If Mike Trout retires today...
 

DISREGARD: Forgot about the 10 year rule. My bad!

So say he(knock on wood) has a career ending injury, is he a hall of famer? Does he get in because of his stretch as the best player in baseball? Or would his career just be simply too short for him to get in. I'm sure this discussion has been had before on this board, but with the hall of fame vote for this year just being completed, I'm curious as to everyone's opinions on it.

He would not get in.

He won't get in. You need 10 years in the MLB to qualify.

[QUOTE=rngrdanny22;11863717]He won't get in. You need 10 years in the MLB to qualify.[/QUOTE]

Whelp see that would have been a good idea for me to look up the requirements before I made the thread wouldn't it have?

No.........

[QUOTE=MarshallCutler6;11863727]Whelp see that would have been a good idea for me to look up the requirements before I made the thread wouldn't it have?[/QUOTE]

It's all good. Even if that wasn't a qualifier, he still has some compiling to do in my opinion. His stats (not advanced metrics) just aren't there since he hasn't been playing very long.

If he continues this arc and calls it quits right at 10 years though, I would think he probably gets in.

Not counting his 40 games in 2011 but if he were to have five more seasons like his last five seasons he definitely would be a Hall of Famer. Right now he kind of compares to Griffey about the same age but with two more MVPs and a Rookie of the Year.

He would get in, because they would change the rule for him.

[QUOTE=rngrdanny22;11863745]It's all good. Even if that wasn't a qualifier, he still has some compiling to do in my opinion. His stats (not advanced metrics) just aren't there since he hasn't been playing very long.

If he continues this arc and calls it quits right at 10 years though, I would think he probably gets in.[/QUOTE]
I agree, I just think it brings up the "compiling" vs "dominance" debate that is had every time the HOF comes around. Should it be about compiling stats over time or should it be about being the best player in baseball for an extended stretch? Just some friendly debate

[QUOTE=MarshallCutler6;11863755]I agree, I just think it brings up the "compiling" vs "dominance" debate that is had every time the HOF comes around. Should it be about compiling stats over time or should it be about being the best player in baseball for an extended stretch? Just some friendly debate[/QUOTE]

I think in his case it would be about his dominance and not numbers. If he were to maintain his output he would be looking about 1,900 hits, 365 homeruns and a batting average just above .300 so it wouldn't be about the numbers.

[QUOTE=MarshallCutler6;11863755]I agree, I just think it brings up the "compiling" vs "dominance" debate that is had every time the HOF comes around. Should it be about compiling stats over time or should it be about being the best player in baseball for an extended stretch? Just some friendly debate[/QUOTE]

If it was the Hall that I think it should be, then is would have to be both.

[QUOTE=scottbdoug;11863788]If it was the Hall that I think it should be, then is would have to be both.[/QUOTE]

Totally agree, but as we know there are more than a few compilers in there

Yes. ROY, 2 MVPs (easily could've been 4 or 5), 4 Silver Sluggers.

It only took Koufax 5 great years to get in. I think Trout's 5 great years would be enough (if they abolished the 10 year rule)

[QUOTE=Corky;11863753]Not counting his 40 games in 2011 but if he were to have five more seasons like his last five seasons he definitely would be a Hall of Famer. Right now he kind of compares to Griffey about the same age but with two more MVPs and a Rookie of the Year.[/QUOTE]

If he has 5 years like his last five he'd be the greatest player ever so yes he'd bed a HOF

The question is what if he becomes a Tori Hunter level player, would he still be in. A top 15 or so OF but not a superstar. I think the answser would be yes still

If he were to have a severe injury "Prince Fielder" and told to retire, the MLB selection committee wouldn't vote him in the first attempt but it wouldn't take more than 3 years because the new wave of analytics as the older committee members are retiring from voting. In this decade as the Most Dominant in Production / WAR / Clutch or Situational / Post Season. Trout after missing a year and 3/4 would be a solid 2 over Cano and behind Cabrera. Does not include pitching because they should have their own dominant player of the decade.

[QUOTE=mjohnatgt;11863754]He would get in, because they would change the rule for him.[/QUOTE]

Yep.

If he had career ending injury tomorrow... MLB would change the rule and he would immediately be inducted. Wouldn't have to wait the 5 years... Injury Monday... HOF Tuesday.

For what it's worth, if he lost his talent and played replacement level for 5 more years then retire he would probably still get in first ballot.

Ferg1945, Even with a much newer committee I'm sure they wouldn't allow a player to be awarded with a first selection entry vote. It's still the Pinnacle of Pinnacle to what standards the committee has set. The Hall would change the standards and he would be in within 3 years which in committee standards is a first time selection.

[QUOTE=Ferg1945;11864366]Yep.

If he had career ending injury tomorrow... MLB would change the rule and he would immediately be inducted. Wouldn't have to wait the 5 years... Injury Monday... HOF Tuesday.[/QUOTE]


They'd probably even change the term hall of Fame to hall of trout

pkscards, Don't think a first. That standard has been set for roughly 90 years.
Is he the "Best" player in baseball ? What Trout in my opinion is - The Most Skilled player in Baseball, like Cam Newton. Though Trout has a overrated arm. Defense should be rated lower since the number of Strike Outs are constantly rising as well as Home Runs. Fewer and fewer defensive plays are attempted.

[QUOTE=Stifle;11864427]pkscards, Don't think a first. That standard has been set for roughly 90 years.[/QUOTE]

Sandy Koufax got in 1st ballot. I think that would be the closest precedent.

Cy Young had to wait and Sandy Koufax was in the league for 12 seasons with 6 dominant seasons - 3 OK seasons and 3 that were blahs. 5 Dominant seasons and a partial Ugh season for Trout, not the same.

[QUOTE=pkscards;11864483]Sandy Koufax got in 1st ballot. I think that would be the closest precedent.[/QUOTE]


Koufax was way more dominant in his 5 year stretch then trout has been. Sandy was head and shoulders above. It's an argument every year to see if trout may or may not be MVP, and he certainly wasn't "dominant" over the AL crop for his latest award. The Koufax/trout argument is apples and oranges

Wise, that is why this Decades Most Dominant player should have a positional player and pitcher. You can't compare a pitcher to a positional player.

Trout will be an inner circle HOFer when all said and done so it's a moot point