Can Cody Bellinger hold off Mike Trout?

[Angelsjunky]

Only fake nerds use bWAR. Real nerds use fWAR.

[Taylor]

I prefer BR's stats pages over FanGraphs'. But I ignore BR's WAR.

[ScottT]

3 minutes ago, Taylor said:

I prefer BR's stats pages over FanGraphs'. But I ignore BR's WAR.

Ha. Same here.

[Pancake Bear]

2 hours ago, happybat4 said:

It wasn't a tie though. Betts was leading.

Only on the basis of defense, which analytics guys admit isn’t perfect. On offense, Trout indisputably was ahead. 

 

[ScottT]

Plus, Betts plays a different position.  So, things get weird.

I have no problem with Betts winning last year though. It was close, offensively, too.   Betts was ahead in wRC 139 to 136.  Trout was ahead 191 to 185 in wRC+.   Betts was ahead .449 to .447 in wOBA.    You could go on.  It was all close except WPA.

[Pancake Bear]

6 hours ago, ScottT said:

Plus, Betts plays a different position.  So, things get weird.

I have no problem with Betts winning last year though. It was close, offensively, too.   Betts was ahead in wRC 139 to 136.  Trout was ahead 191 to 185 in wRC+.   Betts was ahead .449 to .447 in wOBA.    You could go on.  It was all close except WPA.

There’s a reason nobody cites wRC or wOBA - they aren’t widely considered very highly. But yeah, at the end of the day, Betts winning isn’t that big of a deal. It isn’t a total joke like 2012 or 2015(? Or whichever year Donaldson won). 

[bloodbrother]

2012 sucked. The season Trout had was far more rare than Miggy winning the Triple Crown.

[ScottT]

50 minutes ago, Sean-Regan said:

There’s a reason nobody cites wRC or wOBA - they aren’t widely considered very highly. But yeah, at the end of the day, Betts winning isn’t that big of a deal. It isn’t a total joke like 2012 or 2915(? Or whichever year Donaldson won). 

It was all close

 Betts was worthy

[Pancake Bear]

37 minutes ago, bloodbrother said:

2012 sucked. The season Trout had was far more rare than Miggy winning the Triple Crown.

1 steal short of 30/50. Only two guys have done that. No idea how many have been one away. Would imagine it's a small list. There have been ten occasions where a player hit the triple crown in a season since 1930 and six since 1940. Both guys were in a playoff chase, but the Angels finished one game better - Tigers made the playoffs because their division was crap, while the Angels finished third and went home. Trout's WAR was nearly 3 points higher. Offensively they were fairly close, depending on what stats you prefer. Defense and base-running, Trout was top of the league in 2012 while Miggy was among the least valuable in both.

2013 and 2015 were both pretty absurd also. 2017 Trout was injured and still managed to come in like 4th (iirc) despite missing significant time. 2018 was really the only year when someone else winning wasn't a joke. I know some people defend the voters in 2013 and 2015. I do not. But no point in rehashing that. Their position entitles them to vote however they want, whether it's good or not.

[ten ocho recon scout]

5 hours ago, Sean-Regan said:

It isn’t a total joke like 2012 or 2915(? Or whichever year Donaldson won). 

Albert will have at bats on the books in both of those years.

[ten ocho recon scout]

4 hours ago, Sean-Regan said:

1 steal short of 30/50. Only two guys have done that. No idea how many have been one away. Would imagine it's a small list. There have been ten occasions where a player hit the triple crown in a season since 1930 and six since 1940. Both guys were in a playoff chase, but the Angels finished one game better - Tigers made the playoffs because their division was crap, while the Angels finished third and went home. Trout's WAR was nearly 3 points higher. Offensively they were fairly close, depending on what stats you prefer. Defense and base-running, Trout was top of the league in 2012 while Miggy was among the least valuable in both.

2013 and 2015 were both pretty absurd also. 2017 Trout was injured and still managed to come in like 4th (iirc) despite missing significant time. 2018 was really the only year when someone else winning wasn't a joke. I know some people defend the voters in 2013 and 2015. I do not. But no point in rehashing that. Their position entitles them to vote however they want, whether it's good or not.

Reference the 30/50. There was a steal of 2B against the dodgers where trout was clearly safe, but ruled out. (Only caught 4 times that year i think). Thats always going to bug me. Because like you said, it was so rare. (Today, replay would have corrected it)

Trout should have absolutely been mvp that year. But its cool to step back and realize that year changed baseball. It finally forced the old school to reevaluate and bring in the new school in terms of value.

Off the top of my head (AO, clean this up if needed), cabrera had the netter BA to trout having the higher OBP. Cabrera had more home runs, trout more total bases and extra base hits. Cabrera had more rbi to trout leading in runs scored.

Then you factor in one was a beast on the basepaths, the other a liability. Plus defense at CF vs passable at 3B (maybe 1B).

The old school crowd couldnt accept the sacred cow of triple crown meaning less than other things. The fall back argument for talk radio types was "one led his team to the playoffs, the other didnt". 

Angels had a better record than detroit, and the best record in mlb once trout arrived. 

Again. Trout got robbed. But that year, he changed baseball.

Edited July 14, 2019 by ten ocho recon scout

[AngelsLakersFan]

7 hours ago, ten ocho recon scout said:

Reference the 30/50. There was a steal of 2B against the dodgers where trout was clearly safe, but ruled out. (Only caught 4 times that year i think). Thats always going to bug me. Because like you said, it was so rare. (Today, replay would have corrected it)

Trout should have absolutely been mvp that year. But its cool to step back and realize that year changed baseball. It finally forced the old school to reevaluate and bring in the new school in terms of value.

Off the top of my head (AO, clean this up if needed), cabrera had the netter BA to trout having the higher OBP. Cabrera had more home runs, trout more total bases and extra base hits. Cabrera had more rbi to trout leading in runs scored.

Then you factor in one was a beast on the basepaths, the other a liability. Plus defense at CF vs passable at 3B (maybe 1B).

The old school crowd couldnt accept the sacred cow of triple crown meaning less than other things. The fall back argument for talk radio types was "one led his team to the playoffs, the other didnt". 

Angels had a better record than detroit, and the best record in mlb once trout arrived. 

Again. Trout got robbed. But that year, he changed baseball.

It drives me crazy when people cite the triple crown. It was literally like giving the game ball to the guy who hit for the cycle over the guy who hit 4 homeruns.

[ten ocho recon scout]

1 hour ago, AngelsLakersFan said:

It drives me crazy when people cite the triple crown. It was literally like giving the game ball to the guy who hit for the cycle over the guy who hit 4 homeruns.

Good way to put it.

I honestly wonder if say cabrera didnt get the triple crown, if he still wins? Lets say he had identical numbers. But pujols that year didnt start off slow, and hit one more home run, or one more rbi than him. 

Same numbers, no title attached to it. Would he still have beat trout? 

It was one of those things that seemed scripted. At the time, the old school view was still pretty firmly entrenched in baseball. If cabrera didnt win the triple crown and trout won, their would almost be an asterisk for old school types. "He won, but if mcab his one more homerun, he would have been the winner". And think about how silly that is.

Id say as time passed, many who argued back then cabrera was the winner might have a different take today.