NFT: Mike Trout - Can we say this....

But this will be his 9th season in the majors. He hasn't won a single playoff game. Not one. Zero.

It's a team game, so you can be an all-star or even an HOFer without success in the postseason. But to even be a fart in the room where the best player ever discussion is happening, you need to have done something in the postseason. He has zero wins.

So we can't say that. We can't even consider it as a possibility. He isn't in the discussion.

...wither away on the west coast Mike, wouldn't even know you if I bumped into you! (half facetious)

as the GOAT. Won MVP in both leagues, went to the WS in both leagues, great all around player. Killed the Yanks (we discussed the Orioles' lost glory a week or two ago when they were playing the Yanks.)

But what's funny - when I looked at Robinson's Baseball Reference page just now to confirm some of what I'm thinking - his "by age" comparison is Mike Trout!

In comment 14537104 Mike in Long Beach said:

Quote:

But this will be his 9th season in the majors. He hasn't won a single playoff game. Not one. Zero. It's a team game, so you can be an all-star or even an HOFer without success in the postseason. But to even be a fart in the room where the best player ever discussion is happening, you need to have done something in the postseason. He has zero wins. So we can't say that. We can't even consider it as a possibility. He isn't in the discussion.

I think you're mostly right here but I also think there are exceptions to every rule. Ted Williams went to the WS in 1946. His lone World Series, and lost. Ted Williams, to me, is the greatest hitter ever. If you want to argue Lou Gehrig, that's fine. But I think there is a level of individual greatness that can be achieved and recognized independent of team success.

I don't think Trout is the best ever. I think by the time he's done, he may be in the conversation. And part of it really is his defense.

In comment 14537104 Mike in Long Beach said:

Quote:

But this will be his 9th season in the majors. He hasn't won a single playoff game. Not one. Zero. It's a team game, so you can be an all-star or even an HOFer without success in the postseason. But to even be a fart in the room where the best player ever discussion is happening, you need to have done something in the postseason. He has zero wins. So we can't say that. We can't even consider it as a possibility. He isn't in the discussion.

9th season so he isn't even eligible for HoF yet! Need 10 - ask Thurman Munson.

Greatest of all time - no. Top 10 absolutely. Top 5 close.

In no particular order: (my 5)
Ruth (my #1)
Williams
Mays
Aaron
Griffey, Jr

Is he better than Arod or Bonds - 'roids or not? Bonds probably yes. Arod - that is mighty close, I may say Arod.
(neither likely to get in during my life)

In comment 14537120 allstarjim said:

Quote:

In comment 14537104 Mike in Long Beach said: Quote: But this will be his 9th season in the majors. He hasn't won a single playoff game. Not one. Zero. It's a team game, so you can be an all-star or even an HOFer without success in the postseason. But to even be a fart in the room where the best player ever discussion is happening, you need to have done something in the postseason. He has zero wins. So we can't say that. We can't even consider it as a possibility. He isn't in the discussion. I think you're mostly right here but I also think there are exceptions to every rule. Ted Williams went to the WS in 1946. His lone World Series, and lost. Ted Williams, to me, is the greatest hitter ever. If you want to argue Lou Gehrig, that's fine. But I think there is a level of individual greatness that can be achieved and recognized independent of team success. I don't think Trout is the best ever. I think by the time he's done, he may be in the conversation. And part of it really is his defense.

Ruth and Bonds. Pretty boring here. Mays and Henderson.

& I wouldn't even notice. I don't know other sport you can that about, hockey probably for me too.

In comment 14537128 SFGFNCGiantsFan said:

Quote:

& I wouldn't even notice. I don't know other sport you can that about, hockey probably for me too.

Well since you are half in the bag most of the time, would this be unusual? LOL. Just busting ya!

In comment 14537104 Mike in Long Beach said:

Quote:

But this will be his 9th season in the majors. He hasn't won a single playoff game. Not one. Zero. It's a team game, so you can be an all-star or even an HOFer without success in the postseason. But to even be a fart in the room where the best player ever discussion is happening, you need to have done something in the postseason. He has zero wins. So we can't say that. We can't even consider it as a possibility. He isn't in the discussion.

Baseball is the least "team game" of the team sports, if that makes any sense. What else can Trout do to get his team to the playoffs? He's doing his part and then some, it's not his fault they can't put the right team around him.

Yes, he is in the discussion. Showing no signs of slowing down, good chance he's in the top 5 WAR all time when he's done. Certainly the greatest player I've seen outside of steroid era Bonds

In comment 14537129 dep026 said:

Quote:

In comment 14537128 SFGFNCGiantsFan said: Quote: & I wouldn't even notice. I don't know other sport you can that about, hockey probably for me too. Well since you are half in the bag most of the time, would this be unusual? LOL. Just busting ya!

Haha. Touche.

in less than 50% of the seasons it took Jeter (not to pick on Jeter he's passed a lot of players, but Jeter is the most recent big name) I think he has a chance to become the greatest, but he's not yet.

What I do think is an interesting discussion is should the Angels trade him.

As highlighted here, the Angels have made the playoffs once in his career and won zero games.

Is having Trout worth it?

In comment 14537104 Mike in Long Beach said:

Quote:

But this will be his 9th season in the majors. He hasn't won a single playoff game. Not one. Zero. It's a team game, so you can be an all-star or even an HOFer without success in the postseason. But to even be a fart in the room where the best player ever discussion is happening, you need to have done something in the postseason. He has zero wins. So we can't say that. We can't even consider it as a possibility. He isn't in the discussion.

Remind when Trout has had pitchers like Clemens, Pettitte, Mussina, Rivera, etc on his team to do perform that act called pitching...

he was 1-12. Small sample size, I know but he doesn't seem to want the spotlight. The fact that he signed that extension with the Angels knowing full well that there's a decent shot they can never put together a true contender is a bit of a red flag to me.

how about some hitters behind him? They relied on the geriatric Pujols to hit behind thme which failed. Ohtani is good, but he is hardly playing with yearly all-star players to protect him.

Maybe Adell will be the guy who benefits him but he is only 21.

In comment 14537155 Strahan91 said:

Quote:

he was 1-12. Small sample size, I know but he doesn't seem to want the spotlight. The fact that he signed that extension with the Angels knowing full well that there's a decent shot they can never put together a true contender is a bit of a red flag to me.

Bonds went west to San Fran. And his first five appearances in the playoffs he was 19/97, 1 HR, 6 RBIs.

Then he broke out in 2002, when the roids really kicked it...

in any team sport. Not really open for discussion. Trout is a certain HOF'er and probably the best player of the past decade. No player can ever match the domination Ruth had in the time he played.

Only time I see him play is vs. Yankees.

In comment 14537197 averagejoe said:

Quote:

in any team sport. Not really open for discussion. Trout is a certain HOF'er and probably the best player of the past decade. No player can ever match the domination Ruth had in the time he played.

Michael Jordan says hold my beer.

So that is one chink in that armor. Pre steroid bonds, mantle, and mays to me are the best comparisons to trout when you consider the defensive aspects of the game. All three a tick above Griffey IMO.

In comment 14537197 averagejoe said:

Quote:

in any team sport. Not really open for discussion. Trout is a certain HOF'er and probably the best player of the past decade. No player can ever match the domination Ruth had in the time he played.

Ruth was certainly great when the league was lily white.

May I remind you of a man named Wayne Gretzky. Too often he gets lost in these conversations...

Quote:

Baseball is the least "team game" of the team sports, if that makes any sense. What else can Trout do to get his team to the playoffs? He's doing his part and then some, it's not his fault they can't put the right team around him.

It doesn't make sense, ha. You negated you own point. What else can Trout do to get his team to the playoffs? Nothing. There are people out there arguing he's in the mix for best player ever, and his teams still can't make the playoffs... which is why, like I was saying, it's a team game and not an individual game.

The point I think you're trying to make is, when analyzing an individual player, baseball is the type of sport where you would least look at the success of the teams the player was on in comparison to other sports. To that point, presuming that's what you meant, I agree. But the sport itself is one of the most centric sports as 1 or 2 or 3 individuals can't carry the load... unless they all happen to be in the rotation... and even that model is fading with the rise of bullpen importance.

In comment 14537205 dep026 said:

Quote:

In comment 14537197 averagejoe said: Quote: in any team sport. Not really open for discussion. Trout is a certain HOF'er and probably the best player of the past decade. No player can ever match the domination Ruth had in the time he played. Michael Jordan says hold my beer.

No, totally disagree and LeBron probably disagrees too.

In comment 14537174 dep026 said:

Quote:

how about some hitters behind him? They relied on the geriatric Pujols to hit behind thme which failed. Ohtani is good, but he is hardly playing with yearly all-star players to protect him. Maybe Adell will be the guy who benefits him but he is only 21.

Angels are scoring this year. Actually have a very good offense.

As usual, their pitching is abysmal.

In comment 14537210 bhill410 said:

Quote:

So that is one chink in that armor. Pre steroid bonds, mantle, and mays to me are the best comparisons to trout when you consider the defensive aspects of the game. All three a tick above Griffey IMO.

Arod is better than Barry, imho. Bonds was a very good batter before roids and great hitter after roids but overrated as OF. ARod was a far superior fielder and probably better pre-roids batter.
Both whack jobs, too.

So your point that he can't even be considered because he hasn't had a playoff win I believe is extremely misguided.

If he never makes the playoffs again, and continues to perform like this for another 6-8 years before a natural decline, he's in the discussion for greatest player of all time no matter what.

In comment 14537205 dep026 said:

Quote:

In comment 14537197 averagejoe said: Quote: in any team sport. Not really open for discussion. Trout is a certain HOF'er and probably the best player of the past decade. No player can ever match the domination Ruth had in the time he played. Michael Jordan says hold my beer.

Jordan failed at baseball. I think he is holding Ruth's beer (and hot dog).

Trout a great player. Greatest of all time? Hard to say that given the juiced ball but depending on how the rest of his career goes, it's not an unreasonable position.

In comment 14537229 Kyle in NY said:

Quote:

So your point that he can't even be considered because he hasn't had a playoff win I believe is extremely misguided. If he never makes the playoffs again, and continues to perform like this for another 6-8 years before a natural decline, he's in the discussion for greatest player of all time no matter what.

Fair enough, though I disagree. Again, we're not talking about the Hall of Fame. We're going into the world of "Best Player of all Time." And while I do agree with you that, when analyzing a baseball player, you need to have more of (or the most) disconnect between the player and the team success, it's not irrelevant. I don't need him to win a World Series, but he has to win a couple playoff games. That's a check box I simply need checked off. If he can't manage to pull that off in an 18 year career or whatever it winds up being, then it's not enough.

I don't think you're giving enough credence to the rarefied air and how selective and critical we should be when putting someone in that conversation.

In comment 14537219 section125 said:

Quote:

No, totally disagree and LeBron probably disagrees too.

Well Leselfish is a moron. And his case for GOAT ended years ago.

In comment 14537180 bw in dc said:

Quote:

Then he broke out in 2002, when the roids really kicked it...

The steroids kicked in the year after he hit 73 homers?

about baseball is "best" has been quantified. of the major sports it's the most "individual" of them and while team success is a team attribute best player is not team dependent.

WAR measures each player in terms of total contribution to the team. It strips out other players, neutralizes ballpark,

So, while it's not perfect per se, it's probably a better measure of am individual players contribution than any metric in any other sport.

In comment 14537248 dep026 said:

Quote:

In comment 14537219 section125 said: Quote: No, totally disagree and LeBron probably disagrees too. Well Leselfish is a moron. And his case for GOAT ended years ago.

Like MJ the personality better, also.

Is defensive metrics. I don’t think they have caught up that aspect yet.

than the fact that they've had the greatest player of our generation and have done bupkis with him.

What the hell did Ohtani see in that bunch of losers? I get that he would only play on the West Coast, fine, but why the Angels over the Dodgers or the Giants?

In comment 14537259 dep026 said:

Quote:

Is defensive metrics. I don’t think they have caught up that aspect yet.

agree with this, but I do think as flawed as they are they're probably consistent. So as good as any other defensive metric. The important point for evaluating Trout is that he's not overly valued for his defense. In fact his DEF ratings and how they fluctuate year to year are probably a good indicator of the unreliability of the defense part of WAR.

In comment 14537259 dep026 said:

Quote:

Is defensive metrics. I don’t think they have caught up that aspect yet.

I absolutely agree with this. I'm not as conversant as I should be in the metrics, but defensive metrics are just not believable or trustworthy.

has Trout as only a bit above average defensively, career 3.7 defensive WAR. So even if you don't fully trust the defensive metrics, Trout's 72.4 WAR through about 8 full seasons (just an insane number) is almost entirely from his offense and positional value

In comment 14537216 bw in dc said:

Quote:

In comment 14537197 averagejoe said: Quote: in any team sport. Not really open for discussion. Trout is a certain HOF'er and probably the best player of the past decade. No player can ever match the domination Ruth had in the time he played. Ruth was certainly great when the league was lily white. May I remind you of a man named Wayne Gretzky. Too often he gets lost in these conversations...

probably Gretzky in the modern era. Non-team sports i'd go with Karelin.

In comment 14537266 Kyle in NY said:

Quote:

has Trout as only a bit above average defensively, career 3.7 defensive WAR. So even if you don't fully trust the defensive metrics, Trout's 72.4 WAR through about 8 full seasons (just an insane number) is almost entirely from his offense and positional value

exactly, like I posted above:

The important point for evaluating Trout is that he's not overly valued for his defense.

And his ability to play three different infield positions during a year of multiple injuries on the team gives him significant added value. I think a strong argument could be made on his behalf.

In comment 14537266 Kyle in NY said:

Quote:

has Trout as only a bit above average defensively, career 3.7 defensive WAR. So even if you don't fully trust the defensive metrics, Trout's 72.4 WAR through about 8 full seasons (just an insane number) is almost entirely from his offense and positional value

May be less if scorers weren't so friendly to him. The guy missed a routine fly ball last night and it was called a hit. I had to double take.

In comment 14537278 Milton said:

Quote:

And his ability to play three different infield positions during a year of multiple injuries on the team gives him significant added value. I think a strong argument could be made on his behalf.

He will get votes, but he's not close to Trout unless you are of the mindset you don't vote MVP for players not on winning teams.

Even then there's probably a couple players ahead of LeMahieu

In comment 14537125 section125 said:

Quote:

In comment 14537104 Mike in Long Beach said: Quote: But this will be his 9th season in the majors. He hasn't won a single playoff game. Not one. Zero. It's a team game, so you can be an all-star or even an HOFer without success in the postseason. But to even be a fart in the room where the best player ever discussion is happening, you need to have done something in the postseason. He has zero wins. So we can't say that. We can't even consider it as a possibility. He isn't in the discussion. 9th season so he isn't even eligible for HoF yet! Need 10 - ask Thurman Munson. Greatest of all time - no. Top 10 absolutely. Top 5 close. In no particular order: (my 5) Ruth (my #1) Williams Mays Aaron Griffey, Jr Is he better than Arod or Bonds - 'roids or not? Bonds probably yes. Arod - that is mighty close, I may say Arod. (neither likely to get in during my life)

Jr. and possibly Aroid over Mantle? Musial? Good grief.

In comment 14537205 dep026 said:

Quote:

In comment 14537197 averagejoe said: Quote: in any team sport. Not really open for discussion. Trout is a certain HOF'er and probably the best player of the past decade. No player can ever match the domination Ruth had in the time he played. Michael Jordan says hold my beer.

Wilt Chamberlain averaged fifty pts PER GAME for a season. He also averaged 33 rebounds PER GAME for a season. Michael can hold his beer.

In comment 14537284 pjcas18 said:

Quote:

He will get votes, but he's not close to Trout unless you are of the mindset you don't vote MVP for players not on winning teams. Even then there's probably a couple players ahead of LeMahieu

Bregman will have a good case with the Astros for sure...

Is really arbitrary and meaningless. The guy is just incredible. If he played for the Yankees he’d be the biggest player in pro sports

In comment 14537287 GeneInCal said:

Quote:

In comment 14537125 section125 said: Quote: In comment 14537104 Mike in Long Beach said: Quote: But this will be his 9th season in the majors. He hasn't won a single playoff game. Not one. Zero. It's a team game, so you can be an all-star or even an HOFer without success in the postseason. But to even be a fart in the room where the best player ever discussion is happening, you need to have done something in the postseason. He has zero wins. So we can't say that. We can't even consider it as a possibility. He isn't in the discussion. 9th season so he isn't even eligible for HoF yet! Need 10 - ask Thurman Munson. Greatest of all time - no. Top 10 absolutely. Top 5 close. In no particular order: (my 5) Ruth (my #1) Williams Mays Aaron Griffey, Jr Is he better than Arod or Bonds - 'roids or not? Bonds probably yes. Arod - that is mighty close, I may say Arod. (neither likely to get in during my life) Jr. and possibly Aroid over Mantle? Musial? Good grief.

Yes. The Mick was my all time favorite Yankee - so yeah I can make that call. You can rank Gehrig(for certain), DiMaggio and Yogi over Mickey and not be wrong.

Stan was a great player, but top 5?

In comment 14537294 bw in dc said:

Quote:

In comment 14537284 pjcas18 said: Quote: He will get votes, but he's not close to Trout unless you are of the mindset you don't vote MVP for players not on winning teams. Even then there's probably a couple players ahead of LeMahieu Bregman will have a good case with the Astros for sure...

I think LeMahieu should be the MVP, though I have no delusions about it happening. I know it's going to be Trout. But the Yankees have set records this year for injuries. Literally the most injured team ever. And they still have the record in baseball, and LeMahieu's play has been nothing short of remarkable. I don't think the Yankees are where they are without him. He'd get my vote.

i've ever seen play (last 30 years) outside of Bonds. Bonds is the #1 for me right now, we will see hot the next 5/6 shake out for Trout and I will revise then if needed.

In order for Wayne Gretzky to rival him in his particular sport, he'd have to win the Vezina Trophy, then 2 years later start a string as the greatest scorer in hockey history.

He was on his way to being a HOF pitcher.
And it could be argued that had he started as a full time player, he'd have easily hit another 100 home runs and driven in another 300 runs and scored another 300 runs.