2012 MLB Regular Season Running Thread

What about if that April game gets rained out and made up in September?

 

There's no doubt Cabrera has hit the cover off the ball down the stretch and has made this a hell of an MVP race.

Conversely, you can argue that if Cabrera produced like Trout from May-July, then the Tigers run away with the division. And that if Trout produced like Cabrera from May-July the Angels wouldn't have been in the race as long as they were.

The Angels were tanking bad. They would not have been relevant in 2012 if not for Trout. They were in the playoff chase until the last week. Yes, Trout hasn't sustained his other-worldly numbers, but he's still been good. My fixation on Trout isn't the fact I locked onto him earlier, but because I consider defense to be important, too. It's not the MVH award.

 

In Detroit, neither month is preferable for beaver shooting.

 

Sorry it makes you unhappy, but it is going to count. It always does.

LTL reminded me of the other point. Cabrera has been dominant with his team battling for a playoff spot. That does and should matter.

Wasn't Rick the one saying that pressure situations are irrelevant at the professional level because none of these guys would have made it to the pros without being able to handle pressure? As if handling pressure is a yes or no proposition, rather than a matter of degree.

 

FYI: CABRERA VS. TROUT MVP DEBATE TODAY'S 'OUTSIDE THE LINES' TOPIC ON ESPN!! JUST BEGAN!! 8)

FWIW, ALL FOUR PANELISTS WOULD VOTE FOR CABRERA...

 

Can you point to an actual game the Tigers lost because of Cabrera's defense?

Or is this just a matter of dWAR and UZR? Because those stats are crap.

 

Trout didn't really help the Angels out much in April, either.

 

No, that's the admitted flaw in my argument. I know and you know that Trout is a better defender, but I don't believe there is a way to accurately quantify by how much.

 

Sorry, mixed up my Cabreras.

 

I agree with you. I don't believe Cabrera brought anything to the table on defense. But I also don't believe the amount by which Trout brought more according to the numbers.

So when did advanced metrics turn from "defense doesn't mean shit" in the Moneyball heyday to "defense, even outfield defense, is significant enough to turn the course of the MVP race even though we all know these numbers are no good"?

 

My argument is way more simple than trying to quantify defensive metrics. Since a decent argument can be made that either Trout or Cabrera is a better offensive player, and that each meant so much to their teams, to me, the tiebreaker is the known fact that Trout is a better defensive player.

 

Defense has always been value.

There was just a time where "defense" in most of these discussions was just a proxy for the difference between offensive stats and how much the person making the argument liked the player.

Now "intangibles" fills that role.