Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
AL MVP (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter scoobus
- Start date
TobiasFunke
Footballguy
Its Cabrera. Arguing otherwise is stupidity
bicycle_seat_sniffer
Smells like chicken
whats the WAR stats saying these days. Im sure Trout is far more WAR-tastic
shadyridr
Footballguy
I was commenting on an article debating Cabrera vs Trout
shadyridr
Footballguy
I have zero issue with WAR. I thought Trout shouldve won MVP last year. Check this very thread. The issue this year is Trout is on a HORRIBLE team. The award isnt for best overall player. Trout shouldnt even be in the discussion. If they changed the award to best overall player Id be hand in hand arguing WAR with anyone that wanted to.
tri-man 47
Footballguy
TobiasFunke
Footballguy
Why do you get to decide what the award means? I don't recall seeing it written anywhere in the rules that the MVP goes to the best player on a team in the playoff race.
I'm not saying the standings should be disregarded- although I personally would prefer if they were, I realize others interpret the word/award differently. I'm wondering why you think it's not up for discussion.
shadyridr
Footballguy
Discuss to your heart's content. Im not stopping you. I still think its stupidity. Thats my OPINION. Ever hear of it man? Ill bow out now
Doctor Detroit
Please remove your headgear
I didn't say it was a slam dunk, I think Davis has a legit shot right now but the list behind Cabrera begins and ends with him. Finishing 3rd is tenth, tenth is 3rd.
TobiasFunke
Footballguy
shadyridr
Footballguy
Sorry
MY OPINION anybody making the argument of Trout over Cabrera for MVP is a ####in moron.
We good?
TobiasFunke
Footballguy
Sure thing. I mean personally I like to hear people make arguments that challenge my way of thinking. You wanna try to convince me that Aaron Hicks is the Al MVP? Have at it, I can't wait to hear it. But maybe that's just me.
oso diablo
Footballguy
why isn't it? shouldn't it (be given to the best player)? why should the quality of the rest of your team matter for an individual award?
Koya
Footballguy
I'll jump in with the ol' adage of "most valuable player" means the player who, without which, a team would be the most "worse off"
While Chris Davis' overall numbers certainly don't reach the level of Cabrera nor Trout, where the hell would the O's be without him? The Angels might suck, more... where would Detroit be?
It is only with these glasses that a strong case for Davis could be built, I don't think it's enough to warrant him getting THAT much consideration, but it's a viable perspective.
While Chris Davis' overall numbers certainly don't reach the level of Cabrera nor Trout, where the hell would the O's be without him? The Angels might suck, more... where would Detroit be?
It is only with these glasses that a strong case for Davis could be built, I don't think it's enough to warrant him getting THAT much consideration, but it's a viable perspective.
TobiasFunke
Footballguy
So if the Tigers pull away and win the AL Central by 12 games, Cabrera is disqualified because his team would be in exactly the same position with our without him?
Sorry, that doesn't work for me at all. You shouldn't get punished (or rewarded) based on the play of your teammates. We have other trophies and awards for team play.
TobiasFunke
Footballguy
Based on this argument you'd pretty much have to give the award to the best player on any team that wins the division but would have missed the playoffs completely if they'd lost a couple more games- because what's a worse dropoff than going from the division series to not even in the wild card?
Right now that would be Beltre in the AL. There wouldn't be one in the NL unless the D-Backs or Nats make a run, so you'd probably give it to the best player on whichever team finishes third in the NL Central because making the wild card is way better than missing the playoffs completely. Unless they win the second wild card going away, in which case you'd give it to the best player on whichever team wins their division by the slimmest margin.
Like I said, dumb criteria.
Right now that would be Beltre in the AL. There wouldn't be one in the NL unless the D-Backs or Nats make a run, so you'd probably give it to the best player on whichever team finishes third in the NL Central because making the wild card is way better than missing the playoffs completely. Unless they win the second wild card going away, in which case you'd give it to the best player on whichever team wins their division by the slimmest margin.
Like I said, dumb criteria.
shadyridr
Footballguy
i dont know, complain to mlb
shadyridr
Footballguy
detroits lineup without miggy would be very bad. And verlander kinda sucks this year. This team is in the WC hunt with miggy and maybe not even in the playoffs
Politician Spock
Footballguy
I learned back in the 80's that what you are saying is absolutely not true.
In 1985 the Cincinatti Reds were down right awful, and had been for years... Except Dave Parker put together a MONSTER year without which the reds we have lost an additional 20 to 30 games. He was pretty much the entire offens of the team and the reason they finished 2nd, only 5 games out of first.
Willie McGee however was the best player on the best team. Without him the Cardinals still had Vince Coleman, Tommy Herr, Jack Clark, and a pitching staff that was down right nasty. Without Willie McGee, the Cards still have a good shot at finishing first.
Willie won MVP because he was the best player on the best team. Dave Parker was more valuable to his team than any player in the league was to their team... But that's not what the award was about that year.
Of course two years later the award went to Andre Dawson who played for a last place team, which just goes to show every year they use different reasons to justify who gets it and why.
shadyridr
Footballguy
i think theyve been very consistent. When two guys are similar they give it to the one of the playoff team rather than the guy on the last place team. When theres absolutely no candidate on a good team only then will they consider someone on a last place team.
Don Quixote
Footballguy
Dawson is one of the worst MVP winners in recent memory. Ozzie Smith and Jack Clark were both better in 1987 on a first place team.
Koya
Footballguy
I was playing a bit of devil's advocate in regard to something that absolutely is a valid consideration. Now, how much weight you give to that consideration is up to you, but it's certainly a consideration by a lot of people.
Second, you might not think someone should be "punished" for other teammates play, but the title of this very trophy is most valuable player. I'd think that would mean the player that means the most to their team, at least to some degree - it's almost a tautology, because that's the freakin' definition of the award.
Now again, there's plenty of room for you to consider that aspect less than others, but it's definitely a part of the equation, and to dismiss it seems foolish. Even if you, personally, discount it in your own factoring of the equation.
More important, I would be curious - if you took Cabs away vs taking Davis away, what happens. That's all. To which some have replied. I believe it's at least part of the discussion.
Last edited by a moderator:
Politician Spock
Footballguy
Parker wasn't on a last place team. The Reds went 89 and 72 and finished second. Without Parker they probably would have won 60 and finished dead last.shadyridr said:
shadyridr
Footballguy
so they were a good team. I dont get your point. My point is they always give it to someone on a good team (ie winning record or in the playoff hunt most of the year) unless there are absolutely no worthy candidates that year. Only then will they start looking at players on losing teams
Politician Spock
Footballguy
They weren't a good team, They SUCKED! They won 89 games and were in the playoff hunt all year because Parker had a monster year, and ONLY because Parker had a monster year. McGee on the other hand was surrounded by other players also having a good year... So he won. He was the best player on the best team. Without McGee, the Cards still have a great year. Without Parker, the Reds spend their 4th year in a row at the bottom.
oso diablo
Footballguy
20-30 wins extra from a single player? that's pretty historic (or histrionic)
collective
Footballguy
Trout did become the youngest player in Major League history to get two consecutive 20/30 seasons.
Good Posting Judge
Footballguy
A $100 bill lying on some grass near some piles of dogpoop is worth $100. A $100 bill sitting on a stack of other $100 bills is worth $100. Which is just as valuable.
It's Trout, again. Unfortunately.
It's Trout, again. Unfortunately.
shadyridr
Footballguy
a $100 bill is more valuable to a hobo then it is to bill gates.
the moops
Footballguy
Don Quixote
Footballguy
Smack Tripper
Footballguy
But with your flip side, how can anyone other than the top WAR number get the MVP award?
In the last ten years, would you have given the MVP to any lower WAR players than the top guy?
Thunderlips
Footballguy
I mos def think that how a players team is doing is a decisive tiebreaker when two players are close. Trout black inks in R, 3B, and BBs......Cabrera black inks in R, RBI, BA, OBP, SLG, OPS, OPS+ and TB?.......Come on....no brainer.
Thunderlips
Footballguy
This WAR thing...Chacin is really only .4 worse than Kershaw?.....
oso diablo
Footballguy
an excellent argument for which player is best at the plate (even though i'm not all that fond of "black ink" arguments). Even last year, most (if not all) Trout supporters acknowledge that Cabrera was (and still is) better at the plate.
if i am evaluating the best overall player, however, i would also want to consider baserunning and defense.
Thunderlips
Footballguy
But if you go by Defensive WAR....it ain't like Trout's blowing him out of the water. -0.6 to -1.4. Trout doesn't even look to be top 20. That ain't exactly great.
Sure....a thin 21 year old will be faster than a fat 30 year old........in this case, baserunning isn't and shouldn't be the end all be all.
TobiasFunke
Footballguy
A lot of assumptions on how to weigh defense and relative importance of different positions. There is a lot of variables which go into making WAR.
