WAR, not quite up Mig’s alley.
Trout leads the league in batting average (.328), runs scored (112), steals (44) and OPS-plus (169). He is second in OPS (.964) and third in slugging (.571). He also leads the league in WAR (10.0 for baaseball-reference.com and 8.5 for fangraphs.com) by a wide margin—Robinson Cano is the next closest guy at 6.3 and 6.0 from the respective websites.
Those are incredibly difficult numbers to argue against, but Cabrera is stating his case. He leads the league in slugging (.587) and OPS (.980), is second in RBIs (116) and fourth in home runs (35) and runs (89).
...But here are the more telling season numbers: Cabrera has a 5.7 WAR according to baseball-reference.com and a 5.8 at fangraphs.com, making him third and tied for second, respectively. It’s true that there are flaws with WAR, but it is also true that it is the best formula for putting a number to a player’s overall contributions.
With that said, Trout’s WAR numbers dwarf Cabrera’s. And beyond some of the offensive evidence, there is this …
WAR takes into account not only a player’s offensive ability, but also what he’s done defensively and on the bases, and in those categories it’s no contest.
... It’s not fair to compare Trout to Cabrera defensively. Cabrera is a former outfielder-third baseman-first baseman returned to third base this season because the Tigers added Prince Fielder to play first. Cabrera, among qualified AL third baseman, ranks last with a minus-10.7 UZR and last with minus-3 DRS.
Nothing more needs to be said here, so we’ll move on to the impact each player has on his team beyond the obvious statistics …
Repoz
Posted: September 11, 2012 at 05:50 AM |
104 comment(s)
Login to Bookmark
Tags:
awards
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
I think it's more of a case of "this fact is not possibly in dispute so let's move on to items that can be disputed.". That's how I read it anyway.
but to not vote for trout whose team has been playing playoff caliber baseball once he joined the team is just weird.
actually, not weird. stupid.
(Posey is the MVP. And with the Pirates imploding and the Cardinals backing into the playoffs, it's starting to look like Posey will win the Award.)
Andrew McCutchen has the most commonly misspelled last name in baseball, right?
So, let's ignore him entirely. :: Sigh ::
It's a losing battle, Love Handles. Cano's backpfeifengesicht makes an MVP impossible.
Yes, now that nobody is talking about Francoeur anymore.
I'm guessing Braun's MVP's are a thing of the past as long as the BBWAA are voting on it. He's having a great year again, of course. Yadier Molina and Michael Bourn are having great years, too, though a lot of their value is tied up in how much you value their defense.
At this point, per BR, even ignoring defense, Trout has a oWAR that's 23% higher than Cabrera, and he missed a month of the season through no fault of his own. I mean, if the two were even in hitting, you could make the case that Trout's far superior defense is the difference maker, but why do you even need to get there? It's not close just factoring in offense. If Trout gets to 30-50, and it appears that he will, those should be the magic numbers. He's also going to finish with 85-90 RBI from the freaking lead-off spot, and almost certainly would have gone over 100 if he'd started the season in Anaheim.
Still, I agree with Charityslave that if one of these teams gets into the playoffs and the other doesn't, that will be the difference maker for the voters.
Posey seems like the favorite to win the award in the NL at this point (and he deserves to).
Braun: No, hell no.
Headley!!!!: No
Jay Bruce (hold that thought)
Holliday (hold that thought)
Soriano: No
LaRoche: (ummm no)
AmRam: No
Buster: hold that thought
WAR leaders:
McCutchen (hold that thought)
Wright: no.
Braun: (see above)
Bourn: no
Buster: see above
Molina: no
Heyward: ummm no
Headley, sadly still no
Stanton: no
Votto- too much missed time
Ok, basically I see Bruce, Holliday and Buster and possibly McCutchen
Bruce is gonna have the HR crown, Holliday the most well rounded triple crown stat line, Buster is the best player o the Giants and some voters may give him bonus points for being a catcher- McCutchen is the best player and will get some votes- but really he only wins if there is a wild split in the voting (see 1999 AL) of course if there is wild split the very undeserving Bruce very well may win.
Just one month. He came up at the very end of April.
At this point Trout is so good that he transcends the MVP award. The real question is if the AL MVP award can win Mike Trout, or it has to settle for an inferior representative.
and why is jay bruce not receiving the dante bichette type scrutiny on his stat line? his ops at home is 1.008 while on the road it is .771.
I think Miggy could win the award if he wins the Triple Crown. He still has a shot, but at 5 homers back he'd have to get pretty hot for the last 3 1/2 weeks or so.
I presume because there's a difference between taking full advantage (and then some) of your hitter-friendly park and playing in Coors Field circa 1995. Great America is a nice place to hit, but it isn't boosting numbers the way Coors was in Dante's MVP runner-up season.
OK, if Miggy wins the Triple Crown, Trout's MVP would be in serious jeopardy.
Jay Bruce doesn't have a chance to win the MVP, and doesn't deserve it.
Votto is clearly a better player, but his missed time will cost him consideration. Meanwhile, it's taken Bruce's recent surge (OPS of 1.199 over the last 28 days) to move him past the slumping Frasier and Ludwick as the 2nd best hitter on the team. If WAR should be used as a conversation starter when discussing MVP, Bruce's 2.5 bWAR should also end the discussion.
Unfortunately, you can't use oWAR in this way. Despite it's name, it does incorporate defense (by including a position adjustment).
He sounds just like Brandon Moss!
If there are voters out there who would not vote for Trout, they are beyond reasoning with. Best bet would be to tell them that if they don't vote for Trout, their taxes will be raised, they'll lose their health insurance, and the Sandanistas will invade their homes.
Am I missing something? When does have a lesser number make you tied with someone?
It should Buster, Molina, Wright and McCutchen, those are really the only names that should be in the coversation, once you accept that the writers are not going to vote for Braun. (with apologies to Bourn who is just not good enough of a hitter to really be in the conversation regardless of what War says)
At this point in time, I think it's Posey's to lose. I know the writers are idiots, but no way are they dumb enough to vote for Bruce.
At this point Trout should be the MVP he hasn't slowed down even after he crossed 100 games played threshold so that should be evidence enough that he is legitimately this good right now.
He will probably win the batting title, maybe even the rbi title, but the homerun title will require an impressive 3 weeks from him, which might vault him over Trout for the narrative. Writers really do subconsciously, consider September to we worth twice as much (or even three times) as other months.
not looking to be difficult but if you are stating that literally nobody will vote for braun i will propose a good-natured, no funds required wager that braun finishes in the top ten in the nl mvp voting. and if you were not being literal then i will make it appealing and say top five
i understand why he won't 'win'. but i don't see over 2 dozen people excluding him from the ballot completely. and if he is not off the ballot then how do you put him at 8th? you don't. you put him in the top 5.
that's my thinking. he gets excluded from a handful of ballots and then gets votes 3-6 from a bunch of other voters.
Nope, I'm stating that his standings in the final vote will be way below where he should be ranked. Right now the final vote for NL MVP should go in an order roughly
1-2. McCutchen, Posey
3-6. Molina, Wright, Braun, (Bourn if you are a fan of war only)
7 on up, reflections of personal bias, priorities etc...
Braun will finish in that third group and voters will be finding stupid reasons to vote for their preferences over him. To be fair I imagine that Wright will also finish below his actual value in the voting too. (example you will see some voters giving it to Bruce due to the RBI thing, you will see some giving it to Holliday instead of Braun by saying similar players, but that Holliday was on a playoff team, you might even see some giving Headley a push because he's unappreciated) I doubt many ballots will have Braun in top five, regardless of that being where he should be)
I'm not sure if that is odder than not giving him the MVP because his team didn't make the playoffs only to give it to another guy whose team looks like they aren't going to make the playoffs.
I think people are just writing to fill space. I can't imagine Trout doesn't get it. Batting title, SB title, leads the league in runs (by freaking 20 right now), all after missing a month. Everyone notices stuff like that.
Any word on that injury he suffered when he left that game? He's not out for the remainder of the season, is he?
Yes, that's exactly it (and usually the guys writing this don't have votes). If Cabrera wins the Triple Crown, then you've got a race. Otherwise, it's going to be Trout.
*Trout's a better player, but I still think Harper is better media fodder.
Better quotes for sure.
he was back in the lineup last night
it's not even noticed but braun plays through injuries if at all possible. he sits out every so often to give his back a rest but otherwise if he can get on the field he will be there.
this is why i was so exasperated about 2010. it was understood around milwaukee that braun had a bad shoulder, was playing through it, and every 'analyst' around bbtf was trying to decipher if braun was on the downside of his career already. of course he 'only' slugged .501 that season
i know folks don't like him, and i know he comes across as a bit of a jerk but he is a tough kid who produces great numbers every year while improving his game across the board.
he's approaching being the best all around player in brewer history and that is not a low bar of achievement
Of course it's probably his career year.
If we take b-ref's estimates of his defense (and other things) at face value^, his current WAR of 10.2 ranks 28th all time for position players.
Now, assume he'll maintain that rate and play in each of the Angels remaining 21 games - his projected WAR of 12.0 would tie for 4th by a position player, and for 1st among guys not named Ruth.
Now add in that missing month.
^ I think he's a fine defender in center, but he's likely overrated by their metrics, which go a long way in explain his rank on these lists.
1 Anaheim makes playoffs? Because, MVP voters historically give extra creidt to "sparkplugs" (i.e., shortstops or basestealers) on winners. Whereas if you play short for a loser or steal 50 bags for a loser, you get zilch. Examples are Larkin, M Wills, Aparicio.
2 Tigers win Central AND Cabrera leads league in RBI. Because, historically, voters give oodles of extra credit to the big RBI guy when the team wins; so much so that it overwhelms most other factors. But just 'being on a winning team' isn't all that extra-creitable, nor is 'RBI leader' for a non-contender. It's the combo that does it.
A simple model like AVG + HR + RBI + SB/2 will get you close. Sabermetrics have made enough headway that walks and defense get some small level of recognition (plus, it was so obvious that Bonds was the best player in the NL from 2002-2004 even when he couldn't drive in runs since they always walked him with men on, that a simple formula became less predictive) - but the postseason bonuses for certain types of guys are still big.
Andrew McCutchen, for example - his MVP case does not ride much on the Pirates' fate, because he is having one of those "overall great seasons" with no specific marker that ties directly to team performance. His NL MVP case will ride on the Giants' fate (Posey's .330 AVG and 100+ RBI as a catcher for a winner is a great narrative) and what the voters will do with Ryan Braun's "not-suspended-for-PEDS" great year.
(edit: oh, and if Bruce goes bonkers and grabs the RBI crown, we have ourselves an MVP)
Braun is one of my favorite players. I've only been to 3 MLB games in person, but one of them was a Rockies/Brewers game at Coors in August 2010. I made the 500+ mile drive from Salt Lake to Denver mainly so I could see Braun and Prince rake at Coors (Fielder was 0 for 4 with 2 K's, but Braun had 2 doubles).
It actually really bothers me that even though last years suspension was overturned, Braun may have already lost his shot at the HOF, no matter what kind of career he ends up with.
I'd think he's still got quite a ways to go to overtake Yount, no?
A difference of 0.2 WAR is much smaller than the inherent error in WAR.
rbi leaders who have mvp since 2000
ryan howard 2006
alex rodriguez 2007
i am not buying that jay bruce can win the mvp under the conditions you describe.
a .260ish hitting outfielder winning over buster posey?
the writers have their flaws but they are not that dense
sure. but he's getting there
To build on Harvey's point, since 2000 there have been 10 RBI champions who played for playoff teams. Arod in 2007 was the only one who earned the MVP, and he also happened to be the WAR leader in the AL that year.
I know you've spent a lot of time studying the historical results, but past practices are becoming less relevant every year.
I can't see him getting by Stanton, who shares the league lead despite over 100 fewer PAs.
I'm sure Old Man Jeter will get some up-ballot votes just to piss all of us off, he is leading the league in hits by a significant margin and is in contention for the batting title. I don't think he's remotely the MVP of his own team, but he has put together a shockingly good season.
Am I missing something? I just checked the leaders on ESPN and Braun is 5 ahead of both these guys.
Oops, no wonder Harvey's getting riled up, Braun must be invisible. I guess the notion of "Jay Bruce, HR King" was so incongruous from my view of the season I forgot about Braun too.
Jeter usually gets unfair representation(both ways) in the MVP voting, I don't think we'll be to ticked off if he finishes up ballot in a year where he posts a 120 ops+, leads the league in hits. If he finishes behind Trout and Cabrera and Hamilton and Beltre, most people will be fine wherever he ends up.
Heck until about an hour ago, I hadn't realized that Chase Headley was leading the NL in RBI.
I'm glad you and Harvey both pointed this out. RBI is important to the voters, but it's no longer the primary criteria. At least leading the league isn't important, but it's probably being used as a tie breaker, along with team standings still.
Papi 05 ARod 07 Tex 09 Granderson 11
Jones 05 Holliday 07 Howard 08 (semiHoward 09, tied)
Yes, few won MVPs, but I did not mean to say it was the ONLY factor; in 05, voters dis DHs so Papi lost to ARod (but it was close!), and Pujols had 70 pts of BA over Jones. In 07, voters as in the past discounted some Coors effect, and ARod won the award. (but again, it was a close vote). In 08, Pujols had 100 pts (!) of BA over Howard, and Ryan STILL almost undeservedly beat him. In 09, Mauer got the 'played catcher for a winner' boost to add to his .365 avg. And in 11, a pitcher (Velrnader) won the award.
Leading in RBI for a winner is worth, in voters' composite eyes, about 60 extra pts in BA, all other things being equal. Kinda silly, but there you go.
Even as a tiebreaker, it isn't that important. Pujols and Votto were about as close as two guys could be in 2010. Pujols won the RBI title. Votto's team won the division and he won the MVP almost unanimously.
There was a time when voters were truly enamored with big RBI guys. But other than the bizarre Ryan Howard fetish of the past decade, that time is mostly past.
Morneau in 2006 was an abysmal selection, and I can't think of any reason why a voter would've picked him other than "most rbi's on a playoff team."
In 2007, Matt Holliday didn't win the RBI crown until Game 163 (the 13th inning of Game 163, as it happens). All the MVP votes had been cast before he took over the RBI lead.
Do you have a cite for that Tom? There may have been some voters who turned them in early, but the eligibility period runs through the end of the regular season, after the one-game playoff was concluded (and nothing I've seen in a brief search suggests otherwise was in place in 2007).
I would love to, but I don't trust my research abilities enough to do it justice.
People aren't saying that it doesn't factor into the voting, just that it doesn't factor into the voting as much as it used to. Morneau's win, was probably the last gasp of the dying writer who bases his votes on simple criteria.
And I'm telling you that the RBI crown hasn't made much of a difference for players on teams that do win*, as the last dozen years of voting has demonstrated. Sure, the occasional Morneau or more occasional Howard outpolls his numbers, but that also happens with guys without big RBI numbers.
But we've had this argument before. Three years ago you insisted as late as mid-September that Joe Mauer had no chance to beat Teixeira for the MVP, and that vote was almost unanimous. There was a time when winning the RBI crown was huge for an MVP candidate. By and large, that time is over.
Voting on BBWAA awards** has changed, as the beat writers have become more comfortable with advanced metrics. It's evident in Felix and Zach's Cy awards and with Verlander and Mauer's MVP honors. They ain't perfectly in tune with stathead wisdom yet, but the old models for predicting simply aren't very accurate any longer. There still are some biases (playing for a pennant contender in the MVP vote chief among them), but they are much better at using the stats that matter.
* For instance, Josh Hamilton is leading the league in RBIs while playing for the best team in the AL. I haven't seen anyone insist he's one of the leaders in the MVP race.
** It will take much longer for this change to become evident in Hall of Fame voting.
Even if this is meant somewhat paradoxically, it's a good point to remember. For reasons that Der K points to in #44 (it's hard to have a much better year than this one), it's just statistically likely. But also because we tend to look at prospect-aged performers mostly as prospects, when we should be looking at them less with reference to projections and possibilities. To enjoy people the most, assume that what they're doing now is as good as it gets. I admit that is a bleak way to think about, say, Jeff Francoeur, but even he had a good year or two that would have looked better if it had been appreciated as his absolute upside. Call it the "Alicia Silverstone Principle": you can either love Clueless as a near-perfect comedy, or feel depressed because geez, where did it all go from there. Love it for what it is.
deserves got nothing to do with it
(sorry, i had to)
That's not the "reasoning" those voters employ. They're not casting "blame," they're just saying contributions for non-playoff teams have less value because those teams could have missed the playoffs just fine without those contributions.
http://www.baseballthinkfactory.org/newsstand/discussion/ballou_as_far_as_mvp_mauer_closing_in
....where my only post was that Mauer would get more votes if the Twins win. Which was "right", but fairly obvious.
now, I did just now re-run my model of 09, and it shows almost a dead heat between Mauer and Tex (Jeter 3rd) which (duh) was incorrect. My guess is that one cause is that the model gives bonus points to a guy who is new to the team, if a team wins and it did not win last year (Yanks failed to make playoffs in 08); this attempts to quanitfy the narrative that "so and so is responisble for ___ team's surprise winning". In this case, the writers probably did not see Yankees making the playoff as 'surprising'. Also, the model failed to account for a teammate (Derek) influencing the vote; it is clear to me now that its easier to be the MVP when only one man on a team is having a clear cut great year than if credit is split. Adjustment needed.
Note: the model shows that if Tex did NOT win the RBI crown, Jeter would have finsihed ahead of him, so the model is justified in giving extra credit for that. As you said, maybe it's time to lower the coefficient. I am commpletely unconvinced by the data that I should zero it out, but I will rerun it after 2012 to see how it works for this millenium.
I have not run a full 2012 AL model yet to see if Hamilton projects as a favorite.
Oddly enough, his name has just been added to the conversation on ESPN's Baseball Today podcast - it came up last Friday.
I think the reason you haven't heard more about Hamilton is that the Ranger beat reporters are pushing Adrian Beltre's candidacy.
-- MWE
I retract this unsubstantiated claim of mine
This may well be true. Almost everything said about Hamilton in DFW right now is biased by the writer's position on his upcoming contract negotiations (even down to some ludicrous throwaway item like somebody the other day asking Wash if Hamilton might someday hit 50 HR in a season). Meanwhile, there's no similar distraction with Beltre, so he suddenly becomes the good guy and the Valuable Player.
Hamilton's inconsistency has hurt his narrative, too. This year's Rangers are a testament to the idea that you can win a pennant just as easily in April as in September, and he was hugely instrumental in that. But what has he done for us lately …
I wouldn't. It's 28 voters, only two of which are stationed in New York city and many of which are internet 'bloggers' nowadays that I just don't see Jeter surpassing Cano among those willing to look at the numbers. Even assuming Jeter is pegged as an average defensive shortstop, Cano is still the better offensive threat. For all the talk about New York bias, Jeter hasn't done really that well in the MVP voting. He gets a little extra credit from time to time, but he rarely finishes higher than a reasonable spot for him. (and has probably been ripped off a couple of times)
We post the most likely names at the top of the thread. All you have to do is put them in order.
Agreed. For a media darling who had a legit MVP argument twice(1999, 2006), yet never actually won, it seems he's been unfairly hurt in the voting more than he's been unfairly helped. I only remember one season (1998 - I think Jeter finished 3rd) where I felt at the time that he'd placed unreasonably high in the voting (too lazy to look up the SABR numbers and see if that opinion was correct or not), and that was more than nullified the follwing year when he finished unreasonably low (I think he was 6th in 1999).
I'd be happy to participate once you hit 1987-present, which is when I've been following baseball. For everything before that I'd have to do some of that pesky research stuff rather than just trusting my infallible memory. :-)
(That noise you hear in the background is Matt Kemp cursing up a storm.)
I thought the consensus was that Kemps defense was only average in centerfield, and of course when your competition hits .330, 30 steals and 30 hrs and plays plus defense at a corner outfield position, you are stuck with splitting the difference at that point in time...Of course Kemp played in 161 games vs Brauns 150 which should have pushed him over the edge, the tie breaker for being on a division champion was a bit more bonus that Braun probably should have got.
Me too. The only time I see Cano's name is like in articles like this, where they mention his WAR because he's there and never look at him again.
Last time I watched MLB Network, they were pimping Jeter as the Yankee candidate. It has a lot to do with Jeter being on fire lately while Cano has sort of tread water for most of the end of the season. It's too bad, Cano is having what would qualify as a MVP year in the time after A-rod and before Mike Trout. I'll happily settle for him being the best second baseman in baseball though.
He's got a 50/50 chance of breaking Rose's record for most hits as a 38 year old...
2 years ago I thought his chance at 4000 was pretty much gone when he hit .270
Seems kinda double standard to me...
Trout would almost certainly win even if Cabrera or whomever actually PASSES him in WAR. But best player, best story? Auto-win.
To be fair, last year's Dodgers were below .500 every day from May 3 until September 18th, and were in 4th or 5th place for most of the year, until the Rockies totally collapsed. Not exactly contenders.
(That noise you hear in the background is Matt Kemp cursing up a storm.)
I thought the consensus was that Kemps defense was only average in centerfield
It seems kind of silly to take issue with the phrase "Gold Glove defense" when Kemp literally won the Gold Glove.
OTOH, Kemp didn't win the Gold Glove until after the MVP voting (and it was awarded by an entirely different set of voters). So, if you're talking about the qualifications that should be considered in his MVP case, then average defense is a better description.
OTOH, Kemp didn't win the Gold Glove until after the MVP voting (and it was awarded by an entirely different set of voters). So, if you're talking about the qualifications that should be considered in his MVP case, then average defense is a better description.
I've heard this argument before, but I have a hard time believing that the "consensus" on a guy who has won 2 of the last 3 Gold Glove awards is that he is merely an average defender (he had also won the award two years earlier). Perhaps that is the view here, but I don't think that is the consensus among MVP voters. I'm willing to hear evidence to the contrary, though. Do managers/coaches and writers really have such divergent views on player defense?
Well at the time of the voting, he had only won one. On top of that the methodology of the vote for the gold glove really doesn't give a fair indication of the common consensus at the time, the results shape the consensus after the fact, but it's not a good reflection of the consensus before the fact. That is why once someone starts winning gold gloves, they have a tendency to keep winning them provided they stay in the league and stay healthy.
Until they release the vote totals on the gold glove votes, it's not really a good indication of what the masses think, as it's very possible people are winning the award with 3-5 out of 14 votes. This upcoming year is arguably going to be the first year, ever that the gold glove might be useful at determining the consensus and possibly pick a legitimate good fielders at every position.
What is being done differently this year?
I figured CFB was referring to the decision to award Gold Gloves by outfield position, though that actually started last year. I don't believe there are any changes planned for this year.
I can't find the reference to it, so maybe I imagined it, but I was under the impression that Rawlings was going to give out different ballots this year in which the ballots would list the most viable candidates(no possible repeat of Palmiero) and some defensive stats on the ballot.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main