|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
OK to be as fair as possible I will compare the first 5 years for Albert Pujols to 6 for Trout so the Plate Appearances and ABs are close with Trout having 130 more PA and 43 more AB.
Pujols PA 3428 in first 5 years Trout PA 3558 in first 6 years Pujols AB 2954 Trout AB 2997 Pujols BA 332 Trout BA 306 Pujols Runs 629 Trout Runs 600 Pujols Hits 982 Trout Hits 917 Pujols 2B 227 Trout 2B 175 Pujols 3B 11 Trout 3B 37 Pujols HR 201 Trout HR 168 Pujols RBI 621 Trout RBI 497 Pujols SB 29 Trout SB 143 Pujols BB 401 Trout BB 477 Pujols TB 1834 Trout TB 1670 So even with 130 more plate appearances and 43 more at bats he is behind in every offensive category except SB, BB and triples.. Yes i know these are old school stats but I have no faith is the new theoretical/hypothetical stats when they compare players of different positions and different years. |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
I don't really follow modern cards much...but I follow the hobby. The only way a trout card is a good investment is as a short term investment. If trout has a great start...or a great season...yes...I believe his "rarer" cards could potentially be a good "short term" investment assuming you sell!
Long term investment potential is very poor...as has been said. Manufactured scarcity is crap...along with the overproduction of mint condition cards being produced these days. In the future there will be way more high grade cards than low/collector grade. And while I like jeter...this also would be a bad investment. If u want to invest...cobb, ruth are the way to go!!! |
#3
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
If you throw out Trout's 2011 (age 19) stats since he only played 40 games and just look at 2012-2016 compared to Pujols 2001-2005 stats you still have to remember that Trout is one year younger than Pujols. On top of that Trout has a Black Ink (a stat that measures League Leading stats) of 25. Pujols' first 5 year Black Ink is only 18. On the other hand if you look at their Gray Inks (a stat that measures top 10 in league stats) Trout trails Pujols 92 to 110. So it would be hard for me to say Trout is better, but he did dominate more than Pujols whereas Pujols was consistently in the top 10 of the game during his 5 years. For instance Pujols never led the league in RBI or SLG, but was always in the top 10. Trout has led the league in RBI and SLG once, but was only in the top 10 for RBI twice and SLG all 5 years.
__________________
https://www.flickr.com/photos/bn2cardz/albums |
#4
|
||||
|
||||
You have to remember that it was easier to put up those numbers when Pujols was playing. Just like you can't directly compare a guy who played in 1933 with one who played in 1908, you can't directly compare a guy playing in 2002 with one playing in 2016. The context of the game has changed.
Those stats also ignore fielding, and CF is a lot more demanding than 1B is, even though Pujols was a very good first baseman. |
#5
|
||||
|
||||
Ryan Braun first 6 years
AB-3477 BA-313 Runs-614 Hits-1089 2B-223 3B-29 HR- 202 RBI-643 SB-126 BB-305 He looks like the winner ! Might as well buy all his chrome autos .
__________________
Just a collector that likes to talk and read about the Hobby. 🤓👍🏼 |
#6
|
||||
|
||||
You essentially have an extra season added in his totals. That is why there are 523 more at AB in Braun's stats.
__________________
https://www.flickr.com/photos/bn2cardz/albums |
#7
|
||||
|
||||
I know but I'm half joking. But it's also trouts first 6 seasons it's not anyone's fault how many more plate appearances they got .
__________________
Just a collector that likes to talk and read about the Hobby. 🤓👍🏼 |
#8
|
||||
|
||||
Trout only played 40 games that first season so he wasn't eligible for any batting titles (not to mention he was 19). How about we compare Braun's 19-24 year old seasons? After all "it's not anyone's fault how many more plate appearances they got"(in this case Braun only got 1155 in that span).
__________________
https://www.flickr.com/photos/bn2cardz/albums Last edited by bn2cardz; 02-21-2017 at 10:26 AM. |
#9
|
||||
|
||||
I seem to have hijacked this with the Pujols v Trout thing, my original intent was just to point out to Neal that buying mass produced modern cards may not be the best way to go for long term value and was using Pujols, who was as hot a card as anyone, as an example of that.
__________________
My avatar is a sketch by my son who is an art school graduate. Some of his sketches and paintings are at https://www.jamesspaethartwork.com/ He is available to do custom drawings in graphite, charcoal and other media. He also sells some of his works as note cards/greeting cards on Etsy under JamesSpaethArt. |
#10
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
Just a collector that likes to talk and read about the Hobby. 🤓👍🏼 |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
I can't believe you guys have to argue this. Talk about arguing just to argue.
I would like buy any of your early Mantles you wish to sell..thanks |
#12
|
||||
|
||||
Trying to get this back on track to the OP's question. I pick up a few Trout's (and a couple other modern players) each year. I'll normally get the the Topps Series 1 Gold Parallel and a Heritage #'d or SP, not for investment purposes but just for fun. I already got this 2017 Series 1 Gold and I believe the new Heritage will be released March 1st:
__________________
- Jason C. ***I've had 50+ successful BST transactions as both a buyer and a seller. Please feel free to PM me for references*** |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Answer to the original question; yup!
Seriously; we should all collect what we love. That's reason enough. This is a great hobby. RayB
__________________
Legacy Board Member Since 2009. Hundreds of successful transactions here on Network 54. Buy/Sell/Trade with Confidence. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
I have whatever Trout cards I've gotten in packs, None of the big deal ones for sure. I also saved a few of the Pretzel boxes, which were no longer available on my most recent grocery trip.
Steve B |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
So Trout is better because
A) He plays centerfield B) The league overall is worse (If he dominates with the same numbers this must be true right? ) He's a great player, but comparing any stats leaves so much out. Base stuff on base percentage, and fancy stats, and you get the As. A good team that competes without a huge budget. But also a team that won't generally win a big series like playoffs. And since it's a fairly random collection of slightly above average guys the team won't draw fans. Base it just on power and you get a team that's exciting, fills the stands, and costs a bundle and also usually won't win it all. (78 Red Sox) One thing that everyone forgets about baserunning stats is that they're very dependent on the general outlook of most teams at the time. For a decent part of Mantles career the AL was led with <30 stolen bases. Things changed towards the end, but when he was younger AL players didn't really do much base stealing. Very early in his career the NL wasn't stealing many bases either. The attitude of the team towards stealing counts too. in his best year Mantle stole 21. Nobody else on the team even got double digits. The team total was 45. Trouts best year he had 49. But there were three other players on the team in double digits, and the team stole 134. 59 Yankees 45sb 22cs 2012 Angels 134sb 33cs. The Angels stole twice as many bases as the 59 Yankees even attempted. There aren't a lot of good ways to compare the two eras or teams. Steve B |
#16
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
You will never be able to compare straight stats for players playing against different players, but you can compare their dominance in the league for the time they played. That is what I attempt to show.
__________________
https://www.flickr.com/photos/bn2cardz/albums |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
I'm not a big fan of some stats like WAR as indicators of a player being great. Getting a bonus because you play a different position seems pretty silly to me as far as that goes. How great would any centerfielder be if there was say no right fielder? Or a really poor one. I do however agree with it as far as a tool to assemble a competitive team. A really good centerfielder will make two other fielders better as well as covering more area. Saying a player dominated more also seems a bit suspect. Is he that good because he really is better? Or does he look better because the league is a bit weak? That's a really tough question. Some very good pitchers don't do well in some stats because as a #1 starter they're pitching against better starters more often. Pujols stats may appear less dominant, but then yes as someone said it was the silly era, and lots of stats were inflated for various reasons. Oddly, I hear the same argument about the Patriots. They're only great because the division is weak. Of course the division is weak, they all have to play the Pats twice a season. (Plus at least a couple of them are more than a little dysfunctional) That's what makes comparisons so hard. I'd really like to see the results of some of the hardcore stats guys accounting for management style etc. Following the 78 Sox was one of the biggest early lessons, Zimmer would leave pitchers out way too long, especially Torrez who always seemed to fall apart very quickly. Steve B |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Wanted: Vintage cards, Have: Modern cards, Lego & Toys | jnorlund | Everything Else, Football, Non-Sports etc.. B/S/T | 1 | 10-24-2021 06:30 PM |
OMG I'm collecting modern: my modern Houston Astros pickup thread | Laxcat | Modern Baseball Cards Forum (1980-Present) | 34 | 04-18-2016 03:33 PM |
What modern cards are due to rise ?! | Rookiemonster | Modern Baseball Cards Forum (1980-Present) | 21 | 11-05-2015 02:56 AM |
Vintage to modern cards and autographed cards, visit my eBay store. | maddux311 | Ebay, Auction and other Venues Announcement- B/S/T | 0 | 06-05-2015 08:05 PM |
I am done collecting Modern Players except | HOF Yankees | Watercooler Talk- ALL sports talk | 0 | 07-07-2013 03:40 PM |