For those who think Trout over miggy

[MilkSpiller22]

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

Well, I believe making the playoffs should be a factor but not a huge factor. I think 3% makes sense because it is not going to significantly change anything. It only becomes a factor in close races. If u think it is less important then in your calculations don't use it as much. The percentages you use are always going to be based on your preference. And therefore it will be arbitrary for everyone else.

 

[Cleaves2000]

Glad the voters dont care about advanced stats or WAR...


MIGGY IS STILL MVP AS OF TODAY!

 

[jalopy]

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.

Quit making sense, please. It frustrates and confuses these Tiger fans. Trust me when I say that 90 percent of baseball fans agree with you.

 

[StanMarsh51]

Well, I believe making the playoffs should be a factor but not a huge factor. I think 3% makes sense because it is not going to significantly change anything. It only becomes a factor in close races. If u think it is less important then in your calculations don't use it as much. The percentages you use are always going to be based on your preference. And therefore it will be arbitrary for everyone else.

The problem with that is the external factor of strength of division. A team in a strong division could win 92 games and miss the playoffs while a team in a weak division could win 85 games and make the playoffs. Should you really be giving 3% to the guy on the 85 win team because he 'helped his team get to the playoffs?'

We didn't see that happen this year, but it did happen last year.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

The problem with that is the external factor of strength of division. A team in a strong division could win 92 games and miss the playoffs while a team in a weak division could win 85 games and make the playoffs. Should you really be giving 3% to the guy on the 85 win team because he 'helped his team get to the playoffs?'

you can make an excuse for every statistic to be bad... some are simply black and white and making the playoffs is one of them...

 

[Cleaves2000]

Quit making sense, please. It frustrates and confuses these Tiger fans. Trust me when I say that 90 percent of baseball fans agree with you.

So 90 percent of fans thought trout should win MVP? But miggy won easily? Now why dont you try making sense...i guess the voters know nothing.....they should let idiot fans online vote....since 90 percent of them think trout is MVP.

 

[Cleaves2000]

The problem with that is the external factor of strength of division. A team in a strong division could win 92 games and miss the playoffs while a team in a weak division could win 85 games and make the playoffs. Should you really be giving 3% to the guy on the 85 win team because he 'helped his team get to the playoffs?'

We didn't see that happen this year, but it did happen last year.

Whos in the weaker division?

The central had 2 playoff teams.

The central leader tigers beat the west leaders A's in the playoffs

The royals contended

The west had the astros and the mariners.....id love for the tigers to switch spots with the rangers....we own the A's.....then u got sorry teams like angels, mariners, and the stros..

 

[Darkstone42]

Just curious.....after 10 pages of posts about the Miggy/Trout MVP decision....has anyone changed their mind about who should have gotten the award? I am sure with all the stats (both old-style and Saber) presented and all the passionate diatribes about the issue - some of you must have changed your mind! If not, seems like a lot of time and effort was wasted. And....I am sure some of the posters, on both sides of the topic, felt they presented irrefutable evidence and would be hurt (and testosterone deprived) if they didn't change ONE persons mind.

Press on

I changed mine during this thread's life, but not because of this thread. An article Dave Cameron wrote indicated a logical inconsistency in saying Miggy was the MVP because his team made the playoffs and Trout wasn't because his team didn't, but that Trout could be the runner-up.

By the playoff logic, Trout shouldn't have even been in contention, not a finalist, and certainly not runner-up.

I picked Cabrera because of the playoff thing, but I can't rationalize the logical inconsistency, and so I changed my mind once it was indicated to me.

 

[StanMarsh51]

Whos in the weaker division?

The central had 2 playoff teams.

The central leader tigers beat the west leaders A's in the playoffs

The royals contended

The west had the astros and the mariners.....id love for the tigers to switch spots with the rangers....we own the A's.....then u got sorry teams like angels, mariners, and the stros..

What part of "We didn't see that happen this year, but it did happen last year" did you not understand? Did you just bother to neglect that sentence in my post?

 

[MilkSpiller22]

The problem with that is the external factor of strength of division. A team in a strong division could win 92 games and miss the playoffs while a team in a weak division could win 85 games and make the playoffs. Should you really be giving 3% to the guy on the 85 win team because he 'helped his team get to the playoffs?'

We didn't see that happen this year, but it did happen last year.

The ultimate goal for a team during the season is to make the playoffs so they can win the championships... a team that does not make the playoffs does not reach their goal... the best player on a team is most responsible for the team to reach its goal... therefore if a player does not make the playoffs he was not as valuable as one who does make the playoffs...

You can not argue with that!!! the only thing you can debate is how valuable does making the playoffs make you...

 

[Darkstone42]

Whos in the weaker division?

The central had 2 playoff teams.

The central leader tigers beat the west leaders A's in the playoffs

The royals contended

The west had the astros and the mariners.....id love for the tigers to switch spots with the rangers....we own the A's.....then u got sorry teams like angels, mariners, and the stros..

He's not saying that it applies specifically in this case, he's saying it's an inherent problem with the logic of requiring a playoff appearance for an MVP winner. And last year, the Angels had a better record, but they didn't make the playoffs because of the relative strengths of the divisions.

 

[StanMarsh51]

He's not saying that it applies specifically in this case, he's saying it's an inherent problem with the logic of requiring a playoff appearance for an MVP winner. And last year, the Angels had a better record, but they didn't make the playoffs because of the relative strengths of the divisions.

If only Cleaves had bothered to read the last sentence of my post...

 

[MilkSpiller22]

I changed mine during this thread's life, but not because of this thread. An article Dave Cameron wrote indicated a logical inconsistency in saying Miggy was the MVP because his team made the playoffs and Trout wasn't because his team didn't, but that Trout could be the runner-up.

By the playoff logic, Trout shouldn't have even been in contention, not a finalist, and certainly not runner-up.

I picked Cabrera because of the playoff thing, but I can't rationalize the logical inconsistency, and so I changed my mind once it was indicated to me.

See, i dont agree that a playoff player must win the MVP... i think that is insane... But it has to be a factor... The only question you have to answer when you make your evaluations is how important is making the playoffs... I think it is worth 3% of the total evaluation... but others can think it is worth more, and others can think less...

 

[Darkstone42]

The ultimate goal for a team during the season is to make the playoffs so they can win the championships... a team that does not make the playoffs does not reach their goal... the best player on a team is most responsible for the team to reach its goal... therefore if a player does not make the playoffs he was not as valuable as one who does make the playoffs...

You can not argue with that!!! the only thing you can debate is how valuable does making the playoffs make you...

The best player on the team is not "most responsible," he just contributes the most in the positive to his team's successes. In a team sport, no player bears the full responsibility of his team's success, not the full glory, not the full shame. A great power hitter/RBI man will have poor run-production stats on a team with no one who gets on base. The best OBP and baserunning leadoff hitter will have low run totals on a team without anyone who can consistently drive him in. Both of these players are inherently extremely valuable, though, and both of them are doing their jobs. It's the players around them who aren't.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

The best player on the team is not "most responsible," he just contributes the most in the positive to his team's successes. In a team sport, no player bears the full responsibility of his team's success, not the full glory, not the full shame. A great power hitter/RBI man will have poor run-production stats on a team with no one who gets on base. The best OBP and baserunning leadoff hitter will have low run totals on a team without anyone who can consistently drive him in. Both of these players are inherently extremely valuable, though, and both of them are doing their jobs. It's the players around them who aren't.

I did not say that any player takes full responsibilty for their teams success or failures... But the best player on a team is the best player on the team and are more responsible for their teams success and failures than anyone else on their team... so like i said they are most responsible for their teams success and failures...

 

[Ronnie]

When do we vote?

 

[Darkstone42]

See, i dont agree that a playoff player must win the MVP... i think that is insane... But it has to be a factor... The only question you have to answer when you make your evaluations is how important is making the playoffs... I think it is worth 3% of the total evaluation... but others can think it is worth more, and others can think less...

I used to think it was very important. I can't anymore. When it comes down to it, a pitcher needs a good defense to prevent runs, because no pitcher can just strike everyone out. But pitchers who control what they can, and does well with those things (home runs, walks, strikeouts, quality of contact), will succeed to some extent regardless of defense, but even Kershaw would have a high ERA pitching in front of an incompetent defense.

Similarly, hitters need the players around them to be good to get the "counting stats." Votto batted behind Zack Cozart much of this year, for example. Cozart didn't get on base often, and he often found ways to get both himself and Choo out before Votto had a chance to drive them in, so Votto's RBI totals suffered. Conversely, Phillips had a terrible season offensively, but ended up with over 100 RBIs because Votto was always on base to drive in. Bruce is actually a pretty good hitter, but he also benefited from Votto in terms of RBIs.

Andrew McCutchen was on base this year almost 40% of the time, stole 27 bases and was an otherwise very positive base runner. He also drove himself in 21 times, but he still only scored 97 runs. Why? Because Garrett Jones batted cleanup for a large portion of the season behind him, Pedro Alvarez, despite his HR and RBI totals was actually not very good in RISP situations (in fact, he was just average in all situations overall), and the rest of the offense was largely anemic this year. It's no fault of McCutchen's, it's the team around him. Fortunately, the offense was just good enough to win games with the top-notch pitching we got.

Now these are just a couple little things, but you can see how these sorts of events would impact a team's win-loss record. These players cannot be held accountable for underachieving teammates, incompetent managers, and front offices who make poor decisions with their money. Making the playoffs is a team achievement. MVP is an individual award. They have to be separated for maximum objectivity.

 

[Darkstone42]

I did not say that any player takes full responsibilty for their teams success or failures... But the best player on a team is the best player on the team and are more responsible for their teams success and failures than anyone else on their team... so like i said they are most responsible for their teams success and failures...

The best player on the team is, by the definition of best, least responsible for a team's failures.

 

[Cleaves2000]

Just checking in to see if miggys STILL the MVP

One might think his family members or man crushes are in here. They are really mad trout didnt win AGAIN. just face it...miggy IS the MVP.

As the royals fans like to say.....wait til next year...

 

[MilkSpiller22]

When do we vote?

I believe we dont need voters at all... we just need to find the right mathematical formula... have not found the perfect one but i do think i have a good one... Maybe someone wiser than me has a better one... But i do believe voters dont always make the correct pick... This includes HOF...