Trout vs. Puig - who ya got?

[yk9001]

Looking at it, trying to be objective - I can't yet pick one over the other if I am starting a franchise.

[Toby Ziegler]

Trout, easily. And I'm not a homer, either, so there is objectivity here.

 

Don't get me wrong. Puig is quite a talent. He's better than Trout in only one area, and that's arm strength. He's got an absolute cannon.

 

I think Puig vs. Harper could be an interesting argument, though.

[WallyWorld]

really?  Trout has done it for almost 2 full years now, Puig not even half a season.  Trout has already improved his k/BB ratio, while Puig's is alarmingly bad and suggests a serious decline in his offensive numbers.  And then there's the whole attitude thing - Puig is a hothead and makes waves - Trout stays above all that and everyone around the league seems to like and respect him.  What's to decide?

[Caralho]

I can. Trout is a few months younger, plays better defense in center field and right now is cheaper than Puig. He's also a much better base runner. 

[Brandon]

Trout for now.

My main thing with Puig is the sample size before comparisons like this. He looks like the real deal but has cooled off from his crazy good start.

[fan_since79]

Trout, easily. And I'm not a homer, either, so there is objectivity here.

 

Don't get me wrong. Puig is quite a talent. He's better than Trout in only one area, and that's arm strength. He's got an absolute cannon.

 

I think Puig vs. Harper could be an interesting argument, though.

 

Yes he does:

 

http://wapc.mlb.com/play/?cid=mlb&content_id=29729947

[Halos of Anaheim]

Looking at it, trying to be objective - I can't yet pick one over the other if I am starting a franchise.

Are you joking right now? Go check out the Trout fWAR thread. He's already a top 10 player of all time at this pace he's going, and he's 0.7 WAR away (in 240 less games) from passing Mel Ott in most WAR through his age 21 season. 

 

He's going to have 200+ hits, 100+ walks, an OPS over 1.000+ all at 21. As said before...Puig vs Harper would be the better comparison.

[Jay]

Right now you have to say Trout, I think he's more marketable.

[Mudville]

Yasiel has the power, the questions arise when it comes to maturity and making good decisions. He looks like he could be the next Vlad but his demeanor doesn't seem as easy going. Articles already have popped up where other teams do not like his attitude, that he has anger issues. It could be acclimation to MLB and a language and cultural barrier but the warning signs are there, off field problems could pop up in the future.

 

For Trout it is pretty easy to believe he will keep a steady, even keel throughout his career. No major blowups on the field with the umpires, no confrontations with players or the staff. I doubt you ever read of Mike getting into trouble off the field. A good PR guy that will be marketable for more than just his stat line.

 

Since both are amazing talent on the field I would definitely go with Trout and enjoy never having to apologize for anything he may do on or off the field.

[NrM]

Puig has a .462 the  BABIP which is the highest  in baseball for players with at least 250 pa, and it's not even close.

 

 

Puig is very exciting, but I doubt there's anyone in baseball who would take him over trout right now.

 

I agree with the previous poster who said comparing puig to harper makes more sense.

[Jason]

Trout's maturity and discipline at this stage is amazing. He hasn't even reached his ceiling yet either. Trout has the abilities both physically and mentally to succeed at a higher level, for a longer time.

[yk9001]

Puig appears to be a winner.  I love Trout but look at the Dodgers' winning % before he got there and after.

[RePLAY]

Puig appears to be a winner.  I love Trout but look at the Dodgers' winning % before he got there and after.

 

Hows Trout's % last year before and after he got here?

[fan_since79]

It's not just Puig who's helping the Dodgers. A lot of guys have made big contributions to their amazing stretch. Schumaker, the two Ellis's, Punto, Jansen, among others.

 

But Puig brings an energy and a bit of craziness that can keep a team relaxed and confident as the wins start to mount.

[Reveille1984]

Puig appears to be a winner.  I love Trout but look at the Dodgers' winning % before he got there and after.

 

I'm sure Puig has coached the Dodgers pitching staff to have the 3rd best ERA in baseball.  Trout should get on that.

[fan_since79]

Since the All-Star break, their starters and bullpen have sub-2 ERA's and BAA below .200.

 

Their closer Jansen has something like a 10/1 K/BB ratio.

[Inside Pitch]

Looking at it, trying to be objective - I can't yet pick one over the other if I am starting a franchise.

 

 

I'd always take the guy who can play up the middle and has better plate discipline.  

 

I'm just happy MLB has Trout, Harper, Myers, Machado around...

[Jay]

Dodgers are on a roll but I don't believe it's because Puig is a winner.

[Troll Daddy]

Way too early to make this comparison. We'll know in 5 years.

[m0nkey]

In before YoT says "TWTW"

[Brandon]

Everyone knows the Dodgers resurgence is because Mattingly has coached better, some Sosh hasn't been able to do.

[Inside Pitch]

Trout, easily. And I'm not a homer, either, so there is objectivity here.

 

Don't get me wrong. Puig is quite a talent. He's better than Trout in only one area, and that's arm strength. He's got an absolute cannon.

 

I think Puig vs. Harper could be an interesting argument, though.

 

Agree..  I think Puig's power potential is with Harper's

[NrM]

Puig appears to be a winner.  I love Trout but look at the Dodgers' winning % before he got there and after.

Are you forgetting about Hanley Ramirez who also started playing the same time as Puig?

 

Hanley has been even better than Puig with the bat.

[eaterfan]

Puig is like Vlad Guerrero. Trout is better.

[sneaky_flute]

Considering Trout has established himself as one of the best players two years in a row and Puig is playing way above his head, I think I'll go with Trout.