PDA

View Full Version : Article: Cabrera vs. Trout: The MVP Debate for the Ages



Cody Christie
09-24-2012, 08:53 AM
You can view the page at http://www.twinsdaily.com/content.php?1057-Cabrera-vs-Trout-The-MVP-Debate-for-the-Ages

TK10
09-24-2012, 09:34 AM
"Cabrera has a shot to win the first Triple Crown in a long time and this might be hard for some of the older voters to ignore."

Because only the young and hip will vote for Trout thanks to the All Powerful And All Knowing And Entirely Irrefutable Sabermetrics. If Cabrera wins the first triple crown in 45 years and doesn't win the MVP the All Powerful And All Knowing And Entirely Irrefutable Sabermetrics crowd will have officially won.

mnjon
09-24-2012, 10:04 AM
"Cabrera has a shot to win the first Triple Crown in a long time and this might be hard for some of the older voters to ignore."

Because only the young and hip will vote for Trout thanks to the All Powerful And All Knowing And Entirely Irrefutable Sabermetrics. If Cabrera wins the first triple crown in 45 years and doesn't win the MVP the All Powerful And All Knowing And Entirely Irrefutable Sabermetrics crowd will have officially won.

I'm not gonna lie and say that I believe Cabrera should have a strong chance to win the MVP, but your argument doesn't really stand up. As Cody said,
He (Trout) is the first player to compile a WAR of over 10 since Barry Bonds did it back in his heyday. The last center fielder to reach this mark was Willie Mays so Trout is in some good company with the season he has put together.

Considering Willie Mays won his final MVP in '65, it's been even longer since a center fielder has been this good, according to WAR. Cabrera's statistics should definitely be praised and he does deserve the triple crown, but Trout has been a much better all-around player than Cabrera, which I'm guessing most teams would rather have than an offensive machine who plays mediocre defense at third with average speed at best.

And if you think it would be a travesty to not give the triple crown winner MVP, then you may be shocked to find out that not all TC winners have automatically won the MVP, even if it wasn't such a large span of time between the TC winners. Maybe even back then they understood that the TC doesn't automatically make you the best player in the game.

nokomismod
09-24-2012, 10:42 AM
This is a tough year to decide, but I give the nod to Cabrera. He is the last guy you want to see in the on deck circle late in the game. Power, hits for average, and clutch. What Trout did for a big chunk of the season was incredible too. Maybe I'm favoring Cabrera because he's been doing it so long.

Twins Twerp
09-24-2012, 11:30 AM
Baseball writers, who vote for the MVP, are not WAR guys. They are old and remember when Ted Williams and Honis Wagner played. The old school numbers are the most important thing. Wins for pitchers, HR's, RBI's and BA for MVP. Therefore, I think they are going to vote for Cabrera. If he wins the Triple Crown and the Tigers make the playoffs, I think it has to be Cabrera. Trout is good, and has the hype monster going for him. This is going to be a very tight race, with one man, one manchild, both deserving the nod.

tmerrickkeller
09-24-2012, 11:31 AM
Where did I read this? Probably here....We all know Miggy could be the first guy since Yaz in '67 to win the Triple Crown. But when was the last time a player hit .325, stole 50 bases, and hit 30 home runs (which Trout might well do, as right now he's at .323, 48, and 28). The answer is "never." No one has ever done it, much less play Gold Glove centerfield, and score 125 runs.

So after that statement, I still pick Cabrera because he's above Trout in average, homers, and RBI and I value those statistics more than others (blame my baseball card days of the 60s and 70s).

Siehbiscuit
09-24-2012, 11:44 AM
I think THE biggest things the writers will look at is the TRADITIONAL offensive numbers. Cabrera's defense is not great and Trout's is amazing. But the criteria for these voters is something like 7 parts offense, 2 part defense and 1 part how much the media likes you.

Overall, if Cabrera wins a Triple Crown its his rather easily. If he just misses out on the TC, he squeaks it out on the lifetime achievement sympathy vote.

Siehbiscuit
09-24-2012, 11:46 AM
Trout, also may be penalized by some voters because he is a rookie. It's not fair, but these writers have shown that objectivity isn't the way they always operate.

Boom Boom
09-24-2012, 11:49 AM
IMO you have to take the Triple Crown thing out of the equation.

Say Joe Mauer somehow magically nips Cabrera for the batting title by .001. Cabrera still leads in HR and RBI, though. Does your mind change at all because he didn't win the Triple Crown? Because it really shouldn't.

Don't Feed the Greed Guy
09-24-2012, 11:53 AM
Cabrera wins the MVP if he locks up the Triple Crown and/or the Tigers make the playoffs. Trout wins if the Angels can claim a wild card spot, and the Twins continue to play spoiler, eliminating the Motor City Kitties from the postseason. Still the Tri-Crown is the trump card. One other thing to consider: Trout will already take home some hardwarde as the AL Rookie of the Year. The baseball writers may want to spread the wealth, figuring that Trout has a more time to add to his trophy cabinet. So, my money is on Miggy.

TK10
09-24-2012, 11:58 AM
I'm fully aware that a handful of former triple crown winners didn't win the MVP, and to me, it's completely idiotic. La Velle E. Neal and the other voters his age didn't see Ted Williams or Honus Wagner play. Or maybe they did, I bet Bill James and the math nerd brigade has a stat proving La Velle saw Teddy Ballgame in person. I admit, fully, to being an idiot because I'm 34-years-old and am still impressed by 133 RBI. I don't care what Trout's WAR is, someone winning the triple crown after 45 years would be remarkable.

Willihammer
09-24-2012, 12:06 PM
Ironically, Bill James is now back, getting paychecks from the Red Sox organization.

snepp
09-24-2012, 12:30 PM
Because only the young and hip will vote for Trout thanks to the All Powerful And All Knowing And Entirely Irrefutable Sabermetrics. If Cabrera wins the first triple crown in 45 years and doesn't win the MVP the All Powerful And All Knowing And Entirely Irrefutable Sabermetrics crowd will have officially won.

I'm fully aware that a handful of former triple crown winners didn't win the MVP, and to me, it's completely idiotic. La Velle E. Neal and the other voters his age didn't see Ted Williams or Honus Wagner play. Or maybe they did, I bet Bill James and the math nerd brigade has a stat proving La Velle saw Teddy Ballgame in person. I admit, fully, to being an idiot because I'm 34-years-old and am still impressed by 133 RBI. I don't care what Trout's WAR is, someone winning the triple crown after 45 years would be remarkable.

I find being an obnoxious jackass to be much preferable over an objective "nerd."


You've convinced me.

mike wants wins
09-24-2012, 12:45 PM
Defense matters. Base running matters. I am so tired of the "stat nerds" baloney from some posters and managers.....so tired and silly. I would say both are deserving, and either choice would be acceptable.

IdahoPilgrim
09-24-2012, 01:22 PM
Instead of turning this into a debate about which statistics matter more, maybe we should step back and look at the title of the award - Most Valuable Player.

Now, that can be understood in a variety of ways, but for me it means the person who has contributed the most to a team's success and who would be missed the most if not there.

In that respect, I go with Trout. Detroit has other big names (Fielder,Verlander,Jackson) contributing and most would agree they have underperformed all year. On the other hand, if it wasn't for Trout LA wouldn't even be in the race for the wild card. He seems to have added more by his presence.

Brock Beauchamp
09-24-2012, 01:44 PM
I'd rather have Trout on my team but if I had an MVP vote, it'd probably go to Cabrera. I put a lot of weight into play down the stretch and because Cabrera's "production" stat line will include ~140 RBI, I think he deserves the award. Narrowly.

But I won't cry if it goes to Trout.

Seth Stohs
09-24-2012, 01:45 PM
I'd vote for Cabrera without a lot of hesitation. It's not a knock on Trout, and it's not a knock on WAR or sabrmetrics. May not seem like a lot, but the 21 Games Played difference is standing out to me the last couple of days. Trout's struggled some in the last month. Is that a hiccup, or is that a wall of sorts that would have been accentuated by another month of games? Of course we don't know, but we do know that Cabrera has played great all year.

JB_Iowa
09-24-2012, 01:53 PM
45 Years .... for me that says it all.

I went back and looked at the list of Triple Crown winners -- and was amazed at how closely spaced some of them were before 1967. It wasn't a rarity to see several in your lifetime. Maybe that's why Yaz' TC didn't make that big of impression on me in 1967 -- after all, Frank Robinson had done the same thing a year earlier (plus I was really too young to appreciate its meaning). In a similar way, watching Affirmed in 1978, I never dreamed we'd be waiting for another thoroughbred TC winner in 2012 even though I knew there were 25 years between Citation and Secretariat.

If Miggy can pull off the Triple Crown, he deserves to be MVP. If Miggy succeeds, he d*mn well is Baseball's "Most Valuable" -- not just for what he is doing for this year but for what he is doing for baseball's history.

Seth Stohs
09-24-2012, 02:01 PM
I meant to point out that the Triple Crown thing means nothing to me. It's a great, historical little anomaly.It also makes for a fact that the guy had an incredible season. It does not, however, necessitate the best season.

mike wants wins
09-24-2012, 02:21 PM
Why is RBI part of the "triple crown", but not runs scored or stolen bases? This is a center fielder that might be the best defensive player in baseball, and is surely the best base runner. All I am saying is that three statistics do not show the full story. I find it highly ironic that the triple crown is a stat, made up of three other stats, and people that mock stats ate using it to "prove"something as inarguable.

SweetOne69
09-24-2012, 02:55 PM
Why is RBI part of the "triple crown", but not runs scored or stolen bases? This is a center fielder that might be the best defensive player in baseball, and is surely the best base runner. All I am saying is that three statistics do not show the full story. I find it highly ironic that the triple crown is a stat, made up of three other stats, and people that mock stats ate using it to "prove"something as inarguable.

Because the offensive triple crown is all done with the bat. It is the things that the Batter can directly control.

biggentleben
09-24-2012, 03:04 PM
Because only the young and hip will vote for Trout thanks to the All Powerful And All Knowing And Entirely Irrefutable Sabermetrics. If Cabrera wins the first triple crown in 45 years and doesn't win the MVP the All Powerful And All Knowing And Entirely Irrefutable Sabermetrics crowd will have officially won.

I'm fully aware that a handful of former triple crown winners didn't win the MVP, and to me, it's completely idiotic. La Velle E. Neal and the other voters his age didn't see Ted Williams or Honus Wagner play. Or maybe they did, I bet Bill James and the math nerd brigade has a stat proving La Velle saw Teddy Ballgame in person. I admit, fully, to being an idiot because I'm 34-years-old and am still impressed by 133 RBI. I don't care what Trout's WAR is, someone winning the triple crown after 45 years would be remarkable.

I find being an obnoxious jackass to be much preferable over an objective "nerd."


You've convinced me.

POTD nominee

Jim Crikket
09-24-2012, 03:06 PM
The great thing about the MVP award is that it IS subjective. In that regard, it's like the CY or a HOF vote. The criteria will vary from voter to voter. I am old enough to remember the Robinson and Yaz Triple Crowns and maybe it's nostalgic to continue to apply a certain amount of "romance" for that particular achievement. That said, whether Cabrera does or doesn't achieve the TC would not influence my vote. Supporters of both players can make perfectly legitimate cases (to me, anyway). I don't agree that a Cabrera TC should entitle him to the MVP, but if you want to point to his superior performance in a September pennant stretch, I'll consider that argument. I don't feel Trout should be penalized for not being in the Majors to start the season, but if you want to suggest he maybe hit a rookie wall in September, you may have a point. I also agree that Trout arguably had a greater amount of influence on his team's eventual success.

I'm a huge Trout fan and would love to see him win the MVP. But when I consider the kinds of problems Cabrera has dealt with and his willingness to be a "team guy" and move to 3B even knowing he might look bad there, that counts in his favor with me, too.

These two guys have both had incredible seasons and they both deserve serious consideration for MVP. Where writers (and managers) lose me is when they feel inclined to spout garbage about how one or the other is the obvious choice. Nothing about this choice is obvious, to me.

biggentleben
09-24-2012, 03:08 PM
Why is RBI part of the "triple crown", but not runs scored or stolen bases? This is a center fielder that might be the best defensive player in baseball, and is surely the best base runner. All I am saying is that three statistics do not show the full story. I find it highly ironic that the triple crown is a stat, made up of three other stats, and people that mock stats ate using it to "prove"something as inarguable.

Because the offensive triple crown is all done with the bat. It is the things that the Batter can directly control.

Not true. There is a measure of luck build into batting average. Runs batted in are dependent on team unless it's a home run. Even then home runs can be influenced by ballpark, whether, schedule, or many other things. So even those things, the batter doesn't control any more than stolen bases or runs.

Willihammer
09-24-2012, 03:11 PM
Trout's struggled some in the last month. Is that a hiccup, or is that a wall of sorts that would have been accentuated by another month of games? Of course we don't know, but we do know that Cabrera has played great all year.

Well we do have 1300 minor league PAs which suggest that Trout's performance in recent days wouldn't drag him out of the conversation were he to play 21 extra games. He is still providing positive offensive and defensive value even while slumping. That said, Gleeman is right - the award is handed out by 28 Souhan-type writers across the country so bfd who gets it.

biggentleben
09-24-2012, 03:12 PM
I don't feel Trout should be penalized for not being in the Majors to start the season, but if you want to suggest he maybe hit a rookie wall in September, you may have a point. I also agree that Trout arguably had a greater amount of influence on his team's eventual success.

.780 OPS with 3 homers and 4 steals at the leadoff position is hardly a wall. It's just that he set his bar so high in June/July that we see it as such, and that's become a narrative - an incorrect one, but one nonetheless.

DAM DC Twins Fans
09-24-2012, 03:36 PM
The great thing about the MVP award is that it IS subjective. In that regard, it's like the CY or a HOF vote. The criteria will vary from voter to voter. I am old enough to remember the Robinson and Yaz Triple Crowns and maybe it's nostalgic to continue to apply a certain amount of "romance" for that particular achievement. That said, whether Cabrera does or doesn't achieve the TC would not influence my vote. Supporters of both players can make perfectly legitimate cases (to me, anyway). I don't agree that a Cabrera TC should entitle him to the MVP, but if you want to point to his superior performance in a September pennant stretch, I'll consider that argument. I don't feel Trout should be penalized for not being in the Majors to start the season, but if you want to suggest he maybe hit a rookie wall in September, you may have a point. I also agree that Trout arguably had a greater amount of influence on his team's eventual success.

I'm a huge Trout fan and would love to see him win the MVP. But when I consider the kinds of problems Cabrera has dealt with and his willingness to be a "team guy" and move to 3B even knowing he might look bad there, that counts in his favor with me, too.

These two guys have both had incredible seasons and they both deserve serious consideration for MVP. Where writers (and managers) lose me is when they feel inclined to spout garbage about how one or the other is the obvious choice. Nothing about this choice is obvious, to me.

I too remember Yaz and F. Robby getting triple crowns and not dreaming I would go my whole working career (I was in college when Yaz did it and now am retired) without it being done again. On that I vote for Miggy. I also think MVP should come from playoff team--not sure either Tiggers or Angles will be there--but both are close enough. The MVP is for the WHOLE DAM season--Trout's Sept. slump should and will cost him votes.

I can see the Trout arguments--starting with Defense--but I still go with Miggy.

TK10
09-24-2012, 04:59 PM
Jackass idiot here. Just hoping someone could explain to me why quibbling with WAR fans makes one a jackass. It seems to me the WAR crowd loves to denigrate anyone who still thinks RBI and batting average might, just might, indicate a guy is a good player. It's as if there's a cool kids table element to all of this. As if to say if you don't subscribe completely to sabermetrics you aren't a real fan.
Furthermore, isn't it possible that WAR is a bogus stat that, in say 5 years, some other numbers nerd, oops, excuse me, numbers wizard will come along and replace?
Anyway, I hope to see you all at the game tonight. I'll be the guy in 225 keeping score like the decrepit dinosaur I am.

old nurse
09-24-2012, 05:02 PM
Who makes the club win? A few lower place should go to Willingham. Take out Willingham and insert a Clete Thomas type. The domino effect on this team would be that they would make a run at the record for futility. Trout or Cabrera? Trout has probably contributed more to his team's success than Cabrera. That was the intent of the award.

Although, if they had not signed Willingham, would Joe Benson made the squad out of ST and not had the season he did? A topic for another thread of what if.

Monkeypaws
09-24-2012, 05:58 PM
Hitting is the hardest thing to do in baseball - triple crown trumps all-around play for me every day.

And seriously, R.O.T.Y. is a better than average consolation prize for Trout, plus the promise of future contention.

Thrylos
09-24-2012, 07:10 PM
Unless the Angels and the Tigers make the postseason, neither should be the MVP. MVP is about value to the team (i.e. helped the team go some place; unlike Cy Young, which is a best pitcher award.) Because the Angels and the Tiggers would have missed the post-season with them or without them. So, it might be between Cano and Beltre, depending on who makes the post-season.

That's my take. Maybe baseball needs a best player award like the Cy Young (Call it the Babe Ruth or the Barry Bonds Award ;) ) and then we can have that discussion...

biggentleben
09-24-2012, 07:11 PM
6 of 10 of the last Triple Crown winners DID NOT win the MVP

In the last 30 years, there have been 13 10.0 WAR+ players (Trout will be the 14th), only 5 won the MVP

mike wants wins
09-24-2012, 07:20 PM
Why is RBI part of the "triple crown", but not runs scored or stolen bases? This is a center fielder that might be the best defensive player in baseball, and is surely the best base runner. All I am saying is that three statistics do not show the full story. I find it highly ironic that the triple crown is a stat, made up of three other stats, and people that mock stats ate using it to "prove"something as inarguable.

Because the offensive triple crown is all done with the bat. It is the things that the Batter can directly control.

????

RBI is largely dependent on the number of baserunners on when you come up to bat. Heck, you get an RBI for hitting a routine fly to the OF if there is a fast guy on 3rd. Want evidence of that, check out Delmon Young's stats that "good" year he had here....it was about the fact that Mauer and others were on base when he came up to bat.

jm3319
09-24-2012, 10:01 PM
[QUOTE
Because the offensive triple crown is all done with the bat. It is the things that the Batter can directly control.[/QUOTE]


The person ahead of me beat me to it, but please explain how the batter can control how many people are on base for him. In theory, a leadoff guy could hit like 50 triples in a season, a bunch of doubles and 30 homers, and have very low RBI to show for it.

RBI is just not a good reflection of a hitter. the real triple crown should be batting average (a measure of how well the batter can hit the dang ball, but I'm open to arguments against average)/ OBP/ SLG

avg/OBP/SLG...you win these 3 with a good number of "traditional stats" like homers mixed in and you deserve to win.

My vote goes to Trout. He does more for his team than Cabrera. You can win games with the bat, but you can also win them with the glove and legs, too.

beckmt
09-24-2012, 11:26 PM
I believe Cabrera deserves the reward. He has performed all year and the Tigers are better for it. Whether he wins the Triple Crown or not, he has had a remarkable season. Trout has been very good and if he performs at this level, he will win in the future.

PseudoSABR
09-25-2012, 04:00 AM
I think the argument that Cabrera winning the Triple Crown appeals to the BBWA more than Mike Trout's incredulous rookie season grasps at ghosts. Mike Trout's rookie season has all the mythos that baseball writers crave (somewhere Rick Rielly is suddenly interested in baseball). Mike Trout is Mikey Mantle and Willie Mays. The guy has the incredible ease of Mantle and the absurd athleticism of Mays, and he's playing at their prime in his rookie year. Trout's highlight-worthy hops, the Halos' hole when they call him up, his humble personality--only add to his statline. As much as writers like old-stand-bys like RBIs, writers like to dream, and they can dream on Trout until someone slaps them in the face.

There's as much old-school and mystic in Trout as there is Cabrera's potential triple crown. We don't need sabermetrics to tell us that; we have our ****ing eyes.

SweetOne69
09-25-2012, 07:41 AM
While it is true that the batter has no control over who or how many runners are on base when he comes up to bat, he does have direct control over driving the runners in when he does come up to bat. FYI, Cabrera only has 6 SF this year, so 127 of his RBIs were the result of a hit.

For Runs Scored you are relying on someone else to assist you in scoring unless you hit a HR (or steal home).

SweetOne69
09-25-2012, 07:46 AM
One thing that I think is going against Trout is that his offense has really tailed off that last month. He was hitting .345 on August 23rd. His BA has dropped 20pts over the last 28 games. Whereas Cabrera is improving as the season goes on.

Brock Beauchamp
09-25-2012, 08:31 AM
While it is true that the batter has no control over who or how many runners are on base when he comes up to bat, he does have direct control over driving the runners in when he does come up to bat. FYI, Cabrera only has 6 SF this year, so 127 of his RBIs were the result of a hit.

For Runs Scored you are relying on someone else to assist you in scoring unless you hit a HR (or steal home).

Not that it really matters but there are other ways to drive in a run other than getting a hit, such as taking a walk with the bases loaded or hitting into a fielder's choice.

Curt
09-25-2012, 11:41 AM
It is a close call either way and both have had amazing seasons. The next week may still make a difference. Trout is a Phenom, to use a bit of Stengelese, and Cabrera is a monster. There is no MVP stat and there isn't really any particular criteria. Just 28 guys all using their own biases to identify and evaluate candidates. Some voters are surely dolts and some may be geniuses. Best player? How do you evaluate that? Most valuable? Can we even define it? If I were voting today it would be Cabrera. But I acknowledge I'm probably closer to dolt than genius. I've also been brainwashed from an early age to look at BA, HR and RBI. No amount of re-programming can reverse that totally.

JB_Iowa
09-25-2012, 12:03 PM
Will someone who knows how to look this up more quickly than I do please post how many hitters have led their league in Batting Average & Home Runs in the same season since 1967?

To me the RBIs tend to go along with the other two stats -- and depend a lot on the quality of teammates but I just wondered if there are hitters in the last 45 years who missed the Triple Crown just because of RBIs?

Willihammer
09-25-2012, 12:23 PM
Will someone who knows how to look this up more quickly than I do please post how many hitters have led their league in Batting Average & Home Runs in the same season since 1967?

zero

ashburyjohn
09-25-2012, 01:55 PM
WAR, What is it good for?

Absolutely nothing. Say it again, y'all.

biggentleben
09-25-2012, 01:57 PM
WAR, What is it good for?

Absolutely nothing. Say it again, y'all.

Thorough, well thought, deeply intriguing, and underlined argument. Nice work.

JB_Iowa
09-25-2012, 02:00 PM
Will someone who knows how to look this up more quickly than I do please post how many hitters have led their league in Batting Average & Home Runs in the same season since 1967?

zero

Thanks. I know it's not definitive -- and not the only reason for thinking Miggy should be the MVP -- but it does look like that combination of high average and HR's has become somewhat magical.

ashburyjohn
09-25-2012, 02:12 PM
I find being an obnoxious jackass to be much preferable over an objective "nerd."

You've convinced me.

POTD nominee

I was going to post something similar then remembered the part about being banninated for slamming others on this board. Otherwise I would have won your coveted award.

ashburyjohn
09-25-2012, 02:14 PM
WAR, What is it good for?

Absolutely nothing. Say it again, y'all.

Thorough, well thought, deeply intriguing, and underlined argument. Nice work.

https://www.google.com/search?q=Absolutely+nothing.+Say+it+again%2C+y%27a ll.

In case that was needed.

biggentleben
09-25-2012, 02:37 PM
WAR, What is it good for?

Absolutely nothing. Say it again, y'all.

Thorough, well thought, deeply intriguing, and underlined argument. Nice work.

https://www.google.com/search?q=Absolutely+nothing.+Say+it+again%2C+y%27a ll.

In case that was needed.

Oh, I knew the reference quite well.

biggentleben
09-25-2012, 03:13 PM
Will someone who knows how to look this up more quickly than I do please post how many hitters have led their league in Batting Average & Home Runs in the same season since 1967?

zero

Thanks. I know it's not definitive -- and not the only reason for thinking Miggy should be the MVP -- but it does look like that combination of high average and HR's has become somewhat magical.

Not exactly. In the last 20 years, 27 times a player has led his league in either BA or HR and finished in the top 10 of the other stat:

Matt Kemp 2011 - 3rd BA, 1st HR
Miguel Cabrera 2011 - 1st BA, 10th HR
Josh Hamilton 2010 - 1st BA, 5th HR
Carlos Gonzalez 2010 - 1st BA, 4th HR
Albert Pujols 2010 - 6th BA, 1st HR
Albert Pujols 2009 - 3rd BA, 1st HR
Magglio Ordonez 2007 - 1st BA, 7th HR
Matt Holliday 2007 - 1st BA, 4th HR
Ryan Howard 2006 - 9th BA, 1st HR
Alex Rodriguez 2005 - 2nd BA, 1st HR
Derrek Lee 2005 - 1st BA, 2nd HR
Barry Bonds 2004 - 1st BA, 2nd HR
Adrian Beltre 2004 - 4th BA, 1st HR
Albert Pujols 2003 - 1st BA, 4th HR
Barry Bonds 2002 - 1st BA, 4th HR
Manny Ramirez 2002 - 1st BA, 9th HR
Barry Bonds 2001 - 7th BA, 1st HR
Alex Rodriguez 2001 - 7th BA, 1st HR
Larry Walker 2001 - 1st BA, 9th HR
Larry Walker 1999 - 1st BA, 10th HR
Larry Walker 1997 - 2nd BA, 1st HR
Frank Thomas 1997 - 1st BA, 7th HR
Dante Bichette 1995 - 3rd BA, 1st HR
Albert Belle 1995 - 8th BA, 1st HR
Ken Griffey, Jr. 1994 - 9th BA, 1st HR
Barry Bonds 1993 - 4th BA, 1st HR
Gary Sheffield 1992 - 1st Ba, 3rd HR