Trout v. Legendary cards

[packs]

Originally Posted by rats60

If Ted gets the 5 years of his prime that he spent in WWII and the Korean War, his stats absolutely go up. Bob Feller's fastball was clocked as fast as 105 mph, so Ted probably does OK against Aroldis Chapman too. As far as Trout, I don't know. How would Trout react when he picked himself off the dirt when a pitcher actually came inside? It is a completely different game, it is not a given that Trout could adapt and do better.

It is only your opinion that you think the game is harder. I disagree. The game has been watered down by expansion and the best athletes playing in the NBA and the NFL. African American participation is at a level of the mid fifties when some teams had none on their roster. Trout can't even dominate in this environment, no way he does in earlier eras in my opinion.

What does dominance look like to you? Trout has won 3 MVP's, he's finished second in 4 more seasons (7 seasons in the top 2 during his first 9 seasons). He is second among active players when it comes to WAR and he's second to Albert Pujols, whose played twice the career. He's already top 100 all time in WAR and he's only 28 years old. He is universally seen as the best player in the game.

Who is dominating if not Trout?

[rats60]

Originally Posted by packs

What does dominance look like to you? Trout has won 3 MVP's, he's finished second in 4 more seasons (7 seasons in the top 2 during his first 9 seasons). He is second among active players when it comes to WAR and he's second to Albert Pujols, whose played twice the career. He's already top 100 all time in WAR and he's only 28 years old. He is universally seen as the best player in the game.

Who is dominating if not Trout?

Honus Wagner in 1908 finishing first or second in every major offensive category. WAR is a made up stat that is pretty meaningless. MVP voting is a popularity contest. Ted Williams won 2 Triple Crowns and wasn’t named MVP either year.

Trout is the best player, but he isn’t dominating the league. He has very little black ink. He is a power hitter that has never led the league in HRs. He has never led the league in BA. Ted Williams Black Ink 122= dominating. Mike Trout Black Ink (mostly from getting pitched around and walking) 33= not dominating.

[packs]

Originally Posted by rats60

Honus Wagner in 1908 finishing first or second in every major offensive category. WAR is a made up stat that is pretty meaningless. MVP voting is a popularity contest. Ted Williams won 2 Triple Crowns and wasn’t named MVP either year.

Trout is the best player, but he isn’t dominating the league. He has very little black ink. He is a power hitter that has never led the league in HRs. He has never led the league in BA. Ted Williams Black Ink 122= dominating. Mike Trout Black Ink (mostly from getting pitched around and walking) 33= not dominating.

I still don't really buy that. If Trout is the best player, he is dominating the league. You can't be the best player without dominating the league. He's led the league in OPS+ 5 years in a row. If you don't like WAR, what don't you like about OPS+? You don't have to lead the league in home runs to be the best player. I don't think there is any argument to make for Ralph Kiner being the best player of his time, is there?

How important is batting average when you're leading the league in on base four seasons in a row? He's led the league in runs four times as well. You can't do either without being on base.