunately for Trout -- his 1st two seasons have been tremendous, but Cabrera's have been better and his team has fared better. I honestly don't see what the argument is at all right now. Cabrera hit 25 points higher in average with 17 more home runs and 40 more rbi's. Cabrera had a higher OBP and higher OPS. Cabrera also led the league in total bases.

I think people are mesmerized by some of the catches Trout made last year from watching ESPN highlights, because contrary to what many have said -- outside of his range, he wasn't that good, which is why he was moved to LF for Bourjos. Cabrera was tied with Trout in OF assists, even though he didn't even play a game in the OF.

 

[DragonfromTO]

Irrelevant was the wrong word... what i meant is that since it is hard to know what the true value between a 3B and a CF, we can only measure them at their position and where they rank there... We can add what ever position value, but it is separate to how good a player is at that position...

to explain what i mean, if you compare defensively between Miggy and Trout... Trout's dWAR is -.8, while miggy is -1.5... THey play 2 different positions so the replacement player is different... But Trout was only .7 games better... You can add a defensive postion factor, but that should be the same for all players not just the ones in comparison... And since it is impossible to actually find that value it will be different in all evaluations...

I am not sure if that clears anything up...

I feel like people who look at the advanced statistics forget about using the old fassioned statistics... I think RBIs, Runs, And HRs is just as important as RC27, WAR, OPS+...

I use a mathematic formula to get my MVPs, I had Miggy 2 points higher than Trout... Where i give all players who made the playoffs an extra 3 points... So what that shows is that it was very close to begin with, and Trout would have won if either he made the playoffs or if Miggy did not...

I actually had Votto beating out McCutchen, but it was by less than .04...

How'd you determine that making the playoffs should be worth 3 points?

 

[StanMarsh51]

I think it is quite simple why Tejada got the nod in 2002 -- Oakland finished 31 games in front of Texas in the standings and Tejada was red hot at the end of year driving in 72 runs after the all-star break.

In 2003 -- there wasn't a comparable player from a division winning team. The other player who put up numbers comparable to ARod was Carlos Delgado, whose team also didn't make the playoffs.

I don't see how difficult this is? The only way a player is going to win MVP from a losing team is if they are head and shoulders better than any player from a division winner. You will have random MVPs thrown in now and then, like Verlander, who personally, I don't believe deserved the MVP, but no one had a monster year in 2011.

There wasn't a comparable player from a division winning team in 2002 either, regardless of how many RBIs Tejada had. A-Rod had an OPS more than 150 points higher, and was better defensively. And shoot, you can make a case that the gap between A-Rod and Tejada in 2002 was larger than the gap between A-Rod and Posada in 2003. Not to mention, you could argue Nomar had a better year than Tejada, so Tejada was possibly the 3rd best AL shortstop in 2002.

So in 2 seasons where there was no one close to as good as A-Rod on a playoff team...one season they give him the award, and the other season they don't.


Not inconsistent at all by the voters...

 

[MilkSpiller22]

How'd you determine that making the playoffs should be worth 3 points?

Arbitrary number- but all percentages are... Playoffs counts as 3 % in my calculations... when you include things that are difficult to measure, they generally always are a little arbitrary...

 

[element1286]

I think it is quite simple why Tejada got the nod in 2002 -- Oakland finished 31 games in front of Texas in the standings and Tejada was red hot at the end of year driving in 72 runs after the all-star break.

In 2003 -- there wasn't a comparable player from a division winning team. The other player who put up numbers comparable to ARod was Carlos Delgado, whose team also didn't make the playoffs.

I don't see how difficult this is? The only way a player is going to win MVP from a losing team is if they are head and shoulders better than any player from a division winner. You will have random MVPs thrown in now and then, like Verlander, who personally, I don't believe deserved the MVP, but no one had a monster year in 2011.

Unfortunately for Trout -- his 1st two seasons have been tremendous, but Cabrera's have been better and his team has fared better. I honestly don't see what the argument is at all right now. Cabrera hit 25 points higher in average with 17 more home runs and 40 more rbi's. Cabrera had a higher OBP and higher OPS. Cabrera also led the league in total bases.

I think people are mesmerized by some of the catches Trout made last year from watching ESPN highlights, because contrary to what many have said -- outside of his range, he wasn't that good, which is why he was moved to LF for Bourjos. Cabrera was tied with Trout in OF assists, even though he didn't even play a game in the OF.

Using advanced stats Trout was head and shoulders better both years.

Trout played 952 innings at CF and 356 in LF, wouldn't call him a LF. And range is the most important part of playing defense, if an OF can get to a ball easily he is going to catch it.

 

[DragonfromTO]

Arbitrary number- but all percentages are... Playoffs counts as 3 % in my calculations... when you include things that are difficult to measure, they generally always are a little arbitrary...

3 points for playoffs isn't "a little" arbitrary though, it sounds like it's completely arbitrary.