MVPs

You lose a game in early April, you have six months to make up for it. You lose a game in late September, you might be dead. There's more riding on games for teams in pennant races.

Wins count the same, yes. But there aren't win-or-go-home games in April. Cabrera's monster finish with the Tigers in a race does matter.

 

But, then, if an MVP who finishes strong was better in April and May, his team might have it locked up by now.

 

But pressure builds, and the focus tightens. Why else would the crowds scream louder?

 

This silliness about April games meaning as much as September games reminds me that we're close again to A-Rod going 1 for 15 with eight strikeouts randomly at the start of October again.

 

If it is something you can count on, is it truly random?

 

Cabrera's primary competition for the MVP didn't play most of April.

Seriously, nobody is saying those months are meaningless, but there is a reasonable argument to be made that the strong finish matters. There is no argument that it will help his cause with many voters.

 

If one of the knocks against Cabrera is that his team might not make the playoffs, let the record show the Tigers are currently half a game back.

 

I don't recall giving you permission to post.

 

Looking at how someone's team finishes in determining an individual award is one of my biggest pet peeves in baseball. Who the hell cares how the rest of the people on the team do in determining how important one individual's contribution was, unless there is a correlation between the two. (If Verlander throws X number of complete games, then the bullpen doesn't have to work as hard, etc.)
If someone wins a triple crown, then by definition they were the best offensive player and, thus, the most valuable offensive player of the year. If there was a pitcher of greater value, fine. This year, there wasn't.

 

What about defense?

 

By whose definition? You can't make the point that teammates' quality shouldn't matter in judging individuals and then say leading the league in RBI is one-third of being the best and most valuable offensive player.

In theory, it's easy to imagine a guy winning the Triple Crown who rarely walks and is very slow. That guy might not even lead the league in on-base or slugging percentages.

 

Fair point.

FYI, Cabrera is third in the AL in on-base percentage and first in slugging and OPS. Trout is fourth in OBP and slugging, second in OPS.

I've brought this up before and I'm wondering if it is valid. Does Cabrera get credit for switching positions to help the team? He is actually a better first baseman than Prince Fielder, but it helped the Tigers to have Cabrera make the move back to third base. Even if he isn't very good over there, I think making the switch to help the team offensively should be considered as a positive.