I don't understand these people. It's not like Trout and Betts are even particularly close in talent.
“You could make a case for either, but Trout by a hair,” said one National League executive. “Trout is more physical and should be in a better position to maintain his power value as he ages. Betts would need to continue performing like a freak to keep up with Trout.”
■ “Wow, I’m going with Betts!” said one American League scout. “More versatile. The power numbers go to Trout, but I like Betts all around.”
■ “Haven’t seen Trout play in person since 2011, but with that in mind, I’ll go with Betts,” said an American League scout.
■ “Trout,” said a longtime National League scout. “Analytics may favor Mookie, I love both, but Trout never cools.”
■ “I’d go with Trout,” said a National League evaluator. “Close though. Betts is a year younger and has a better OPS over the last two years.”
■ “Trout’s ahead of him, no doubt,” said one American League executive, “but Mookie has the ability to catch up if he has a couple of really consistent years, which he appears to be on his way to doing.”
Even the guys who picked Trout are morons. These guys better be employed by the Orioles or something, because that is scary.
I especially liked the guy who said the analytics favour Betts. The f***? Or how about the guy who chose Betts because he hasn't seen Trout play in person since 2011, lmfao. A true scout, that guy.
Another guy says Betts had a better OPS the last 2 years. What the f***? That isn't even close to the truth, and that's one of the few references to objective performance. How do you make a statement like that without knowing? It's not like they were both top 5, either.
Christ. I need to rinse my eyes.