Who is better, Kittredge or Stephenson?
Andrew Kittredge leads with a GOAT score of 53.3 against 53.3 for Tyler Stephenson — a gap of 0.0 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Shareable comparison — send this exact matchup to anyone.
Kittredge wins: Peak, Longevity, Statistics
Stephenson wins: Dominance, Honours
Shareable URL · /compare/ros-andrew-kittredge-vs-ros-tyler-stephenson
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Kittredge leads in 3 of 5 weighted categories.
Cumulative output season by season — the shape of each career against the other.
| Ghost race · career day | 30 | 100 | 365 | 1000 | 1825 | 3650 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🏳️ Kittredge | 0 | 0 | 14 | 44 | 182 | 401 |
| 🏳️ Stephenson | 0 | 0 | 5 | 105 | 271 | 557 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 season periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | KittredgeActive · Baltimore Orioles | StephensonActive · Cincinnati Reds |
|---|---|---|
| MLB games | 364 | 687 |
| MLB wins | 34 | — |
| MLB strikeouts | 441 | — |
| MLB award: INT Mid-Season All-Star | 1 | — |
| MLB award: MiLB.com Organization All-Star | 1 | 2 |
| MLB award: AL All-Star | 1 | — |
| Number | 39 | 37 |
| MLB hits | — | 557 |
| MLB home runs | — | 78 |
| MLB award: MID Mid-Season All-Star | — | 1 |
| MLB award: FSL Mid-Season All-Star | — | 1 |
| MLB award: FSL Post-Season All-Star | — | 1 |
| Dominance w25% | 49.6 | 52.7 |
| Peak w20% | 61.2 | 55.4 |
| Longevity w20% | 57 | 47.4 |
| Honours w20% | 38 | 50 |
| Statistics w15% | 64.1 | 63.9 |
Andrew Kittredge leads with a GOAT score of 53.3 against 53.3 for Tyler Stephenson — a gap of 0.0 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Stephenson scores higher on dominance, honours. Kittredge leads on peak, statistics, longevity.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Kittredge: 53.3, Stephenson: 53.3.
Make your case for Kittredge vs Stephenson. The scoring is published in full — if you can point at the pillar or the weight you disagree with, we read it. Read the methodology paper.