If the award in debate here was Most Valuable Hitter, Cabrera takes the cake. But it's not. Cabrera is statistically the worst defensive player at his position in the Major Leagues (according to UZR he has cost the Tigers 11.1 runs this year), with absolutely no range, and on the basepaths, one of the slowest. Basically, he hurts his team in a rather substantial way when he's not at the plate.
And regarding the Triple Crown, I'll just have to quote Keith Law.
This is begging the question: It assumes that the Triple Crown is an accurate measure of value, which it's not. Here's a short list of important factors not covered by the Triple Crown categories: Walks, the added value of doubles and triples, stolen bases, other aspects of baserunning, defensive value, positional value, park effects -- in other words, huge swaths of the game that are completely ignored. Triple Crown is cute, but there's something very arbitrary and dated about its categories, an anachronistic way to look at the game that is wildly out of tune with how front offices look at players today. Once you realize, as you must, that a player who wins the Triple Crown has not necessarily delivered the most value, this argument evaporates.
I haven't even gotten into the offensive, defensive, and baserunning metrics with Trout as I am pressed for time but this should do for now.
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/happy-22nd-birthday-mike-trout-2/