Jump to content
  • Welcome to AngelsWin.com

    AngelsWin.com - THE Internet Home for Angels fans! Unraveling Angels Baseball ... One Thread at a Time.

    Register today to join the most interactive online Angels community on the net!

    Once you're a member you'll see less advertisements. Become a Premium member and you won't see any ads! 

     

IGNORED

Kershaw or Trout?


santini1

Recommended Posts

Two very different players of different positions but they are both doing great things for each of their own roles... who do you think is the better player? not now, i mean taking age into account (trout doing things that 22 year olds have never done, and Kershaw's early accomplishments and only getting better). I think we can all agree that if we compare them to players of the past, theyre both doing things that would rank them among the top players to ever play if they stay on track and healthy for the rest of their careers. So, who do you think ends up with a better career?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kershaw is the best pitcher on the planet (Arguably)

Trouts the best player on the planet (not arguably)

 

This. It is like comparing a quarterback and a running back - they fulfill two different roles.

 

That said, we can compare relative dominance. Check out Trout's fWAR over the last three years:

 

25.7 Trout

18.6 McCutchen

17.9 Cabrera

16.8 Cano

14.8 Wright

 

Now compare Kershaw's RAR-WAR over the same span:

19.5 Kershaw

15.4 Hernandez

15.1 Sale

13.3 Darvish

12.9 Scherzer

 

Trout has been 38.2% better than the next best player, while Kershaw has been 26.6% better. Given all of the variations in statistics, I think it is pretty close: both are clearly the best at what they do, with Trout getting the edge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This. It is like comparing a quarterback and a running back - they fulfill two different roles.

 

That said, we can compare relative dominance. Check out Trout's fWAR over the last three years:

 

25.7 Trout

18.6 McCutchen

17.9 Cabrera

16.8 Cano

14.8 Wright

 

Now compare Kershaw's RAR-WAR over the same span:

19.5 Kershaw

15.4 Hernandez

15.1 Sale

13.3 Darvish

12.9 Scherzer

 

Trout has been 38.2% better than the next best player, while Kershaw has been 26.6% better. Given all of the variations in statistics, I think it is pretty close: both are clearly the best at what they do, with Trout getting the edge.

 

WAR for pitchers is pretty much worthless as it's basically a glorified version of FIP*, outcomes on balls in play are completely ignored in determining WAR for pitchers. Players like Jered Weaver who induce lots of weak popups have almost the same fWAR ratings as players like Joe Blanton who don't give up free passes but allow doubles every other at bat. 

 

IMO the difference between Kershaw and the others should be greater. 

 

*FIP = ((13*HR)+(3*(BB+HBP))-(2*K))/IP + constant

Edited by ScottLux
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guys , I think most of you are missing the argument. Im not ask in who you prefer, obviously most of us will take the everyday player, I mean in terms of production at their respective positions.Angelsjunky put it great with those numbers though, exactly what I was looking for ! Some sort of comparison vs others from their own position s.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

AJ your analogy is way off. This more like a quarterback and a field goal kicker.

The quarterback spends most of the time orchestrating the scoring for the team and drives the offense.

The field goal kicker only spends a minor part of any game on the field and often his contribution is overshadowed by what the rest of the offense did. Only once in a while is the team really depending on him. Most of the time he could go 0-5 in field goals and still win.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is tough.  Based on what they have done already, both could be one of the best to ever play.  Kershaw has done it for much longer though so I will go with Kershaw, for now.  Both are the best at what they do.  I don't understand how Kershaw is arguably the best.  Who comes close?  He isn't even in his prime yet and he already has 6 1/2 years of stats that give him a 2.55 ERA, a half point below the next qualified starter.  He has every qualified starter beat in ERA, FIP, and ERA+ by a decent margin.  I would rather have Trout then Kershaw because he is an every day player, but I think at this point its safer to say Kershaw has been better at his trade then Trout has (as ridiculous as that sounds).  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As far as kershaw being the best, id still argue that felix needs to be considered. Similar numbers, but felix does it in the tougher league.

I read a good article a few years back about how the nl cy young almost always (in the last decade) comes from the west. And it mentioned how much the parks in the west favor pitchers (sans az and coors), and how the west is generally a weak division overall. Meaning that the number 1 team generally has the best pitcher, and the teams behind are generally pretty bad.

Oakland has been good for 3 or so yesrs now, texas was until recently. Weve had pitching isdues but have been good offensively for a few years, and aside from 10/11 were great offensively before that. Thats who felix has been facing

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's like comparing a quarterback with a middle linebacker. The pitchers job is to shut down the opposing offensive. However in this case the middle linebacker 9th plays one out of five games.

AJ your analogy is way off. This more like a quarterback and a field goal kicker.

The quarterback spends most of the time orchestrating the scoring for the team and drives the offense.

The field goal kicker only spends a minor part of any game on the field and often his contribution is overshadowed by what the rest of the offense did. Only once in a while is the team really depending on him. Most of the time he could go 0-5 in field goals and still win.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is tough. Based on what they have done already, both could be one of the best to ever play. Kershaw has done it for much longer though so I will go with Kershaw, for now. Both are the best at what they do. I don't understand how Kershaw is arguably the best. Who comes close? He isn't even in his prime yet and he already has 6 1/2 years of stats that give him a 2.55 ERA, a half point below the next qualified starter. He has every qualified starter beat in ERA, FIP, and ERA+ by a decent margin. I would rather have Trout then Kershaw because he is an every day player, but I think at this point its safer to say Kershaw has been better at his trade then Trout has (as ridiculous as that sounds).

This. I dont know how any pitcher comes close to kershaw (up to this point in his career). And I dont think I understood, did you say Coors and AZ favors pitchers?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, I said sans those two (not those two). But the latrine, att and petco are all. Ig time pitcher parks.

The dogs are the class of the division...the rox have some bats but on the road are a different story...after that who? The giants have a weak offense, arizona is a shell of itslef and the pads are horrible (offense wise). When the giants were winning a few years ago, the dodger offense was horrible, and the other teams were as they are today.

Im not taking anything away from kershaw. I hate the dodgers but love him. But pitching where hes been the last few years has benefitted him, as its benefitted the giants staff as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...