**The Perennial MIKE TROUT Thread**

[fabiani12333]

Originally Posted by BigSeph

I mean, my take on Trout is pretty cut and dry at this point. He is what he is.

First part of career he was an exciting superstar, a must-watch player who carried a high batting average, growing power, stole a lot of bases and made amazing plays in center field.

In his mid/late 20s he sold out for power, and his batting average dropped, stolen bases dropped, home run totals went up. He bulked up noticeably.

In his late 20s his body started breaking down and was dealing with nagging injuries when he WAS healthy. He hasn't played 120+ games in his past 4 seasons, so he can't accumulate counting stats like hits/HRs/SBs even though his rate stats, when healthy, are still elite.

He is hurt again, with an injury history that is cumulative. Shredded calf muscles, degenerative back issues, and now power-sapping broken hamate bone. Giancarlo Stanton should be knocking on the door of 500 HRs by now but he's still sitting close to Trout's HR totals. Because both of them are breaking down physically, and while still capable of producing at a high level, aren't on the field enough to produce anything that will lead to an impressive end-of-career resume.

I can't just view baseball players through rate stats and WAR. If you want to be measured among the greats you have to measure up with counting stats.

And Trout's ability to get there is seriously in question now. 3 of his 4 lowest batting average seasons were in the last 4 years. He doesn't steal bases anymore. He isn't a great centerfielder anymore.

This will be the lasting image of Mike Trout - a Pujolsian decline x 10 as he tries to stay on the field long enough to hit some statistical milestones.

He could have retired after his back diagnosis and would have had a much more impressive resume and mystique as people look back on his playing career. Then he came back and is out for the season - again.

All the shine is off Giancarlo now. People threw in the towel because he's always injured and he's showing a decline in production. Trout is there now.

That's not to say his cards won't be worth big bucks in the future, there's a whole generation of collectors who worship the guy (this thread has several examples) and despite Pujols chasing milestones and being pretty awful the last few seasons of his career, his cards still sell very well.

But for a guy who was on a trajectory to be one of the all-time greats, a top-10 player in MLB history, he is no longer on that trajectory. If I can be honest and give Trout his props as THE MLB superstar of the 2010s, why can't his fanboys be honest and admit that he's physically breaking down and is unlikely to realize the promise that he showed early in his career?

It also caused me to re-evaluate the weight I give advanced stats like WAR. I think for roster building and front office decisions it's a useful statistic, but the average fan has no idea that centerfielders used to receive a -4 defensive penalty in calculating WAR, and now they receive a +2 bonus just for playing centerfield. Playing games and getting hits and HRs and producing real things matters.

Rate stats are nice, but they don't tell the whole story.

WAR is a counting stat.

Trout and Pujols won't be viewed similarly. Pujols had an all-time great decade peak. Trout only had an epic half-decade peak.

[tjforce]

Originally Posted by Bcr

Trout has a better WAR7 than Mantle. Who would rather have for 7 of their best years?

This right here is the issue that some folks don't understand.

In the 3rd grade when you got to pick a person to do a book report on, and you had to chose between Babe Ruth, Hellen Keller, or Abe Lincoln, did you chose Babe Ruth because of where his WAR7 ranked all time?

People acting like these advanced measures (which there are a near infinite amount of) are the end all, be all, just don't get that there are other things that go into creating a great legacy. What's the advanced measure on Jeter flipping the ball to the catcher against the A's? How much regular season WAR is equal to Pujols hitting 3 Home Runs in one World Series Game? Or how about Manny Ramirez blasting out 29 post season career Home Runs? Heck, there are more memorable plays from a guy who finished his career with 598 hits and 841 strike outs than there are of Trout, and that's because Bo Jackson was one of the most ridiculous athletes to ever play sports.

Trout will have a legacy. It'll get him into Cooperstown, and I even hope he's able to come back and have a good enough run to make it an even stronger resume than it is. But to just constantly go back to the advanced metrics as a reason why you can avoid all the holes in the resume is just missing the obvious point.

[daveyc1]

Originally Posted by jhssketchcards

Mickey Mantle more HR in the postseason than Trout, Ohtani, and every Angel on their current roster. Cherry picking stats is foolish. Trouts WAR is incredible no doubt, but c’mon.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I would say trouts WAR WAS incredible. At least through age 27. in the 4 seasons since he has accumulated a whopping 14 WAR.

[kooky4cards]

The only way Trout's card prices maintain their current levels over the next 20 years is if he has a miraculous turnaround, meaning:

- he stays relatively healthy and plays 130+ games over the next 6 or 7 seasons
- no significant decline in power, bat speed, or batting avg. through age 37/38
- reaches 600+ home runs, or has some postseason success/highlights

... OR ...

- none of the above, but he carries his team to WS victory, and is voted either ALCS MPV or WS MVP

While neither of these scenarios are impossible, they are highly improbable.

He is much more likely to end his career with cumulative stats similar to Frank Thomas: 500-550 HR's, 2300-2500 hits, .295 / .300 BA. Maybe his US175 card holds the same nostalgia and value as Griffey's '89 UD card (maybe).

[daveyc1]

Originally Posted by tjforce

This right here is the issue that some folks don't understand.

In the 3rd grade when you got to pick a person to do a book report on, and you had to chose between Babe Ruth, Hellen Keller, or Abe Lincoln, did you chose Babe Ruth because of where his WAR7 ranked all time?

People acting like these advanced measures (which there are a near infinite amount of) are the end all, be all, just don't get that there are other things that go into creating a great legacy. What's the advanced measure on Jeter flipping the ball to the catcher against the A's? How much regular season WAR is equal to Pujols hitting 3 Home Runs in one World Series Game? Or how about Manny Ramirez blasting out 29 post season career Home Runs? Heck, there are more memorable plays from a guy who finished his career with 598 hits and 841 strike outs than there are of Trout, and that's because Bo Jackson was one of the most ridiculous athletes to ever play sports.

Trout will have a legacy. It'll get him into Cooperstown, and I even hope he's able to come back and have a good enough run to make it an even stronger resume than it is. But to just constantly go back to the advanced metrics as a reason why you can avoid all the holes in the resume is just missing the obvious point.

This is it. Exactly. Trout has no signature moments. He has no signature season or stat line. He holds no prominent records. He is not charismatic, at all.

He was really good at drawing BB, but far from the best. And really good at accumulating WAR. What happens in 25 years when no one cares about WAR anymore? think of all the stats that no longer matter.

[oplum29]

Trout is/was an awesome baseball player. to me, he's still the top dawg in the league, even if just by name only.

but he'll remembered as a "what if" player. what if he had stayed healthy, which is sad. add Griffey Jr. to that list.

he'll also be remembered for wasting a lot his prime years with a garbage Angels team that did nothing to help him out. i'm surprised he didn't pull a Lebron and leave to NY, Boston, or LA for a shot at winning a championship and bolstering his total worth (which was lost with the Angels).

he'll also be remembered for striking out in the WBC.

so to answer the question, Mantle or Trout? give me Mantle.

[rfgilles]

Originally Posted by daveyc1

This is it. Exactly. Trout has no signature moments. He has no signature season or stat line. He holds no prominent records. He is not charismatic, at all.

He was really good at drawing BB, but far from the best. And really good at accumulating WAR. What happens in 25 years when no one cares about WAR anymore? think of all the stats that no longer matter.

The 3 MVPS will.

[ThoseBackPages]

BURN Your FISH!

[daveyc1]

Originally Posted by kooky4cards

The only way Trout's card prices maintain their current levels over the next 20 years is if he has a miraculous turnaround, meaning:

- he stays relatively healthy and plays 130+ games over the next 6 or 7 seasons
- no significant decline in power, bat speed, or batting avg. through age 37/38
- reaches 600+ home runs, or has some postseason success/highlights

... OR ...

- none of the above, but he carries his team to WS victory, and is voted either ALCS MPV or WS MVP

While neither of these scenarios are impossible, they are highly improbable.

He is much more likely to end his career with cumulative stats similar to Frank Thomas: 500-550 HR's, 2300-2500 hits, .295 / .300 BA. Maybe his US175 card holds the same nostalgia and value as Griffey's '89 UD card (maybe).

The Frank Thomas comparison seems a really good one for Trout. I would consider Frank the better hitter over the first 5400 AB's. much better at getting on base.

[BigSeph]

Originally Posted by fabiani12333

WAR is a counting stat.

Trout and Pujols won't be viewed similarly. Pujols had an all-time great decade peak. Trout only had an epic half-decade peak.

Again, prior to the past week I always put a significant value on WAR when comparing players and looking at all-time greats.

But it's not the same as a hit, a HR, a SB, an amazing catch, a clutch playoff moment, etc.

Those are real things that happen on a baseball field.

WAR is not. It's a made-up stat that attempts to measure a player's run contribution compared to a mythical "average" player. It has so many arbitrary adjustments and baked-in fudge factors (like a free +2.5 defensive adjustment just for playing centerfield) that if you are simply a .250 hitter with 20 HRs per year and a .350 OBP, you are going to have 5+ WAR just by playing CF, C or SS. Go look at the top-20 dWAR list for 2023. It's full of catchers, shortstops and centerfielders.

That's where I jump off the Trout bandwagon. Andruw Jones got the same positional dWAR "bonus" as Trout as a centerfielder post-1993. Jones led MLB in dWAR 4 times and didn't have a full season dWAR below 1.1 until he was 31 years old.

Trout has had 2 seasons - ever- over 1.1 dWAR. So if he were playing another position on the field more in line with his defensive capabilities (like left field) his WAR would be noticeably less than it is today.

He had a 21 defensive runs saved season in 2012. Awesome year.

Since that season he is -24 on defensive runs saved.

Yet he's still raking in the positional "bonus" by not moving off CF, when anyone who watches baseball the past few years can see that he's not nearly as mobile, fast, or efficient in CF as he was his first couple of years. His arm isn't great.

Centerfielders get a +2.5 positional adjustment every year. Leftfielders get a -7 positional adjustment.

Imagine Adam Dunn's career WAR if the Reds had just left him in centerfield to cost them runs.... In 2009 Dunn had 38 HRs, a .398 OBP and a .928 OPS.

He ended up with a -5.2 dWAR which completely erased his 4.0 oWAR.

Trout would be getting crushed on dWAR if he played left field, and as soon as the Angels move him off CF the world will see what a hoax his WAR stats have been.

[BAHoopla]

Originally Posted by Bcr

Trout has a better WAR7 than Mantle. Who would rather have for 7 of their best years?

This makes ZERO sense as I think we can all agree that during The Mick’s 7 years the number of HOF OF’s far exceeded the OF’s during Trouts 7 years. Again Trout benefitted greatly from a very mediocre decades of so so replacement players.

[SupermanBrandon]

How many baseball fans (and casual fans) do you know that walk around with their first thought being a players WAR or OPS number?

[BAHoopla]

Originally Posted by SupermanBrandon

How many baseball fans (and casual fans) do you know that walk around with their first thought being a players WAR or OPS number?

Only those who claim WAR is their compass

[ThoseBackPages]

Originally Posted by SupermanBrandon

How many baseball fans (and casual fans) do you know that walk around with their first thought being a players WAR or OPS number?

not many.

especially people not on the internet. those people know how great Trout is

[SupermanBrandon]

Originally Posted by ThoseBackPages

not many.

especially people not on the internet. those people know how great Trout is

He was great. He's just not 20-30 years from now inner circle GOAT great. That ship has sailed.

[pete2345]

Soft player physically and mentally same as its always been.

[jhssketchcards]

Originally Posted by BAHoopla

This makes ZERO sense as I think we can all agree that during The Mick’s 7 years the number of HOF OF’s far exceeded the OF’s during Trouts 7 years. Again Trout benefitted greatly from a very mediocre decades of so so replacement players.

This right here. Mantle played with Berra who won 3 MVPs, Maris who won 2, and Elston Howard won 1.
Ohtani is a unicorn with Trout, but other than him, LAA have struggled to even field an All star besides Trout the last decade. Easy to be an MVP on a team that sucks


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ThoseBackPages]

Originally Posted by SupermanBrandon

He was great. He's just not 20-30 years from now inner circle GOAT great. That ship has sailed.

i agree that he is more Hobby inner circle than Sport inner circle

[daveyc1]

Originally Posted by BigSeph

Again, prior to the past week I always put a significant value on WAR when comparing players and looking at all-time greats.

But it's not the same as a hit, a HR, a SB, an amazing catch, a clutch playoff moment, etc.

Those are real things that happen on a baseball field.

WAR is not. It's a made-up stat that attempts to measure a player's run contribution compared to a mythical "average" player. It has so many arbitrary adjustments and baked-in fudge factors (like a free +2.5 defensive adjustment just for playing centerfield) that if you are simply a .250 hitter with 20 HRs per year and a .350 OBP, you are going to have 5+ WAR just by playing CF, C or SS. Go look at the top-20 dWAR list for 2023. It's full of catchers, shortstops and centerfielders.

That's where I jump off the Trout bandwagon. Andruw Jones got the same positional dWAR "bonus" as Trout as a centerfielder post-1993. Jones led MLB in dWAR 4 times and didn't have a full season dWAR below 1.1 until he was 31 years old.

Trout has had 2 seasons - ever- over 1.1 dWAR. So if he were playing another position on the field more in line with his defensive capabilities (like left field) his WAR would be noticeably less than it is today.

He had a 21 defensive runs saved season in 2012. Awesome year.

Since that season he is -24 on defensive runs saved.

Yet he's still raking in the positional "bonus" by not moving off CF, when anyone who watches baseball the past few years can see that he's not nearly as mobile, fast, or efficient in CF as he was his first couple of years. His arm isn't great.

Centerfielders get a +2.5 positional adjustment every year. Leftfielders get a -7 positional adjustment.

Imagine Adam Dunn's career WAR if the Reds had just left him in centerfield to cost them runs.... In 2009 Dunn had 38 HRs, a .398 OBP and a .928 OPS.

He ended up with a -5.2 dWAR which completely erased his 4.0 oWAR.

Trout would be getting crushed on dWAR if he played left field, and as soon as the Angels move him off CF the world will see what a hoax his WAR stats have been.

This. this is it. I have been saying it for years, though not as eloquently as you, and no one wants to hear it. so much of Trouts "WAR" domination is fraudulent. he has not belonged in CF for many years, yet he is reaping the reward of the positional adjustment and costing his team on defense.

Same with Jeter. He should have been moved off from SS the very second they aquired ARod. probably before that. He was an even worse SS than Trout is a CF.

Trout would seem much more pedestrian WAR wise had he been playing a more appropriate position. without the gaudy WAR numbers, the rest of his production wouldnt shine quite so brightly.

[theshowandme]

Did I just read that Mike Trout has been playing in a weak era when guys are throwing 100+ mph and every team has an arm barn of guys with insane stuff?

[SupermanBrandon]

Is there a way to adjust his WAR and see what it would be if he had played LF instead of CF for the past 5 years?

[TBTC Baseball]

Originally Posted by theshowandme

Did I just read that Mike Trout has been playing in a weak era when guys are throwing 100+ mph and every team has an arm barn of guys with insane stuff?

We had asterisk for Maris' 61, what do we put for Judge's 62...since it is a "weak era"?

[MattRoc]

Originally Posted by theshowandme

Did I just read that Mike Trout has been playing in a weak era when guys are throwing 100+ mph and every team has an arm barn of guys with insane stuff?

Apparently so. TIL baseball is the only profession that has gone backwards in the last 70 years.

[redauto5]

Originally Posted by daveyc1

lots of players have won MVP awards. I am talking about all time seasons. Brett 80, Koufax 66, Pedro 99 &00, Mantle 56 & 61, Williams 41, even Judge 22. What does Trout have? He has no memorable seasons. Even at his peak. check out the stats. He has lots of BB and lots of WAR.



he has led the league in BB and runs a few times, but the overwhelming majority of his league-leading stats are rate stats. rate stats are simply easier to rank high in the fewer AB you get. with all the BB and missed games it is easier to have high SLG % OPB+ etc. notice after 16, when the AB numbers start to tank, his rate stats spike? that is because pre 2017, he was getting 550-625 AB's. much harder to keep rate stats super high then. this is why getting to .400 is so hard. Brett and Gwynn both had short seasons the years they came close.



The high WAR numbers can be attributed to his propensity to BB and the CF positional adjustment. at his very very best, Trout was an average CFer. for the last half dozen years, below average. He should not have been playing there, or getting that positional adjustment.



When Ohtani leaves, he will be playing MUCH more DH and those WAR numbers will tank. He is also selling out for power and you can see it in the BA, OBP and K rates. the bat has slowed and he has to start the swing earlier.



I think 50 years into the future, he will be seen as a player who had a very good 8 years or so in the 2010's

So yeah, playing the premium position of center field adequately shouldn't count for anything. Playing a decent 1B should count the same. Doh.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

[rfgilles]

Originally Posted by daveyc1

This. this is it. I have been saying it for years, though not as eloquently as you, and no one wants to hear it. so much of Trouts "WAR" domination is fraudulent. he has not belonged in CF for many years, yet he is reaping the reward of the positional adjustment and costing his team on defense.

Same with Jeter. He should have been moved off from SS the very second they aquired ARod. probably before that. He was an even worse SS than Trout is a CF.

Trout would seem much more pedestrian WAR wise had he been playing a more appropriate position. without the gaudy WAR numbers, the rest of his production wouldnt shine quite so brightly.

Playing LF is much easier than playing CF. Players who move down the defensive spectrum usually do better from a fWAR perspective.

Think Manny Machado from SS to 3B. Starling Marte moving from CF to LF. Brett Gardner moving from CF to LF.

Just look at Fernando Tatis moving from SS to RF.

That accounts for why the positions are weighed differently.