I am in a debate about a few players with some friends, and could use help to prove (or disprove my point). I am learning how to dive deep into stats, but I'm not there yet.

They have said that Carlos Gonzalez is one of the best players in baseball, and that because of his "long swing" and athleticism, that he will continue to have years like the one he's having now.

I argue that he has a high BABIP and HR/FB ratio and that it won't be sustainable, and that while he's good, his poor plate vision and high BABIP will catch up to him.

They ALSO argue that CarGo is in the "same class" as Carl Crawford, and that defensively they're the same kind of player. WAR and UZR disprove that easily, but that's not something they'll buy into I'm sure... since they also feel that Dexter Fowler is one of the best defenders in baseball.

Furthermore, they don't believe that Fowler and Seth Smith are replacement level players.

So, DRB, can you help me...

1. Prove that CarGo's numbers are unsustainable.

2. Prove that Craw is a much better player than CarGo due to FAR superior defense and comprable offensive productivity.

3. Fowler and Smith are replacement level players, and Fowler in particular is not a good defender at all, and in fact is below replacement level.

And, am I wrong in saying that I'd gladly have Matt Joyce over Carlos Gonzalez? Just looking at the numbers, it seems to me that I'd rather have Joyce...

Anyways, if you can help I'd appreciate it!

Thanks!