Discussion in 'MLB Baseball Forum' started by Rock Strongo, Jul 6, 2018.
Mookie hasn't played 2nd base since 2014. There's no point in mentioning this.
You did notice the thread we’re on, right?
yes, and it has little relevance. it's like saying Bryce Harper has experience behind the plate.
My point was, fuck second base, there’s no point of this thread. Mookie’s own grandmother wouldn’t take him over Trout.
Unless she’s retarded.
betts has 40/40 potential like trout (neither have done it yet).
mookie has as many 100 RBI seasons as trout in 3 fewer full seasons.
in mookies first 4 seasons, he is a .299 hitter. trout was .308 after his first 4.
in those first 4, trout fanned a whopping 617 times (154 per season). mookie has struck out 281 times in his first 4 seasons, i.e a bit more than half as many k's over that time frame vs trout.
trout out walked mookie 352 to 213 over that same span.
food for thought is all.
This is due to Betts getting more at bats per season (partially because he walks less and partially because he's on better offenses). Trout's career high in at bats in 602, whereas Betts' at 672.
Betts' at bats per RBI is worse than Trout's...
It may be fun to talk about, but ultimately, it means fuckall.
Mookie has not had a single "Trout-like" season. Trout's done it his entire career.
No rational person would take Mookie over Trout at this point.
not this year with men on
betts 27rbi/83ab 1 per 3.07 ab
trout 31/107 1 per 3.4 ab
when u got the black hole of jbj and vaz in front of u not many chances When does Cora wake up and bat him 3rd
btw no way am i taking mookie over trout at this point of their careers
Why only look at their RBIs with men on, when they can get RBIs with no men on (solo HRs)? Trout has 19 solo HRs this year, so not including all at bats would leave those 19 RBIs out.
For this year:
Trout - RBI every 6.28 ABs
Betts - RBI every 6.34 ABs
whew! good thing i said trout!
As an independent fan I'd go for Trout. Even as a Red Sox fan I'd still want Trout if both were available.
5'9" Mookie likes to tower over the 5'5" Pedey and point out that his bald spot is getting bigger.
Pedey then threatens to sic his brother on Betts' nieces and nephews.
Trout... I'll admit I hit the "mookie" option in the poll, which I didn't mean to do but I'm going with Trout... Mookie hopefully can continue what he is currently doing... We KNOW Trout can continue what he is doing
You have to start arguing All-Time players before any of them compare to Trout. There is nobody in the league right now that is as much of a complete player as he is.
I realize that his career is far from over but it's so unbelievable that he is so consistently amazing. That's what you tend to see when you look at the careers of the elite, inner circle (like tiny radius inner circle) guys.
Age not as much a factor as games played. Trout has almost double the amount of games played. Betts 571 and Trout 1017. While Trout is also 55 + pounds heavier. The knees take a beating.
LMFAO. No. Not even. Highest single-season OPS is only good enough for 119th all time. How about adjusted OPS+? He's single-season high is good enough for 60th all time and it is his only season in the top 100. No, he is not an all-time top five player, unless you want to pretend like the first 115 years of MLB did not happen.
Separate names with a comma.