AL Most Valuable Player

Ever since the possibility of a Miguel Cabrera Triple Crown emerged late in the season, people have been debating the American League Most Valuable Player Award. What started as a hypothetical (if Miggy wins the Triple Crown, is he the MVP?) became a reality as Miguel Cabrera actually won the American League Triple Crown, the first since Carl Yastrzemski (I can spell Roethlisberger at this point, but I had to look that one up) in 1967.

But you already knew all that - so let's get started.

The Case For Miggy

This one is pretty simple. Miguel Cabrera led the league in Home Runs (44), RBI (139) and Batting Average (.330) en route to the Triple Crown. With those stats one could make a very strong case that he was the best hitter in the American League (i.e. baseball) especially considering he also led in Slugging and OPS.

Miguel Cabrera's team also made the playoffs and played very well down the stretch hitting .333/.395/.675 with 11 homers in September. 

The Case For Trout

This one is also simple. Mike Trout hit .326/.399/.564 and led the league in stolen bases (49) runs (129) and OPS+ (171).  And that's just with the bat and legs as Trout also played a mean CF. Add it up and Trout led all of baseball in fWAR (10.0).

The Choice

Miguel Cabrera had a MVP-type season but he's no Mike Trout. Winning the Triple Crown is an awesome achievement and it will go down in history but it doesn't have to translate to being the best player in the league or the most valuable player in the league. Miguel Cabrera  led the AL in three arbitrary hitting stats but he wasn't necessarily even the best hitter in the AL. 

Let me explain. Context is pretty important as all parks aren't created equal. We know about Coors Field and Petco Park and how different their hitting environments are. Well, while Comerica Park (Detroit) and the Angel Stadium of Anaheim don't have as stark of a difference they are clearly different hitting environments. Comerica is often thought of as a pitchers park but that reputation isn't based on fact since it actually leans towards being a hitters park. The Angels Park meanwhile has been quite the pitchers park, previous reputations be damned.

Miguel Cabrera led the league in OPS, but every OPS isn't created equal. If we look at Adjusted OPS, or OPS+ which accounts for the league and park that you play in, we find that Mike Trout led the league (171) with Miguel Cabrera finishing second (165). Further, if we use other adjusted hitting stats, like wRC+ we find that both Miggy and Trout led the league with 166 wRC+.

Considering that Mike Trout plays a more demanding position, and plays it exceedingly well, the case for Miggy relies on his bat. When you then realize that Miggy's bat wasn't actually any better than Mike Trout, the case for Miggy falls apart...

Unless you care more about the 'intangibles' and the fact that the Tigers made the playoffs with Miggy playing well down the stretch while the Angels missed out on post-season baseball with a struggling Trout. I'll admit, it is a fact that the Tigers made the playoffs. It's also a fact that the Angels had more wins in a tougher division. While Miggy played great in September (180 wRC+), Trout was no slouch (152 wRC+).

All else equal, team record could be a deciding factor but all else isn't equal. It's not even close. Mike Trout hits better, plays a tougher position, plays it better and runs the bases better than anyone in baseball.

I'd love to say case closed, but unfortunately the feeling is that Miggy is going to win the award. The other feeling is that in 10 years we will look back on this debate and wonder while it even occurred.

UPDATE: Still not convinced Trout had a better season at the plate? Check this out.

UPDATE 3:16 PM: Maybe you don't agree with me, but what about Nate Silver?