Poll - Greatest Living Player

[G1911]

Originally Posted by CobbSpikedMe

My opinion is Judge is better than Pujols. That's not going to change. Sorry if you don't like it.

Also, since there are no pink elephants by the way, there is no opinions on what color it is. There is only fact. When choosing what color elephant is the greatest color, there is only one choice, gray, so there is no opinion to be made. Bad analogy.


.

I'm sure it won't, nor do I need to like it. I'm just fascinated by this revolutionary notion that opinion should not be fact based. I suppose that to hold an opinion that cannot be argued on any objective grounds, one must throw out objectivity and facts entirely to still insist upon it, but it is rare to see it done so directly.

[CobbSpikedMe]

Originally Posted by G1911

I'm sure it won't, nor do I need to like it. I'm just fascinated by this revolutionary notion that opinion should not be fact based. I suppose that to hold an opinion that cannot be argued on any objective grounds, one must throw out objectivity and facts entirely to still insist upon it, but it is rare to see it done so directly.

"Revolutionary notion"? I don't think it's revolutionary. I don't see why you're getting so bent out of shape about this. My opinion may not be based on current statistical fact, but comparing a guy's lifetime stats against another guy who still has many years to go in his career is not really possible. It is possible to have an opinion that Judge is the better living player than Pujols was without looking at stats currently available.

You amuse me with your passion on this opinion vs. facts notion. One is not relevant to the other. It's apples and oranges. It's like the Red Sox fans chanting Yankees suck all the time. The Yankees franchise is the best team in baseball history, but their opinion is that they suck. Not based at all on facts or stats. It's just their opinion. And they are welcome to it. Same goes for any fan of any team of any sport who says their team is the best.



.

[packs]

If you are choosing to weigh stats in favor of your opinion that Bonds is the greatest living player, it's still only your opinion that stats are the determining factor of greatness.

The question wasn't which living player has the best stats; it was who do you think is the greatest. I don't think there's a strict formula for determining greatness.

[CobbSpikedMe]

Ok, I looked at some basic stats and here are the results of Judge's adjusted stats based on at bats to Pujols career stats.

What does this tell us? This is where Judge is headed if he has the same at bats that Pujols has. Pujols only wins in the hits, but Judge still has 3,000+ hits at this pace.

There are a couple of stats/facts for you.



.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by CobbSpikedMe

Ok, I looked at some basic stats and here are the results of Judge's adjusted stats based on at bats to Pujols career stats.

What does this tell us? This is where Judge is headed if he has the same at bats that Pujols has. Pujols only wins in the hits, but Judge still has 3,000+ hits at this pace.

There are a couple of stats/facts for you.



.

Obviously I think Pujols is better, but I'm not even arguing the stats. I'm arguing that an opinion that openly states it is not being fact-based, about an issue for which we can easily pull thousands of facts, is completely illogical and silly.

Why would you hold an opinion that is not fact based, when you could instead let facts shape opinion, and use reason?

[CobbSpikedMe]

Originally Posted by G1911

Obviously I think Pujols is better, but I'm not even arguing the stats. I'm arguing that an opinion that openly states it is not being fact-based, about an issue for which we can easily pull thousands of facts, is completely illogical and silly.

Why would you hold an opinion that is not fact based, when you could instead let facts shape opinion, and use reason?

I just gave you facts that show Judge is better than Pujols and now you still argue that my opinion is not fact/stat based. I can't win apparently with you. And you can't win with me. Stalemate.


.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by CobbSpikedMe

I just gave you facts that show Judge is better than Pujols and now you still argue that my opinion is not fact/stat based. I can't win apparently with you. And you can't win with me. Stalemate.


.

Yes, because it is not fact-based. You are the one who said that your opinion was not based in fact, which is what I have disagreed with. Here:

Originally Posted by CobbSpikedMe

It's an opinion, not a stats fact-based opinion.

.

If you would like to now use stats or other kinds of facts to form an opinion, we now agree.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by CobbSpikedMe

Ok, I looked at some basic stats and here are the results of Judge's adjusted stats based on at bats to Pujols career stats.

What does this tell us? This is where Judge is headed if he has the same at bats that Pujols has. Pujols only wins in the hits, but Judge still has 3,000+ hits at this pace.

There are a couple of stats/facts for you.



.

Mr Judge would need that Tony Gwynn insane bump in production in his mid/late 30s to end up with those totals. He is definitely my current favorite player. He is kinda like Bonds in that just watching his at bats brings excitement.

[CobbSpikedMe]

Originally Posted by bnorth

Mr Judge would need that Tony Gwynn insane bump in production in his mid/late 30s to end up with those totals. He is definitely my current favorite player. He is kinda like Bonds in that just watching his at bats brings excitement.

Very true Ben. I highly doubt he will end up with those stats, just wanted to compare the pace he is on with Pujols totals. I don't think anyone can compare his current stats with a lifetime stat of someone else. That was kind of what I was saying. I thought the whole conversation was fun though for sure.


.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by CobbSpikedMe

Ok, I looked at some basic stats and here are the results of Judge's adjusted stats based on at bats to Pujols career stats.

What does this tell us? This is where Judge is headed if he has the same at bats that Pujols has. Pujols only wins in the hits, but Judge still has 3,000+ hits at this pace.

There are a couple of stats/facts for you.



.

Judge is 32. That's not a realistic comparison. He isn't going to get to 11K at bats when at age 32 he doesn't even have 4K. So how does this mean anything?

[CobbSpikedMe]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Judge is 32. That's not a realistic comparison. He isn't going to get to 11K at bats when at age 32 he doesn't even have 4K. So how does this mean anything?

Of course he won't get to 11K ABs. My comparison makes sense because if he had a level playing field to compare, where both of them had the same ABs, then Judge would beat Pujols numbers in all the categories shown except hits. But Judge would still be a 3,000 hit club member and only be 150 short of Pujols. How else can you compare them unless they both had the same ABs? It's apples to oranges otherwise.


.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by CobbSpikedMe

Of course he won't get to 11K ABs. My comparison makes sense because if he had a level playing field to compare, where both of them had the same ABs, then Judge would beat Pujols numbers in all the categories shown except hits. But Judge would still be a 3,000 hit club member and only be 150 short of Pujols. How else can you compare them unless they both had the same ABs? It's apples to oranges otherwise.


.

I don't follow at all. So it's just irrelevant that Judge didn't start until age 25 and has spent lots of time on the DL? We just assume that away in order to compare him? I see no logic in this whatsoever?

[G1911]

Originally Posted by packs

If you are choosing to weigh stats in favor of your opinion that Bonds is the greatest living player, it's still only your opinion that stats are the determining factor of greatness.

The question wasn't which living player has the best stats; it was who do you think is the greatest. I don't think there's a strict formula for determining greatness.

Yes. It is an opinion, for like the fifth time. A fact-based opinion. One can use facts other than stats.

An analysis or opinion that ignores facts is a lesser opinion than one that uses facts to shape a coherent argument. It is obviously preferable to base and shape analyses, opinions and beliefs with facts. An opinion that presents itself as ignoring is just meaningless. This is very, very, very basic stuff.