Originally Posted by bubbachunk
If they are such small sample sizes why give any ranking to Vitters then? The way you are going about this argument it would seem you are trying to make the point neither should be top 100 but still with an angle of defending Vitters.
Because there is more than just blanket looking at someone's total numbers. There is projection involved. Scouting. Differences in leagues. Sample sizes. Age in relation to level. Etc.
And, in this case, there isn't much of a difference in the numbers when you really look at them objectively.
Vitters was considered by some to be the top hitting prospect in the draft 2 years ago. That says a lot.