2012 MLB Season

[NJTank]

The Triple Crown is so rare to not give the MVP to Cabrera is just bewildering and I know Ted Williams yadda yadda yadda they vote was different than and the writters hated Ted Williams.

[NEW.ERA]

Cabrera leading the triple crown race this late is in reality all the writers need to give him the MVP. I get Trout, but Miggy is about to do something not seen in the AL since 1967.

But of course Baseball writers will make it a two horse race, when it's not.

[Still MIGHTY]

Trout did start to fall off in this last month. Had he kept up his pace and actually beat out Cabrera for the batting title, then playoffs or not, it'd be a much closer argument. But with the Triple Crown and the playoffs, I'd give it to Cabrera.

-----

And the Angels... They didn't lose the season last night or Sunday. They lost the season with an 8-15 April. If they flip that and start 15-8, they'd probably win the division. Hell, If they even went 11-12 in April, they'd be in the playoffs. After April, everything turned around with Trout's arrival and Pujols being Pujols. There's other single events you could point to and blame (blowing saves with 9th inning homers to KC and Seattle two weeks ago, things like that.) But the season was lost in April.

Hell, you could say it was almost lost in the offseason. Yes, Pujols ended up being a fantastic signing and despite his inconsistency, Wilson was better than what they had. Even the midseason acquisition of Greinke was great. He came in and did pretty much all that we wanted him to do. But what they never improved was the bullpen. They only signed LaTroy Hawkins (who ended up being a dumpster fire everytime he pitched) and Jason Isringhausen (who ended up being as irrelevant as possible). Frieri was acquired early on and was fairly decent, but like I pointed out, those two blown saves to KC/Seattle hurt really bad, especially at the point in the season they happened.

Resign who we've got. See what the hell you can do with Wells, if anything at all. But at the end of the day, fix the damn bullpen.

[RedSox44]

I really, really want the Sox to stop sucking so that the Orioles win the division so that my dream "Beltway World Series" has a better chance of happening.

Also, I want to be able to cheer against someone in the AL Wild Card game, and A's-O's won't allow me to do that.

[Eye]

I agree up until the last argument about making the playoffs. Best supporting cast =/= best player.

The award isn't best player, though.

[pmoehrin]

James Shields picks up the rare complete game loss.

[BigBubba]

At least I can take solace in the fact that the Blue Jays now cannot finish last in the AL East.

I honestly thought this year was when we'd finally get over the hump and challenge for the Wild Card, but once again, it just wasn't our year. Hopefully AA can land a starter or two in the offseason. Congrats to Team X for winning the World Series, you had a great run, strong team yadda yadda yadda. See y'all in April.

[Epiphanic]

http://joeposnanski.blogspot.com/2012/09/trout-miggy-and-mvp.html

tl;dr:

1. Trout has a much higher WAR than Cabrera. Not that WAR is the end-all-be-all of MVP statistics, but it's worth noting that every single other Triple Crown winner also had the highest WAR, by a large margin. Trout also leads Cabrera in Runs, OBP, and OPS+.

2. The Angles have more wins than the Tigers. Playoffs or not, the Angels have more wins.

3. Winning the Triple Crown doesn't guarantee an MVP (see Williams, Ted) and if, for some reason, Cabrera doesn't win the Triple Crown does that make his season any less great?

--------

Essentially, Cabrera is a fine choice for MVP. But so is Trout. Both choices are perfectly defensible.

[Kramerica Industries]

I cannot believe the Yankees won tonight. Unreal.

James Shields picks up the rare complete game loss.

Well, nine inning complete game loss, allowing 1 ER, 2 H, 0 BB, and striking out 15, a Rays single game record.

It truly takes acts of magic to beat the Orioles.

[infrared41]

I don't care if you call it play-in or the Wild Card round (which I think is the official name) or round one. Whatever floats your boat.

But denying that it's part of the post-season is silly. It is.

Right, but it's possible the losers of these newly implemented games won't feel like they made it to the dance.

OK, that's just silly.

Let's just wait and see on that one. MLB can say this is a playoff game, but solely related to what happens on the field (not talking about revenue), it's not much different than game 163 from past seasons.

What I found silly silly was this statement: "...losers of these newly implemented games won't feel like they made it to the dance" No offense, but I thought it was absurd that you think you know how a major league team would feel about...well...anything. It was a silly statement. We've all made them. Own it and move on.

To the point I think you were trying to make... If it's called a playoff game, it's a playoff game. Period.

[infrared41]

And the Angels... They didn't lose the season last night or Sunday. They lost the season with an 8-15 April. If they flip that and start 15-8, they'd probably win the division. Hell, If they even went 11-12 in April, they'd be in the playoffs. After April, everything turned around with Trout's arrival and Pujols being Pujols. There's other single events you could point to and blame (blowing saves with 9th inning homers to KC and Seattle two weeks ago, things like that.) But the season was lost in April.

You don't get it. Games in April are meaningless. Just ask any baseball "expert."

Sarcasm aimed at our resident baseball know-it-alls aside, your assessment is 100% correct.

[pmoehrin]

http://joeposnanski....gy-and-mvp.html

tl;dr:

1. Trout has a much higher WAR than Cabrera. Not that WAR is the end-all-be-all of MVP statistics, but it's worth noting that every single other Triple Crown winner also had the highest WAR, by a large margin. Trout also leads Cabrera in Runs, OBP, and OPS+.

2. The Angles have more wins than the Tigers. Playoffs or not, the Angels have more wins.

3. Winning the Triple Crown doesn't guarantee an MVP (see Williams, Ted) and if, for some reason, Cabrera doesn't win the Triple Crown does that make his season any less great?

--------

Essentially, Cabrera is a fine choice for MVP. But so is Trout. Both choices are perfectly defensible.

The first two points I would say are fine to make regardless of whether or not anyone agrees with them. But the third one about Williams needs some context.

Ted Williams didn't get the MVP in '47 because alot of sportswriters had it in for him. People were not going to vote for him for MVP no matter what type of numbers he put up. And if you look at the MVP voting in alot of years it shows. To me its a poor historical precendence to site and one that I would hope never gets repeated again. Not that a triple crown doesn't automatically qualfiy you as MVP. I don't think it should, but that a player can have personal issues held against him by voters.

Granted Cabrera's struggles with alcohol may be held against him somewhat, but I don't think any writer is coming in with the attitude of I'm not voting for Cabrera no matter what his numbers are.

The WAR stat though I think is the biggest argument against Cabrera and its the argument cites, so its just a minor point I'm making. I would give it to Trout myself, but if Cabrera wins it I can't complain. Its almost a matter of preference in terms of which player you think is more deserving. Even Cabrera's fielding which alot of people myself included ripped him for at the beginning the year has improved a great deal as the season has gone along.

[infrared41]

In my opinion, Trout was the best overall player this season. How many runs has he saved with his glove? How many runs did he help set up with his speed? You can't say that about Cabrera. But in theory, the award is supposed to go to who was most valuable to their team. That's where it gets tricky. I still think it's Trout, but I'm basing that solely on the fact that along with his batting stats, he can play defense. With Cabrera, you hope he fields what's hit at him. But again, who was most "valuable" to their team? You can make a helluva case for both players. If I had a vote, I'd split it.

Also, Cabrera's "struggles with alcohol" are not going to be a factor in this. At all.

[Shumway]

To add to the AL MVP debate...

When Trout came up, the Angels had the 2nd worst record in all of baseball. Since then, the Angels have had the best record in the AL.

[NJTank]

http://joeposnanski....gy-and-mvp.html

tl;dr:

1. Trout has a much higher WAR than Cabrera. Not that WAR is the end-all-be-all of MVP statistics, but it's worth noting that every single other Triple Crown winner also had the highest WAR, by a large margin. Trout also leads Cabrera in Runs, OBP, and OPS+.

2. The Angles have more wins than the Tigers. Playoffs or not, the Angels have more wins.

3. Winning the Triple Crown doesn't guarantee an MVP (see Williams, Ted) and if, for some reason, Cabrera doesn't win the Triple Crown does that make his season any less great?

--------

Essentially, Cabrera is a fine choice for MVP. But so is Trout. Both choices are perfectly defensible.

http://joeposnanski....gy-and-mvp.html

tl;dr:

1. Trout has a much higher WAR than Cabrera. Not that WAR is the end-all-be-all of MVP statistics, but it's worth noting that every single other Triple Crown winner also had the highest WAR, by a large margin. Trout also leads Cabrera in Runs, OBP, and OPS+.

2. The Angles have more wins than the Tigers. Playoffs or not, the Angels have more wins.

3. Winning the Triple Crown doesn't guarantee an MVP (see Williams, Ted) and if, for some reason, Cabrera doesn't win the Triple Crown does that make his season any less great?

--------

Essentially, Cabrera is a fine choice for MVP. But so is Trout. Both choices are perfectly defensible.

WAR?

Are you kidding me

Home Runs RBI and hits win games WAR is fought in Afghanistan

[Still MIGHTY]

This is definitely one of the tighter MVP debates in a while. (Not that I can even remember who te top MVP candidates in each league were for the last several years or who actually won, but still.)

Both Cy Youngs are pretty close as well. And you can have NYY, BAL, TEX, and OAK finish in any combination of the four in the divisions/wild cards. Quite the competitive year of baseball.

WAR?

Are you kidding me

Home Runs RBI and hits win games WAR is fought in Afghanistan

Shut up.

[NJTank]

Here is some stunning news R.A. Dickey was pitching all season with a torn abdomen

http://espn.go.com/blog/new-york/mets/post/_/id/58327/dickey-needs-surgery-for-abdominal-tear

Can you say legendary season for the 2012 Cy Young.

[Eye]

I don't care if you call it play-in or the Wild Card round (which I think is the official name) or round one. Whatever floats your boat.

But denying that it's part of the post-season is silly. It is.

Right, but it's possible the losers of these newly implemented games won't feel like they made it to the dance.

Let's just wait and see on that one. MLB can say this is a playoff game, but solely related to what happens on the field (not talking about revenue), it's not much different than game 163 from past seasons.

Chipper and Jason Heyward disagree.

[Jason Heyward and Chipper Jones celebrating]

I'm pretty sure teams don't bust out the champagne for winning their 89th game.

PLAYOFFS!

Fair enough, I suppose.

I don't care if you call it play-in or the Wild Card round (which I think is the official name) or round one. Whatever floats your boat.

But denying that it's part of the post-season is silly. It is.

Right, but it's possible the losers of these newly implemented games won't feel like they made it to the dance.

OK, that's just silly.

Let's just wait and see on that one. MLB can say this is a playoff game, but solely related to what happens on the field (not talking about revenue), it's not much different than game 163 from past seasons.

What I found silly silly was this statement: "...losers of these newly implemented games won't feel like they made it to the dance" No offense, but I thought it was absurd that you think you know how a major league team would feel about...well...anything. It was a silly statement. We've all made them. Own it and move on.

To the point I think you were trying to make... If it's called a playoff game, it's a playoff game. Period.

I already "owned it". I've truncated the post because it won't go through with all the quote boxes in it. I removed your post, the shortest one, because it was the easiest, where you said, "That's just silly."

In my original post, I didn't deny it was a playoff game; I agreed with STLFanatic that it is a playoff game. I never claimed I knew how a major league team would feel about this new playoff game, I just said it was possible (which you left out when you quoted my post in your post), because we really are in uncharted waters with this new playoff game. IMO, it has the feel of a college basketball play in game. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong. I already acknowledged that I may be.

[ninersdd]

Bye-Bye Dodgers. Cardinals are in!

[rams80]

OH HAI ATLANTA REMEMBER US?!