Is Miguel Cabrera the best hitter ever

[Howie115]

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.

I can't argue. And if I was starting a team today, I'm apt to say you would pick Trout over Cabrera, because of age and speed. But the voters sort of have a set notion as to what the word "Valuable" means, and I'll agree it's subjective.

As to Cabrera being the best HITTER, I think what amazes me most is he's about to win his third consecutive batting title with almost NO infield hits. Trout had to have at least a couple dozen infield singles last season and again this year.

 

[StanMarsh51]

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.

But if you're going to bring up Trout batting leadoff as a factor the gap in runs, shouldn't it also be used as a factor in explaining part of the gap in RBIs?

Cabrera for instance had 444 runners on base for him last year, 45% more than Trout's 306. Cabrera also had 77 more total RISP than Trout. While it doesn't explain the full difference, it probably explains a good portion of it.

 

[Howie115]

Cabrera for instance had 444 runners on base for him last year, 45% more than
Trout's 306. Cabrera also had 77 more total RISP than Trout. While it doesn't
explain the full difference, it probably explains a good portion of it.

Can't argue. Also have to say that some hitters thrive and even get better with RISP. Cabrera is hitting .419 with RISP this season, and .356 last season. Trout is hitting .328 with RISP this season, .324 last year. Very good, but Cabrera is better. So it goes beyond just opportunities.

 

[7Samurai13]

Also when the season was on the line Trout floundered in August and September while Cabrera thrived.

 

[Howie115]

Also when the season was on the line Trout floundered in August and September
while Cabrera thrived.

I think Trout hit about .278 in September. Not really "floundering", but certainly not in the class of what Cabrera did in September.

 

[ImSmartherThanYou]

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...

Well, most of them don't know their asshole from a hole in the ground, so an instructional guide might be of good use.

The thing you gotta realize about most writers is that they're just guys doing a job. Very few of them have actual keen insight into the game. Their job is to write stories and sell papers/magazines/get clicks on a website. They don't necessarily know more about the game than you or I just because they cover it for a living.

 

[7Samurai13]

I think Trout hit about .278 in September. Not really "floundering", but certainly not in the class of what Cabrera did in September.

He batted .284 in August, very respectable.
He batted .257 in September. Not at all what I would expect or want from an "MVP" if my team is fighting for a playoff spot.

 

[ImSmartherThanYou]

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.

There's a plethora of categories more important than RBI or AVG. You named several of them, and there are others. To me, the Triple Crown would be OBP/SLG/OPS+.

I believe Cabrera was better offensively, but not by so much that it offsets the additional value that Trout provided on defense and on the bases (two areas where Cabrera was a detriment). I don't think Cabrera's selection was terrible, and I actually expected him to win because of the TC, and think his selection is justifiable due to the fact that Trout only played 139 games. I would have voted for Trout and believe he was most deserving, but Cabrera's selection was by no means egregious or a travesty, as was the case when Morneau or Howard or Pudge Rodriguez.

 

[ImSmartherThanYou]

Also when the season was on the line Trout floundered in August and September while Cabrera thrived.

This myth still exists?

He hit .287/.383/.500 over the last two months of the season last year. They weren't his two best months, but he obviously didn't "flounder".

 

[ImSmartherThanYou]

He batted .284 in August, very respectable.
He batted .257 in September. Not at all what I would expect or want from an "MVP" if my team is fighting for a playoff spot.

Saying he hit .257 in September is misleading. It ignores the last three days of the season which brings his Sept./Oct. average up to .289.

Still, remind me why we're only looking at batting average? For a leadoff hitter?

 

[1905 Giants]

There's a plethora of categories more important than RBI or AVG. You named several of them, and there are others. To me, the Triple Crown would be OBP/SLG/OPS+

How do you feel about WAR?

 

[MI Nightmare]

Your logic fails in this particular circumstance, since Trout's team has 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.

1. HRs. Is there anything better than hitting a home run, while at the plate?

2. RBIs. I would say a grand slam, followed by a base clearing triple and so on, is the real purpose of the game from an offensive standpoint. Kudos to those on base, their batting averages and on base percentages should reflect their abilities.

3. BA. Could make an argument for OBP or OPS here but we all know if one can't hit then one won't be playing ball too long.

 

[ImSmartherThanYou]

How do you feel about WAR?

It's not right in this context because it's an all-encompassing stat.

But I like it just fine. I think people who consider it an end-all are fools, but people who completely ignore it are even bigger fools. It's a convenient shorthand to see who the most productive all-around players are. But it's obviously a theoretical stat and has its flaws. I also prefer baseball-reference's WAR to Fangraphs' WAR (for both players and pitchers).

 

[StanMarsh51]

I think Trout hit about .278 in September. Not really "floundering", but certainly not in the class of what Cabrera did in September.

He hit .289/.400/.500 in the final month (Sept + Oct) of the year.


But if we take that into context, here's who he faced:

From Sept 1 on, 18 of the Angels final 30 games was against the top 3 AL teams in ERA, and only 3 of those 30 games were against a team that didn't have an above average team ERA (3 vs the Royals)

So the Angels may have had the toughest schedule in terms of pitching opponents that final month (I haven't checked other teams,' but I'd be surprised if one had a tougher schedule for hitters).

 

[ImSmartherThanYou]

1. HRs. Is there anything better than hitting a home run, while at the plate?

2. RBIs. I would say a grand slam, followed by a base clearing triple and so on, is the real purpose of the game from an offensive standpoint. Kudos to those on base, their batting averages and on base percentages should reflect their abilities.

3. BA. Could make an argument for OBP or OPS here but we all know if one can't hit then one won't be playing ball too long.

1. I never suggested HR wasn't an important statistic, just that the three Triple Crown stats aren't the three most important. That doesn't mean one of them isn't extremely important. A HR is the single greatest result a hitter can accomplish in a plate appearance.

2. I don't understand what you're trying to say here. The purpose of offense is to score runs, not drive them in. They don't decide games by RBI, they decide them by R. So if you're going to put a counting stat that accounts for runs, then the stat should be runs scored rather than RBI. Still, runs scored are influenced by a number of factors a hitter can't control.

3. Could make an argument? Batting average is an extremely limited statistic. It treats a single the same as a HR and ignores other ways of reaching base. It still has value, but only to provide context, rather than to measure the offensive prowess of a hitter. Which hitter would you rather have, assuming a similar number of plate appearances?
Player A: .310 AVG/.340 OBP/.430 SLG
Player B: .248 AVG/.365 OBP/.510 SLG
Player B is clearly the better all-around offensive player, but countless people would dismiss him because of his unimpressive AVG.

 

[7Samurai13]

Saying he hit .257 in September is misleading. It ignores the last three days of the season which brings his Sept./Oct. average up to .289.

Still, remind me why we're only looking at batting average? For a leadoff hitter?

Because I don't feel like rattling off the 98 stats that you sabermetric assholes look for. His OPS dropped 100 points compared to his season average in August and September and struck out nearly 25% of his plate appearances. God these boards are just as douchey as the ESPN boards were. I love baseball but the casual fan can't come here because of pricks like you smarther.

 

[steveringo]

Because I don't feel like rattling off the 98 stats that you sabermetric assholes look for. His OPS dropped 100 points compared to his season average in August and September and struck out nearly 25% of his plate appearances. God these boards are just as douchey as the ESPN boards were. I love baseball but the casual fan can't come here because of pricks like you smarther.

You can still be a casual fan, but most people that seek out message boards to discuss sports have already crossed into the more-than-casual-fan zone. You can learn a lot here....

 

[7Samurai13]

You can still be a casual fan, but most people that seek out message boards to discuss sports have already crossed into the more-than-casual-fan zone. You can learn a lot here....

I am sure I could, but if I don't spend my entire life finding every tiny little meaningless stat and quote them in every single post, you get douche canoes like smarther who says that homeruns, batting average, RBI's are all meaningless stats. So I need to tell you what Trout's OPS+, in day games, after the allstar game, played at home to be able to post here.

 

[MI Nightmare]

1. I never suggested HR wasn't an important statistic, just that the three Triple Crown stats aren't the three most important. That doesn't mean one of them isn't extremely important. A HR is the single greatest result a hitter can accomplish in a plate appearance.

2. I don't understand what you're trying to say here. The purpose of offense is to score runs, not drive them in. They don't decide games by RBI, they decide them by R. So if you're going to put a counting stat that accounts for runs, then the stat should be runs scored rather than RBI. Still, runs scored are influenced by a number of factors a hitter can't control.

3. Could make an argument? Batting average is an extremely limited statistic. It treats a single the same as a HR and ignores other ways of reaching base. It still has value, but only to provide context, rather than to measure the offensive prowess of a hitter. Which hitter would you rather have, assuming a similar number of plate appearances?
Player A: .310 AVG/.340 OBP/.430 SLG
Player B: .248 AVG/.365 OBP/.510 SLG
Player B is clearly the better all-around offensive player, but countless people would dismiss him because of his unimpressive AVG.

Driving runs in is scoring runs. What good does it do for a player to get on base without a batter that can drive him in?

On offense, it's all about putting runs on the board. Unless you're Ty Cobb, you won't be stealing home often. The player on base will need help.

 

[broncosmitty]

Because I don't feel like rattling off the 98 stats that you sabermetric assholes look for. His OPS dropped 100 points compared to his season average in August and September and struck out nearly 25% of his plate appearances. God these boards are just as douchey as the ESPN boards were. I love baseball but the casual fan can't come here because of pricks like you smarther.

Annoying as fuck isn't it?