UPDATE: Cabrera over Trout for A.L. MVP

Nate Silver says Mike Trout over Miguel Cabrera:

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/11/14/the-statistical-case-against-cabrera-for-m-v-p/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

What say you?

 

Re: Nate Silver and FiveThirtyEight.com ...

Interesting column.

On the earlier thread, someone brought up a great question: If Trout is such an otherwordly talent in center field, why does the Angels' late-inning, protect-the-lead lineup involve moving him to left?

I also have yet to hear which game the Tigers lost because of Cabrera's defense. I accept that he isn't great, but I think it has been taken on faith a little bit that it mattered so much.

Regardless, I think the decision is close as can be and I wouldn't argue with however it went. But it will be fun to watch the sabermetrician snit when they don't get their way.

 

Re: Nate Silver and FiveThirtyEight.com ...

I wade through web pages and blog postings and I sense the energy coming Cabrera's way. The numbers say Trout has a chance at it, but every ounce of intuition in my body tells me Cabrera is a lock for MVP.

 

Re: Nate Silver and FiveThirtyEight.com ...

You are the first person in more than 40 years to win the Triple Crown and you DON'T win the MVP? How messed up is that?

Besides, I thought Trout just won something the other day.

 

Re: Nate Silver and FiveThirtyEight.com ...

What is "messed up" about it if the other guy had a better overall year?

 

Re: Nate Silver and FiveThirtyEight.com ...

I agree that Trout performed better statistically and still think Miggy was the league's MVP. Miggy played the role of superstar on the Tigers, which won the AL title, while Trout played role of hot prospect on an under-performing Angels. Miggy had a big contract and high expectations. Everyone in the clubhouse knew their year rested on his shoulders and he performed exceptionally in that role and led the club to a title. He even changed positions to accommodate the club. No such pressure on Trout.

 

Re: Nate Silver and FiveThirtyEight.com ...

Funny one.

Nate Silver makes a good case. Jeff Passan, on behalf of Nate Silver, does not.

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/mlb-s-stats-revolution-doesn-t-have-enough-political-muscle-to-reward-al-s-true-mvp--mike-trout-.html

Passan reads like he's trolling in this column. Not just building a case but insulting anyone who disagrees. Based on his last column here, that the Giants were being stupid and hypocritical for not reinstating Melky Cabrera, maybe trolling is a pattern for him, which would be disappointing but not all that rare among writers.

But Passan (and anyone who goes this route) suffers a huge flaw in logic: Silver wasn't trying to say who should win the election. He was predicting the outcome. That's it. And the analysis of that question is not remotely like the analysis of the question "who is a more valuable baseball player?"

 

Re: Nate Silver and FiveThirtyEight.com ...

Many people, fairly I might add, still believe the MVP should, things being anywhere near equal, go to a player on a playoff team. Cabrera winning the MVP will not be a rejection of sabermetrics. If they renamed the award the "Player of the Year," Trout would probably garner more votes.

 

Re: Nate Silver and FiveThirtyEight.com ...

Positive ≠ Normative

 

Re: Nate Silver and FiveThirtyEight.com ...

Yea, but did you see Trout's FG%NHLNASCAR8675309 numbers? They were off the charts.

 

Re: Nate Silver and FiveThirtyEight.com ...

Stolen bases are quite new-fangled.

 

Re: Nate Silver and FiveThirtyEight.com ...

In what way did the othe guy have a better year than the guy who won the triple crown? The only possibility I could see is if you were comparing a position player to a pitcher.

But one guy led the league in batting average, home runs and runs batted in for a team that won the pennant. What else can you ask from a position player?