Why does the Triple Crown seem underhyped?

I never typed that.

Nor did I imply it.




Noted. Amended.

 

I'm kind of nervous that I agree with hondo on the main point (Cabrera over Trout) because we're so far opposed on everything else.

Cabrera's team winning its division and Trout's team finishing third is, perhaps, somewhat muted by the fact that the Angels have won 89 games and the Tigers have won 87. I don't know. Maybe not.

And Trout's stolen bases do mean quite a bit -- not just the raw number but the 92 percent success rate. He has only given up four outs this way, which is a pretty small price to pay for the runs created.

 

I don't get too wrapped up in that because of the unbalanced schedule. It skews wins totals. BTW, Cabrera would be my MVP.

But the idea that support for Trout is enmeshed merely in support for "nerdy stats" is preposterous.

Of course, Hondo has now moved the goal posts. He's explaining why runs scored and stolen bases are not important. Which is a fine argument, I suppose. But it's not the one he made at all.

 

Dick, I thought about that unbalanced schedule, but I don't think it can be used to the Tigers' credit in this case. The Angels played a lot of games against the A's and Rangers and also faced the Giants -- that's three 90-plus-win teams. Even the M's aren't shit-awful. Tigers got a full complement of games against one team that's slightly worse than Seattle and two teams that are terrible.

 

I'll say it ... if Cabrera played in NYC or Boston, this would be the biggest thing ever.

 

Trout did quite a bit more on the field than Cabrera this season and is a far more complete player, overall. With that said, Cabrera would still be my MVP choice.

 

Total agreement. ESPN would be daring people to say Trout would have a sniff at the MVP.

I would bet anything that Cabrera won more games with his bat than Trout did with his defense. Subtract any games that might have been lost outright due to Cabrera's defense, and he'd still be ahead of the game. It's the same reason by I would have taken Ripken over Ozzie any day. Ripken meant way more with the bat to his team than Ozzie did with his glove to his team.

 

That is a fair argument, your RBI rant on the other hand is ridiculous. Are you aware of where each bats in the lineup?