Why does the Triple Crown seem underhyped?

Again, I repeat the point that neither player could have done much better at the tasks to which their respective ballclubs assigned them. Therefore, this debate comes down to an argument about the tasks themselves, not the players. My opinion is, all of the tasks are pretty damn valuable.

 

I know it's not popular to sit on the fence, but I think both had tremendous seasons and I can't find any really compelling reason to argue one over the other. I'm fine with whoever wins.

Though I'm the kind of person who cares very little about who wins the MVP in any sport or Heisman. We all watch the games. We know who the best players are. I don't need to choose one of them.

 

As much as Sabermatricians would want you to belive, I don't think the underhyping has anything to do with the value of the RBI and the BA in today's game. The Triple Crown, as arbitary as it is today, is still one of those hallowed marks, and generally this type of stuff is still eaten up by the media and public. I would even argue that it being those three stats should play into his favour for publicity as numbers everyone is familiar with and comfortable with, like slipping into a comfortable pair of slippers. It just feels good. I think sabermatricians get a little too defensive over things like this sometimes.

I think most of the real reasons have already been brought up like Cabrera being late to the party, Cabrera's past douchiness, Cabrera not being in a major market or carrying the type of star power that the likes of Trout, Jetes, Hamilton, etc carry.

I also think there is still some hangover from the steroid era where the most respected of all offensive marks fell multiple times due to drug cheats. By no means am I insinuating that Cabrera is a cheat. What I am saying is that there is still some disillusionment with watching some of these marks fall or met. People just don't give as big a shit anymore.

 

Sabermatricians and American soccer fans seem to think alike. They want to push things that most do not want to buy. They both love to play the "your too stupid to understand" card.

 

What if he was a likable white player?

 

This is a tremendous point that I didn't think of when I wrote out the list of possible reasons. People are simply immune to big offensive accomplishments at this point.

 

Except the feeling I get from sabermetrics people is that they/we are begging people to understand. It's not the "you're too stupid to understand" card. It's the, "this stuff is way less complicated than you think it is" card.

 

I'm not so sure. Trout leads the AL in OPS+ (ballpark adjusted OPS).

 

To me it's the missionary zeal that sabermetrics types go about their business that is a turn off.

 

Was waiting for someone to go there. And I think there's some truth to it.

 

Great. Trout leads in what people think he might have possibly done if they played in the same park. Cabrera is better when you look at what each player has actually done. The stats used to measure ballpark factor are shaky at best and it's not like Cabrera plays in one that favors hitters.

Cabrera has the higher real OPS and he has done it while playing the entire season while Trout was in the minors for almost all of April.

 

I would also throw out that with the expansion of the playoffs, people don't care as much about anything that happens in the regular season anymore. Many (most?) of us here grew up watching the four-team postseason model, and we have a significant portion that remembers the two-team system. Back then you could see a 95- or even a 100-win team miss the playoffs. Now we have a third of teams getting an invite, and the NBA-ization of the playoffs has created a kind of "wake me when the real season starts" feeling regarding the regular season.