BP Unfiltered

Colin, my view is that the third category is intended to be applied to the games on the field. In other words, "general character" matters to the extent it matters to the winning of ballgames. Others may reasonably differ. As I always say, that's why we have a vote.

The BBWAA should probably clarify the meaning of this, but I think leaving it to the interpretation of each voter will do OK.

Obvs, I'd vote for Trout, but:

By your rationale, Cabrera has played more games than Trout and is a better choice under Item 2. It does not matter that the Angels kept Trout in the minors, Cabrera has played in about 18% of the season more than Trout.

As for item 3, does that mean you have to give consideration to the other enumerated identifiers? Does willingness to move to 3B for the team and work at not sucking at it, suiting up (nearly) every day, also address disposition, effort, and loyalty?

Curious whether such a clause also applies to HOF voting.

The clause clearly doesn't apply to anything off the field, since it's a consideration to be used in determining a player's "Value' relative to other players; and the only thing that makes one "Valuable" as a player is what one does on the field.

If off the field issues count, Mother Theresa could've been an MVP candidate.

I don't understand all the objections here. The character clause is there. Colin is just bringing our attention to it, that's all. There is an obvious character flaw in Cabrera.

If you vote, you have to ask the questions:
Will I consider the character clause?
Should Cabrera's transgressions affect my consideration of the character clause?

Those are valid questions to raise.

If this article got a defensive rating in Strat-O-Matic, it would be a 5 in a corner outfield spot.

So...has Cabrera drove drunk this season? If not, it should not be considered. The MVP award is a single-season award.

However, if he had a DUI this season, would it be okay to drop him to the #7 slot on your ballot to make it more difficult for him to win the award based on other's voting?

To flesh out rule #1, if Trout and Cabrera were statistically equal in WAR, would Trout be worth more to his team because he's being paid $400K this season compared to ~$25 Million?

I believe criteria #3 pertains specifically within the context of the team, not off the field behavior. In other words, what is the player like off the field BUT in the clubhouse?

I'm confused Colin. Are you trying to imply that the MVP voting guidelines could/would allow a voter to use the fact that Cabrera has had transgressions in his past? Because the guidelines are clearly meant to be for the current season only. And as far as I can tell, Cabrera has been a model player on and off the field this year. In fact, the incident a few weeks ago where he took the Fire Leyland sign would be to me a positive in Cabrera's column as he handled himself very well.

If you are trying to imply that rule 3 above could possibly allow consideration of the past, then that would also mean that voters could look at past year stats, games played, etc.

I think everyone would be in agreement that the MVP is meant to be decided on events that happen during the season. And by virtue of rule 3 above, voters CAN consider events (negative and positive) that are not necessarily strictly statistical/performance based. If Braun's PED tests came to light before the voting was done, then yes, any voter could consider it as part of his decision-making process. But also conversely, if a voter decided to leave Braun off his ballot this year because of last year's PED investigation, then they would not be following the above guidelines for MVP.

We all know that some voters WILL do this and there is nothing any of us can do about it.

The reality is that, regardless of whether or not the character clause is supposed to be only for this year, people will consider the totality of what they know about the player. That said, I don't think Cabrera's past history with DUIs will sway many voters, although I'm pretty sure Braun will be left of some NL MVP ballots on "principal." One thing to consider, while driving under the influence is reprehensible, it may be a symptom of a problem Cabrera has, as opposed to a just a poor choice or bad behavior.

Prepare to act on the question, everyone... the Greg Spira Internet Baseball Awards are coming soon.

"Only regular-season performances are to be taken into consideration."

Even if you stretch the character clause prior to 2012, the Cabrera DUI happened in Spring Training, not the regular season. Thus, you have another gray area argument on your hands.

Of course, if you're going back that far already, the regular season clause has already been busted.

Like others, I would give clause 3 little weight and also would interpret it in the context of a "Most Valuable Player" award to apply to only qualities that affect the team's ability to win games or win a playoff slot.

By the way, what a mess gramatically. Points 1-3 are phrases and points 4-5 are sentences.

I don't think his DUI has any impact on this season's voting, nor should it. I read point 3 to be in the context of both a) this season, and b) team impact.

"General character, disposition, loyalty, and effort."

My take: If a player were involved in an off-field incident (whether it was a crime or simply another distraction), I would think to be relevant to the MVP Award, it would have to have a discernable effect on the team this season. Past mistakes having an impact today would be relevant, but past mistakes with no impact on this season's team / results would not.

More germane to item #3 for Miggy, as mentioned by others above, would be his willingness to switch to a tougher defensive position in the off-season, work at it without complaint (as far as I can know), and be a congenial fellow on the team (I have nothing but anecdotal evidence here).

As far as point #3 goes, I will definitely not be voting for Delmon Young for MVP.

Come to think of it, he fails on the first point as well.

This is totally disgusting. Given that by all accounts Cabrera has been a model teammate this year how is his story any different than Josh Hamilton's?
I don't come to this site for this kind of trash and this didn't reek of desperate trolling for page views I'd honestly consider canceling my subscription.
Y'all are better than this.

I respect the question.

I don't think it's right to discuss this with the assumption that DUIs equal low character. Addiction is a very real and serious thing and leads people to do terrible things. I don't know Cabrera personally or know what his issues are all about, but I do know that I'm not going to jump to the assumption that him getting in a car under the influence is a direct reflection of his character. I get that people will disagree with this point, but I'd ask those people to seek to understand what goes on in a person's brain that causes them to do certain things. Miguel Cabrera is a victim of a disease, just the way society was a victim of Miguel Cabrera. So we might turn this around in a completely different direction. Maybe Cabrera is a hero for battling his disease. Maybe his character is better now more than ever. The idea that we know anything about his character because of his history of alcohol abuse is silly.

I think we're left with personal interviews, tweets, teammates' perceptions, and displays of on-field character. Otherwise, it's irresponsible for us to make judgments based on snapshots of people's lives.

Cabrera got a DUI so he's out. Trout didn't play in enough games to be considered per #2. #4 says "Former winners are eligible" so since it doesn't address non-former-winners I assume they're ineligible--scratch Cano, Beltre, Jackson, Zobrist. No Hamilton, because crack/character. No A-Rod because cheater/character. No Mauer because only 141 games played so far. I'll vote...Pujols. Past winner, charitable guy, 100RBI. And I read somewhere that he's the best player on the Angels and Heyman is laughable for saying he isn't.

After looking at the article Colin linked above, I would say that there are a number of other items on the negative side of the ledger when it comes to Mr. Cabrera's character beyond the drinking/driving issue.

Unrelated to that though, I do wonder whether the people claiming that looking at possible character issues previous to this year's regular season is unfair would feel the same if the actions were even more egregious. If in 2010 it came out that he had molested children (but was not convicted due to a legal technicality) while also claiming an affinity for Hitler's actions, would people not consider these issues in their 2012 MVP consideration? Character is character regardless of when you display the actions that show your true character.

Miggy is the Tigers nominee for the Roberto Clemente Award this year - http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/09/18/baseball-announces-the-roberto-clemente-award-nominees/

Meanwhile, I can't see previous transgressions weighing into the 2012 MVP race. That'd be unfortunate.

Not only did he drive drunk, he was arrested for domestic violence with a BAC of 0.26 at 6 or 7am, when the Tigers had two games to go in the middle of a race with the Twins. With that rate of alcohol in his system, he was probably still drunk by game time.