Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(RotoExperts)   Miguel Cabrera may win the AL Triple Crown but someone else in the AL had a better year. Wait... What?   (rotoexperts.com) divider line 612
    More: Interesting, fantasy baseball, Fantasy Baseball MVP, AL Triple Crown, Miguel Cabrera, American League, MVP, fantasy, Carl Yastrzemski  
•       •       •

2769 clicks; posted to Sports » on 02 Oct 2012 at 11:51 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



612 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-10-02 08:33:42 PM  

Sandor at the Zoo: It's no stretch to say that sabermetrics is the reason why I love the game of baseball now more than I ever have before.


This is absolutely true for me as well. I kinda liked baseball as a kid, though I actually liked basketball more. Eventually I started watching baseball games at night mostly as a way to distract myself from boring school work. If I missed a game, eh, I'll live.

Then I read Moneyball.

Then my team won the world series, using some of the stuff from...Moneyball.

Then I read just about everything I could find, starting with the works of Bill James. And now I generally plan things like work schedules around the Sox, because I don't WANT to miss any games.
 
2012-10-02 08:35:14 PM  
And as an addendum, I talk to my mom about baseball just about every night. She talks about how much she loves Jacoby, and how much Aceves annoys her, and how Bobby V is killing this team.

I guarantee she doesn't have a clue what WAR is. And that's just fine.
 
2012-10-02 08:39:41 PM  

DeWayne Mann: Sandor at the Zoo: It's no stretch to say that sabermetrics is the reason why I love the game of baseball now more than I ever have before.

This is absolutely true for me as well. I kinda liked baseball as a kid, though I actually liked basketball more. Eventually I started watching baseball games at night mostly as a way to distract myself from boring school work. If I missed a game, eh, I'll live.

Then I read Moneyball.

Then my team won the world series, using some of the stuff from...Moneyball.

Then I read just about everything I could find, starting with the works of Bill James. And now I generally plan things like work schedules around the Sox, because I don't WANT to miss any games.


Yeah, I meant to leave after that verbal vomit but I can't help myself. You're all guys, I'm just the dumb chick, I'm out. Debating politics with feckingmorons is way more enjoyable anyway.
 
2012-10-02 08:42:42 PM  

Nehllah: DeWayne Mann: Sandor at the Zoo: It's no stretch to say that sabermetrics is the reason why I love the game of baseball now more than I ever have before.

This is absolutely true for me as well. I kinda liked baseball as a kid, though I actually liked basketball more. Eventually I started watching baseball games at night mostly as a way to distract myself from boring school work. If I missed a game, eh, I'll live.

Then I read Moneyball.

Then my team won the world series, using some of the stuff from...Moneyball.

Then I read just about everything I could find, starting with the works of Bill James. And now I generally plan things like work schedules around the Sox, because I don't WANT to miss any games.

Yeah, I meant to leave after that verbal vomit but I can't help myself. You're all guys, I'm just the dumb chick, I'm out. Debating politics with feckingmorons is way more enjoyable anyway.


How staggeringly poor was your reading of my response, and the response of Dewayne Mann. Like, you could not have responded in a more tone-deaf fashion.
 
2012-10-02 08:42:49 PM  

Nehllah: DeWayne Mann: Sandor at the Zoo: It's no stretch to say that sabermetrics is the reason why I love the game of baseball now more than I ever have before.

This is absolutely true for me as well. I kinda liked baseball as a kid, though I actually liked basketball more. Eventually I started watching baseball games at night mostly as a way to distract myself from boring school work. If I missed a game, eh, I'll live.

Then I read Moneyball.

Then my team won the world series, using some of the stuff from...Moneyball.

Then I read just about everything I could find, starting with the works of Bill James. And now I generally plan things like work schedules around the Sox, because I don't WANT to miss any games.

Yeah, I meant to leave after that verbal vomit but I can't help myself. You're all guys, I'm just the dumb chick, I'm out. Debating politics with feckingmorons is way more enjoyable anyway.


[well...bye.jpg]
 
2012-10-02 08:43:49 PM  

Sandor at the Zoo: How staggeringly poor was your reading of my response, and the response of Dewayne Mann. Like, you could not have responded in a more tone-deaf fashion.


I doubt she read it.
 
2012-10-02 08:46:39 PM  

DeWayne Mann: Sandor at the Zoo: How staggeringly poor was your reading of my response, and the response of Dewayne Mann. Like, you could not have responded in a more tone-deaf fashion.

I doubt she read it.


I did read it. I meant my own verbal vomit, it was embarrassing.
 
2012-10-02 08:48:06 PM  

Nehllah: Yeah, I meant to leave after that verbal vomit but I can't help myself. You're all guys, I'm just the dumb chick, I'm out.


No one called or referred to you as "the dumb chick", but I did find it amusing that it was "the chick" who whipped out her metaphorical wang and measured just how longer it was much she loved baseball more than the guy who, after spending this much time in thread, obviously HATES the sport and just really loves spreadsheets.

Sorry, but I don't see where the hell that came from. Some weirdos on the net disagreed with you. The horror.
 
2012-10-02 08:48:16 PM  

DeWayne Mann: sab6300: DeWayne Mann: Dafatone: Oh man oh man. In my dream world, we're putting "Fangraphs is a big fan of Hernandez, though, so he probably was pretty good." on his HoF plaque.

Well it's not like I saw him play in person. I was like 4 when he retired. What else could I have said?

You mean you would want to see him play before making an opinion on the subject. Holy shiat PROGRESS!

I never said that watching a guy play is a bad thing. Scouting is integral to the game.

What I said is that anecdotes aren't data. Your anecdotes aren't any better than mine, so why bring them up?

Dafatone: I was also 4. So all my clamoring for him is based on hearsay.

Hooray!


I agree mine wouldn't be any better than yours assuming we've seen the same amount of baseball over the years. But I find it weird you wouldn't trust someone with way more experience. Like you just said scouting is a big part of the game. A lot of what scouts look for beyond the raw numbers is the X factor that can't be quantified.

At the end of the day it comes down to opinion. To bring it full circle it only matters what the old geezers writing about baseball everyday think.

I'll continue to love the game for all the reasons that never make it to the box score.
 
2012-10-02 08:49:10 PM  

Nehllah: I did read it. I meant my own verbal vomit, it was embarrassing.


Oh, ok, apologies. It seemed like you were saying what we said was verbal vomit.

Apology accepted.
 
2012-10-02 08:49:25 PM  

Nehllah: I did read it. I meant my own verbal vomit, it was embarrassing.


Oh, fair enough then. Disregard my last comment. That was totally not me and it was my...uh...cat who jumped on my keyboard.
 
2012-10-02 08:53:59 PM  

sab6300: But I find it weird you wouldn't trust someone with way more experience.


I would, to some degree. I greatly, greatly respect guys like Kevin Goldstein. I just highly, highly doubt there are any scouts with 30 years experience hanging out on fark today. There's even a guy who IS on fark (that I won't name, though I think we all know) who works for MLB, and I don't think I'd even trust his anecdotes.

But you know what? Experienced scouts are wrong an awful lot, too. Look at the draft.

So even if the world's greatest scout (maybe he looks like Clint Eastwood) came over to me and said "You know, David Eckstein is a far better player than Dustin Pedroia," well....there's an awful lot out there to disagree with him.
 
2012-10-02 08:54:35 PM  

Killer Cars: Nehllah: I did read it. I meant my own verbal vomit, it was embarrassing.

Oh, fair enough then. Disregard my last comment. That was totally not me and it was my...uh...cat who jumped on my keyboard.


You mean your mom's cat.
 
2012-10-02 08:58:00 PM  

sab6300: I'll continue to love the game for all the reasons that never make it to the box score.


Trust me, we all do as well. I don't literally jerk off at night to Mike Trout's WAR or a bunch of other gaudy sabermetrics, and I "appreciate" (for lack of a better word) on a warm and fuzzy holistic level a lot of simple nuances of the game way more than, well, stats.

The latter however are, to me, more fun to argue or debate with then "hey, that change-up Greg Maddux threw in a fastball count was awesome!" I mean, a great pitch selection IS awesome, but, it's not exactly something you can espouse sheer verbosity over with other people for a length of time without wandering in strange directions and veering off course. Stats can provide a framework and guidelines.
 
2012-10-02 09:00:39 PM  

DeWayne Mann: You mean your mom's cat.


Actually, it was Schrödinger's. I cat-sit for Austrian physicists from time to time.
 
2012-10-02 09:01:16 PM  

Killer Cars: sab6300: I'll continue to love the game for all the reasons that never make it to the box score.

Trust me, we all do as well. I don't literally jerk off at night to Mike Trout's WAR or a bunch of other gaudy sabermetrics, and I "appreciate" (for lack of a better word) on a warm and fuzzy holistic level a lot of simple nuances of the game way more than, well, stats.

The latter however are, to me, more fun to argue or debate with then "hey, that change-up Greg Maddux threw in a fastball count was awesome!" I mean, a great pitch selection IS awesome, but, it's not exactly something you can espouse sheer verbosity over with other people for a length of time without wandering in strange directions and veering off course. Stats can provide a framework and guidelines.


And it's worth noting that a lot of the newer stats actually do a really good job at capturing a lot of those simple nuances, making it even easier to check them out.

Look at the PitchF/X stuff at brooksbaseball, for instance. My Grandmother would've sold his soul to get that stuff 50 years ago.
 
2012-10-02 09:02:30 PM  

Killer Cars: DeWayne Mann: You mean your mom's cat.

Actually, it was Schrödinger's. I cat-sit for Austrian physicists from time to time.


Hold on a second. Technically, a mom's basement is a sort of box.

I don't want to alarm you, but there may be a poison gas capsule and a radioactive isotope hidden somewhere nearby.
 
2012-10-02 09:08:38 PM  
Meh. Ted Williams had a triple-crown year and lost the MVP to some singles hitter from a bigger market.
 
2012-10-02 09:11:09 PM  

lilbjorn: Meh. Ted Williams had a triple-crown year and lost the MVP to some singles hitter from a bigger market.


Like I said, the '34 AL MVP was ever better.

Gehrig won the Triple Crown, but lost to a guy who

1. Played in significantly fewer games
2. Had slightly worse hitting stats
3. Had more defensive value
4. Played for a team with a slightly better record

The difference, of course, was that everyone was in the same division, so the team with the better record ALSO made the playoffs.
 
2012-10-02 09:11:25 PM  

DeWayne Mann: sab6300: But I find it weird you wouldn't trust someone with way more experience.

I would, to some degree. I greatly, greatly respect guys like Kevin Goldstein. I just highly, highly doubt there are any scouts with 30 years experience hanging out on fark today. There's even a guy who IS on fark (that I won't name, though I think we all know) who works for MLB, and I don't think I'd even trust his anecdotes.

But you know what? Experienced scouts are wrong an awful lot, too. Look at the draft.

So even if the world's greatest scout (maybe he looks like Clint Eastwood) came over to me and said "You know, David Eckstein is a far better player than Dustin Pedroia," well....there's an awful lot out there to disagree with him.


Absolutely it's far from and exact science. And I guess that's the difference between us. I love sitting down with seasoned fans and talking baseball. I respect their opinion because they've see guys I'll only read about.

My grandfather has been around baseball his whole life (amateur and pro) so when he tells me something I usually listen. I get it that it doesn't make what he says right or wrong, it's just an observation. But for some reason those story's feel more real to me than cold stat lines.

CSB. One time at Oriole Park Adam Jones was dogging it on a ground ball. This was the days of bad baseball in Baltimore and a stadium so quiet you could hear a pin drop. Sitting next to the O's dugout my grandfather said "You're loafing out there Jonesy" The skipper pointed to my grandfather and nodded his head as Jones came back to the dugout.
 
2012-10-02 09:22:33 PM  

sab6300: And I guess that's the difference between us. I love sitting down with seasoned fans and talking baseball. I respect their opinion because they've see guys I'll only read about.


You misunderstand. I do the exact same thing.

The difference between us is that I don't go out and make some sort of larger point about what they tell me.

I used to work for an IT company. Among other things, we'd go to the houses of elderly people. My boss knew I was a big baseball fan, so one day he says "Hey, I've got a big treat for you! Go to this guy's house to fix his computer, and tell him you like baseball."

So I do, and the guy goes "I used to play for the Yankees!"

HOLY CRAP! Now, I'm a Red Sox fan (even brought my hat with me, just in case), but that's cool! So he starts telling me all these stories about Mickey Mantle and Phil Rizzuto and it's great! And then he tells me that a few years back, the local minor league team brought him in as an adviser to talk to a particular blue chip prospect who has having a lot of trouble adjusting to being famous.

Great stuff, right?

...the only problem is, there's absolutely no record of this guy ever playing for the Yankees (or the Senators, who he said he got traded to). That doesn't mean he didn't: maybe he changed his name. Maybe he only got into one game and somehow baseball-reference missed him. Maybe he only played for them in Spring Training. I don't know.

So, you know, I still remember those stories. But if we ever talk about that particular blue chip prospect, there's no way I'm going to bring up the story of when he almost quit because of the fame.

Stats don't change. How we analyze them, yeah, that can change. But the numbers don't.

Memories do.
 
2012-10-02 09:30:32 PM  

DeWayne Mann: sab6300: And I guess that's the difference between us. I love sitting down with seasoned fans and talking baseball. I respect their opinion because they've see guys I'll only read about.

You misunderstand. I do the exact same thing.

The difference between us is that I don't go out and make some sort of larger point about what they tell me.

I used to work for an IT company. Among other things, we'd go to the houses of elderly people. My boss knew I was a big baseball fan, so one day he says "Hey, I've got a big treat for you! Go to this guy's house to fix his computer, and tell him you like baseball."

So I do, and the guy goes "I used to play for the Yankees!"

HOLY CRAP! Now, I'm a Red Sox fan (even brought my hat with me, just in case), but that's cool! So he starts telling me all these stories about Mickey Mantle and Phil Rizzuto and it's great! And then he tells me that a few years back, the local minor league team brought him in as an adviser to talk to a particular blue chip prospect who has having a lot of trouble adjusting to being famous.

Great stuff, right?

...the only problem is, there's absolutely no record of this guy ever playing for the Yankees (or the Senators, who he said he got traded to). That doesn't mean he didn't: maybe he changed his name. Maybe he only got into one game and somehow baseball-reference missed him. Maybe he only played for them in Spring Training. I don't know.

So, you know, I still remember those stories. But if we ever talk about that particular blue chip prospect, there's no way I'm going to bring up the story of when he almost quit because of the fame.

Stats don't change. How we analyze them, yeah, that can change. But the numbers don't.

Memories do.


Why does there have to be a point at all? The story I shared has zero to do with anything, but it's a fun aspect of the game. I love Ken Burn's Baseball series that showed the game behind the numbers.

That stuff will always be more important to me than numbers.
 
2012-10-02 09:36:52 PM  
I think it would be just if the voting was split evenly between the two of them, and they share the award. It happened before- Willie Stargell and Keith Hernandez were the co-MVPs in 1979.
 
2012-10-02 09:37:44 PM  

sab6300: Why does there have to be a point at all?


Hi, welcome to Fark.

What we do here on Fark is argue and disagree and make stupid jokes and some people like to troll.

If you're not trying to do one of those things, perhaps you're in the wrong place.

Otherwise, if you're trying to do one of the latter three things, well, I guess there doesn't need to be a point. But if you're here to do to the first...doesn't a point sorta go hand in hand with that?

So if you're just here to disagree with what people say, go right ahead. Use all the crazy anecdotes you want. Eventually, most people will probably ignore you. Or reply with "CSB."

I'm here to argue (and make stupid jokes).
 
2012-10-02 10:05:30 PM  

DeWayne Mann: Killer Cars: sab6300: I'll continue to love the game for all the reasons that never make it to the box score.

Trust me, we all do as well. I don't literally jerk off at night to Mike Trout's WAR or a bunch of other gaudy sabermetrics, and I "appreciate" (for lack of a better word) on a warm and fuzzy holistic level a lot of simple nuances of the game way more than, well, stats.

The latter however are, to me, more fun to argue or debate with then "hey, that change-up Greg Maddux threw in a fastball count was awesome!" I mean, a great pitch selection IS awesome, but, it's not exactly something you can espouse sheer verbosity over with other people for a length of time without wandering in strange directions and veering off course. Stats can provide a framework and guidelines.

And it's worth noting that a lot of the newer stats actually do a really good job at capturing a lot of those simple nuances, making it even easier to check them out.

Look at the PitchF/X stuff at brooksbaseball, for instance. My Grandmother would've sold his soul to get that stuff 50 years ago.


The fact that you referenced that joke, however many hours later, makes me bow in awe.

Again, I had to read it twice to make sure it was a joke, then once more to figure out what the hell you were talking about.
 
2012-10-02 10:11:23 PM  
Highlights of this thread:

1) Mystique trolls
2) DeWayne Mann's Grandma was Branch Rickey
3) Stats are the end all be all of baseball, but they leave it a soulless husk
4) Mystique troll repentance
5) Mystique troll derp double down
6) Killer Cars' cat is remarkably well spoken
7) We are gonna miss you baseball, come back soon
 
2012-10-02 10:14:06 PM  

DeWayne Mann: I'm here to argue


I'll say one last thing, then leave this thread alone until I get an email alert.

In my perfect world, this is how this thread would've unfolded:

Someone else comes in, uses some decent and well designed stats (but probably not ones that I typically use), and makes a logical case for Cabrera. Something like the following (and note that I'm going to make up a lot of stuff in the next paragraph)

Cabrera has been a significantly better hitter. While Trout might lead in OPS+ and wRC+, Cabrera has a massive lead in TAv! Combined with his advantage in games played, hittingwise, Cabrera has provided far more value (and the gap grows every day). While it's true that Cabrera isn't a great baserunner, with Fielder behind him, he doesn't need to be. And in terms of fielding, FRAA thinks he's significantly closer in value to Trout than either DRS or UZR does, and I think that FRAA makes more sense here because [list of reasons why FRAA might be better]. Finally, I don't think the park factors are quite right. It seems more like an odd 1 year variation. If we use the 3 year factors, that changes things slightly. Overall, while it's close, I think Cabrera is the more valuable player this year.

I WOULD LOVE THIS GUY. I'd still disagree with him, but he'd immediately become one of my favorite posters on the site.

Instead, I got a combination of

1. Highly subjective arguments
2. Bad & misleading stats (RBI, BA, etc)
3. Anecdotes
4. Accusations of Racism

Which, unfortunately, is exactly what I expected.
 
2012-10-02 10:17:07 PM  
Ok, I lied but only because there were two posts while I was typing that up.

roc6783: The fact that you referenced that joke, however many hours later, makes me bow in awe.

Again, I had to read it twice to make sure it was a joke, then once more to figure out what the hell you were talking about.


If I had ANY photoshop skills, I'd totally make a picture of Branch Rickey wearing a dress & bonnet and post it and say it was from a family reunion.

roc6783: Highlights of this thread:


Ah, I was so hoping my crazy ex-Yankee would make the list. I miss that guy.

...don't miss his computer, though. guh.

Ok, NOW i'm closing it 'til I get an email alert.
 
2012-10-02 10:22:50 PM  

sab6300: DeWayne Mann: sab6300: And I guess that's the difference between us. I love sitting down with seasoned fans and talking baseball. I respect their opinion because they've see guys I'll only read about.

You misunderstand. I do the exact same thing.

The difference between us is that I don't go out and make some sort of larger point about what they tell me.

I used to work for an IT company. Among other things, we'd go to the houses of elderly people. My boss knew I was a big baseball fan, so one day he says "Hey, I've got a big treat for you! Go to this guy's house to fix his computer, and tell him you like baseball."

So I do, and the guy goes "I used to play for the Yankees!"

HOLY CRAP! Now, I'm a Red Sox fan (even brought my hat with me, just in case), but that's cool! So he starts telling me all these stories about Mickey Mantle and Phil Rizzuto and it's great! And then he tells me that a few years back, the local minor league team brought him in as an adviser to talk to a particular blue chip prospect who has having a lot of trouble adjusting to being famous.

Great stuff, right?

...the only problem is, there's absolutely no record of this guy ever playing for the Yankees (or the Senators, who he said he got traded to). That doesn't mean he didn't: maybe he changed his name. Maybe he only got into one game and somehow baseball-reference missed him. Maybe he only played for them in Spring Training. I don't know.

So, you know, I still remember those stories. But if we ever talk about that particular blue chip prospect, there's no way I'm going to bring up the story of when he almost quit because of the fame.

Stats don't change. How we analyze them, yeah, that can change. But the numbers don't.

Memories do.

Why does there have to be a point at all? The story I shared has zero to do with anything, but it's a fun aspect of the game. I love Ken Burn's Baseball series that showed the game behind the numbers.

That stuff will always be more importa ...


Just to throw in an old baseball story, one of the coolest things that's happened to me was going to a Yankees game and sitting next to some ancient guy, who proceeds to tell me about how everyone thinks Phil Rizzuto was a great bunter, but really, Frankie Crosetti was better.
 
2012-10-02 10:34:42 PM  

DeWayne Mann: Ok, NOW i'm closing it 'til I get an email alert.


Penis.

HAHA you got an email alert.
 
2012-10-02 10:51:31 PM  

Killer Cars: DeWayne Mann: Ok, NOW i'm closing it 'til I get an email alert.

Penis.

HAHA you got an email alert.


DANGIT

Actually, that took awhile. Email alerts are slow now. Possibly because I have like 100 of them.

Dafatone: Just to throw in an old baseball story, one of the coolest things that's happened to me was going to a Yankees game and sitting next to some ancient guy, who proceeds to tell me about how everyone thinks Phil Rizzuto was a great bunter, but really, Frankie Crosetti was better.


Considering the crazy old guy I was talking about's first name was "Frank," until I read the word Crosetti, I got really worried that this was going to end up being about my guy and make me look dumb.

But no. He wasn't Frankie Crosetti. Though I double checked, JUUST in case.
 
2012-10-02 11:08:02 PM  
IT'S THE farkING TRIPLE CROWN PEOPLE, THERE IS NO ARGUMENT.
 
2012-10-02 11:09:26 PM  
That's right, I saw the +1 next to the thread. Sue me.

Fade2black: IT'S THE farkING TRIPLE CROWN PEOPLE, THERE IS NO ARGUMENT.


Except for the 4 times when the triple crown winner didn't win the MVP, right?
 
2012-10-02 11:15:37 PM  

DeWayne Mann: Except for the 4 times when the triple crown winner didn't win the MVP, right?


Two of those were Ted Williams. Doesn't count.
 
2012-10-02 11:16:35 PM  

DeWayne Mann: That's right, I saw the +1 next to the thread. Sue me.

Fade2black: IT'S THE farkING TRIPLE CROWN PEOPLE, THERE IS NO ARGUMENT.

Except for the 4 times when the triple crown winner didn't win the MVP, right?


So the first Triple Crown in over 45 years means nothing against a rookie with worse stats on a team that isn't making the playoffs?

This is why I turn baseball off once Football starts.
 
2012-10-02 11:16:41 PM  

DeWayne Mann: And as an addendum, I talk to my mom about baseball just about every night. She talks about how much she loves Jacoby, and how much Aceves annoys her, and how Bobby V is killing this team.

I guarantee she doesn't have a clue what WAR is. And that's just fine.


Came back to reread. This stuck out to me.

Why do people say stat studying means that we don't love it. My mom loves her tigers. She'll wear her pink jerseys and try to catch a verlander start everytime she goes back to detroit, and overall loves dingers and wins. My dad loves his angels and scioscia's small ball. I'm getting into statistics, and enjoy watching games but when it comes down to it all three of us love baseball differently. However all three of us attended a no-hitter for a team none of us like and all of us call it the coolest thing we've seen.

We all love it, and trying to call out someone on it is the lowest form of argument.
 
2012-10-02 11:22:22 PM  
Oh I got the email alert much quicker this time. Neat.

The Bestest: DeWayne Mann: Except for the 4 times when the triple crown winner didn't win the MVP, right?

Two of those were Ted Williams. Doesn't count.


But Lou Gehrig has one!

Fade2black: So the first Triple Crown in over 45 years means nothing against a rookie with worse stats on a team that isn't making the playoffs?


First, why does him being a rookie matter at all?

Second, he has SOME worse stats, yes. He's better in others, and not just ones that have been invented in the last 50 years.

Third, and let's be very, very clear, I'm not personally convinced by the following (but I'm not convinced by a Triple Crown either), but

Mike Trout is the first player EVER with

30 HR
47 SB
121 Runs

Isn't that at least as impressive as a Triple Crown? NEVER BEEN DONE.

thecpt: Why do people say stat studying means that we don't love it.


No clue, which is why I said that was, by far the most insulting thing in the thread. Call me a robot. Call me a racist. Call me anti-social.

Don't say I don't love baseball.
 
2012-10-02 11:23:11 PM  
..it took 12 innings on game 161, but the Yankees have FINALLY won a game in which they've trailed after 8
 
2012-10-02 11:24:01 PM  

The Bestest: ..it took 12 innings on game 161, but the Yankees have FINALLY won a game in which they've trailed after 8


Against the Red Sox. Doesn't count.
 
2012-10-02 11:29:01 PM  

Fade2black: So the first Triple Crown in over 45 years means nothing against a rookie with worse stats on a team that isn't making the playoffs?


I've been largely avoiding all the MVP threads, but honestly, this argument right here is DUMB.

The Angels will finish ahead of the Tigers in a MUCH harder division. Being on the team that sucked the least in baseball's suckiest division this year is not a supportive argument for Miggy.
 
2012-10-02 11:33:13 PM  

The Bestest: Fade2black: So the first Triple Crown in over 45 years means nothing against a rookie with worse stats on a team that isn't making the playoffs?

I've been largely avoiding all the MVP threads, but honestly, this argument right here is DUMB.

The Angels will finish ahead of the Tigers in a MUCH harder division. Being on the team that sucked the least in baseball's suckiest division this year is not a supportive argument for Miggy.


Which, of course, also ignores the "baseball is a team game" aspect.

Side note, does anyone remember how many people died during the 2003 "A-rod won MVP for a last place team" riots?
 
2012-10-02 11:38:49 PM  

DeWayne Mann: Side note, does anyone remember how many people died during the 2003 "A-rod won MVP for a last place team" riots?


Actually, I was joking (which was hopefully obvious), but that's an interesting award compared to today.

A-rod led the league in the following stats:

Runs
HR
SLG

That's it. And he played for a last place team.

The guy who won second (though it was close), Carlos Delgado, led in

RBI
OPS
OPS+

as a first baseman for a THIRD place team.

Finally, in third place, we get a playoff player. Posada led in

[crickets]

as catcher for a first place team.
 
2012-10-03 12:13:13 AM  

The Bestest: DeWayne Mann: Except for the 4 times when the triple crown winner didn't win the MVP, right?

Two of those were Ted Williams. Doesn't count.


There were 10 triple crown winners from 1900 to 1947. So, at that time, it might have been a big deal but not an OMG big deal. It happened a couple of times per decade. Considering it hasn't been done in 45 years, it's a real rarity now. I'm sure the specialization of relief pitchers, among other things, make it a much tougher achievement. One that will be rewarded accordingly.
 
2012-10-03 12:15:27 AM  
Time is running out on the Dodgers...
 
2012-10-03 12:17:20 AM  

sigdiamond2000: The Tigers aren't even a .500 team in that sky-is-falling scenario that everyone was sure would play out.


Did anyone honestly think the Tigers wouldn't win the AL Central this year before the season started? I'm a White Sox fan, but even I would have bet the farm on Detroit this season. It looks like all 49 ESPN analysts who posted pre-season predictions thought the same (source). Yahoo agreed. Others possibly as well, but I'm too lazy...

Don't get me wrong, I don't think this is an argument against Cabrera in any way, shape or form, but I honestly hadn't heard anyone suggest the Tigers were anything but a runaway favorite for the division this season before.
 
2012-10-03 12:22:38 AM  

TheMatchHare: Did anyone honestly think the Tigers wouldn't win the AL Central this year before the season started? I'm a White Sox fan, but even I would have bet the farm on Detroit this season. It looks like all 49 ESPN analysts who posted pre-season predictions thought the same (source). Yahoo agreed. Others possibly as well, but I'm too lazy...

Don't get me wrong, I don't think this is an argument against Cabrera in any way, shape or form, but I honestly hadn't heard anyone suggest the Tigers were anything but a runaway favorite for the division this season before.


Oh, Tigers were the clear pre-season favorite, but that's not the issue here. The Indians led mid-season and the Tigers were 3 back of the White Sox just two weeks ago.
Everyone knew the AL Central would suck this year, but everyone was also expecting the Tigers to play just average and run away with the division because the rest of it sucked that bad. No one expected the Tigers to kinda suck along with them.
 
2012-10-03 12:22:39 AM  

DeWayne Mann: Killer Cars: DeWayne Mann: Ok, NOW i'm closing it 'til I get an email alert.

Penis.

HAHA you got an email alert.

DANGIT

Actually, that took awhile. Email alerts are slow now. Possibly because I have like 100 of them.

Dafatone: Just to throw in an old baseball story, one of the coolest things that's happened to me was going to a Yankees game and sitting next to some ancient guy, who proceeds to tell me about how everyone thinks Phil Rizzuto was a great bunter, but really, Frankie Crosetti was better.

Considering the crazy old guy I was talking about's first name was "Frank," until I read the word Crosetti, I got really worried that this was going to end up being about my guy and make me look dumb.

But no. He wasn't Frankie Crosetti. Though I double checked, JUUST in case.


My crazy old baseball guy story involves a guy who never made it ppast what would be considered AA these days.

Steve Dalkowski, who apparently could throw upwards of 115 mph, used to hang out with my grandfather and the usherss at AA games in New Britain, CT. He used to tell stories of striking out every famed ball player from the fifties and sixties, during spring training games.

He's also a raging alcoholic, but awesome to talk baseball with.
 
2012-10-03 12:30:53 AM  

ChrisDe: I'm sure the specialization of relief pitchers, among other things, make it a much tougher achievement


How do you figure?

We're not talking about something like a .400 hitter, where you need to hit a specific amount.

There's always a leader in average, always a leader in RBI, always a leader in HR. Why would relievers prevent players from leading in all three, especially considering there's a strong connection between HR & RBI?

One possible explanation has to do with the increase in offense, particularly HR. If people are hitting more HR IN GENERAL, it stands to reason that it's less likely that the leader in average is the leader in HR.

But perhaps even more likely is something far simpler: expansion. More starting players means smaller likelihood that a player leads in HR & BA, which are not as strongly connected.

This all, of course, ignores that the Triple Crown is only the Triple Crown because some guys really liked it 100 years ago, but...

TheMatchHare: I honestly hadn't heard anyone suggest the Tigers were anything but a runaway favorite for the division this season before.


Yeah, the only thing that "surprised" people was how bad the team ERA was. Mostly because most people don't actually realize what ERA means...
 
2012-10-03 12:33:02 AM  

professorkowalski: AA games in New Britain, CT


All I have to say about this is


GO NAVIGATORS!
 
2012-10-03 12:37:41 AM  
uh oh.. Dodgers aren't going quietly into that cold night just yet
 
Displayed 50 of 612 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report