Josh Donaldson passed Miggy in WAR

[Cooler Heads Prevail]

People can have different definitions, but with each one Trout still wins it. I'm disregarding the team making the playoffs as a requirement, as that's just ridiculous. Most valuable to league, Trout. Most valuable to team, Trout. Gave team best shot to make postseason (single handedly), Trout. Best all around player, Trout. Best offensive player, Trout. Since intangibles such as motivation are not known or measured, there is no argument that it should be anyone other than Trout. Team's dependence on player, Trout. etc. etc.

 

Whole load of baloney based on an extremely flawed statistic. The only advantage Trout has is age. If they were the same age, most teams would want Cabrera because he's a truly historical hitter. In fact, the Angels are nowhere near a playoff team this season with Trout, whereas Cabrera has made significant easily illustrated input into several playoff teams.

 

Its actually funny seeing the absolute lunacy that some of you display just because some flawed stat is leading you on. Go ahead scream it out as many times as you want, it's a completely horseshit theory.

[connorp]

I think last year's same discussion centered more around what "mvp" actually meant and less about WAR.

 

While none of us know and there are some exceptions (mostly media friendly guys like Ripken and such).. Smart money seems to show team performance is part of the voter's formula.

 

While that's not ideal if you want to determine who the "literal" mvp is, thats what it is. Trout will be heavily penalized for LAA sucking..MC will be MVP in a formula-less system but 2014 will still come..hopefully Jays dont suck so bad again:(

[Jays]

Its actually funny seeing the absolute lunacy that some of you display just because some flawed stat is leading you on.

Go ahead scream it out as many times as you want, it's a completely horseshit theory.

[Cooler Heads Prevail]

I'm sure it is very good. But not perfect, how could it be? And I think there are impacts a player can have that don't show up on a stat sheet anyway. Not just intangibles, but how other players in the lineup are affected, how opposing players pitch to them, how many risks the manager takes, etc. He cements that lineup. Removing Cabrera from that Tigers lineup would leave such a massive void, I just think the loss of wins would be more than WAR would suggest. (caveat: pure opinion, but I think a fairly common one)

 

The whole concept of WAR is flawed. Aggregating disparate items together by summing them is rarely a good practice.

[GD]

The whole concept of WAR is flawed. Aggregating disparate items together by summing them is rarely a good practice. I suspect those on this board that are pitching the idea of WAR as an accurate measure of anything have no background in advanced mathematics at all.

 

Now's the part where you brag about your degree, right?

[GD]

That may be true, but in this case it is good practice. We can get accurate run performance values for batting, baserunning and fielding... why not add them together to get a player's total performance? Seems pretty sensible to me.

 

We don't even need to add them up. We can just look at them individually.

 

There are three areas to evaluate a position player in baseball: Hitting, Fielding, Baserunning.

 

Cabrera beats Trout in hitting, and it's not close. (73.0 to 60.1)

 

Trout beats Cabrera in base running, and it's not close. (8.1 to -4.3)

 

Trout beats Cabrera in the field, and it really isn't close. (4.0 to -15.4)

 

These are all sensible arguments that don't even need a number to defend. Is anyone in their right mind going to argue Trout's a better hitter, Cabrera's a better base runner, or Cabrera's better in the field?

 

I love this article. It sums the Trout vs Cabrera thing up very very well.

 

http://www.baseballnation.com/2012/11/16/3654460/mike-trout-miguel-cabrera-stats-mvp

[Nox]

The whole concept of WAR is flawed. Aggregating disparate items together by summing them is rarely a good practice.

 

 

Yah, except there's a completely logical basis for comparison. The effect on run differential which is really all that matters.

[Nox]

I'd take either player in a heartbeat, and probably Trout first, if I was building team from scratch.

 

There should be no probably if we frame the comparison this way. "Who's the most valuable asset in baseball" is essentially rhetorical at this point.

[G-Snarls]

We don't even need to add them up. We can just look at them individually.

 

There are three areas to evaluate a position player in baseball: Hitting, Fielding, Baserunning.

 

Cabrera beats Trout in hitting, and it's not close. (73.0 to 60.1)

 

Trout beats Cabrera in base running, and it's not close. (8.1 to -4.3)

 

Trout beats Cabrera in the field, and it really isn't close. (4.0 to -15.4)

]

 

All true. And this keeps the weighting of each component in mind. For runs +/-, hitting is more important than defense, and both are much more important than base running.

[GD]

All true. And this keeps the weighting of each component in mind. For runs +/-, hitting is more important than defense, and both are much more important than base running.

 

A win is a win.

[G-Snarls]

A win is a win.

 

Right. But being an above average hitter contributes a lot more to runs and wins than being an above average base stealer. Your numbers (and WAR) recognize that.

[GD]

Right. But being an above average hitter contributes a lot more to runs and wins than being an above average base stealer. Your numbers (and WAR) recognize that.

 

Oh, okay, I didn't realize that's what you meant. But I don't see how this helps Cabrera's case.

[theblujay]

Every time I see the title of this thread I become enraged.

[GD]

Every time I see the title of this thread I become enraged.

 

http://www.chiefrok.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/yes-let-the-hate-flow-through-you.jpg

 

Join the dark/SABR side, blujay...

 

WE HAVE COOKIES and better stats

[theblujay]

http://www.chiefrok.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/yes-let-the-hate-flow-through-you.jpg

 

Join the dark/SABR side, blujay...

 

WE HAVE COOKIES and better stats

 

I can't support anything that says Donaldson is better than Cabrera

[GD]

I can't support any form of rational thought

 

ftfy

[theblujay]

ftfy

 

Its pretty rational that Cabrera is better than Donaldson overall, and this year.

[theblujay]

I feel like you guys discount intangibles too much. Also situational hitting.

[GD]

I feel like you guys discount intangibles too much. Also situational hitting.

 

Troll bait does not get better than this.

 

Well done. I'm dead serious. This is nice work. You're improving by the day.

[theblujay]

Troll bait does not get better than this.

 

Well done. I'm dead serious. This is nice work. You're improving by the day.

 

Where are they accounted for in WAR? They might not be the biggest factors, but they're not irrelevant

[GD]

Where are they accounted for in WAR? They might not be the biggest factors, but they're not irrelevant

 

I'm actually gonna humor you. Go on Fangraphs. Look up "Clutch," "Win Probability Added," and "Run Expectancy/24." Excellent situational stats. It's obviously all noise but I like them for shits and giggles.

[theblujay]

I'm actually gonna humor you. Go on Fangraphs. Look up "Clutch," "Win Probability Added," and "Run Expectancy/24." Excellent situational stats. It's obviously all noise but I like them for shits and giggles.

I like the idea of WPA. Is it by pitch or PA?

[GD]

I like the idea of WPA. Is it by pitch or PA?

 

By event.

[kcjaysfan]

I feel like you guys discount intangibles too much. Also situational hitting.

 

Where are they accounted for in WAR? They might not be the biggest factors, but they're not irrelevant

 

Methinks you don't understand what intangible means. The relevant definition of intangible is "not tangible." The relevant definition of tangible is "capable of being appraised at an actual or approximate value." So, by definition, these intangibles of which you're incredibly fond cannot be accounted for in metrics, advanced or otherwise.

 

Another great definition of tangible is "capable of being precisely identified or realized by the mind." So, the best part of intangibles is that, by definition, they cannot by accounted for, even by your feeble mind.

[theblujay]

Methinks you don't understand what intangible means. The relevant definition of intangible is "not tangible." The relevant definition of tangible is "capable of being appraised at an actual or approximate value." So, by definition, these intangibles of which you're incredibly fond cannot be accounted for in metrics, advanced or otherwise.

 

Another great definition of tangible is "capable of being precisely identified or realized by the mind." So, the best part of intangibles is that, by definition, they cannot by accounted for, even by your feeble mind.

 

Is this sarcasm I can't tell. I hope you know what I mean by intangibles

[kcjaysfan]

Is this sarcasm I can't tell. I hope you know what I mean by intangibles

 

Do you know what you mean?

[theblujay]

By event.

 

So if I player hits the first pitch or the 15th pitch for a single its the same?

 

A 3-1 that scrapes the wall and a 0-2 HR on a good pitch to the 2nd deck is the same?

 

If so, that's my problem with it.

[GD]

So if I player hits the first pitch or the 15th pitch for a single its the same?

 

A 3-1 that scrapes the wall and a 0-2 HR on a good pitch to the 2nd deck is the same?

 

If so, that's my problem with it.

 

They're fair gripes. It doesn't matter because clutch is ******** though.

[theblujay]

None of this is even remotely relevant - it will all show up in the results.

 

How long will it take for it to show up in the results.

[theblujay]

I don't even really know what you're arguing to be honest. Clutch factor is a measure of a player's performance in high-leverage situations vs. own performance in context-neutral situations. For this purpose, all that matters is the result.

 

I thought you were implying that in the two scenarios I made above that the superior player would benefit from having better ABs in the long run because their stats would normalize. How long do you think that would take?