66 replies to this topic

[SportsGuy]

Its not out of line, I just disagree. Like I said, I'm arguing semantics.

But your disagreement holds no water because you just said you think Manny is a better baseball player than Jones despite his lack of experience.

For the same reason you are arguing against Trout, you aren't using for Manny.

[bnickle]

But your disagreement holds no water because you just said you think Manny is a better baseball player than Jones despite his lack of experience.

For the same reason you are arguing against Trout, you aren't using for Manny.

Lets put it this way, I wouldn't give Manny the "best Orioles player" title which is different than saying Manny is the best Orioles player right now. Just like Trout was the "best player in '12" but I wouldn't bestow him with the title of "best player in baseball".


I think I've made that distinction numerous times and explained why. TO me you earn a title even if it's ambigious, subjective, and not even real. I mean there is no official "Best Player in Baseball".


If you want to say you got me on something it's the fact that I'm arguing something that I'm not really adamant about. Calling Trout the best player in baseball is understandable. If we're sitting around a bar and the question was asked whos the best player in baseball and you said Trout it would be one of those things where I shrugged my shoulders, nodded my head and said something like " Worthy choice, but I would take Braun or Cabrera because they have a track record and have proven themselves over more than just a year.

[mweb08]

Lets put it this way, I wouldn't give Manny the "best Orioles player" title which is different than saying Manny is the best Orioles player right now. Just like Trout was the "best player in '12" but I wouldn't bestow him with the title of "best player in baseball".

 

But MLB Network did what you are comfortable doing here. They said he is the best right now. 

[bnickle]

Based on my gut.

But seriously, for a guy that is so into knocking people like me for relying too much on stats, it seems odd to me that you seem so anti-scouting in this regard. Trout was a top 3 prospect who displayed all the tools you'd want in a player while using those tools to have a fantastic year by both the numbers and by watching him play. While I'm not confident in him being that spectacular going forward, I didn't see any warning signs that would suggest he wasn't a great player.

Same with Manny in a smaller sample size. While I want to see more of him before definitively declaring him a superstar, from both the stats and by watching him, I don't think what is happening is fluky. In both cases, we're talking about top prospects who are elite defenders, have very strong offensive ability, and so far that has translated into strong production at an extremely young age. That's a great combination going forward, but of course anything can happen.

Obviously, I'm playing devil's advocate. As I've said i think Trout will continue to be good. Still, in this situation assuming Trout isn't a fluke doesn't mean he isn't a fluke. Different then talking about a guy like Gomez who has been in the league 5 years and has a track record. You have something to compare it too. There is a base to call his '13 season a fluke. If Trout drops back to being a 5 WAR player then we'll look back and still say his rookie year was fluky even though a 5 WAR player is still very good. Thats my whole point. We know how good Cabrera or Braun are. We can say they are a 6-7 WAR player. They are still in their prime and have done it for 3+ years now. With Trout, you have one season to go off of. There is nothing to compare his 1st year numbers against except your expectations going forward. Thats why I think it's bolder to call him the best player in baseball over Cabrera or Braun.



Again, if we had a draft before this season started where the players were just playing one year Cabrera or Braun would have been my 1st pick. Thats not overusing stats thats using common sense and being somewhat conservative. Give me the safe bet for my 1:1 pick over higher upside but a relatively unknown downside.

[mweb08]

But MLB Network did what you are comfortable doing here. They said he is the best right now. 

 

To further illustrate that they are approaching this list as the best right now rather than the meaning Brandon puts on "the best player in baseball," they picked Matt Kemp the previous year. Obviously that was only based on one year, and I think both of us would have more of an issue with that choice than Trout.

[bnickle]

To further illustrate that they are approaching this list as the best right now rather than the meaning Brandon puts on "the best player in baseball," they picked Matt Kemp the previous year. Obviously that was only based on one year, and I think both of us would have more of an issue with that choice than Trout.

Thats fine. Thats obviously not what I've been arguing this whole time. I think this was discussed in the thread where he was named best player in baseball. We all kind of agreed it was ambigious and that if they meant who they were ranking more on a season by season basis vs an overall broad view of "best baseball players" that it was much harder to argue against Trout.

[mweb08]

Yes, but it's why you should not have had such an issue with it. It wasn't hard to figure out what they were doing either and I've repeated it multiple times.