2013 MLB Regular Season running thread

[Matt1735]

The award is not for the best player, or the best player by advanced statistics. It's the Most Valuable Player. Value is a subjective term, and the voters, in their wisdom, decided that Cabrera deserved the award over Trout. Some people, i'm sure voted that way because of the Tigers making the postseason. Some voted for Trout because of his WAR, BAPIP or better defense or whatever.

There is no right or wrong to this argument. The voters voted on a subjective award and it went to Cabrera. You are allowed to disagree with the selection, but you aren't right and the voters aren't wrong. It's a vote.

 

[93Devil]

Yeah, we did. Quite well.

Nope.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/awards/awards_1987.shtml#NLmvp

If you want to argue Strawberry, Murphy or Eric Davis, I'll listen. But if you're saying Ozzie, then go get an STD from Herpes.

Jack Clark.

Or any of the guys you mentiond. But the top two vote-getters that year? Um, no.

Clark did miss 30 games that season. I don't know if that factored into some of the votes or not.

 

[NDJournalist]

The award is not for the best player, or the best player by advanced statistics. It's the Most Valuable Player. Value is a subjective term, and the voters, in their wisdom, decided that Cabrera deserved the award over Trout. Some people, i'm sure voted that way because of the Tigers making the postseason. Some voted for Trout because of his WAR, BAPIP or better defense or whatever.

There is no right or wrong to this argument. The voters voted on a subjective award and it went to Cabrera. You are allowed to disagree with the selection, but you aren't right and the voters aren't wrong. It's a vote.

There are stats that calculate value.

 

[peacer84]

The award is not for the best player, or the best player by advanced statistics. It's the Most Valuable Player. Value is a subjective term, and the voters, in their wisdom, decided that Cabrera deserved the award over Trout. Some people, i'm sure voted that way because of the Tigers making the postseason. Some voted for Trout because of his WAR, BAPIP or better defense or whatever.

There is no right or wrong to this argument. The voters voted on a subjective award and it went to Cabrera. You are allowed to disagree with the selection, but you aren't right and the voters aren't wrong. It's a vote.

Well said.

 

[Dick Whitman]

The award is not for the best player, or the best player by advanced statistics. It's the Most Valuable Player. Value is a subjective term, and the voters, in their wisdom, decided that Cabrera deserved the award over Trout. Some people, i'm sure voted that way because of the Tigers making the postseason. Some voted for Trout because of his WAR, BAPIP or better defense or whatever.

There is no right or wrong to this argument. The voters voted on a subjective award and it went to Cabrera. You are allowed to disagree with the selection, but you aren't right and the voters aren't wrong. It's a vote.

OK. It's subjective. What if they had picked Jemile Weeks instead?

 

[JC]

The award is not for the best player, or the best player by advanced statistics. It's the Most Valuable Player. Value is a subjective term, and the voters, in their wisdom, decided that Cabrera deserved the award over Trout. Some people, i'm sure voted that way because of the Tigers making the postseason. Some voted for Trout because of his WAR, BAPIP or better defense or whatever.

There is no right or wrong to this argument. The voters voted on a subjective award and it went to Cabrera. You are allowed to disagree with the selection, but you aren't right and the voters aren't wrong. It's a vote.

Well said.

They should take the subjectiveness of "most valuable to the team" out of it. This mythical bullshirt about being the most valuable to your team brings far too many other factors that are beyond the player's control. The beauty of baseball is that most things can be measured. Vote for the player that had the best year, simple. This doesn't mean it shouldn't have been Cabrera but it takes a lot of the guessing, old cliched baseball bullshirt out of it.

If you want to use the playoff argument, fine but it is ridiculous to use it when the other guy's team had more wins than yours.

 

[Steak Snabler]

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

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

Last I checked, there are quite a few other players on each team who have an effect on the outcome.

The Angels also had a better record than the Tigers, playing in a tougher division. That Detroit made the playoffs and Anaheim didn't was only because teams are divided geographically.

 

[NDJournalist]

Jeter is giving a press conference at 5 p.m. Eastern. Wonder if retirement is a possibility.

 

[Batman]

Three games in a row, the Phillies have had first and third with nobody out in a key situation against the Pirates. Three games in a row, they have managed to completely and utterly fork it up and take themselves out of a potentially big inning.
Tuesday: Jimmy Rollins on third, ground ball hit to shortstop and he's thrown out at home.
Wednesday: Rollins on third again. Ball hit in the hole to Pedro Alvarez, who is moving to his left. Rollins hesitates for some reason. Alvarez goes to second for the first out, then the second baseman throws home to get Rollins by three steps for a 5-4-2 double play.
Thursday: Chase Utley on third. Hard grounder to Alvarez, who is playing in on the grass. Utley breaks for home, Alvarez easily throws him out. Phils still get two runs in the inning (largely thanks to a passed ball and a sinking liner to shallow center that McCutchen had to go to his knees for, letting slow-ass Ryan Howard tag from third), but it could've been a lot more. Now they're down 5-3 in the eighth.
Good job, fellas. Way to handle the fundamentals.

 

[peacer84]

The award is not for the best player, or the best player by advanced statistics. It's the Most Valuable Player. Value is a subjective term, and the voters, in their wisdom, decided that Cabrera deserved the award over Trout. Some people, i'm sure voted that way because of the Tigers making the postseason. Some voted for Trout because of his WAR, BAPIP or better defense or whatever.

There is no right or wrong to this argument. The voters voted on a subjective award and it went to Cabrera. You are allowed to disagree with the selection, but you aren't right and the voters aren't wrong. It's a vote.

Well said.

They should take the subjectiveness of "most valuable to the team" out of it. This mythical bullshirt about being the most valuable to your team brings far too many other factors that are beyond the player's control. The beauty of baseball is that most things can be measured. Vote for the player that had the best year, simple. This doesn't mean it shouldn't have been Cabrera but it takes a lot of the guessing, old cliched baseball bullshirt out of it.

If you want to use the playoff argument, fine but it is ridiculous to use it when the other guy's team had more wins than yours.

All right, you've started to sway me. It's probably not a great determinant between these two, though I'm sure it was used in the actual voting.

But someone on here who goes by a sexually transmitted disease believes it should never matter under any circumstance. And that I don't agree with. Not even that it should matter in MOST cases, but there are some cases, in which it should be taken into account.

 

[Batman]

Jeter is giving a press conference at 5 p.m. Eastern. Wonder if retirement is a possibility.

Manky says Jeter is announcing his return, and that he'll retire when he's 55 with 7,433 career hits.

 

[NDJournalist]

The award is not for the best player, or the best player by advanced statistics. It's the Most Valuable Player. Value is a subjective term, and the voters, in their wisdom, decided that Cabrera deserved the award over Trout. Some people, i'm sure voted that way because of the Tigers making the postseason. Some voted for Trout because of his WAR, BAPIP or better defense or whatever.

There is no right or wrong to this argument. The voters voted on a subjective award and it went to Cabrera. You are allowed to disagree with the selection, but you aren't right and the voters aren't wrong. It's a vote.

Well said.

They should take the subjectiveness of "most valuable to the team" out of it. This mythical bullshirt about being the most valuable to your team brings far too many other factors that are beyond the player's control. The beauty of baseball is that most things can be measured. Vote for the player that had the best year, simple. This doesn't mean it shouldn't have been Cabrera but it takes a lot of the guessing, old cliched baseball bullshirt out of it.

If you want to use the playoff argument, fine but it is ridiculous to use it when the other guy's team had more wins than yours.

All right, you've started to sway me. It's probably not a great determinant between these two, though I'm sure it was used in the actual voting.

But someone on here who goes by a sexually transmitted disease believes it should never matter under any circumstance. And that I don't agree with. Not even that it should matter in MOST cases, but there are some cases, in which it should be taken into account.

Why should it ever be taken into account? It's an individual award and, as I've already told you twice, Trout was worth THREE MORE WINS than Miggy last year.