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! 

     

Trout 60-WAR Watch


Recommended Posts

He's at 59.8 after last night's 2 home runs.

On pace for 51 HR, 131 Runs, 131 BB. Leading the majors in Runs, Walks, OBP, Stolen Base Pct, Runs Created, Times on Base, and tied with J.D. Martinez in HR. Right behind Betts in SLG. Leading MLB in WAR, of course.

https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/t/troutmi01.shtml

 

Edited by fan_since79
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, fan_since79 said:

He's at 59.8 after last night's 2 home runs.

On pace for 51 HR, 131 Runs, 131 BB. Leading the majors in Runs, Walks, OBP, Stolen Base Pct, Runs Created, Times on Base, and tied with J.D. Martinez in HR. Right behind Betts in SLG. Leading MLB in WAR, of course.

https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/t/troutmi01.shtml

 

Havent paid attention to stats in a long time. But pretty amazing hes leading in so many categories.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, ten ocho recon scout said:

Havent paid attention to stats in a long time. But pretty amazing hes leading in so many categories.

He's leading in a few more specialized categories as well.

A sabermetrician's dream player. I especially like his career adjusted OPS+ of 174 which puts him 6th place all-time, ahead of Mantle, Cobb, Foxx, Mays, DiMaggio, and a bunch of other Hall of Famers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, fan_since79 said:

On pace for 55 home runs but only 105 RBI.

On pace now for 14.3 WAR this year. Ruth's 14.1 is the record for position players, set in 1923.

 

This is proof to me that WAR isn't accurate.

I love Trout as much as any Angel fan but this stuff comparing him to Ruth is silly..Jesus, Ruth almost hit .400 in 23.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Angels#1Fan said:

This is proof to me that WAR isn't accurate.

I love Trout as much as any Angel fan but this stuff comparing him to Ruth is silly..Jesus, Ruth almost hit .400 in 23.

You aren't considering the fact Ruth only faced white players and no relief pitchers. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Angels#1Fan said:

I'm considering the fact that at this point in Trout's career he isn't as good as Ruth was..and it isn't close!

Babe Ruth played nearly 100 years ago. How could you possibly know this?

You also dodged the actual fact that Ruth faced nothing but white players and the same pitcher for the entire game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, tdawg87 said:

Also Babe Ruth is the all-time WAR leader. There's a reason for that.

If WAR was really accurate Ruth's numbers would be even higher.

Ruth won 94 games and lost only 46 as a pitcher with a era of 2.28..how many games has Trout won?

If I was starting a team and I had a choice of Ruth or Trout being my first player I'd choose Ruth every time.

When Trout's career is over perhaps he'll equal Ruth and other HOF players but that hasn't been written yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Angels#1Fan said:

If WAR was really accurate Ruth's numbers would be even higher.

Ruth won 94 games and lost only 46 as a pitcher with a era of 2.28..how many games has Trout won?

If I was starting a team and I had a choice of Ruth or Trout being my first player I'd choose Ruth every time.

When Trout's career is over perhaps he'll equal Ruth and other HOF players but that hasn't been written yet.

Tim McCarver and Joe Morgan were having this exact discussion the other day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, tdawg87 said:

Because I live in the present? Baseball players are as good as they've ever been.

If you choose to disagree that's up to you.

That's only your opinion that players are better today..maybe they are and maybe they aren't.

If for example you are in the crowd that believes pitchers only threw 82 mph 100 years ago then I can see how you arrived at your opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, eaterfan said:

Nothing screams "coherent argument" like claiming a stat is bad because a player is the best of all time when that's exactly what the stat says.

Maybe he was better than the stat says?

BTW..I don't necessarily think the stat is bad (I in fact didn't say that either). I said imo it wasn't accurate.

BTW..I based my argument about the accuracy of WAR on Ruth having a far bigger season in 23 than Trout this year!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Angels#1Fan said:

That's only your opinion that players are better today..maybe they are and maybe they aren't.

It's pretty well proven players are better today. Pitching velocity has steadily risen. If you want to think about it a little more deeply, read Ben Lindberg's article on pitcher hitting over the last century. Pitchers are basically a control group - players who aren't selected for their ability to hit. The closest thing we can get to pulling an average Joe from the stands and putting him out there. Pitcher hitting has declined relative to league average steadily over the last century. It suggests that relative to the general population the players have gotten steadily better over the last century.

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...