**The Perennial MIKE TROUT Thread**

[Stifle]

Originally Posted by redauto5

Mike Trout - 84 WAR and counting...(53rd) 13 years in the bigs and counting...

Ernie Banks - 68 WAR (126th)
19 years in the bigs.

I realize WAR isn't the end all be all, and yes Postseason performance plays its part in a players legacy, but I think you're missing Mike Trouts sustained greatness just a little bit here.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

You do realize Ernie Banks had to serve in the military 1951-1953. In that time period of age 20-22, Banks played just 10 games. I’m sure you knew that? He came straight out of the military to the Cubs. In 55 Banks had a 8.2. If he were to pull a Al Kaline from age 20-22 which was nearly on Ernie’s time line, add over 20 to that total and I believe he would have done it or more.

Is Trout a Hall of Famer, definitely. Is Chris Paul a Hall of Famer, definitely. Is Paul being crucified for not getting it done in the Post Season, definitely. Is Todd Helton a HOF’er ? is Joe Mauer a HOF’er ? is Joey Votto a HOF’er. Unlike Trout, these players are on the cuff with Lousy Post Season performances. Add Prince Fielder. Is Kershaw going to be recognized as great as he is in the regular season when his Post Season performance has been disappointing?

[redauto5]

Originally Posted by Stifle

You do realize Ernie Banks had to serve in the military 1951-1953. In that time period of age 20-22, Banks played just 10 games. I’m sure you knew that? He came straight out of the military to the Cubs. In 55 Banks had a 8.2. If he were to pull a Al Kaline from age 20-22 which was nearly on Ernie’s time line, add over 20 to that total and I believe he would have done it or more.

Is Trout a Hall of Famer, definitely. Is Chris Paul a Hall of Famer, definitely. Is Paul being crucified for not getting it done in the Post Season, definitely. Is Todd Helton a HOF’er ? is Joe Mauer a HOF’er ? is Joey Votto a HOF’er. Unlike Trout, these players are on the cuff with Lousy Post Season performances. Add Prince Fielder. Is Kershaw going to be recognized as great as he is in the regular season when his Post Season performance has been disappointing?

I understand all you are saying here, just don't know why you compared Trout to Dale Murphy and Bobby Bonds in the first place TBH.

To say a 20 year old Ernie Banks would've lit the world on fire, while possible, seems a bit of a stretch as well. 20 WAR between ages 20-22 would've been magical and would've certainly added a lot to Ernie's legacy. Unfortunately we'll never know, and yes his military service is certainly worth considering when talking about his full legacy just as Ted Williams' is, etc.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

[atk825]

Originally Posted by Stifle

You do realize Ernie Banks had to serve in the military 1951-1953. In that time period of age 20-22, Banks played just 10 games. I’m sure you knew that? He came straight out of the military to the Cubs. In 55 Banks had a 8.2. If he were to pull a Al Kaline from age 20-22 which was nearly on Ernie’s time line, add over 20 to that total and I believe he would have done it or more.

Is Trout a Hall of Famer, definitely. Is Chris Paul a Hall of Famer, definitely. Is Paul being crucified for not getting it done in the Post Season, definitely. Is Todd Helton a HOF’er ? is Joe Mauer a HOF’er ? is Joey Votto a HOF’er. Unlike Trout, these players are on the cuff with Lousy Post Season performances. Add Prince Fielder. Is Kershaw going to be recognized as great as he is in the regular season when his Post Season performance has been disappointing?

Trout had 100 games of his age 28 season taken away.

[wharfrat7624]

He’s baaackkkk


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[wharfrat7624]

Some should stick to the basketball forums..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Stifle]

Originally Posted by atk825

Trout had 100 games of his age 28 season taken away.

I realize that. It stinks that a player with his skill level loses time because that is something we all lose. We should all want the best players be playing in the biggest stage. If he doesn’t win a single playoff game what is the relevance of WAR ? The whole idea of winning games is to advance to the playoffs. Add Banks, Trout, Murphy and Bobby Bonds and we have the same result : 0 playoff wins for players who were massively talented but were barely seen when the biggest stage arrived. It matters.

[ScooterD]

Originally Posted by pete2345

Stop by this pit stop of a thread from time to time. Same as ever the same bagholders making excuses for this washed average player sad really.

Are you saying that he was an average player that is now washed (worse than average)? Or an average player (now) after being washed?

Either way, an average player would have a zero WAR - right? He doesn’t - so the numbers don’t support that he is or was ever average.

[BoSoxFan1999]

Originally Posted by ScooterD

Are you saying that he was an average player that is now washed (worse than average)? Or an average player (now) after being washed?

Either way, an average player would have a zero WAR - right? He doesn’t - so the numbers don’t support that he is or was ever average.

A replacement level player would have 0 WAR (replacement level is BAD). I think the "average" MLB player would be between 1-2 WAR...probably closer to 1.

As for the Trout haters, well....haters gon' hate.

[zworykin]

Originally Posted by ScooterD

Are you saying that he was an average player that is now washed (worse than average)? Or an average player (now) after being washed?

Either way, an average player would have a zero WAR - right? He doesn’t - so the numbers don’t support that he is or was ever average.

Why would you engage with the troll? What could anyone possibly stand to gain from that? Just ignore him.

[Cardsandcoffee]

Originally Posted by zworykin

Why would you engage with the troll? What could anyone possibly stand to gain from that? Just ignore him.

Agreed. Would highly recommend everybody just stop acknowledging individuals who are known trolls, those who are here not to contribute meaningful dialogue or is a general fan of the Meteor. Much more pleasant and engaging dialogue ensues

[ScooterD]

Originally Posted by zworykin

Why would you engage with the troll? What could anyone possibly stand to gain from that? Just ignore him.

Originally Posted by Cardsandcoffee

Agreed. Would highly recommend everybody just stop acknowledging individuals who are known trolls, those who are here not to contribute meaningful dialogue or is a general fan of the Meteor. Much more pleasant and engaging dialogue ensues

If his comment was trolling, it would not be condoned on these boards (per the TOS).

With that said, I was genuinely curious if he could back up his opinion (although it was stated as a fact) with any specific facts. I thought maybe he knew something that I didn’t - which is very possible considering that I just found out that Julio Teheran is still pitching in the MLB

[Boo]

I fully expect Trout to have a couple 3 hit games this week with mulitiple HRs, it always seems to happen like that.

[Chris P]

Originally Posted by ScooterD

If his comment was trolling, it would not be condoned on these boards (per the TOS).

With that said, I was genuinely curious if he could back up his opinion (although it was stated as a fact) with any specific facts. I thought maybe he knew something that I didn’t - which is very possible considering that I just found out that Julio Teheran is still pitching in the MLB

He doesn't..he just likes to stir up stuff here. Basketball season is done so he can't do it to his other targets (Lebron and Luka) so he's back to target Trout

[BoSoxFan1999]

Originally Posted by Boo

I fully expect Trout to have a couple 3 hit games this week with mulitiple HRs, it always seems to happen like that.

He did have a stretch last year where he went 0-20something with a ton of K's, but as we can see his year still turned out OK. Hopefully he's just in some funk that he's about to break out of.
Ohtani's shoulders can only carry so much load, Mike!

[Stifle]

Originally Posted by BoSoxFan1999

A replacement level player would have 0 WAR (replacement level is BAD). I think the "average" MLB player would be between 1-2 WAR...probably closer to 1.

As for the Trout haters, well....haters gon' hate.

WAR is a accounting stat. Is Trout Vital to the Angels, exceptionally vital but building stats that are utilized to equate value has won the Angels how many playoff games. WAR doesn’t utilize situational performance and the game of baseball with the exception of blowouts is dictated pitch by pitch. Situational performance over accounting performance is where the players are tiered differently. It’s not a Trout thing because Ted Williams was crucified in arguments vs Ruth in the debate of valuing who was better. Yes, the World Series “playoffs” was the critiquing of Williams that his fans couldn’t defend. Ted stunk in the most critical opportunity of his career. Was Williams one of the best of all time, for sure but he was tiered below Ruth ! Like it or not.

[jswest18]

Originally Posted by Stifle

WAR is a accounting stat. Is Trout Vital to the Angels, exceptionally vital but building stats that are utilized to equate value has won the Angels how many playoff games. WAR doesn’t utilize situational performance and the game of baseball with the exception of blowouts is dictated pitch by pitch. Situational performance over accounting performance is where the players are tiered differently. It’s not a Trout thing because Ted Williams was crucified in arguments vs Ruth in the debate of valuing who was better. Yes, the World Series “playoffs” was the critiquing of Williams that his fans couldn’t defend. Ted stunk in the most critical opportunity of his career. Was Williams one of the best of all time, for sure but he was tiered below Ruth ! Like it or not.

It's been said a ton of times but I guess worth rehashing considering what you seem to be saying. Baseball is so much different than the other major pro leagues. There is so much out of one player's control when it comes to overall team success and playoff appearances. I think Acuna and the Braves are a prime example of this. Acuna was the consensus MVP front runner for the NL in 2021 when he tore his ACL right before the all star break. The Braves were 44-44 at the time. They went on to win the World Series that year because they caught fire at the right time and they picked up several smaller pieces to replace RAJ who all played great after joining the team. There are negative 100 GMs, owners or coaches who would choose to have any of those players over RAJ.

There have been zero MLB players who have put a bad team on their shoulders and made them a legitimate playoff team. It's just not possible in baseball considering how little control one player has on the outcome of a game. Now can a great or transcendent player make an otherwise mediocre team a playoff contender or can they put them over the top as a WS contender? Maybe. But even that has its limitations.

I don't think it's a good argument to criticize any MLB player for their lack of WS rings or even their playoff appearances. Now if a player makes it to the playoffs and you want to judge their performance in the playoffs and have that be a part of the valuation of their career then ok. I think that's fair to a limited extent. But even that is flawed.

If you look at the post season each year then you almost always see guys who are platoon players or who are average MLB players get hot and carry the team during a series. See David Freese and the Cardinals or Eddie Rosario and the Braves. Obviously you can point to great players who have had tremendous post season success like Pujols or Reggie Jackson but Willie Mays slashed .248/.343/.325 with 1 HR and 3 SBs in 33 career post season games. He has a WS title to his name and that was his best post season but even that was not anything to brag about. I don't think anyone would look at Willie's career though, regular or postseason, and deny he's one of the 3-5 greatest players of all time if not the greatest.

I know that there is inherently some bump to a player's legacy if he has post season success and even more so if he has a WS ring. Baseball is just different though and so postseason performance, especially WS rings, has never held significant importance when evaluating a players career or greatness. I think that will remain the case with Trout no matter what the future holds for him in terms of the postseason.

[Cardsandcoffee]

Originally Posted by jswest18

It's been said a ton of times but I guess worth rehashing considering what you seem to be saying. Baseball is so much different than the other major pro leagues. There is so much out of one player's control when it comes to overall team success and playoff appearances. I think Acuna and the Braves are a prime example of this. Acuna was the consensus MVP front runner for the NL in 2021 when he tore his ACL right before the all star break. The Braves were 44-44 at the time. They went on to win the World Series that year because they caught fire at the right time and they picked up several smaller pieces to replace RAJ who all played great after joining the team. There are negative 100 GMs, owners or coaches who would choose to have any of those players over RAJ.

There have been zero MLB players who have put a bad team on their shoulders and made them a legitimate playoff team. It's just not possible in baseball considering how little control one player has on the outcome of a game. Now can a great or transcendent player make an otherwise mediocre team a playoff contender or can they put them over the top as a WS contender? Maybe. But even that has its limitations.

I don't think it's a good argument to criticize any MLB player for their lack of WS rings or even their playoff appearances. Now if a player makes it to the playoffs and you want to judge their performance in the playoffs and have that be a part of the valuation of their career then ok. I think that's fair to a limited extent. But even that is flawed.

If you look at the post season each year then you almost always see guys who are platoon players or who are average MLB players get hot and carry the team during a series. See David Freese and the Cardinals or Eddie Rosario and the Braves. Obviously you can point to great players who have had tremendous post season success like Pujols or Reggie Jackson but Willie Mays slashed .248/.343/.325 with 1 HR and 3 SBs in 33 career post season games. He has a WS title to his name and that was his best post season but even that was not anything to brag about. I don't think anyone would look at Willie's career though, regular or postseason, and deny he's one of the 3-5 greatest players of all time if not the greatest.

I know that there is inherently some bump to a player's legacy if he has post season success and even more so if he has a WS ring. Baseball is just different though and so postseason performance, especially WS rings, has never held significant importance when evaluating a players career or greatness. I think that will remain the case with Trout no matter what the future holds for him in terms of the postseason.

This.

[BigSlim16]

Trout stolen base! Party like it’s 2013


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Cardsandcoffee]

Originally Posted by BigSlim16

Trout stolen base! Party like it’s 2013


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I know haha I couldn't believe my eyes! He should do it some more. Maybe not 49 times but I'd take 10-15

[Rabs]

Originally Posted by BigSlim16

Trout stolen base! Party like it’s 2013


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ironic that I posted yesterday asking if he’d even attempted a steal all year.

[SidVish]

Great post jswest18. Many people watch baseball their entire lives and fail to grasp or understand what they're watching.

Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk

[2010GBPackers]

Originally Posted by jswest18

It's been said a ton of times but I guess worth rehashing considering what you seem to be saying. Baseball is so much different than the other major pro leagues. There is so much out of one player's control when it comes to overall team success and playoff appearances. I think Acuna and the Braves are a prime example of this. Acuna was the consensus MVP front runner for the NL in 2021 when he tore his ACL right before the all star break. The Braves were 44-44 at the time. They went on to win the World Series that year because they caught fire at the right time and they picked up several smaller pieces to replace RAJ who all played great after joining the team. There are negative 100 GMs, owners or coaches who would choose to have any of those players over RAJ.

There have been zero MLB players who have put a bad team on their shoulders and made them a legitimate playoff team. It's just not possible in baseball considering how little control one player has on the outcome of a game. Now can a great or transcendent player make an otherwise mediocre team a playoff contender or can they put them over the top as a WS contender? Maybe. But even that has its limitations.

I don't think it's a good argument to criticize any MLB player for their lack of WS rings or even their playoff appearances. Now if a player makes it to the playoffs and you want to judge their performance in the playoffs and have that be a part of the valuation of their career then ok. I think that's fair to a limited extent. But even that is flawed.

If you look at the post season each year then you almost always see guys who are platoon players or who are average MLB players get hot and carry the team during a series. See David Freese and the Cardinals or Eddie Rosario and the Braves. Obviously you can point to great players who have had tremendous post season success like Pujols or Reggie Jackson but Willie Mays slashed .248/.343/.325 with 1 HR and 3 SBs in 33 career post season games. He has a WS title to his name and that was his best post season but even that was not anything to brag about. I don't think anyone would look at Willie's career though, regular or postseason, and deny he's one of the 3-5 greatest players of all time if not the greatest.

I know that there is inherently some bump to a player's legacy if he has post season success and even more so if he has a WS ring. Baseball is just different though and so postseason performance, especially WS rings, has never held significant importance when evaluating a players career or greatness. I think that will remain the case with Trout no matter what the future holds for him in terms of the postseason.

Baseball is definitely the most difficult sport for one player to "carry" a team; in fact, it's pretty much impossible. However, it becomes difficult to keep defending Trout when year after year, the Angels miss the playoffs.

#1) In the era he has played it has increasingly become easier to get in.
#2) It's not like he plays for some bottom-feeding team - the Angels spend money.
#3) For the past 2-3 seasons, the Angels have had him and Ohtani on the roster - perhaps the best two players in the league and still nothing.
#4) It's not like folks are criticizing Trout for not having a WS ring (Kershaw went through this for a stretch), he literally has one postseason appearance with one win and one hit. One postseason hit in an era where half the league makes the playoffs is really difficult to swallow considering the above points.

Also, bringing Mays into this discussion doesn't make much sense. Post-War players played in an era when winning the AL or NL pennant was the main objective, winning the World Series was just the cherry on top. Plus, there were no playoffs - it was the WS and that was it. So saying Mays had 33 playoff games...yada, yada, yada...is discounting the fact that if he were in the modern era he would have played well over 100+ playoff games.

[zworykin]

Originally Posted by 2010GBPackers

Baseball is definitely the most difficult sport for one player to "carry" a team; in fact, it's pretty much impossible. However, it becomes difficult to keep defending Trout when year after year, the Angels miss the playoffs.

#1) In the era he has played it has increasingly become easier to get in.
#2) It's not like he plays for some bottom-feeding team - the Angels spend money.
#3) For the past 2-3 seasons, the Angels have had him and Ohtani on the roster - perhaps the best two players in the league and still nothing.
#4) It's not like folks are criticizing Trout for not having a WS ring (Kershaw went through this for a stretch), he literally has one postseason appearance with one win and one hit. One postseason hit in an era where half the league makes the playoffs is really difficult to swallow considering the above points.

Also, bringing Mays into this discussion doesn't make much sense. Post-War players played in an era when winning the AL or NL pennant was the main objective, winning the World Series was just the cherry on top. Plus, there were no playoffs - it was the WS and that was it. So saying Mays had 33 playoff games...yada, yada, yada...is discounting the fact that if he were in the modern era he would have played well over 100+ playoff games.

If you don't see the complete logical disconnect between the piece of your quote that I bolded and literally everything that comes after it, I don't know what to tell you. You can't admit that it's "impossible" for Trout to carry the team in one breath, and then talk about how his team's failures reflect poorly on him in the next.

[eephuspitch]

Originally Posted by jswest18

It's been said a ton of times but I guess worth rehashing considering what you seem to be saying. Baseball is so much different than the other major pro leagues. There is so much out of one player's control when it comes to overall team success and playoff appearances. I think Acuna and the Braves are a prime example of this. Acuna was the consensus MVP front runner for the NL in 2021 when he tore his ACL right before the all star break. The Braves were 44-44 at the time. They went on to win the World Series that year because they caught fire at the right time and they picked up several smaller pieces to replace RAJ who all played great after joining the team. There are negative 100 GMs, owners or coaches who would choose to have any of those players over RAJ.

There have been zero MLB players who have put a bad team on their shoulders and made them a legitimate playoff team. It's just not possible in baseball considering how little control one player has on the outcome of a game. Now can a great or transcendent player make an otherwise mediocre team a playoff contender or can they put them over the top as a WS contender? Maybe. But even that has its limitations.

I don't think it's a good argument to criticize any MLB player for their lack of WS rings or even their playoff appearances. Now if a player makes it to the playoffs and you want to judge their performance in the playoffs and have that be a part of the valuation of their career then ok. I think that's fair to a limited extent. But even that is flawed.

If you look at the post season each year then you almost always see guys who are platoon players or who are average MLB players get hot and carry the team during a series. See David Freese and the Cardinals or Eddie Rosario and the Braves. Obviously you can point to great players who have had tremendous post season success like Pujols or Reggie Jackson but Willie Mays slashed .248/.343/.325 with 1 HR and 3 SBs in 33 career post season games. He has a WS title to his name and that was his best post season but even that was not anything to brag about. I don't think anyone would look at Willie's career though, regular or postseason, and deny he's one of the 3-5 greatest players of all time if not the greatest.

I know that there is inherently some bump to a player's legacy if he has post season success and even more so if he has a WS ring. Baseball is just different though and so postseason performance, especially WS rings, has never held significant importance when evaluating a players career or greatness. I think that will remain the case with Trout no matter what the future holds for him in terms of the postseason.

Bravo.

[eephuspitch]

Originally Posted by SidVish

Great post jswest18. Many people watch baseball their entire lives and fail to grasp or understand what they're watching.

Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk

It is the most misunderstood team sport in America...and it's not even close.