I think the important line here is the last sentence. As an aspiring GM, this mirror my thinking exactly (and for the record, I think Davis has a better chance than Trout this year at unseating Cabrera):
Buster Olney:
? Mike Trout is unlikely to be part of the MVP debate given the Angels? struggles, writes Alden Gonzalez. I?d respectfully disagree and here?s why: Miguel Cabrera has been dealing with some nagging injuries and if Detroit maintains its sizable lead in the AL Central, he might get more days off than he usually does, giving Trout an opportunity to build a significant statistical advantage.
I believe this, too: If Cabrera hadn?t won the Triple Crown last year -- if he had led the AL in hitting and RBIs but not in home runs -- I think Trout would have won the MVP. But once Cabrera became the first player in 45 years to get a Triple Crown, voters looked past Trout?s overall statistical advantage.
The same split of opinion among baseball people remains in place, I think -- the folks in uniform think Cabrera is one of the greatest players of all time, while a lot of front-office types believe Trout is the better player, and not by a small margin.
