What a fucking asshole.
What a fucking asshole.
I really doubt he'd be able to afford $700K. Most people couldn't. Hopefully he has to do extensive community service to help beautify the city rather than aid in trashing it.
Would you rather where this or a JaMarcus Russell Raiders jersey? Wow... just... wow...
Easily the Rocker jersey. Rocker was actually pretty good until he started talking crap to the media people. JaMarcus was never good.
Don't the Marlins historically wait until after they win the World Series to do this type of thing?
Yes, please excise A-Rod from the Bronx.
AL Cy Young = David Price
NL Cy Young = R.A. Dickey
The new school thinking loses: Cabrera wins MVP.
Mike Trout is a better player than Miguel Cabrera.
And Miguel Cabrera is a drunken wife beater.
As long as defense and baserunning don't count, it was well-deserved.
Yeah, it's not like Miguel Cabrera carried his team to the playoffs (Trout disappeared in September). I know how making the post-season, RBIs/HRs/BA are irrelevant to Trout fans though.
Which team ended the season with a better record, the Angels or the Tigers?
I think the Triple Crown is interesting for historical reasons. Even setting aside the fact that we aren't supposed to take RBIs too seriously any more, it's still impressive. But all that aside, when you compare the offensive numbers, I don't see much difference in the quality produced by the two players. And I'm not talking future-age nerd stats, either. The baserunning and defense was overwhelmingly in Trout's favor.
For me, the team argument actually tips in Trout's favor when you consider that his team a) played at a 95-win pace with him on the roster, and b) still finished with a better record than Cabrera's team did.
Which is more important? Making the post-season or having a better record?
Apparently playing in a shit division = MVP? ok.
Cabrera was more valuable to the Tigers this season than Trout was to the Angels.
Mike Trout was more valuable to Major League Baseball than Miguel Cabrera was to Major League Baseball.
Says baby sandwich
Hey, at a certain level, I'm very sympathetic to the "did your team make the postseason?" argument when it comes to the baseball MVP. I think it's a credible argument to make, and I would be hesitant to ever support a guy who played on a sub .500 team, and I am also more reluctant to support a guy whose team missed the playoffs in favor of a similarly-situated player whose team did. But here, its clear the reason Detroit got into the postseason was because it was playing in a division so poor that no one managed to put together a record as good as three other teams in each of the other two divisions.
The baseball bat was more valuable to Major League Baseball than Trout or Cabrera
Nate Silver Votes Mike Trout Over Miguel Cabrera
cabrera won the triple crown and was raking down thedit = oh fucke stretch and in the two playoff series they won. he played like shit in the world series and they lost.
edit - oh fuck
As someone who likes the Angels and a big Trout fan, Cabrera won the MVP the last day of the season when he still went out and played instead of sitting out and protecting his Triple Crown. Can you make a case for Trout? Absolutely but look past the biased opinion for Trout and realize Cabrera did something that hasn't been done in 45 years and yes he deserved the MVP.
Also Cabrera only missed one game the entire season. Trout obviously missed more, granted he wasn't called up until 20 games into the season so it isn't his fault, but it's still something that you also have to consider.
Baseball seasons aren't comparable from year to year. Pitching changes. Ballparks change. Drugs that everyone is secretly using change.Quote:
It may seem hard to argue against a player who won the triple crown. But Cabrera’s numbers, while worthy of an M.V.P. award in many seasons, weren’t historically great. His batting average, R.B.I. and home run totals would also have qualified for the American League’s triple crown in 2008. Before that, however, you would have to go back to 1972 to find a year in which his numbers were good enough to lead the league in all three categories.
Trout clearly was the better all-around player, statistically, but the MVP isn't about that. At best you can say, without Trout's contributions, the Angels would have also not made the playoffs?