2017 MLB Regular Season Thread - Part 5

[GIN ANTONIC]

2012 is the only season he rightfully didn't win it, and that's only because cabrera won the triple crown. he should have 4 MVP awards by now with a 5th on the way after this season

He was so much better than Cabrera in 2012. Triple Crown is nice and shiny but it doesn't actually mean anything. Trout had better OBP and Runs scored vs. Cabrera's BA and RBI. The only one that was close was 2015 when he lost to Donaldson and even there I would have given it to Trout. I guess last year with Mookie he got pretty close too but he's been best player every year he's been in the league except for Harper's freak season where I'd give Bryce the edge.

 

[GIN ANTONIC]

So apparently we should just discount stats like HR, hits, total bases, doubles, triples, and batting average a lot of guys have because of Mike Trout's WAR,

I never heard of this stat until he came on the scene and now it's apparently the reason he should win the MVP every year.

Seriously, this stat is so ridiculous it's almost impossible for someone other than Trout to have the most WAR every year.

You know in baseball there's things like defense, baserunning, positional importance right? There's also stats such as runs scored, OBP, OPS, OPS+ that are a little bit more insightful than RBI and BA.

And it's totally possible for someone to beat Trout in WAR in any given year... you just have to be better than him... which no one has been able to do. Like why are you upset about us saying the best baseball player is the best baseball player?

 

[Virtanen18]

Seriously, this stat is so ridiculous it's almost impossible for someone other than Trout to have the most WAR every year.

Maybe the others should play better then.

 

[Virtanen18]

And it's totally possible for someone to beat Trout in WAR in any given year... you just have to be better than him... which no one has been able to do. Like why are you upset about us saying the best baseball player is the best baseball player?

Not uncommon.

Feel like hockey writers do the same with Erik Karlsson.

 

[GIN ANTONIC]

Not uncommon.

Feel like hockey writers do the same with Erik Karlsson.

Yeah but he's a Swede and not named Sidney or Connor so you kind of expect that. There's legit no reason, real or make believe, that anyone should be arguing against Trout being the best right now.

 

[Vamos Rafa]

He was so much better than Cabrera in 2012. Triple Crown is nice and shiny but it doesn't actually mean anything. Trout had better OBP and Runs scored vs. Cabrera's BA and RBI. The only one that was close was 2015 when he lost to Donaldson and even there I would have given it to Trout. I guess last year with Mookie he got pretty close too but he's been best player every year he's been in the league except for Harper's freak season where I'd give Bryce the edge.

I wouldn't go as far as saying that a historical achievement like the Triple Crown "doesn't mean anything."

 

[Eyedea]

The 0.3 fWAR difference between Trout and Donaldson in 2015 should tell everyone that it was a toss up and in no way did Trout absolutely, 100%, unequivocally deserve the award, right? Sure, voters likely cared a lot more about the runs/ribbys/playoffs, but it was a lot closer and in no way did Donaldson rob him of the award like some people care to believe.

 

[ucanthanzalthetruth]

WAR is important because it counts meaningful statistic the standard HR, AVG, RBI don't look at. Eric Hosmer's 2016 season is a perfect example of why it's useful. If it was 1987, most people would think his 2016 season numbers would mean he was very good.

 

[Sacha Baron Corbin]

ChrisK has been making this ridiculous WAR argument since Trout's MVP last year, and keeps going back to it even though it has been thoroughly debunked numerous times on this board. It's actually amusing at this point, and not to mention the fact that statically Trout is having his best season yet even with the injury.

I dunno, maybe I'm crazy for thinking there are more insightful stats than home runs and RBI's?

 

[GIN ANTONIC]

The 0.3 fWAR difference between Trout and Donaldson in 2015 should tell everyone that it was a toss up and in no way did Trout absolutely, 100%, unequivocally deserve the award, right? Sure, voters likely cared a lot more about the runs/ribbys/playoffs, but it was a lot closer and in no way did Donaldson rob him of the award like some people care to believe.

I mean I'm definitely not saying that in fact I said that was really the only year that was close. JD was absolutely worthy but gun to my head if you asked me to pick the better player that year I go Trout.

 

[GIN ANTONIC]

I wouldn't go as far as saying that a historical achievement like the Triple Crown "doesn't mean anything."

Well it means Cabrera led in 3 categories that at one time people thought were the be all end all of baseball stats. Now we know better. Sorry yes, it's great that Miggy had the most HR, RBI, BA but that essentially being the reason he won MVP and not that he was the better player that year is dumb. Miggy could have hit 100 hr that year but if the total picture doesn't add up to him being the best player then he shouldn't win it.

 

[Eyedea]

I mean I'm definitely not saying that in fact I said that was really the only year that was close. JD was absolutely worthy but gun to my head if you asked me to pick the better player that year I go Trout.

I'm moreso referring to Terry Yake's "2012 is the only season he rightfully didn't win it" remark. I mean yeah, I guess Trout rightfully deserved to win 2015, but so did Donaldson. The difference in fWAR was negligible and JD performed better defensively (based on UZR and DRS) while also having a higher WPA/LI than Trout.

What you said was correct, JD has basically been the biggest competition to Trout over his career to date, and he beat him in the one year where it could be considered a toss up.

 

[Cassano]

Cards came back into the playoff race out of nowhere

 

[TheMoreYouKnow]

The thing with advanced metrics is that nobody truly knows what they actually express because they're computer-generated metrics based on formulas combining a lot of factors. We say "wins above replacement" but that's not something you see or feel when watching the games because both the 'win' part and the 'replacement' part aren't real, concrete things, they're used as abstract concepts here. They could also name it "real gud player stat" and it'd be the same thing.

That's their strength on the one hand as they capture a lot more of a player's play than the traditional stats. But their weakness is that it automatically makes them a lot less accessible and perhaps joyful especially for kids. If you have to run a report on your laptop before you know who the best player on the field was on a given day, it's kind of tedious.

As such their use is maybe more for front office staff and hardcore nerds and less for the general viewing public - in the interest of baseball's popularity - and it could be argued that the MVP award is more designed for the latter group.

 

[KaseMeOutside]

So apparently we should just discount stats like HR, hits, total bases, doubles, triples, and batting average a lot of guys have because of Mike Trout's WAR,

I never heard of this stat until he came on the scene and now it's apparently the reason he should win the MVP every year.

Seriously, this stat is so ridiculous it's almost impossible for someone other than Trout to have the most WAR every year.

It's impossible because that's how good he is you seem afraid of new stats that measure essentially per AB efficiency.

 

[Quid Pro Clowe]

The 0.3 fWAR difference between Trout and Donaldson in 2015 should tell everyone that it was a toss up and in no way did Trout absolutely, 100%, unequivocally deserve the award, right? Sure, voters likely cared a lot more about the runs/ribbys/playoffs, but it was a lot closer and in no way did Donaldson rob him of the award like some people care to believe.

Though I believe Trout was the mvp, I had no issues with JD winning it.

 

[Quid Pro Clowe]

Not uncommon.

Feel like hockey writers do the same with Erik Karlsson.

True, but Burns had a higher war last year.

 

[MurrayBannerman]

Meanwhile, Trout was at 10.01 bWARP, while Donaldson was at 7.50.

I think it's reasonable to assume that there's some sort of middle ground there amongst the defensive statistics.

 

[Marc the Habs Fan]

Stanton has 17 homers in his last 30 games. What a monster.

Actually, now 18.

 

[Eyedea]

Meanwhile, Trout was at 10.01 bWARP, while Donaldson was at 7.50.

I think it's reasonable to assume that there's some sort of middle ground there amongst the defensive statistics.

I don't know, I'm kind of curious as to how a defensive net negative like Mike Trout managed to get 10 FRAA in 2015, while Donaldson was replacement level. Like I'm familiar with the differences in the metrics used by BP and FG, but it's interesting that the play-by-play data considers his 2015 season as the best defensively (with every other year below average), while the zone data believes his 2012 season to be the best (with every other year average to below).

 

[Taro Tsujimoto]

Oh, if only the Mets could play all 162 of their games at Citizens Bank Park...

 

[Del Preston]

Marco Acestrada

 

[GIN ANTONIC]

I don't know, I'm kind of curious as to how a defensive net negative like Mike Trout managed to get 10 FRAA in 2015, while Donaldson was replacement level. Like I'm familiar with the differences in the metrics used by BP and FG, but it's interesting that the play-by-play data considers his 2015 season as the best defensively (with every other year below average), while the zone data believes his 2012 season to be the best (with every other year average to below).

I think that this whole discussion just lends credence to the fact that WAR and defensively metrics aren't perfect.... But they are a hell of a lot better than what we judged players on before. I don't know if there's a point arguing Trout v Donaldson in 2012. Maybe every discussion brings us a little closer to clarity but it has certainly illuminated a lot of points that would have been missed a decade ago. Either way, it's a move in the right direction and away from putting all of the importance on counting on stats