Originally Posted by amsteel
If Cabrera deserves it more just because of the statistical circumstance of the Triple Crown and the relatively long epoch since the last winner, you can make a similar unreasoned argument that Trout's performance just as amazing because he could win the ROY and MVP in the same season which is a rarer feat than winning the Triple Crown.
It's all objective bull****, since they're pretty much even. But saying MC should win it solely because of the Triple Crown is comically flawed and shortsighted.
Which is also comically shortsighted, since stating something like "the Triple Crown's not that rare of an achievement" relies heavily
on pre-WWII results, which nobody in their right mind would argue has any relevance on today's game (If Tip O'Neill can do it in 1887, ANY OLD BASTARD CAN, TOO).
This is why people hate sabremetrics, god damn it. The Triple Crown is something special, no matter how you want to argue it. If you can't accept that, well, then I guess we have to agree to disagree.