2012 MLB Season

[HedleyLamarr]

When was the last time a guy won the MVP when defense was a deciding factor?

The only way Cabrera doesn't win the MVP is if the Angels reach the postseason and the Tigers don't, and if Cabrera doesn't win the Triple Crown.

[Kramerica Industries]

I have no clue. But, then again, there aren't many players in recent memory who are/were as gifted with the glove and bat as Mike Trout is. The only player who comes to mind is Andruw Jones, but Andruw and Trout are almost nothing alike as far as the type of offensive players they are.

[pmoehrin]

I have no clue. But, then again, there aren't many players in recent memory who are/were as gifted with the glove and bat as Mike Trout is. The only player who comes to mind is Andruw Jones, but Andruw and Trout are almost nothing alike as far as the type of offensive players they are.

Its pretty rare a one dimensional player on either side wins the MVP. Mo Vaughn, Dick Allen, Elston Howard got a few top 20 votes back in '67 even though he only hit .178.

That's about as much as I can say. I don't think there's much question that defense is accounted for by voters. Now to what extent is another question, but just looking at the guys who have won the MVP, your not going to find too many iron gloves in the group.

[GFB]

While I'm not discrediting anything Trout has done this year as he has been phenomenal and I'm a huge fan, he has had the ESPN hype train behind him for the better part of the last 5 months. He also plays in a major market and is the most exciting American-born player since Ken Griffey Jr.

Miggy however plays in a mid-major market, barely speaks any English, and is just now gaining any hype for his season.

[pmoehrin]

While I'm not discrediting anything Trout has done this year as he has been phenomenal and I'm a huge fan, he has had the ESPN hype train behind him for the better part of the last 5 months. He also plays in a major market and is the most exciting American-born player since Ken Griffey Jr.

Miggy however plays in a mid-major market, barely speaks any English, and is just now gaining any hype for his season.

I don't think the problem with Cabrera is so much the Detroit market as it is that he's just not that well liked. He has a history of alcohol and physical abuse and in this day and age that's going to be held against you right or wrong.

With Trout maybe he's been overhyped, but he's been having the best season by a rookie since Ted Williams. Its pretty hard to overstate something like that. We could be seeing the makings of what will be this generation's Willie Mays. But I also if your a true fan of the sport you can look past all the media hype with anybody.

I do think the popularity factor could be a major deciding factor. Trout puts a great face on the sport both on the field and off. I don't think the same can be said for Cabrera unfortunately. I don't like it but its just the way it is and to an extent the way its always been.

[FiddySicks]

As good as Trout has been, if Miggy wins the Triple Crown and doesn't get MVP, there's something seriously wrong with the MVP voting process.

[Eye]

As good as Trout has been, if Miggy wins the Triple Crown and doesn't get MVP, there's something seriously wrong with the MVP voting process.

A-Rod won in 2003 on a last place team; there already is something seriously wrong with the MVP voting process.

[Funky Bunky]

As good as Trout has been, if Miggy wins the Triple Crown and doesn't get MVP, there's something seriously wrong with the MVP voting process.

A-Rod won in 2003 on a last place team; there already is something seriously wrong with the MVP voting process.

Wait, are you saying ARod doesn't deserve it because of how well his team played? That's bull . If you're the best player in the league, you're the best player in the league.

[GFB]

While I'm not discrediting anything Trout has done this year as he has been phenomenal and I'm a huge fan, he has had the ESPN hype train behind him for the better part of the last 5 months. He also plays in a major market and is the most exciting American-born player since Ken Griffey Jr.

Miggy however plays in a mid-major market, barely speaks any English, and is just now gaining any hype for his season.

I don't think the problem with Cabrera is so much the Detroit market as it is that he's just not that well liked. He has a history of alcohol and physical abuse and in this day and age that's going to be held against you right or wrong.

With Trout maybe he's been overhyped, but he's been having the best season by a rookie since Ted Williams. Its pretty hard to overstate something like that. We could be seeing the makings of what will be this generation's Willie Mays. But I also if your a true fan of the sport you can look past all the media hype with anybody.

I do think the popularity factor could be a major deciding factor. Trout puts a great face on the sport both on the field and off. I don't think the same can be said for Cabrera unfortunately. I don't like it but its just the way it is and to an extent the way its always been.

While Miggy has had some off the field problems, I don't think that makes him unlikeable. As someone who watches him almost everyday, all his teammates and most Latin ball players love him. At the All Star break, people were ready to hand the MVP to Josh Hamilton, whose off the field antics make Cabrera's look mild. So while I understand and somewhat agree with your point, I dont believe it's as large of an issue that you are making it out to be. With that being said, Trout is a PR dream.

If Trout overtakes Miggy in BA and wins the MVP, fine by me. He deserves it. But if Miguel Cabrera wins the TC and does not win the MVP, that's where I would take issue it and place the burden of the blame on the media for keening too much on one player (TEEEEEBOW!).

[The_Admiral]

As good as Trout has been, if Miggy wins the Triple Crown and doesn't get MVP, there's something seriously wrong with the MVP voting process.

A-Rod won in 2003 on a last place team; there already is something seriously wrong with the MVP voting process.

Wait, are you saying ARod doesn't deserve it because of how well his team played? That's bull . If you're the best player in the league, you're the best player in the league.

Gotta do it when it counts. All things being equal (or relatively equal) between a guy in a pennant race and a guy in the cellar, I take the guy in the pennant race.

[RyanMcD29]

In other news today, MLB signed an extension of the television rights to Fox and TBS, with Fox getting more playoff games for a new national sports cable channel that will be taking Speed Channel's place.

Ten more years of Fox Baseball? Yeah, shoot me.

[Shumway]

While I'm not discrediting anything Trout has done this year as he has been phenomenal and I'm a huge fan, he has had the ESPN hype train behind him for the better part of the last 5 months. He also plays in a major market and is the most exciting American-born player since Ken Griffey Jr.

Miggy however plays in a mid-major market, barely speaks any English, and is just now gaining any hype for his season.

I don't think the problem with Cabrera is so much the Detroit market as it is that he's just not that well liked. He has a history of alcohol and physical abuse and in this day and age that's going to be held against you right or wrong.

With Trout maybe he's been overhyped, but he's been having the best season by a rookie since Ted Williams. Its pretty hard to overstate something like that. We could be seeing the makings of what will be this generation's Willie Mays. But I also if your a true fan of the sport you can look past all the media hype with anybody.

I do think the popularity factor could be a major deciding factor. Trout puts a great face on the sport both on the field and off. I don't think the same can be said for Cabrera unfortunately. I don't like it but its just the way it is and to an extent the way its always been.

While Miggy has had some off the field problems, I don't think that makes him unlikeable. As someone who watches him almost everyday, all his teammates and most Latin ball players love him. At the All Star break, people were ready to hand the MVP to Josh Hamilton, whose off the field antics make Cabrera's look mild. So while I understand and somewhat agree with your point, I dont believe it's as large of an issue that you are making it out to be. With that being said, Trout is a PR dream.

If Trout overtakes Miggy in BA and wins the MVP, fine by me. He deserves it. But if Miguel Cabrera wins the TC and does not win the MVP, that's where I would take issue it and place the burden of the blame on the media for keening too much on one player (TEEEEEBOW!).

Is it really too much media coverage? When's the last time a 20-year-old kid (or anyone, for that matter) had a season like Trout's been having? That's not just going to fly under the radar.

That said, I'd give the MVP to Miggy right now, and I'm an Angels' fan.

[GFB]

While I'm not discrediting anything Trout has done this year as he has been phenomenal and I'm a huge fan, he has had the ESPN hype train behind him for the better part of the last 5 months. He also plays in a major market and is the most exciting American-born player since Ken Griffey Jr.

Miggy however plays in a mid-major market, barely speaks any English, and is just now gaining any hype for his season.

I don't think the problem with Cabrera is so much the Detroit market as it is that he's just not that well liked. He has a history of alcohol and physical abuse and in this day and age that's going to be held against you right or wrong.

With Trout maybe he's been overhyped, but he's been having the best season by a rookie since Ted Williams. Its pretty hard to overstate something like that. We could be seeing the makings of what will be this generation's Willie Mays. But I also if your a true fan of the sport you can look past all the media hype with anybody.

I do think the popularity factor could be a major deciding factor. Trout puts a great face on the sport both on the field and off. I don't think the same can be said for Cabrera unfortunately. I don't like it but its just the way it is and to an extent the way its always been.

While Miggy has had some off the field problems, I don't think that makes him unlikeable. As someone who watches him almost everyday, all his teammates and most Latin ball players love him. At the All Star break, people were ready to hand the MVP to Josh Hamilton, whose off the field antics make Cabrera's look mild. So while I understand and somewhat agree with your point, I dont believe it's as large of an issue that you are making it out to be. With that being said, Trout is a PR dream.

If Trout overtakes Miggy in BA and wins the MVP, fine by me. He deserves it. But if Miguel Cabrera wins the TC and does not win the MVP, that's where I would take issue it and place the burden of the blame on the media for keening too much on one player (TEEEEEBOW!).

Is it really too much media coverage? When's the last time a 20-year-old kid (or anyone, for that matter) had a season like Trout's been having? That's not just going to fly under the radar.

That said, I'd give the MVP to Miggy right now, and I'm an Angels' fan.

Well, I'm a Tigers fan and Trout has my vote unless Cabrera wins the triple crown. And as I said before, Trout is the most exciting player baseball has seen since Griffey Jr...

Although, I do think it has been a little too much a little too early with Trout. ESPN has throwing out Mickey Mantle comparisons over the last month. Baseball is a funny game and the kid is 20 years old. With the "Entertainment" gaining precedence over the "Sports" in ESPN over the last 10 years, it's a captivating story that ESPN has and will continue to squeeze every penny out of. Granted, it is only one network, but they are currently unmatched in audience and pull. I mean, can you imagine the run they would get out of Mark Prior if he repeated his rookie year with the Cubs this year? It's a more charismatic Strausburg playing for one of baseball's marquee teams... They would make his persona as large as Tebow's in today's pop culture.

[Eye]

As good as Trout has been, if Miggy wins the Triple Crown and doesn't get MVP, there's something seriously wrong with the MVP voting process.

A-Rod won in 2003 on a last place team; there already is something seriously wrong with the MVP voting process.

Wait, are you saying ARod doesn't deserve it because of how well his team played? That's bull . If you're the best player in the league, you're the best player in the league.

The award is MVP, not best player. Where was his value that year? Texas finished last with A-Rod, they could have finished last without him.

[NJTank]

With Cabrera close to winning triple crown he has to be the MVP, it is a rare feat. Besides Trout is the lock for ROTY

[Funky Bunky]

As good as Trout has been, if Miggy wins the Triple Crown and doesn't get MVP, there's something seriously wrong with the MVP voting process.

A-Rod won in 2003 on a last place team; there already is something seriously wrong with the MVP voting process.

Wait, are you saying ARod doesn't deserve it because of how well his team played? That's bull . If you're the best player in the league, you're the best player in the league.

The award is MVP, not best player. Where was his value that year? Texas finished last with A-Rod, they could have finished last without him.

Just because you have worse players around you doesn't mean you aren't the most valuable player in the league that year. If you're going to trade for this player, you're going to have to pay the most, because he has the most value. A Rod helped them win 71 games that year, he was very valuable to them in helping them win 71 games, but because the team around him wasn't very good, they didn't win enough to get in the playoffs, and should you punish Rodriguez for that? It's the Most Valuable Player award, not the Most Valuable Player from one of the Better Teams award.

Here's a scenario: Player A hit .279, with 25 HRs, 87 RBIs, 70 runs, an OPS of .800, and his team made the playoffs. Player B hit .340, with 37 HRs, 115 RBIs, 80 runs, an OPS of .988, but his team didn't make the playoffs. Is Player A more valuable just because his team made the playoffs and Player B's team didn't?

[Funky Bunky]

With Cabrera close to winning triple crown he has to be the MVP, it is a rare feat. Besides Trout is the lock for ROTY

I think it will come down to who wins the batting title.

[Eye]

As good as Trout has been, if Miggy wins the Triple Crown and doesn't get MVP, there's something seriously wrong with the MVP voting process.

A-Rod won in 2003 on a last place team; there already is something seriously wrong with the MVP voting process.

Wait, are you saying ARod doesn't deserve it because of how well his team played? That's bull . If you're the best player in the league, you're the best player in the league.

The award is MVP, not best player. Where was his value that year? Texas finished last with A-Rod, they could have finished last without him.

Just because you have worse players around you doesn't mean you aren't the most valuable player in the league that year. If you're going to trade for this player, you're going to have to pay the most, because he has the most value. A Rod helped them win 71 games that year, he was very valuable to them in helping them win 71 games, but because the team around him wasn't very good, they didn't win enough to get in the playoffs, and should you punish Rodriguez for that? It's the Most Valuable Player award, not the Most Valuable Player from one of the Better Teams award.

Here's a scenario: Player A hit .279, with 25 HRs, 87 RBIs, 70 runs, an OPS of .800, and his team made the playoffs. Player B hit .340, with 37 HRs, 115 RBIs, 80 runs, an OPS of .988, but his team didn't make the playoffs. Is Player A more valuable just because his team made the playoffs and Player B's team didn't?

So, then the Rangers would have still been bad without A-Rod. He had value that year, but not the Most Value. I'm not denying he had value, just not the Most Value.

Based on your hypothetical scenario, it sounds like Player B would have more value than Player A, but I can't say that Player B would be the MVP because there would arguably be more players with better, equal or near equal stats. I don't know what other players exist in this world, but Player C, D and Q's stats could be interesting.

[Kramerica Industries]

In other news...God, you guys are never going to believe this...

...

umm...

The Orioles won a game in extra innings.

[Lights Out]

So, then the Rangers would have still been bad without A-Rod. He had value that year, but not the Most Value.

If we're going to take it that literally, might as well give the award to the league leaders in WAR every year and be done with it. Mike Trout and Ryan Braun win it this year, Jacoby Ellsbury and Matt Kemp last year, Josh Hamilton and Albert Pujols the year before, Ben Zobrist(!) and Albert Pujols the year before that, et al.