OT: Triple Crown

[Gunzaan]

2011: 8.5
2012: 5.5

for BZ

Ok, so it was last year that his WAR was ridiculous. Just goes to show you that numbers don't tell the whole story, though.

 

[DewsSox79]

well RBIs are stupid. BA is just as bad.

 

[nickofypres]

And the fact that the triple crown is meaningless to people is a bad sign... It is a side product of the stat/sabre guy's overwhelming belief that stats are the be-all, end-all way to judge players.

My MVP vote would go to Cabrera.

Its just kind of conclusive though, obviously a player going for/winning the triple crown is a sign they're a having a good year. But RBI is arbitrary, that's a team dependent stat. Trout could have had more RBI's if he didn't lead off.

Batting average isn't a worthless stat to an extent, but why cherry pick a single stat for the triple crown? Why isn't OBP, SLG, OPS+, wRC+, etc all figured in too?


Cabrera is a great hitter, no one is going to argue against that. But, Trout isn't that far behind him in batting, and blows him away on defense.


Without Trout, LA doesn't have the record it does (which is better than Detroit's btw)

 

[Gunzaan]

well RBIs are stupid. BA is just as bad.

They aren't stupid at all, they are just a product of a bunch of different variables. Someone has to lead the league in driving in runs and hitting the ball, though.

 

[DewsSox79]

They aren't stupid at all, they are just a product of a bunch of different variables. Someone has to lead the league in driving in runs and hitting the ball, though.

having a high BA still doesnt mean you get OB at a descent clip. Miggy does both which is awesome, but getting on base is the most important. RBIS are just a product of his 1) homeruns 2) hitting with guys on base.

I never really cared much for RBIs.

like 901 said, trout is leading off, less chance to obtain more RBIs which isnt Trouts fault.

 

[DewsSox79]

Triple Crown isn't meaningless, but it isn't an end-all/be-all stat. And it never has been. There have been several players who have won the Triple Crown but didn't win the MVP. By the same token, WAR isn't an end-all/be-all stat either. I just think Trout's all-around play and excellent hitting is more "valuable" than Cabrera's superb hitting.

pretty much this.

I mean who would a team rather have? a player with a shit ton of tools or a guy who can just rake but is suspect with speed, agility, defense (range)

 

[Gunzaan]

Its just kind of conclusive though, obviously a player going for/winning the triple crown is a sign they're a having a good year. But RBI is arbitrary, that's a team dependent stat. Trout could have had more RBI's if he didn't lead off.

Batting average isn't a worthless stat to an extent, but why cherry pick a single stat for the triple crown? Why isn't OBP, SLG, OPS+, wRC+, etc all figured in too?


Cabrera is a great hitter, no one is going to argue against that. But, Trout isn't that far behind him in batting, and blows him away on defense.


Without Trout, LA doesn't have the record it does (which is better than Detroit's btw)

So team records count, but not making the playoffs means nothing?

Trout doesn't have the power or plate coverage that Cabrera has, that is why he leads off. You can also make the case that Trout's high runs total & stolen bases are a product of the teammates he has hitting behind him.

And I'd say that without Cabrera, the Tigers don't make the playoffs. This team didn't hit for most of the year, aside from Cabrera & Fielder. Avila, Boesch, etc all had down years.

 

[Capt. Serious]

Trout has 30 HR's & 49 SB's...dayum.

 

[nickofypres]

So team records count, but not making the playoffs means nothing?

Trout doesn't have the power or plate coverage that Cabrera has, that is why he leads off. You can also make the case that Trout's high runs total & stolen bases are a product of the teammates he has hitting behind him.

And I'd say that without Cabrera, the Tigers don't make the playoffs. This team didn't hit for most of the year, aside from Cabrera & Fielder. Avila, Boesch, etc all had down years.

LA had a better record than Detroit but didn't make the playoffs. You're really going to hold that against Trout because LA plays in a tougher division than Detroit? 3 teams in the west could end up with 90 or more wins.

You could argue that, I guess, but I RS and SB don't go into the Triple Crown.

Fielder really picked it up right before the ASG, which is when Detroit got hot. I'm not saying its all Fielder, but without Cabrera, it isn't all doom and gloom. They still have Verlander, Scherzer (who pitched out of his mind), Fielder, etc. They're not the Royals.

 

[MRubio52]

I think the Angels were 4-16 without Trout, and 85-56 with him. The narrative at the time was that Trout was the reason the Angels started playing well again. Obviously there are more factors at play, but I do think Trout should get at least some credit for the turn-around. I love me some Miggy and I think the Triple Crown is neat, but I think Trout should be the MVP.

 

[Capt. Serious]

Speaking of the Tigers, is V-Mart the full time DH next season?

 

[nickofypres]

Speaking of the Tigers, is V-Mart the full time DH next season?

Yes.

 

[Capt. Serious]

Just makes that lineup even more lethal.

 

[nickofypres]

Just makes that lineup even more lethal.

Probably, but you never know how Martinez recovers.

 

[Capt. Serious]

True. I'm starting to wonder if guys like Avila had a career season last year & really isn't that good.

Not saying he is a bum, just wanted to bring it up.

 

[nickofypres]

Avila's 2010 season included a .366 BABIP, which is concerning given that his career line is .324.

He seems to takes about 21-25% of his at bats for walks, which leads to a pretty good OBP, which is good. But, he'll likely, given what we know of so far in his career, will probably never replicate 2011.

He gets injured a lot. I know some Tigers fans who aren't even sure he'll be in the league in 5 seasons.

 

[Capt. Serious]

just think, the Sox could've had Mike Trout at #23 overall in the draft & instead chose Jared Mitchell..ugh.

 

[brett05]

just think, the Sox could've had Mike Trout at #23 overall in the draft & instead chose Jared Mitchell..ugh.

Wait a moment. I know I would rather have Trout than Mitchell but no one at the time wanted Trout over Mitchell. Anyone can be a GM after history has happened.

 

[brett05]

I think the Angels were 4-16 without Trout, and 85-56 with him. The narrative at the time was that Trout was the reason the Angels started playing well again. Obviously there are more factors at play, but I do think Trout should get at least some credit for the turn-around. I love me some Miggy and I think the Triple Crown is neat, but I think Trout should be the MVP.

Like Albert Pujols. He was awful the first month or so into the season if I remember right.

 

[nickofypres]

Also, no way we know if Trout is the same player if the Sox draft him. Different farm system, different coaches. Butterfly effect.