2013 MLB Regular Season running thread

[Uncle.Ruckus]

OK. What else is worth considering? Defense? Speed?

 

[NDJournalist]

I'm not saying its all that matters.

But comparing two players, I'd say it's worth considering.

Not really, seeing as it's not a team award.

 

[Uncle.Ruckus]

I'm not entirely comfortable being on the same side of an argument as Herpes. I hereby abstain from further Trout-Cabrera debates.

 

[peacer84]

Sure. Power and average.

 

[JC]

One got to the postseason. And one didn't.

That seems to be pretty important in a "most valuable" discussion when comparing two players.

The player should be able to control the division he plays in?

 

[JC]

I'm not entirely comfortable being on the same side of an argument as Herpes. I hereby abstain from further Trout-Cabrera debates.

It's like agreeing on the odd occasion with Mark or Drip, you feel a little dirty afterwards.

I think either Cabrera or Trout were fine choices but using making the playoffs as a reason you voted for Cabrera is absurd.

 

[peacer84]

I think there's merit for a guy who got his team to the playoffs, over a guy who didn't. It's just one part of the process.

 

[NDJournalist]

I think there's merit for a guy who got his team to the playoffs, over a guy who didn't. It's just one part of the process.

Even though Trout was about three wins more valuable despite not getting called up until the end of April?

 

[Dick Whitman]

I know it's a minority opinion, but I don't find the playoff argument to be a bad one at all. If there is a point to the season, and that point is to make it to the postseason, then to me that is a fair component of determining who the most valuable player of the season was. I guess it's the "if you ain't first, you're last" argument. I don't that it means that his actual performance was any better, or that he performed better in pressure situations, etc., etc. Just that I think it recognizes that there's an end game to those 162 games - making the postseason.

 

[peacer84]

Yeah, I was throwing out factors that may go in Cabrera's favor. It's certainly not the single greatest reason I would have voted one way or the other.

 

[NDJournalist]

I know it's a minority opinion, but I don't find the playoff argument to be a bad one at all. If there is a point to the season, and that point is to make it to the postseason, then to me that is a fair component of determining who the most valuable player of the season was. I guess it's the "if you ain't first, you're last" argument. I don't that it means that his actual performance was any better, or that he performed better in pressure situations, etc., etc. Just that I think it recognizes that there's an end game to those 162 games - making the postseason.

That's equivalent to saying the end game for a pitcher is to win games. Sure, that's what he'd like to do. But baseball is a lot more team-dependent than, say, football or basketball. It's not a team award, it's an individual honor.

 

[JC]

I think there's merit for a guy who got his team to the playoffs, over a guy who didn't. It's just one part of the process.

You don't control the division you are in. You want to use it as some sort of tiebreaker if they are in the same division or one wins the wild card and the other doesn't then fine, but the Angels WON moree games than the Tigers with a more difficult schedule.