Is Miguel Cabrera the best hitter ever

[bravesfan]

Best Hitter? I think not

To Name A Few Better:
-Jimmie Foxx
-Ted Williams
-Stan Musial
-Joe Jackson
-Ty Cobb
-Clean Barry Bonds (if he was definitively ever clean)
-Babe Ruth
-Lou Gehrig
-Maybe Frank Thomas
-Willie Mays
-Mickey Mantle

half those guys didn't even play against black players or latinos

 

[da55bums]

Apparently, you can't.

we all understand what secondary stats are, can't help you any more than that.

 

[steveringo]

Cabrerra deserved the MVP. He won the Triple Crown. His team won the pennant. That's a good combination. Trout has a case, but Cabrerra is a better choice IMO.

I hate to join a discussion late, bu did you just use the Triple Crown to defend an MVP???

I definitely give winning the division a lot of weight when determining a player's value (maybe too much), but AVE, HR & RBI???

 

[broncosmitty]

half those guys didn't even play against black players or latinos

Don't forget the Asians.

 

[1905 Giants]

half those guys didn't even play against black players or latinos

OK, post-integration better hitters:

-Clean Barry Bonds
-Frank Thomas
-Willie Mays
-Mickey Mantle
-Hank Aaron
-Albert Pujols
-Mike Schmidt

 

[da55bums]

OK, post-integration better hitters:

-Clean Barry Bonds
-Frank Thomas
-Willie Mays
-Mickey Mantle
-Hank Aaron
-Albert Pujols
-Mike Schmidt

A Roid - clean if he ever was
Stan Musial
Manny Ramerez
Ken Griffey Jr
Frank Robinson
Edgar Martinez
Vlad Guerrero
Andres Galaraga
Dante Bichette....

the list could go on...and on...of the players who dominated the league for a few years.

 

[rokketmn]

I definitely give winning the division a lot of weight when determining a player's value (maybe too much), but AVE, HR & RBI???

I hate it when people bring up players on winning teams when it comes to MVP. Baseball (like most others) is a team sport. Take Prince Fielder, Justin Verlander, or Austin Jackson (to name a few) off of the Tigers last season, and they don't win their division. They were no less important to their team than Cabrera.

I get it that if you are playing in a pennant race, the pressure is on and so forth, but that is overrated in my opinion. Most players care about the game and are not giving away at bats just because they are not in a pennant race. They are doing their best in each game, trying to win each game, and if for nothing else, their own personal stats.

Cabrera's season was great. There is no doubt, but the Tigers feasted on some weak teams over the final 2 months of the season. I did the exact numbers back when the CBS board was around, but they played something like half their games against the Indians, Royals, and Twins over that time frame. Add to that the head to head games against the overrated White Sox, who the Tigers actually trailed in the division, and that is a very soft schedule. While you can surely argue about the pressures of a pennant race, there isn't much (and certainly no more) individual game pressure when you are facing these weak teams game in, game out.

That said, does the fact that Trout's Angels were in a pennant race for the entire season, but finished about 4 games out of the playoffs diminish his great season and mean he was less important to his team? After all, the Angels had more wins than the Tigers did. It was just a reflection of the more competitive division that Trout played in that they missed the playoffs.

As the 2012 MVP re-vote shows (at my last check), was that nearly all of the posters here thought Trout should have come away with the MVP, despite NOT making the playoffs.

I just think that you can't look at numbers on a screen or a piece of paper, and make a decision. Context has to be taken into account. Just because a player plays on a winning team should not be a criteria of the MVP. It can be a consideration if 2 players are very close, but I don't think Cabrera's Tigers making the playoffs with fewer wins in a weaker division than the Trout's Angels should be a determining factor.

Another way to look at is that the player on the better team has better players around him. Maybe he receives better lineup protection; maybe he gets a chance to drive in or score more runs. The entire TEAM performs better, and not just because of one player, but because of all of them.

 

[Howie115]

I just think that you can't look at numbers on a screen or a piece of paper, and
make a decision. Context has to be taken into account.

Agree on context, BUT.... I think a player on a division winner deserves the award unless some other player's numbers are SO FAR SUPERIOR that you have to give it to the other guy. Trout had a ridiculously good all-around season, but was it so far superior to a guy who won the Triple Crown and was on a division winner? Room for debate, but I don't think so.

 

[rokketmn]

Agree on context, BUT.... I think a player on a division winner deserves the award unless some other player's numbers are SO FAR SUPERIOR that you have to give it to the other guy. Trout had a ridiculously good all-around season, but was it so far superior to a guy who won the Triple Crown and was on a division winner? Room for debate, but I don't think so.

I am not saying there is anything wrong with selecting Cabrera over Trout last season. It is just not the vote I would have cast. That is just my opinion. That is as long as you are just looking at their individual seasons and not because Cabrera played on a division winner.

How do you account for the Angels winning more games and the Tigers weaker division? Should that be given equal consideration in the voting process?

Do you think the Tigers make the playoffs last season without Justin Verlander?

 

[7Samurai13]

A Roid - clean if he ever was
Stan Musial
Manny Ramerez
Ken Griffey Jr
Frank Robinson
Edgar Martinez
Vlad Guerrero
Andres Galaraga
Dante Bichette....

the list could go on...and on...of the players who dominated the league for a few years.

Seriously, you would take Edgar Martinez, Manny Ramirez, Vlad, Galaraga, and Bichette over Cabrera? WOw you must think that Miguel is a really bad player. There must be 20-30 better players than he is right now. Cabrera as the best player ever is a joke though.

 

[Howie115]

Do you think the Tigers make the playoffs last season without Justin Verlander?

Do you think the Angels win 90 games without Jared Weaver going 20-5 / 2.81? Or Pujols' 30 HR/105 RBI? Or Torii Hunter's .316 / 92 RBI?

I've agreed there is plenty of reason to pick Trout, but your Verlander reason is weak. Both Cabrera and Trout had several good teammates.

 

[ImSmartherThanYou]

I hate it when people bring up players on winning teams when it comes to MVP. Baseball (like most others) is a team sport. Take Prince Fielder, Justin Verlander, or Austin Jackson (to name a few) off of the Tigers last season, and they don't win their division. They were no less important to their team than Cabrera.

I get it that if you are playing in a pennant race, the pressure is on and so forth, but that is overrated in my opinion. Most players care about the game and are not giving away at bats just because they are not in a pennant race. They are doing their best in each game, trying to win each game, and if for nothing else, their own personal stats.

Cabrera's season was great. There is no doubt, but the Tigers feasted on some weak teams over the final 2 months of the season. I did the exact numbers back when the CBS board was around, but they played something like half their games against the Indians, Royals, and Twins over that time frame. Add to that the head to head games against the overrated White Sox, who the Tigers actually trailed in the division, and that is a very soft schedule. While you can surely argue about the pressures of a pennant race, there isn't much (and certainly no more) individual game pressure when you are facing these weak teams game in, game out.

That said, does the fact that Trout's Angels were in a pennant race for the entire season, but finished about 4 games out of the playoffs diminish his great season and mean he was less important to his team? After all, the Angels had more wins than the Tigers did. It was just a reflection of the more competitive division that Trout played in that they missed the playoffs.

As the 2012 MVP re-vote shows (at my last check), was that nearly all of the posters here thought Trout should have come away with the MVP, despite NOT making the playoffs.

I just think that you can't look at numbers on a screen or a piece of paper, and make a decision. Context has to be taken into account. Just because a player plays on a winning team should not be a criteria of the MVP. It can be a consideration if 2 players are very close, but I don't think Cabrera's Tigers making the playoffs with fewer wins in a weaker division than the Trout's Angels should be a determining factor.

Another way to look at is that the player on the better team has better players around him. Maybe he receives better lineup protection; maybe he gets a chance to drive in or score more runs. The entire TEAM performs better, and not just because of one player, but because of all of them.

Great, great post. I agree with just about all of this.

 

[broncosmitty]

Trumbo.... Also good last year. Ervin Santana, not so much. Maybe had it not been for him, the masses wouldn't have to expend so much energy re-writing history? But since they're all better suited to determine annual awards, Ill sit back and let them do their duty.

 

[ImSmartherThanYou]

Agree on context, BUT.... I think a player on a division winner deserves the award unless some other player's numbers are SO FAR SUPERIOR that you have to give it to the other guy. Trout had a ridiculously good all-around season, but was it so far superior to a guy who won the Triple Crown and was on a division winner? Room for debate, but I don't think so.

Your logic fails in this particular circumstance, since Trout's team had more wins while playing a tougher schedule. Cabrera making the playoffs should not have been a deciding factor.

The Triple Crown is just an arbitrary accomplishment. Impressive, yes, due to its rarity, but arbitrary nonetheless. Why are those the three Triple Crown categories? They're certainly not the three most important offensive categories.

 

[ImSmartherThanYou]

Trumbo.... Also good last year. Ervin Santana, not so much. Maybe had it not been for him, the masses wouldn't have to expend so much energy re-writing history? But since they're all better suited to determine annual awards, Ill sit back and let them do their duty.

Rewriting history? Who's rewriting history?

 

[StanMarsh51]

Great, great post. I agree with just about all of this.

+1

I believe this is the first thing I've ever agreed with rokketmn on.

 

[broncosmitty]

Rewriting history? Who's rewriting history?

Could be it's an instructional guide to BBWAA members that's being written? Idk. But what you fellas value, clearly isn't what those who actually vote value. Maybe once there's a generational die off...

 

[Howie115]

They're certainly not the three most important offensive categories.

And what categories are more important? Miguel led Trout considerably in SLG PCT (.606 - .564) and OPS (.999 - .963). Trout had a small edge in OBP (.399-.393) and OPS+ (168 - 164). Again, too minor to offset Cabrera's lead in the triple crown categories. Trout also struck out 139 times to Cabrera's 98 times, in 50 fewer at-bats.

The biggest offensive edge to Trout is in speed-related categories (SB, triples). He also scored 129 runs to Cabrera's 109, but batted leadoff. If you believe this is enough to make the case for Trout, I completely understand. Obviously, most of the MVP voters disagreed.

 

[rokketmn]

Do you think the Angels win 90 games without Jared Weaver going 20-5 / 2.81? Or Pujols' 30 HR/105 RBI? Or Torii Hunter's .316 / 92 RBI?

Of course they don't. That is my point about why I think you have to throw the playoffs and being more important to your team theories out the window and just look at the players involved. No single player brings his team to the post-season.

 

[rokketmn]

I can't argue against Cabrera getting the MVP. He was deserving. I just thought Trout was more deserving for reasons that go beyond offensive stats: His defense and baserunning. The pressure he adds to a pitcher/catcher/defense when he is on base. The abiity to go 1st to 3rd on a sharp single to CF, or score from 2nd. The hits he takes away with his defense. These are areas he has the clear edge over Cabrera.

I said last season that I thought Cabrera was the best hitter in the game. I just didn't think he was the best PLAYER.