Obviously… thanks for looking at yourself and being truthful, lol. Pshhhh. And now you’ll do the thing where you’ll keep responding…
I was directly responding to your post where you asked "What about Correa is so much better than Pena It's certainly not the bat and Pena's is not that much worse defensivley." So I wasn't calling him a "Generational Player". What does that even mean? There's nothing objective to that label. And you seem to be of the belief that two non-generational players are therefore equals. They are not. Neither Roy Oswalt nor Wade Miller were "generational talents", but I know which one was better.
Misunderstood the point. Generational could mean different things to different people. Best SS of this generation. Top 5 SS of all time. Top 10 SS of all time. HOF. Top 10 player of all time. All you can do is say what Correa is. Then decide if that meets your definition of generational. And it's not really accurate until his career is done and we KNOW what that was in total.
You should probably read what led up to that post it was about the fact that somebody said Correa was a Generational player, and then I responded that his numbers were not that much better than Pena so why is he Generational. The word Generational is what started the conversation, so if you have not read that post, you can't understand my post. It seems we have the same issue with saying somebody is generational, and I never said Pena and Cornea are equals, so I don't know where you got that from.
Does Correa fit any of that? It seems you made my point for me and no Generational does not mean different things. What is Correa? An above average SS?
First 8 seasons (age) Ripken(28): ROY, 7 AS, 5 SS, 1 MVP, 1 WS A-Rod(26): 5 AS, 5 SS Jeter(29): ROY, 5 AS, 4 WS, 1 WS MVP Correa(27): ROY, 2 AS, 1 GG, 1 WS Larkin(29): 5 AS, 5 SS, 1 WS Trammell(27): 3 AS, 4 GG, 1 WS, 1 WS MVP Yount(25): 1 AS, 1 SS Ripken: WAR=50.4, MVP=1, top5=2 A-Rod: WAR=46.4, top5=2, top10=4 Jeter: WAR=40.6, top5=1, top10=4 Correa: WAR=39.5, top5=1 Larkin: WAR=34.7, top10=1 Trammell: WAR=31.4, top10=1 Yount: WAR=27.0,
You are the same person who was saying in the KPJ thread that a 4% difference in TS% isn't a big deal. Now you think that a 150 point difference in OPS is "not that much better." You may have a basic problem with statistics. And if you can't understand statistics, you can't understand my post.
Correa is on pace to be a hall of famer. He’s pretty ****ing good. Now a nice chunk of value is wrapped up in his defense, so it’ll be interesting to see how that holds up going forward. Moving to third might actually benefit him.
Jesus. Didn't realize Cal Ripken was sporting that high of WAR his first 8 seasons over A-Rod and his crazy stats.
I think he needs a 3 or 4 seasons like 2021 to be on a hall of fame pace. He has the talent to do it, but who knows if he can stay healthy. If he played 150 games in 2017, 2018, and 2019 then that would probably help him a ton. He's lost over a quarter of his prime years to injuries. Generally players like that don't track well into their later years. I wish him the best because he's amazing when he's 100% and locked in.
If he keeps doing what he’s doing he’ll be a hall of famer, that’s the pace he’s on. I’m not sure that I’d bet on him sustaining it long enough to pull it off, but it wouldn’t surprise me either. I’ll always love Correa either way.
How posters/members get so invested and dug in with arguing with each other over professional athletes for pages on end I’ll never know. I’m either not great at multitasking or they’ve got time to burn.
"It's crazy after a single season people are saying he is better than Correa." I said it last winter, before a single game had been played. In fact what I said was that he would begin the year unremarkably but a very strong finish would put him ahead of Correa for the year. Not many here agreed with me at the time but blind hogs find truffles all the time.
Time to burn, anger management and/or insecurity issues, and a complete disregard for the forum experience of everyone who isn’t one of the three people jumping through semantic hoops to “win” a debate that we have all already lost.
