 |
| Ryan Sandberg |
This article prompted me to think a bit about relating sports to ideas discussed in class. The obvious way was to incorporate dirty hands with steroids in baseball, but then I read an article by one of my favorite journalists, Terry Foster.
 |
| Mike Trout |
In regards to the race, Foster claims, "It is sabermetrics versus old-school baseball reference. If the old-school thinking is more powerful than we think, then Triple Crown winner Cabrera should win. If the new kids on the black have gone behind closed doors to take over baseball, then Trout wins."
 |
| Miguel Cabrera |
To understand why Trout supporters can be seen as liberal, you have to understand what sabermetrics is and what it represents. Sabermetrics involves a number of new, more advanced statistics that can be used to analyze baseball players. The most important of these statistics is Wins Above Replacement (WAR), which analyzes the amount of wins a player contributes to his team versus a minor league replacement player. A WAR of 10 means a player contributes 10 more wins than a replacement player.
This way of thinking about a player's contribution to the team is completely new. It can even be considered a type of "French Revolution". It does not build upon any stats used in the past. It does not build upon any sort of baseball tradition. Sabermetrics was first used by current Oakland A's General Manager Billy Beane, as anyone who has seen Moneyball knows. Due to Billy Beane's success, many other teams have begun to employ sabermetrics. The following clip from Moneyball will help illustrate how revolutionary sabermetrics is
In this clip Jonah Hill's character Peter Brand essentially says that all the teams of the past have been doing it wrong. They've been looking at players and statistics wrong, and says they're stuck in an old way of thinking. He suggests a better way of analyzing players.
Back to the MVP race, Trout supporters cite WAR as the reason why he should win MVP. Trout had a WAR of 10.7, which is the 13th highest WAR since 1900 by any American League position player. Cabrera's WAR was only 6.7. The liberal thinkers who support WAR and sabermetrics would take Trout over Cabrera every time.
Cabrera supporters bring up the fact that Cabrera won the triple crown, which means he led the league in batting average, runs batted in, and home runs. These are the classic stats that baseball followers have always used. They point out that the triple crown is a feet accomplished in the past only by Hall of Famers. In his article, Foster also argues how Cabrera consistently has a better average than Trout in late innings. He points out that past sports superstars like Michael Jordan and John Elway would not be considered so highly if not for their late game heroics. These ideas are all consistent with a Burkean conservative point of view. Tradition and the past trump all.
So what do you guys think? Is supporting Cabrera the equivalent of being a Burkean conservative in terms of baseball? Is sabermetrics a liberal undertaking? Was Cabrera the true MVP of the American league?
I totally agree that the AL MVP race took on a conservative vs. liberal nature. I am a big baseball fan, and late in the season I was finding myself in the argument a lot. The end of the baseball season coincides pretty closely with the ramping up of people's political discussions in an election year. I found that people arguing for Trout were usually Democrats, and people arguing for Cabrera were usually Republicans. Obviously this observation is anecdotal and uses a small sample set, but it makes sense. Liberals, or Democrats, are more willing to accept change (a conservative might argue too eager to change.) In this case the change is to a new way to evaluate a baseball players' value. Conservatives tend more to resist change i.e. stick to BA/HR/RBI.
ReplyDeleteOff the polisci topic, Trout was more valuable, I think. Cabrera is a better hitter, which is the only thing that traditional stats measure. However, The extent to which he is better at hitting is dwarfed by the extent to which Trout is better defensively and on the basepaths. These are things that the new stats measure that the old stats didn't.
I do agree with the idea that supporting Cabrera can be equated to Burkean conservatism. This is because of the way that it seems Cabrera beat out Mike Trout. Obviously, Cabrera had a great season in winning the triple crown, as he led three major statistical categories. However, as you are saying, and as pointed out in moneyball, maybe these statistics are not analyzing the right things. Maybe these statistics are used because they have always been used. I'm not a huge baseball fan, so I don't know how strong this new sabermetrics is at analyzing a player's worth. But from what I can see baseball tends to be a sport shaped by tradition. The huge controversy created by players who have taken steroids is all a product of the traditional way of playing baseball being challenged. Baseball fans and analysts it seems hate the idea of someone having an edge over past players. This is true of many sports as no one likes to see their childhood idol's achievements overshadowed by young,relatively new players.
ReplyDeleteNevertheless, I feel like the question of what exactly the MVP is supposed to signify needs to be answered. If it is the player with the best overall stats then likely Cabrera should have one. If it is the player that was most instrumental in helping their team win games, and this new WAR stat is able to predict this accurately, then Trout should have one. Before this is done it is hard to say for sure whether or not baseball demonstrated it being stuck in the past and favoring a more Burkean way of thinking in terms of who the best player is.
Brett,
ReplyDeleteI definitely agree with your post. I believe that baseball in itself is the most tradition oriented game played in America. While other sports, like Football, may have surpassed baseball in pure popularity, baseball is a tradition engrained heavily in the history of our country. This being said I enjoy your Burkean assessment of the situation. I tend to think, because of baseball's past, most things will be decided on a conservative basis. You used the WAR stat as an example of liberalism in baseball. This stat is relatively new, yet is talked about heavily and well-known already. People knew how much better Trout's WAR was than Cabrera's, yet the people in power chose Cabrera anyways. This is because he won the Triple Crown, a feat so historic and laden with tradition that baseball could not ignore it. I think the label of Burkean Conservatism is perfect for the state of Baseball today.