Depressing twitter thread RE Trout.

[eligrba]

5 minutes ago, Kevinb said:

Sorry winning titles actually means something. The entire reason we play sports is to win. Jordan won 6, LeBron won 4, Gretzky has 4, Brady on a much larger roster has 5, Big Ben has 2 same as Peyton, even Rodgers has 1 as does Brees. Winning and being the best player on the team that wins is important to ones legacy.

Competition is why people play sports.  If winning was the only reason to play, people who do not win enough would complain incessantly to point of great annoyance.

[kevinb]

Just now, The_Outrunner said:

I actually submitted accidentally,but yes you're right

I know. BTW now Ovi has one too. 

[kevinb]

Just now, eligrba said:

Competition is why people play sports.  If winning was the only reason to play, people who do not win enough would complain incessantly to point of great annoyance.

You are right we play sports because we love competition and we love to win. Losers complain winners do not. You are obviously not a fan of sports. Go on this message board the day we lose it's a giant complaint fest. When we win it is much more quiet. 

[Stradling]

1 minute ago, Kevinb said:

So you said he wasn't a pitcher but he is? Ok got it. 

Yes twat I did, then I admitted I was wrong.   You are incapable of admitting you are ever wrong because you are incapable of ever seeing you are wrong.   It’s due to your overall lack of intelligence and your incredible amount of arrogance.  

[Stradling]

Just now, Kevinb said:

You are right we play sports because we love competition and we love to win. Losers complain winners do not. You are obviously not a fan of sports. Go on this message board the day we lose it's a giant complaint fest. When we win it is much more quiet. 

He’s not a fan of sports?  What a fucking joke.   

[The_Outrunner]

4 minutes ago, Kevinb said:

I know. BTW now Ovi has one too. 

Aaron donald, Ovi and Trout? Haha 

[eligrba]

2 minutes ago, Stradling said:

He’s not a fan of sports?  What a Facking joke.   

[kevinb]

1 minute ago, The_Outrunner said:

Aaron donald, Ovi and Trout? Haha 

Ha 

Well to be fair Donald has only been in the league 5 years. Trout still has at least 10 plus years left so there is plenty of time for him to get one. 

[kevinb]

7 minutes ago, Stradling said:

Yes twat I did, then I admitted I was wrong.   You are incapable of admitting you are ever wrong because you are incapable of ever seeing you are wrong.   It’s due to your overall lack of intelligence and your incredible amount of arrogance.  

I am admit when I am wrong. I have even wrote back that I was wrong on the message board. But I do love your insults. They are kind of comforting in a way. 

 

[Lou]

15 minutes ago, Kevinb said:

I have even wrote back that I was wrong on the message board

[Angelsjunky]

2018 (2nd): Betts was statistically slightly better than Trout, so there is no fault there. Add in playing for arguably the greatest Red Sox team ever and that makes it easy for voters.

2017 (4th): Injury, but probably would have won if he played just 130+ games rather than 114.

2016 (1st): Deserved it over Betts, despite East Coast Butthurt.

2015 (2nd): Lost to Donaldson who was worthy, but Trout was better according to B-R (9.4 to 8.5) and Fangraphs (9.3 to 8.7)

2014 (1st): His worst year (8.3 fWAR) but still far better than #2 in fWAR, Brantley (6.5)

2013 (2nd): fWAR leader (10.1) but lost to Miggy in his best year (.348/.442/.636, 44 HR, 137 RBI, 8.6 fWAR). 

2012 (2nd): fWAR leader (10.0) but lost to Triple Crown Miggy (.330-44-139, 7.2 fWAR). 

I would say that he was never truly robbed of an MVP - nothing truly egregious. He probably should have won it in 2015, but Donaldson was also great and close enough, and of course the Blue Jays made it to the ALCS. 2013, also, but five years ago WAR wasn't quite as ubiquitous as it is now, and Miggy was ridiculous.

[Pancake Bear]

36 minutes ago, Kevinb said:

Sorry winning titles actually means something. The entire reason we play sports is to win. Jordan won 6, LeBron won 4, Gretzky has 4, Brady on a much larger roster has 5, Big Ben has 2 same as Peyton, even Rodgers has 1 as does Brees. Winning and being the best player on the team that wins is important to ones legacy.

Barry Bonds - 0 rings

Ted Williams - 0

Ty Cobb - 0

Carl Yastrzemski, Griffey, Gwynn - ditto. 

Ever heard of Luis Sojo? Former California Angel; career WAR: 4.2 in 848 PA over 16 seasons; he has 5 rings. 

Winning a championship sounds good on your resume, but in most sports it means next to nothing about how good you actually are. 

Peyton Manning won Super Bowl 50, becoming the worst QB (by his performance in that season) to win a SB. 

It sounds good to people who don’t know how to rate talent, but it means jack regarding what level they are as a player.

Whenever someone uses rings in an argument, it says “I have no idea how to actually measure a player’s skill and I’ve fallen for the stupid historical narrative that the best players win”. 

Best QB’s all time? There’s too many variable based on quality of team, etc. but just based on individual numbers - it’s probably Peyton or Brees. Brady is probably top 5, maybe even 3rd, but he isn’t a better QB than either of those guys. 

Back to baseball: No one effects the game even to the extent a QB does in football. Trout has more than anyone since Bonds. Remember how many rings Bonds has? Scroll up - or I’ll just tell you: It’s zero. 

Rings tell us absolutely *nothing* about how good a player is. 

[tdawg87]

6 minutes ago, Sean-Regan said:

Barry Bonds - 0 rings

Ted Williams - 0

Ty Cobb - 0

Carl Yastrzemski, Griffey, Gwynn - ditto. 

Ever heard of Luis Sojo? Former California Angel; career WAR: 4.2 in 848 PA over 16 seasons; he has 5 rings. 

Winning a championship sounds good on your resume, but in most sports it means next to nothing about how good you actually are. 

Peyton Manning won Super Bowl 50, becoming the worst QB (by his performance in that season) to win a SB. 

It sounds good to people who don’t know how to rate talent, but it means jack regarding what level they are as a player.

Whenever someone uses rings in an argument, it says “I have no idea how to actually measure a player’s skill and I’ve fallen for the stupid historical narrative that the best players win”. 

Best QB’s all time? There’s too many variable based on quality of team, etc. but just based on individual numbers - it’s probably Peyton or Brees. Brady is probably top 5, maybe even 3rd, but he isn’t a better QB than either of those guys. 

Back to baseball: No one effects the game even to the extent a QB does in football. Trout has more than anyone since Bonds. Remember how many rings Bonds has? Scroll up - or I’ll just tell you: It’s zero. 

Rings tell us absolutely *nothing* about how good a player is. 

[kevinb]

25 minutes ago, Sean-Regan said:

Barry Bonds - 0 rings

Ted Williams - 0

Ty Cobb - 0

Carl Yastrzemski, Griffey, Gwynn - ditto. 

Ever heard of Luis Sojo? Former California Angel; career WAR: 4.2 in 848 PA over 16 seasons; he has 5 rings. 

Winning a championship sounds good on your resume, but in most sports it means next to nothing about how good you actually are. 

Peyton Manning won Super Bowl 50, becoming the worst QB (by his performance in that season) to win a SB. 

It sounds good to people who don’t know how to rate talent, but it means jack regarding what level they are as a player.

Whenever someone uses rings in an argument, it says “I have no idea how to actually measure a player’s skill and I’ve fallen for the stupid historical narrative that the best players win”. 

Best QB’s all time? There’s too many variable based on quality of team, etc. but just based on individual numbers - it’s probably Peyton or Brees. Brady is probably top 5, maybe even 3rd, but he isn’t a better QB than either of those guys. 

Back to baseball: No one effects the game even to the extent a QB does in football. Trout has more than anyone since Bonds. Remember how many rings Bonds has? Scroll up - or I’ll just tell you: It’s zero. 

Rings tell us absolutely *nothing* about how good a player is. 

This will be fun. What I said was "Winning and being the best player on the team that wins is important to ones legacy."

Yaz, Griffey, Bonds, and Gwynn were great players. But they didn't win titles. So they are great players who didn't win titles. 

Nope never heard of Luis Sojo. Also I am glad he won 5 titles. No where did I say winning a title makes you great. I again said "winning and being the best player on the team that wins is important to ones legacy." It is ok I will let that pass being as this is our first discussion.

While yes Peyton won Super Bowl 50 being terrible you know what he also did was win when he was great. If Peyton only won when he was terrible he would looked on differently. Also Peyton better than Brady? Hmm you do know they were in the AFC and at the peak at the same time. He also beat Brady 3 times out of the 5 in the playoffs. You know what Peyton doesn't have though? 3 more titles. Brees is great but guess what Brees also has a ring. Has been at the peak the same amount as Brady and Brady has more. Brees also didn't make the playoffs a handful of times while Brady was consistently there. Brady went to the Super Bowl 8 times. How many has Brees been to? Peyton? How about combined? 3 times combined. But hey Brees is still playing he could get there again. 

Rings are not the end all be all of who's an all time great. But if you are an all time great rings matter, it's why we play the game. To win. Jim Kelly went 0-4 in Super Bowls and that kills me as a Bills fan, Marino got to 1 and lost. Both are extremely talented and great QB's of their time, just aren't as good as some of the ones who got one. I would take Troy Aikman over Jim Kelly. Aikman got there faced the Bills and smoked them twice. I love Jim Kelly but he couldn't get the ring. 

Winning a ring doesn't mean you're great. But if you are great and you win a ring, especially as the best player on the team, it is the cherry on top of a delicious sundae. 

[Stradling]

Oh so it’s less about greatness and more about legacy.  Those guys that won more championships had better teams.  

[kevinb]

Maybe. Maybe they didn't. I am not going to go through all of this and every single year but for an example Tom Brady became the full time qb in 2001. Tom Brady won a Super Bowl that post season. The team went 11-5 that year. The year prior to that year the team went 5-11. So you are telling me the team became that much better in one year and it had very little to do with Tom Brady? They went up against the greatest offense in history at that time in the Rams. The team that won the Super Bowl 2 years before. It is about legacy. Legacy matters, and so do rings. 

[kevinb]

How do you determine better teams by winning in regular season? 

or winning in the post season?

2004 the Boston Red Sox finished with a record of 98-64 second place in the AL East. Yankees had a record of 101-61 and finished first. Which team was better? 

Winning something in the post season means something. It is historic. It is what legacies are built on. No one cares the Yankees finished the season in first place. They care that Boston held the trophy at the end of the year. 

[Pancake Bear]

22 minutes ago, Kevinb said:

This will be fun. What I said was "Winning and being the best player on the team that wins is important to ones legacy."

Yaz, Griffey, Bonds, and Gwynn were great players. But they didn't win titles. So they are great players who didn't win titles. 

Nope never heard of Luis Sojo. Also I am glad he won 5 titles. No where did I say winning a title makes you great. I again said "winning and being the best player on the team that wins is important to ones legacy." It is ok I will let that pass being as this is our first discussion.

While yes Peyton won Super Bowl 50 being terrible you know what he also did was win when he was great. If Peyton only won when he was terrible he would looked on differently. Also Peyton better than Brady? Hmm you do know they were in the AFC and at the peak at the same time. He also beat Brady 3 times out of the 5 in the playoffs. You know what Peyton doesn't have though? 3 more titles. Brees is great but guess what Brees also has a ring. Has been at the peak the same amount as Brady and Brady has more. Brees also didn't make the playoffs a handful of times while Brady was consistently there. Brady went to the Super Bowl 8 times. How many has Brees been to? Peyton? How about combined? 3 times combined. But hey Brees is still playing he could get there again. 

Rings are not the end all be all of who's an all time great. But if you are an all time great rings matter, it's why we play the game. To win. Jim Kelly went 0-4 in Super Bowls and that kills me as a Bills fan, Marino got to 1 and lost. Both are extremely talented and great QB's of their time, just aren't as good as some of the ones who got one. I would take Troy Aikman over Jim Kelly. Aikman got there faced the Bills and smoked them twice. I love Jim Kelly but he couldn't get the ring. 

Winning a ring doesn't mean you're great. But if you are great and you win a ring, especially as the best player on the team, it is the cherry on top of a delicious sundae. 

Isn’t that exactly what I said to begin with? One wonders what exactly you were disagreeing with. My whole point: Being on a winning team doesn’t tell us how good of a player you are. You just said the same thing. You also said basically it’s a legacy thing: Which, again, is exactly what I said in the first post that you disagreed with. 

I’m left to assume that your replies then were simply acknowledging that I was right. 

I agree. 

[kevinb]

6 minutes ago, Sean-Regan said:

Isn’t that exactly what I said to begin with? One wonders what exactly you were disagreeing with. My whole point: Being on a winning team doesn’t tell us how good of a player you are. You just said the same thing. You also said basically it’s a legacy thing: Which, again, is exactly what I said in the first post that you disagreed with. 

I’m left to assume that your replies then were simply acknowledging that I was right. 

I agree. 

I don't completely agree with you but I don't completely disagree with you either. The thing that matters is winning. It is the only reason we play whatever sport we play. Be it golf, rec hockey, or if you are a pro athlete you play to win the game, cue the Herm Edwards video. Arguing rings is important between the all time greats. Arguing rings just to argue rings is dumb. Robert Horry has 7 rings that does not make him better than Jordan. But arguing who was better Malone, Barkley or Jordan. Jordan dominated them in the same era and had 6 rings. Debate over Jordan wins imo.

 

[ten ocho recon scout]

3 hours ago, Kevinb said:

Um he said that none of the guys I said were pitchers. Not that one of the guys got hurt and didn't pitch.

Dude...lol, i swear to god you argue just for the sake of arguing. 

Youre the dude that turns into grammar nazi when you cant make an actual argument. 

To your point on ohtani, HES A DH until further stated. And even if he was Pedro in his good years, that would be ONE guy out of 5 SP spots.

In reference to rodman and when he joined the Bulls, 'Uh' its anecdotal. I never implied 2 guys would suddenly change us....not that two basketball players would change us. Its simply pointing out no matter how good trout or anyone else is, it doesnt matter if the TEAM isnt deep....not 3 or 4 guys in a lineup

[kevinb]

3 minutes ago, ten ocho recon scout said:

Dude...lol, i swear to god you argue just for the sake of arguing. 

Youre the dude that turns into grammar nazi when you cant make an actual argument. 

To your point on ohtani, HES A DH until further stated. And even if he was Pedro in his good years, that would be ONE guy out of 5 SP spots.

In reference to rodman and when he joined the Bulls, 'Uh' its anecdotal. I never implied 2 guys would suddenly change us....not that two basketball players would change us. Its simply pointing out no matter how good trout or anyone else is, it doesnt matter if the TEAM isnt deep....not 3 or 4 guys in a lineup

Um he said none of the guys were pitchers with Ohtani being one of the guys. He’s a dh and a pitcher. He wouldn’t have won the rookie of the year being just a dh. And it’s not anecdotal you were the one that mentioned two players. I was just curious what you meant by Pippen and Rodman and what you meant by it. And why you didn’t think Ohtani Simmons and Upton weren’t able to be either. But I agree completely normal to get angry about that. 

[Tank]

36 minutes ago, ten ocho recon scout said:

Dude...lol, i swear to god you argue just for the sake of arguing. 

carve it in stone.

[eligrba]

14 hours ago, Kevinb said:

Sorry winning titles actually means something. The entire reason we play sports is to win. Jordan won 6, LeBron won 4, Gretzky has 4, Brady on a much larger roster has 5, Big Ben has 2 same as Peyton, even Rodgers has 1 as does Brees. Winning and being the best player on the team that wins is important to ones legacy.

 

14 hours ago, Kevinb said:

Oh is it? Randy Johnson 1 title, Roger Clemens 2 titles, Derek Jeter 5 titles, Greg Maddux 1 Title, Alex Rodriguez 1 title, Mariano Rivera 5. Man great players in baseball don't win titles 

 

14 hours ago, Kevinb said:

You are right we play sports because we love competition and we love to win. Losers complain winners do not. You are obviously not a fan of sports. Go on this message board the day we lose it's a giant complaint fest. When we win it is much more quiet. 

 

12 hours ago, Kevinb said:

This will be fun. What I said was "Winning and being the best player on the team that wins is important to ones legacy."

Yaz, Griffey, Bonds, and Gwynn were great players. But they didn't win titles. So they are great players who didn't win titles. 

Nope never heard of Luis Sojo. Also I am glad he won 5 titles. No where did I say winning a title makes you great. I again said "winning and being the best player on the team that wins is important to ones legacy." It is ok I will let that pass being as this is our first discussion.

While yes Peyton won Super Bowl 50 being terrible you know what he also did was win when he was great. If Peyton only won when he was terrible he would looked on differently. Also Peyton better than Brady? Hmm you do know they were in the AFC and at the peak at the same time. He also beat Brady 3 times out of the 5 in the playoffs. You know what Peyton doesn't have though? 3 more titles. Brees is great but guess what Brees also has a ring. Has been at the peak the same amount as Brady and Brady has more. Brees also didn't make the playoffs a handful of times while Brady was consistently there. Brady went to the Super Bowl 8 times. How many has Brees been to? Peyton? How about combined? 3 times combined. But hey Brees is still playing he could get there again. 

Rings are not the end all be all of who's an all time great. But if you are an all time great rings matter, it's why we play the game. To win. Jim Kelly went 0-4 in Super Bowls and that kills me as a Bills fan, Marino got to 1 and lost. Both are extremely talented and great QB's of their time, just aren't as good as some of the ones who got one. I would take Troy Aikman over Jim Kelly. Aikman got there faced the Bills and smoked them twice. I love Jim Kelly but he couldn't get the ring. 

Winning a ring doesn't mean you're great. But if you are great and you win a ring, especially as the best player on the team, it is the cherry on top of a delicious sundae. 

 

12 hours ago, Kevinb said:

How do you determine better teams by winning in regular season? 

or winning in the post season?

2004 the Boston Red Sox finished with a record of 98-64 second place in the AL East. Yankees had a record of 101-61 and finished first. Which team was better? 

Winning something in the post season means something. It is historic. It is what legacies are built on. No one cares the Yankees finished the season in first place. They care that Boston held the trophy at the end of the year. 

Have you thought about packaging these gems as a training program for coaches?  Sounds like you have something to offer.

[kevinb]

49.99 plus shipping and handling

[UndertheHalo]

Presumably covering Puig is riveting for Alden. 

Few things better then covering a cognitively impaired man child I suppose. 

Edited November 17, 2018 by UndertheHalo