The Trout supporters would vote for him because he had the top WAR rating among all players. That thinking only reinforces my view that to satisfy stats zealots a list of statistics should be used to determine award winners and Hall of Famers. No voters would be needed.
First in WAR, first for m.v.p. Establish statistical criteria for the Hall of Fame and induct the players who clear the statistical hurdles. The reason the stats zealots would like this system is it would eliminate members of the Baseball Writers Association as voters.
That’s right, the stats zealots are envious of the baseball writers because they get to vote for these things and the zealots don’t. That is not to say that new-age statistics haven’t started creeping into the award decisions of some of the BBWAA voters, presumably the younger, less experienced ones.
...To me, the beauty of the BBWAA’s m.v.p. voting is it challenges voters to study and think about the contributions players made to the success of their teams. It raises interesting questions, too.
Should Trout, for example, be penalized in m.v.p. consideration because the Angels weren’t good enough to take advantage of what he did for them? In Prince Fielder, did Cabrera have more help in helping the Tigers win than Trout had from any of his teammates?
What fans and new-age nerds should understand, if they don’t already, is most valuable players is not the same as player of the year. Player of the year is much simpler to decide, and – who knows? – maybe Trout is the player of the year. But he is not the most valuable player, no matter what WAR says. WAR, you see, does not have a vote in this election.