If the Angels call you up and say, “I’ll trade Mike Trout for your best player,” don’t you say yes without thinking?
Justin Verlander may think this because Miguel Cabrera’s defense hasn’t hurt him much, as Justin’s ERA is lower than his FIP.
Hat tip, BBTF.
Given the salary cost & years left in their careers, yes you trade Miggy for Mike. Fewer dollars per win for the next few years.
Isn’t there already an award for best offensive player? Doesn’t most valuable player imply something more; who was most valuable in getting his team to where it is at the the end of the season? Which would imply that you need to be in the post-season, otherwise no matter what you did didn’t help the team (looking at you Andre Dawson voters, though I’d make an exception for 1972 Steve Carlton.)
If Detroit makes the post season and the Angels don’t, Cabrera gets it. Vice versa, and it goes to Trout. If it’s both/neither, then I go to the triple crown tie breaker. Miguel achieves it, he’s MVP.
On the other hand, given the Yankees pitiful offense since August, Derek Jeter has been extremely valuable to the Yankees.
rbj » Miguel is the better offensive player. Trout just kills him, however, in running and fielding. Miguel is negative in both. There should be no tie breaker here.
What if your best player is a young ace pitcher, like Kershaw or King Felix? For any position player over the age of 25, the answer would almost certainly be “yes”–even if he blew out his knees tomorrow and was done you’d still be able to mitigate the damage with the millions of saved salary.
Cabrera defenders have been trying to give him Doug Flynn Memorial Grand Slam Intangible points for being willing to take a more difficult defensive position to get another bat into the lineup, even if the actual defensive result isn’t pretty.