Thank you, TPM.
I'm not really as interested in figuring out why the voters did what they did, or figuring out ahead of time who WILL be the selection, as I am in discussing some kind of consistent methodology for who SHOULD be the selection.
With that said, though, I agree that there were other things at play (though I'd point out that both Fred Lynn and Ichiro both won MVPs as rookies - Ichiro's being the more controversial - so I don't think it is really a matter of Trout not having gained enough respect through experience). I acknowledged about that Cabrera has been overlooked and that it was probably a big factor in his winning. And if the award was called "AL MVP 2010-2012" there is no doubt Cabrera would be a fine choice (he led all of MLB in fWAR through those years, led his league - 2nd only to Joey Votto in MLB - in both RE24 and WPA in that time).
I just disagree with using these kinds of things as a factor as a voter, or of looking beyond the 2012 season to award an MVP for the 2012 season. If you look back at the history of MVP voting, it becomes obvious when that happens. The voters overlook somebody to vote for a pitcher, and reward him later, or they decide to pass over a great player because he just won the year before and they want to move on, etc., etc. Almost always, that creates this circular issue where there is yet another "mistake" to make up for down the line. It would be much better if they just stuck to what happened in the year they are making the award and be done with it.
But, insofar as you are talking about why the voters did what they did, I'm sure you are right.