[wilfra]

The geeks are winning that culture clash. ESPN.com now includes a lot of advanced metrics in their stats and last year in the Mike Trout vs Miguel Cabrera MVP race they discussed why Mike Trout was the favorite of the new school at length, constantly discussing his obscene WAR[1].

Nate Silver was ahead of his time on those advanced metrics but he was undoubtedly one of the pioneers. If people had been more receptive to his brand of statistics five years ago he likely never even goes into politics. Sports was his first love (along with poker, which he goes out of his way to not mention these days, unfortunately. He even obscured his username on the largest poker forum[2], so it would be harder to find with search engines).

Completely random thought that probably means nothing, but is worth noting: he's openly gay[3]. With the tide on gay athletes turning sharply and quickly, I have to think that factored into his decision. Perhaps he is hopeful he can play a role in that, being the champion of the gay athlete or at least the one guy at ESPN they know will be on their side.

[1]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wins_Above_Replacement

[2]http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/members/4548/

[3]http://gawker.com/5969477/sexually-gay-but-ethnically-straig...

[clarky07]

slightly off topic, but it's absurd to think that Trout should have won the MVP, when Cabrera was the first Triple Crown winner in 45 years. I don't care what his WAR was.

[wilfra]

That was the old school argument, verbatim. The new school disagrees. I don't really have an opinion but I'm pretty certain Nate agrees with the new school and would disagree strongly with your view.

The new school argument is something like: the Triple Crown is an overvalued and superficial accomplishment and giving a player the MVP based solely on that is making a similar error to the scenes in Moneyball where the scouts cared about irrelevant things like whether a player has an attractive girlfriend or how he gets on base (walks vs hits).

[clarky07]

WAR is a nice stat as far as a general manager is concerned (or for fantasy), but it shouldn't decide who is the MVP. Last year Cabrera had the best hitting season anyone has had in decades. He finished 4th in WAR because of various weightings given to defense, baserunning, position played, and the bizarre and nebulous "replacement player." WAR is also sadly calculated differently by everyone, making it harder to judge as a useful metric. A single + SB is calculated as being worth more than a double. Why?

I have no problem with using WAR as something to include in the discussion, but it should not be the complete deciding factor.

Interesting side note, apparently Oakland's (famous for using sabermetrics) model for WAR had Cabrera on top - http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1570961-mike-trout-vs-mig...