Who was better? Tim Salmon or Garret Anderson

[Dick B Back]

Who has the Angels record for most RBIs in a game?

[T.G.]

Brandon Wood.

[PattyD22]

7 minutes ago, Dick B Back said:

Who has the Angels record for most RBIs in a game?

I know who it is, but I still think overall Salmon was slightly better.

i wanted to guess Freddie Patek though.

[Kevin]

GA had the better eye infection.

 

[Dick B Back]

17 hours ago, Dick B Back said:

Who has the Angels record for most RBIs in a game?

Too easy, I know.

How about who has the Angels record for most doubles in a season?

[T.G.]

28 minutes ago, Dick B Back said:

Too easy, I know.

How about who has the Angels record for most doubles in a season?

That would be @Stradling - He's definitely had the most double-doubles.

[Stradling]

30 minutes ago, True Grich said:

That would be @Stradling - He's definitely had the most double-doubles.

Yes.  The number is alarming. 

[Dick B Back]

21 minutes ago, RBM said:

Garret Anderson

Correct! GA had 56 doubles in 2002.

[Dick B Back]

Here’s the next one-

Who has the Angels single season record for extra base hits?

[Stradling]

Just now, RBM said:

Garret Anderson.

Wait, why isn't Tim Salmon the answer to any of these questions? Is there an underlying agenda at play here?

Tim Salmon was the better player, it really isn’t close.  It has nothing to do with what you are hinting at.  GA was awesome, but he isn’t Tim Salmon.  

[Pancake Bear]

7 minutes ago, RBM said:

Garret Anderson.

Wait, why isn't Tim Salmon the answer to any of these questions? Is there an underlying agenda at play here?

Being okay for a long time doesn’t make you elite. Anderson was more durable. Salmon was comfortably ahead when healthy. So, yeah, Anderson generally leads in counting stats. That shouldn’t be a surprise. He’s also generally behind in rate stats for most seasons they played together - not just the end of his career when he probably should’ve just retired. 

[Pancake Bear]

This is why counting stats being used for hall of fame voting can be at times problematic. Basically, we can end up overvaluing someone whose main value was playing a long time. That’s not to say durability and longevity don’t have value, but ask any team which they’d rather have in a given season: Longevity means jack. They want the better player. Context is essential when dealing with counting stats. 

[Stradling]

16 minutes ago, RBM said:

Garret Anderson.

Wait, why isn't Tim Salmon the answer to any of these questions? Is there an underlying agenda at play here?

No.  Salmon was better.  

There you go.  

[Stradling]

7 minutes ago, RBM said:

Are you saying you think Anderson was ok for a long time and Salmon was elite?

I’ll say it like this, but you won’t care because you are willing to die on this hill, Garret had one season better than Salmon’s career average in OPS+.  Salmon had 7 years better than Garret’s best year in OPS+.  

[Stradling]

Just now, RBM said:

Again, not a question for you.

I see a trend.

You should probably send him a message since you are posting on a forum and getting upset that others are responding.  

[Lou]

Waiting for nerd to post Close & Late stats.

 

 

 

Please. 

[stormngt]

GA was an multiple All Star and won HR derby

waiting for the board to explode!!!!!!!

[Dick B Back]

4 hours ago, RBM said:

Garret Anderson.

Wait, why isn't Tim Salmon the answer to any of these questions? Is there an underlying agenda at play here?

I voted that Salmon was better than GA.

My underlying questions were to show that although GA was not as good, he did alot of things not many have and holds many single game, season, and totals records for the club.

My personal opinion is that we should retire numbers 15 and 16.

[beatlesrule]

On 3/3/2020 at 9:06 AM, VariousCrap said:

Love them both.  They made the 90's and early 2000's so much fun to watch Angels baseball. 

Without even seeing their numbers, my first reaction was Salmon over Anderson.  After seeing their numbers, I see my first reaction was correct.

Exactly this. I thought it was one of those trick threads that actually proved GA was better but no, it's not one of those threads.

[Kevin]

GA being lazy made him more durable.

 

Edge: Lowell

[Pancake Bear]

2 hours ago, RBM said:

Are you saying you think Anderson was ok for a long time and Salmon was elite?

I think Anderson’s durability masked how much better Salmon was, yes. I think if Salmon has matched Anderson’s games played, he would have had significantly better counting stats. However, Anderson was durable, and Salmon was less so. 

I think Salmon was an all star level talent over five or more years. I think Anderson was a slightly above average major league outfielder who had two very solid seasons, one of which was all star level.

I think the only way anyone can argue Anderson was better is by using counting stats. Those are relatively easy to counter. 

On the other hand, to counter my contention that Salmon was better, you would have to explain how Salmon had no less than 7 seasons with a higher wRC+ than Anderson’s best year. Most of Anderson’s years were either just barely above 100 (league average) or just under (after his prime). From 93 through 06, Timmy had 2 seasons below 110. One of which was an injury shortened season of 2005. 

So, tl;dr: After reviewing the numbers, yes, I would say Salmon was elite, albeit he struggled with injuries more, while Anderson was slightly above average in his prime years and just okay the rest of them. 

[Pancake Bear]

54 minutes ago, RBM said:

I have no problem with someone saying Salmon was the better player but this statement is ridiculous IMO.

 

1 hour ago, Pancake Bear said:

On the other hand, to counter my contention that Salmon was better, you would have to explain how Salmon had no less than 7 seasons with a higher wRC+ than Anderson’s best year. Most of Anderson’s years were either just barely above 100 (league average) or just under (after his prime). From 93 through 06, Timmy had 2 seasons below 110. One of which was an injury shortened season of 2005. 

I’m open to you trying, but I don’t know how successful you’ll be. The facts are pretty clear. 

[Lou]

I don't think either number should be retired. 

[disarcina]

was always a huge fan of GA !  - look at his annual stats for about a ten year period -roughly 1984-1994 there abouts --

for a span of those years he was in the top three- to - five in the total hits category in all of MLB --- the guy topping him was Derek Jeter.

GA could field -- I think the comments about his 'laziness' in the field are not only inaccurate but offensive.

GA seemed to be loping after a fly ball when in reality  - If you really watched GA play - particularly CF -- he got such a good read of the ball off the bat and a good jump -- he didn't need to run all out (which can actually make catching the fly ball/ line drive more difficult) because he was pretty much there at the spot of the ball -- GA also must have positioned himself well in the OF to get those jumps and read on the ball.

GA was very consistent. He was well on his way to a 3,000 total career hit total when he injured his back stopping his consistent hit total of about 175 hits a season.

I think GA is one of the great all time Halos. Not dis-respect to Timmy Salmon who is also a all time great Halo and a face of the franchise player (something GA never was and really shied away from) - I just think GA was the better all around ballplayer and athlete. I'm pretty sure GA played three sports in high school -- that used to be the norm for great players -- it's becoming less and less the case these days as players tend to focus on just one sport these days from an early age. Not a good development IMO.

[Dick B Back]

5 minutes ago, Lou said:

I don't think either number should be retired. 

If we only retired numbers of HOFers who retired with an Angels cap on, the wall would be almost bare and Mikey would be wearing #26 or somethin’.