Options
Mike Trout.....1990 Rickey Henderson
Mickey71
Posts: 4,234 ✭✭✭✭
in Sports Talk
I keep hearing that Trout had a season that no player has ever had let alone a rookie. I think one has to dig very deeply to explain how Trout is better than Henderson was in 1990. Trout is a better fielder....I will concede that.
Hendersons stats in 1990
AB's 489
Runs 119
Hits 159
2b's 33
HR's 28
BA .325
OBP .439
OPS 1.016
SLUG .577
SB's 65
Walks 97
K's 60
Oakland also won 103 games and went to the World Series.
How many more stats do we need than all of these? Batting average against 40 year old left handed relievers during night games while raining....dome games do not count?????
Hendersons stats in 1990
AB's 489
Runs 119
Hits 159
2b's 33
HR's 28
BA .325
OBP .439
OPS 1.016
SLUG .577
SB's 65
Walks 97
K's 60
Oakland also won 103 games and went to the World Series.
How many more stats do we need than all of these? Batting average against 40 year old left handed relievers during night games while raining....dome games do not count?????
0
Comments
<< <i>I keep hearing that Trout had a season that no player has ever had let alone a rookie. >>
I haven't heard anyone say that.
Are you talking about leadoff hitters, because otherwise why did you pick Henderson in 1990? A good season, but Babe Ruth had a bunch of better ones.
AB 672
Runs 109
Hits 217
Doubles 43
Triples 9
Homers 32
Runs 94
SB 12
Avg. .323
Slg .557
Ops. .916
Ops+ 150
TB 374
Nice!
I picked Henderson because I know he was a guy who stole a ton of bases ; but also had some good power. As far as my 1st statement about Trout.......many were talking about his season in some type of historical perspective when they get comparing the MVP race. I think I heard at 1 point he was to having the highest WAR ever. Not sure how he ended up with that stat.
AB's 474
Runs 120
Hits 139
2b's 23
HR's 37
BA .299
OBP .399
OPS .991
SLUG .593
SB's 50
Walks 84
K's 134
<< <i>mlbfan2,
I picked Henderson because I know he was a guy who stole a ton of bases ; but also had some good power. As far as my 1st statement about Trout.......many were talking about his season in some type of historical perspective when they get comparing the MVP race. I think I heard at 1 point he was to having the highest WAR ever. Not sure how he ended up with that stat. >>
They may have been talking about the highest WAR ever for a rookie. I believe he broke that record by quite a bit. At one point, he also had a huge lead in WAR over the 2nd place guy. It was the biggest lead in about 100 years. But, he was never that close to the highest WAR ever.
<< <i>I keep hearing that Trout had a season that no player has ever had let alone a rookie. I think one has to dig very deeply to explain how Trout is better than Henderson was in 1990. Trout is a better fielder....I will concede that.
Hendersons stats in 1990
AB's 489
Runs 119
Hits 159
2b's 33
HR's 28
BA .325
OBP .439
OPS 1.016
SLUG .577
SB's 65
Walks 97
K's 60
Oakland also won 103 games and went to the World Series.
How many more stats do we need than all of these? Batting average against 40 year old left handed relievers during night games while raining....dome games do not count????? >>
You don't need a lot of stats, just the ones that are most accurate. OPS+, Adjusted Batter Runs, Win Probabilty Added, WAR....those are the measurement that include all of those items you list above, but put the appropriate run and win value on them. In short, they are more valid.
Your attempted joke about batting average vs left hand relievers as a stat measurement is your way of trying to say you don't need or understand the advanced measurements. Because if you did understand evaluative methods, you would understand that using RBI or BA are pretty similar to your LH reliever joke, in that using them makes people draw all kind of inaccurate conclusions, the exact thing you are attempting to scoff at.
It seems you are getting on Trout because he is getting a lot of credit(which he deserves), and because he happened to be better this year than a guy who won the triple crown(which puts your 'world in a tizzy' because you can't understand how a guy who won a triple crown can be a lesser player for the year).
There are probably at least 30 individual seasons in the last 15 years that were better than Cabrerra's season this year, and none of those guys won the triple crown.
Sosa 2001:
AVG .328
HR 64
RBI 160
Runs 146
OB% .437
SLG% .737
OPS 1.174
If we look like you are looking, Sosa also had three other seasons that blow away Cabrerra's season. Belle, Juan Gonzalez, Mo Vaugh, Giambi, Helton...all had seasons that blow away Cabrera's using traditional measurements that you enjoy so much. However, using a good measurement tool, it would show many of those season's weren't as good as Cabrerr'a this year.
But, using a good measurement tool will also put season's such as Joe Mauer's MVP year as much better than Cabrerra's.
SO whether you are using your traditional methods or the better methods, you are going to find many seasons either way in the last 15 years or so that were better than Cabrerra's this year.
As for Trout's WAR, he is getting a boost due to his defense and a boost due to him beating out the other CFers in the league by so much. BOth those two areas have room for debate and aren't as precise, however, his defense and position do favor him over Cabrerra. Nailing down the exact amount is difficult(and WAR tries to and does a good enough job).
Also, Trout also did extremely well in the precise offensive measurements that don't have the same room for debate. He did lead the league in OPS+, and was in the very top of the leaders in Win Probabity Added, and Batter RUns.
Common sense should prevail that when a defensive centerfielder is on par hitting wise with a corner infielder, it should be pretty clear that the defensive centerfielder was better...and that isn't even looking at his base running ability!
I had to look back at my posts............I never mentioned Cabrera once. I said Rickey Henderson in 1990. Also when you mentioned the guys that had better seasons than the guy I never mentioned once............maybe not Helton; but the others were no doubt or highly suspected of you know what. Their stats don't mean basically anything to anybody. None of them are getting in the hall unless they buy a ticket.
<< <i>mlbfan2,
I picked Henderson because I know he was a guy who stole a ton of bases ; but also had some good power. As far as my 1st statement about Trout.......many were talking about his season in some type of historical perspective when they get comparing the MVP race. I think I heard at 1 point he was to having the highest WAR ever. Not sure how he ended up with that stat. >>
You said the MVP race. Is Cabrerra part of that race?
Those guys aren't any more or less suspicious than Cabrerra with PED, so no, I wasn't taking that into account.
Mickey, Henderson's 1990 season was outstanding, and if you look at his offense compared to Trout's, Henderson edges him slightly. However, given how close they are offensively, why is it so hard to see that Trout's season may have been better because he did it while playing CF and Henderson LF?
You don't see the advantage a team has by getting that type of production out of a position where all the other teams get little from...especially with Trout being a plus defender in CF on top of it?
Mlbfan asked about the historical stuff I was hearing about Trout. I said I saw info during some of the MVP discussions. I repeat again.......this is not about the guy that I did not name at all. I was talking about Rickey Henderson. The guy who says things like: Rickey thinks Rickey's going to swipe 3 bases today.
If you really want my opinion between Trout and Cabrera....I think Cabrera wins the MVP by a slight vote total. If you asked me which player I would rather have....I would chose Cabrera. If you ask me who will have the better career...I would guess Cabrera//Cabrera is already most of the way there to the HOF. Trout will have to stay very healthy with the high octane game he has. Speed is everything to his game. He's a great all around player.
<< <i>Objectivity,
Mlbfan asked about the historical stuff I was hearing about Trout. I said I saw info during some of the MVP discussions. I repeat again.......this is not about the guy that I did not name at all. I was talking about Rickey Henderson. The guy who says things like: Rickey thinks Rickey's going to swipe 3 bases today.
If you really want my opinion between Trout and Cabrera....I think Cabrera wins the MVP by a slight vote total. If you asked me which player I would rather have....I would chose Cabrera. If you ask me who will have the better career...I would guess Cabrera//Cabrera is already most of the way there to the HOF. Trout will have to stay very healthy with the high octane game he has. Speed is everything to his game. He's a great all around player. >>
Thing is, one doesn't have to "dig very deep" to see why Trout's season this year could be better than Henderson's from 1990...unless one doesn't understand why a CF doing that is of more value than a LF doing it.
Nah, I wasn't really looking for your opinion on the MVP race. I'm not really that interested in MVP races because the way people choose it makes it trivial(because they base it on the goodness or badness of the players' teammates, and not the player himself).
I do have interest in determining 'better', and this past season Trout was better than Cabrerra.
As for the future, it would be foolish for anyone to think Trout would have a better career than Cabrerra....mainly because Cabrerra's is already mostly in the books, and Trout still has to navigate the waters. That still doesn't change that Trout actually had a better season than Cabrerra(triple crown or not).
<< <i>You don't need a lot of stats, just the ones that are most accurate. OPS+, Adjusted Batter Runs, Win Probabilty Added, WAR....those are the measurement that include all of those items you list above, but put the appropriate run and win value on them. In short, they are more valid. >>
In 1990 Henderson's OPS+ was 189, BtRuns was 63.1, WP+ was 14.6, WAR was 9.8. Trout was at 171, 55.4, 13.8 and 10.7
Based on the most accurate of stats, the only place where Trout has an edge is that he was a top defensive center fielder, while Henderson was a top defensive right fielder
But Henderson did play center field for a full season just a few years earlier. And his zone fielding ratings were nearly identical to Trout
Which is better 49 out of 54 in stolen base attempts or 77 out of 91?
Have to believe Henderson was one of the better defensive left fielders in history, based on range factor, zone ratings and the fact that he did well his brief time in center. Not sure how much of a credit it is, though. Any left fielder who is really good plays center. Yastrzemski probably top, Bonds and Minoso are the only other ones I see with multiple gold gloves. Even if I'm missing someone, it shouldn't take too much to have an argument as top 10 or so?
<< <i>
But Henderson did play center field for a full season just a few years earlier. And his zone fielding ratings were nearly identical to Trout
>>
That is an excellent point! This does put a dent into the whole positional value adjustment...and that is why I always put more stock into the hitting measurements, and that is why I don't put as much stock in the WAR of a guy like Ben Zobrist who achieved a high war based on the positional adjustment.
However, Trout did have exceptionally high value based on the precise hitting measurements, and not solely because of the positional adjusment.
As for Henderson vs Trout, Henderson does have the better offensive numbers between the two for the seasons in question, and Henderson could play CF(and has), so maybe Trout shouldn't get as big a boost over him for defensive value.
Maybe it is Henderson's manager who should get downgraded for not using Henderson in CF...instead of Henderson getting the downgrade
Or, the positional adjustments shouldn't be put on the same 'run level' as the more precise hitting measurements. The OPS+, Win Probability Added, and the Base Outs per the 24 base and out situations are pretty telling of a player's contribution. THe defense and positional value are much more murky!