What's up with Mike Trout?

[packs]

To that I would say this; take a look at the list of other 3 time MVP players:

Because they aren't going away:
Bonds
A-rod

The rest:
Albert Pujols
Mike Schmidt
Mickey Mantle
Yogi Berra
Roy Campanella
Stan Musial
Joe DiMaggio
Jimmie Foxx

and of course, Mike Trout. Pretty hefty list and if he wins a fourth MVP, which I really don't think is far from the realm of possibility, he is again in a class of his own.

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by packs

To that I would say this; take a look at the list of other 3 time MVP players:

Because they aren't going away:
Bonds
A-rod

The rest:
Albert Pujols
Mike Schmidt
Mickey Mantle
Yogi Berra
Roy Campanella
Stan Musial
Joe DiMaggio
Jimmie Foxx

and of course, Mike Trout. Pretty hefty list and if he wins a fourth MVP, which I really don't think is far from the realm of possibility, he is again in a class of his own.

Yes hes an ELITE Regular Season player at this point.....i dont doubt he would be great in playoffs as well but if he doest get the chance, you cant put him over others who proved to be great against far better playoff competition.

of course a terrible regular season player who was great int he playoffs wouldnt make that player better than trout....however there could be other 3x MVP or lesser that is considered better due to the entire body of work including playoffs.

[packs]

He plays against every AL team every season and against a number of NL teams through interleague play. He is playing every playoff team. It's not like the AL and NL are separate any longer.

There is a Brian Doyle for every Mariano Rivera in the postseason. It really isn't the maker or breaker it's made out to be.

To echo an earlier post; Ted Williams hit 200 over 7 career postseason games. Is there any argument over the player he was?

[nat]

Whatever happens with the post season (which 40% of teams now qualify for, let's not pretend it's all that special), Trout is already one of the greatest to have ever played.

Career slash lines, along with OPS+ (which is adjusted to account for the context in which the player played)

Trout: 303/416/584, and 176
DiMaggio: 325/398/579 and 155

Trout is a better hitter than Joe DiMaggio, and they both play centerfield. He's already accumulated more total value to his career than DiMaggio, despite playing in more than 300 fewer games. And he's still only 30.

He's currently 38th all-time in career WAR (tied with Jeff Bagwell). By the end of the year he should be roughly tied with Ken Griffey Jr. If he's healthy next year he'll finish the season up around Wade Boggs and Jimmie Foxx. The only question with Trout at this point is health. It's been iffy so far. If the injuries catch up to him, he's a better version of Griffey. If not, he's a top 10 player.

[Peter_Spaeth]

As Packs and I both have mentioned, Ted Williams is the complete answer to the wrong notion that playoff success is necessary to be an elite all time legend. Why is this even being debated? Can it enhance one's legend, sure. Necessary, absolutely not.

[Eric72]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

...Why is this even being debated?...

Because you could write, "water is wet" and there would be contrarian knuckleheads debating you.

Although not unique to Net54, there seems to be an uptick in the frequency of such behavior on this site lately. (I can hear a few keyboard warriors typing their responses to my post already)

[clydepepper]

Originally Posted by Eric72

Because you could write, "water is wet" and there would be contrarian knuckleheads debating you.

Although not unique to Net54, there seems to be an uptick in the frequency of such behavior on this site lately. (I can hear a few keyboard warriors typing their responses to my post already)

Actually, I started this thread trying to make sense of the extended slump Trout was in...not his greatness, though I did comment on that later on.

There are several good-to-great hitters who are just starting to hit (Soto for example) or are still having down seasons and I believe at least some of that can be blamed on the lockout and abbreviated spring training. Plus the fact that teams had 15 and 16 man pitching staffs to start the season...good grief!


.

.

[frankbmd]

Originally Posted by Eric72

Because you could write, "water is wet" and there would be contrarian knuckleheads debating you.

Although not unique to Net54, there seems to be an uptick in the frequency of such behavior on this site lately. (I can hear a few keyboard warriors typing their responses to my post already)

I put a 2 inch cube of water in my bourbon last night. It disappeared along with the bourbon. Does this prove unequivocally that water is wet? I think not.

Your favorite keyboard warrior

[mrreality68]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

As Packs and I both have mentioned, Ted Williams is the complete answer to the wrong notion that playoff success is necessary to be an elite all time legend. Why is this even being debated? Can it enhance one's legend, sure. Necessary, absolutely not.

+1 agree and he served and lost prime time of career.

[clydepepper]

answering my own original question:

He has back issues, has missed the last four games and, thusly, will not participate in the All-Star game.


.

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

As Packs and I both have mentioned, Ted Williams is the complete answer to the wrong notion that playoff success is necessary to be an elite all time legend. Why is this even being debated? Can it enhance one's legend, sure. Necessary, absolutely not.

well people who point to Derek Jeter being better than Arod would disagree... that not me but just saying,

i have defended Clayton Kershaw for years for his postseason..so i am not a hater of lack of playoff success players compared to their regular season and/or lack of championships...

but i do agree a 'lesser' regular season player perhaps just a bit lesser, who has a much greater playoff success would be 'better' in my book as you cant say winning and doing well in the postseason doesnt matter like spring training,..its a second season.....especially now with so many playoff teams versus the amount of playoff teams in years past...

[packs]

You're getting into the subjective which is good for discussions. In a subjective world, I would say Derek Jeter was the better player between him and A-Rod. I say that because if I were going to have to choose one player for my team, I would choose Jeter over A-Rod every time.

That's not because Jeter had better stats. It's because I'd rather have him on my team knowing he has attributes you won't necessarily get with A-Rod.