I stand corrected. I agree with both of your comments (especially about the MVP not being about a projection of future ability or a reward for past greatness - something I specifically said not too many posts up, almost two years ago).
In my defense, what I meant really was, I feel vindicated by Trout's performance since because so many said he hadn't done enough to deserve it yet (really a refutation of our argument that the award is and should be ONLY about a singular stand-alone season), and that if he was really as good as we argued he was, he would continue to play well enough to earn lots of MVPs. Well he has played that well, and he still hasn't gotten the MVP recognition he deserves. Funny how most of the same people who said Trout hadn't done enough in 2012 to overcome Cabrera, and that he'd win plenty when he repeated that kind of season, STILL argued against Trout and for Cabrera in 2013 (when Trout was ALSO better than Cabrera). It's hard to see any argument for anybody to beat out Trout this year, but it won't surprise me if the same crowd who argued for Cabrera over Trout over the last two years comes up with one.
Good stuff, EdgarFan.
As I said in the thread two years ago, I really couldn't care less what anyone else said or may continue to say. Trout was way more valuable in 2012 than Cabrera. He was more valuable in 2013, too. And, he's been more valuable so far this year. In reading through this thread I actually wish I spoke with more conviction when the topic came up and then continued, instead of apologizing for calling people out. Trout was more valuable and whoever disagreed was wrong.
Anyway, it sure was interesting looking back here nonetheless. Hope all is well with you in the northwest, EdgarFan! 