Getting Mike Trout to 168.4 WAR
For the third time in four years, Mike Trout finished as a runner-up MVP. Trout had a compelling case, but Josh Donaldson was a deserving winner. Even if you think Trout should have won, you’re probably fine with Donaldson winning. More than one guy can deserve it, after all.
Regardless, the outcome of an award vote doesn’t change what Trout’s achieved through his first four seasons. And what Trout’s done through his first four seasons is unprecedented. Already, he’s arguably accomplished more than any player in history through his age-23 season. Already, he’s had a top-10 all-time four-year peak, and those are the only years we’ve seen him have. The next question, naturally, is a biggie. Don’t lie — you’ve thought about it. Even if you’re a skeptic, it’s a thought that’s crossed your mind, if even for a fleeting moment.
“What if this guy is the best that’s ever done it?”
What if? Never hurts to wonder. Could Trout be the greatest? If he ends up as the greatest, what would that even take? What would that career look like? What could that career look like?
The all-time leader in position player Wins Above Replacement, according to our leaderboards, is Babe Ruth, at 168.4 WAR. Let’s have a little fun.
* * *
Trout’s career currently stands at 38.5 WAR, by our model. That already places him 256th all-time in the modern era for hitters, ahead of the entire careers of Hall of Famers Roy Campanella and Pie Traynor and baseball legends Roger Maris and Kirk Gibson. But that’s not good enough. No, 256th isn’t first; we’re envisioning a world where Mike Trout goes out on top.
The Mickey Mantle comparisons are alive and well, but you hear a lot of Willie Mays too. Mays played from age 20 until age 42. Trout debuted at 19, but he didn’t play his first full season until 20. Keeping the Mays comparison going, we’ll say Trout plays until he’s 42, as well.
Rather than look into a crystal ball to see the future of Trout’s career, let’s instead look to the past. For each year of Trout’s career, let’s subjectively assign him a particularly Troutian real-life season by a real-life player that happened at that same age. For example, Trout’s age-25 season is Sal Bando’s age-25 season. Then, for each season, we’ll use historical league averages to translate the actual stats to a modern-day equivalent.
The only rules of this exercise are as follows:
- No Bonds, no Ruth
- No duplicates
- Mike Trout ends up as the Greatest Of All Time
* * *
Age 24
- Age comp: Mike Trout, projected 2016
- WAR: 9.2
- Translated numbers: .307/.410/.585, 37 HR, 175 wRC+
We start things off not with a historical player comp, but instead what we have available to us here at the site. This is Mike Trout’s 2016 Steamer projection. The big picture here is that one of the most accurate publicly available player projection systems pegs Mike Trout’s true talent level at age 24 as a nine-win player with a near .300/.400/.600 slash line. It’s important to remember that these projection systems are typically conservative. What we see is a median projection. Median projection as in, there’s room left for improvement. Improvement. This is simply the base with which we begin.
Age 25
- Age comp: Sal Bando, 1969
- WAR: 7.7
- Translated numbers: .283/.372/.547, 36 HR, 154 wRC+
Yet, in Trout’s age-25 season, he regresses. His true-talent level may be a nine-win player, but there’s got to be some give and take, right? For the first time in his career, Trout posts a WAR below eight. For the first time in his career, Trout posts a wRC+ below 165. The batting average, on-base percentage and slugging percentage: all career-lows. Still nearly an eight-win player.
It’s the end of the 2017 season, and Mike Trout now ranks 119th all-time in career hitter WAR at the age of 25, having surpassed the likes of Todd Helton, Vladimir Guerrero and Jim Rice in the past calendar year.
Age 26
- Age comp: Mickey Mantle, 1958
- WAR: 8.8
- Translated numbers: .295/.426/.595, 46 HR, 187 wRC+
Now in his age-26 season, Trout is entering the years in which most hitters throughout history have tended to hit their peaks. That may be the craziest thing about what Trout’s already done — we haven’t yet seen his hypothetical “peak years.” In 2018, Trout begins to realize those typical peak years and lives up to those Mantle comparisons, replicating Mantle’s age-26 season. Trout posts career-highs in homers and wRC+, though the average, OBP and WAR have all been done before.
At 64.2 career WAR, Trout has now compiled a Hall of Fame-worthy resume by his age-26 season. The best is yet to come. Trout now ranks 75th all-time, having leapfrogged Alan Trammell, Roberto Alomar and Ernie Banks.
Age 27
- Age comp: Carl Yastrzemski, 1967
- WAR: 11.1
- Translated numbers: .335/.423/.689, 60 HR, 194 wRC+
On last Friday’s episode of Effectively Wild, hosts Sam Miller and Ben Lindbergh coincidentally discussed Trout’s future and provided what turned out to be several particularly relevant quotes for this exercise.
Miller noted that, despite all four of Trout’s seasons to date having been roughly equal in terms of overall value, he’s curiously resembled four seemingly separate players. There’s been all-around speed-and-defense Trout, walks Trout, strikeouts Trout and, most recently, slugging Trout. Miller asked Lindbergh to declare his favorite version. After initially answering “all-around Trout,” Lindbergh continued:
“I kind of like the 40-home run hitter Trout, too. Like, I’m curious to see how far that can go. When he gets a little older, is he going to add even more power? Is he going to be a 50-homer guy? I’m fascinated to see where he goes next.”
Added Miller:
“You’re right. If you put him in a park that boosted his power a bit and if the era comes back a little to a more neutral or more hitter-friendly era, this guy is potentially a 60-home run hitter. Which, nobody even saw the 30s coming.”
At some point, Trout is going to have his trademark season. It’s possible that it’s already happened, but that wouldn’t be any fun. Instead, it happens in the mythical age-27 season. Trout has Carl Yastrzemski’s trademark Triple Crown year, which translates in modern day to a .335 batting average and 60 homers. The 194 wRC+ will go down as his career-high, which is still three points lower than what Bryce Harper did in 2015.
Trout is now at 75.3 career WAR, all but securing his place in Cooperstown by the age of 27. He ranks 32nd all-time, one spot below Ken Griffey Jr. and two spots ahead of Johnny Bench. His career still has another 15 years.
Age 28
- Age comp: J.D. Drew, 2004
- WAR: 8.6
- Translated numbers: .291/.412/.538, 29 HR, 162 wRC+
Trout begins to receive a poor man’s version of the Barry Bonds treatment, getting pitched around to the tune of J.D. Drew’s 18.3% walk rate from 2004. Trout’s “held” to just 29 home runs, but he’s issued the free pass a career-high 161 times. The Bonds treatment was never expected to stop him. It was a merely a means to divert the damage.
Now at 83.9 career WAR, Trout cracks the top-25, sandwiched between Chipper Jones and Joe DiMaggio.
Age 29
- Age comp: Nelson Cruz, 2010
- WAR: 4.9
- Translated numbers: .317/.406/.588, 23 HR, 170 wRC+
Everyone’s nightmare comes true: Trout falls victim to injury for the first time in his career. No one’s invincible. In early August, Trout is hit with a fastball on the hands, breaking a wrist. He misses the remainder of the season. Like Nelson Cruz in 2010, Trout’s still able to post nearly five wins in 108 games due to an extremely hot first half, but we’re given perhaps our first reminder that Trout is human after all.
Still, Trout is able to leapfrog Jones, George Brett and Wade Boggs on the all-time WAR leaderboard, ending the season ranked 22nd all-time, with 88.8 WAR.
Age 30
- Age comp: Lenny Dykstra, 1993
- WAR: 6.8
- Translated numbers: .292/.400/.484, 22 HR, 143 wRC+
Still recovering from the wrist injury, Trout gets off to a dreadful first half in the inaugural year of his 30s, leading many to question whether the inevitable decline from greatness was near. He still makes the All-Star Game on popularity alone, but the numbers aren’t there; he’s barely an above-league average hitter by the break. A strong second half saves his season and restores hope, but the wrist still zaps his power for much of the year and he finishes the season with career-worsts in slugging percentage, homers and wRC+. Still roaming center field and providing value with his speed, Trout is able to post a seven-win season, but it’s now been three years since he was the best player in baseball.
The career WAR leaderboard now has Trout placed 17th, between Yastrzemski and Eddie Mathews, with 95.6 WAR.
Age 31
- Age comp: Willie Mays, 1962
- WAR: 10.5
- Translated numbers: .294/.367/.618, 53 HR, 163 wRC+
The wrist injury now well behind him, Trout again reclaims his spot as baseball’s consensus best player, posting double-digit WAR for the final time in his career by having Willie Mays’ age-31 season. Trout’s resurgence comes thanks to a new hyper-aggressive approach — a far cry from the early, more patient Trout years. He posts baseball’s highest first-pitch swing rate, ambushing pitchers early in the count to rack up a league-high 31 homers by the All-Star Break. By the time pitchers adjust to Trout’s free-swinging approach, much of the damage has already been done. He posts a career-low walk rate of just 8.4%, but slugs 50+ homers for the second and last time in his career.
Trout cracks 100 career WAR during this season, becoming just the 14th hitter in the modern era to do so. Frank Robinson and Jimmie Foxx rank beneath him in the 100-WAR club, with Rickey Henderson and Mike Schmidt next in line. With 445 homers by his age-31 season, people begin wondering whether Trout can end up as the game’s all-time home run leader.
Age 32
- Age comp: Jackie Robinson, 1951
- WAR: 9.0
- Translated numbers: .326/.399/.544, 25 HR, 155 wRC+
Trout continues his aggressive approach adopted the year prior — 2023 — but this time it results in fewer homers and more singles and doubles. Trout’s .326 average is his highest since 2019, but he slugs just 25 homers and posts a 155 wRC+, pedestrian for his standards.
Down goes Henderson, Schmidt, Mel Ott, Mantle and Alex Rodriguez. Trout’s top-10 all-time four-year run from way back in the early 2010s has now turned into a top-10 all-time career. 115 WAR. Only seven names separate Trout from the Babe.
Age 33
- Age comp: Lonnie Smith, 1989
- WAR: 8.1
- Translated numbers: .315/.411/.576, 29 HR, 166 wRC+
Ho-hum. An eight-win season at age 33. If Lonnie Smith could do it, why not Mike Trout? He is going to go down as the Greatest of All Time, after all.
His 29 homers leave him with 499 at the end of the year. He surpasses Lou Gehrig’s career WAR, and enters the next season with 123.2 WAR under his belt. And then there were six.
Age 34
- Age comp: Jim Edmonds, 2004
- WAR: 8.3
- Translated numbers: .288/.395/.608, 39 HR, 168 wRC+
By now, Trout’s speed and defense have noticeably declined, and age 34 is his final season in center field. Still, the bat remains. He homers in his first at-bat of the year for number 500. Thirty-eight more bring his career total to 538 — 17th all-time and two more than Mantle.
Eight more wins means Trout usurps Stan Musial, Rogers Hornsby and Ted Williams. Mike Trout is now fifth all-time in career WAR, trailing only Ruth, Bonds, Mays and Hank Aaron. This marks the final eight-win season of Trout’s career. It marks the final seven-win season of Trout’s career, too.
Age 35
- Age comp: Chipper Jones, 2007
- WAR: 6.9
- Translated numbers: .320/.401/.578, 29 HR, 163 wRC+
Trout is now a 35-year-old, bat-mostly left fielder, but he can still play. He may no longer be the game’s elite, but, like Chipper Jones in ’07, he’s still near the top.
Hank Aaron now rests a spot below Trout on the all-time WAR leaderboard. The Mount Rushmore of Baseball now displays the faces of Ruth, Bonds, Mays and Trout.
Age 36
- Age comp: Roberto Clemente, 1971
- WAR: 6.5
- Translated numbers: .342/.364/.546, 17 HR, 148 wRC+
Taking a page from his old teammate Albert Pujols‘ book from a decade prior, Trout continues his late-career aggressive approach, this year taking it to an extreme. Trout’s elite bat-to-ball ability lets this approach work, and he hits a career-best .342 despite a lack of speed or power. The wRC+ is in a three-year decline, but Trout remains among the game’s best hitters at the age of 36.
He still trails Mays on the career WAR leaderboard, with Ruth and Bonds several good years away.
Age 37
- Age comp: Mike Schmidt, 1987
- WAR: 6.1
- Translated numbers: .283/.371/.534, 34 HR, 139 wRC+
The three-year wRC+ decline culminates in a career-worst figure of 139, though Trout overhauls his swing to take advantage of his new friend, the Green Monster. Trout sells out to the pull-field with increased loft on his swing, and is able to muster 34 homers at the ripe age of 37, just like Raul Ibanez in 2009.
Trout has overtaken Mays. He has the third-highest career WAR in MLB history. He hits his 600th career homer shortly after the All-Star Break, and finishes the season with 618.
Age 38
- Age comp: Joe Morgan, 1982
- WAR: 5.2
- Translated numbers: .281/.391/.456, 18 HR, 143 wRC+
The homers over the Green Monster turn into doubles off the Green Monster and Trout posts the final 4+ WAR season of his career.
That’s 156.4 career WAR. Fewer than 10 wins separate Trout and Bonds. Just 12 to the Babe.
Age 39
- Age comp: Darrell Evans, 1986
- WAR: 3.8
- Translated numbers: .238/.346/.453, 33 HR, 121 wRC+
Entering the season with 636 career homers, Trout has become determined to be the all-time home run king. He sells out for power completely, batting just .238 with a career-worst 121 wRC+, but he slugs 33 more dingers and passes Mays for fifth all-time. Now a three- to four-win player, Trout is far from the game’s best, though he’s still a well above-average starter.
Trout joins Ruth and Bonds in the 160 WAR club. By this time, everyone knows Trout will hang on as long as possible in pursuit of becoming the all-time home run leader.
Age 40
- Age comp: Dave Winfield, 1992
- WAR: 3.8
- Translated numbers: .288/.370/.528, 37 HR, 140 wRC+
The power sell-out continues. Trout is able to add 37 more homers to his resume, becoming just the fifth player in history to hit 700, but it’s the final time he hits 20 in a single season and it’s also the best wRC+ over his final three years.
A total of 706 home runs and 163.8 WAR. Still trails Ruth and Bonds in each category.
Age 41
- Age comp: Carlton Fisk, 1989
- WAR: 3.4
- Translated numbers: .293/.353/.514, 18 HR, 129 wRC+
For the first time in his career, the end appears near for Mike Trout. He’s still swinging for the fences, but the power just isn’t there anymore. He also misses time here and there with various ailments, and he’s able to hit just 18 homers.
He does pass Ruth in homers, finishing the year with 724, and Bonds in WAR, at 167.2, but there’s not much time left.
Age 42
- Age comp: Stan Musial, 1963
- WAR: 1.2
- Translated numbers: .258/.327/.430, 14 HR, 98 wRC+
In the final season of Mike Trout’s legendary career, we see him as a below-league average hitter for the first time since he was 19. But he plays until the end, giving it everything he’s got. He’s able to muster just 14 home runs, and he ends the season with 738 lifetime.
Realizing that he still needs more than 40 homers to surpass all-time home run king, Alex Rodriguez, Trout gives in to his body’s aches and pains and calls it quits. That last season, though? That last season was worth 1.2 wins. Exactly what Stan Musial did when he was 42. Exactly what Trout needed to match Babe Ruth’s career total. Trout and the Babe each call it a career with 168.4 WAR as a hitter. Hidden decimals give Trout the number one spot on the leaderboard. Mike Trout ends his career as the greatest player of all-time.
| Year | Age | Player | AVG | OBP | SLG | HR | wRC+ | WAR | Career |
| 2011 | 19 | M. Trout | 0.220 | 0.281 | 0.390 | 5 | 87 | 0.7 | 0.7 |
| 2012 | 20 | M. Trout | 0.326 | 0.399 | 0.564 | 30 | 167 | 10.3 | 11.0 |
| 2013 | 21 | M. Trout | 0.323 | 0.432 | 0.557 | 27 | 176 | 10.5 | 21.5 |
| 2014 | 22 | M. Trout | 0.287 | 0.377 | 0.561 | 36 | 167 | 8.0 | 29.5 |
| 2015 | 23 | M. Trout | 0.299 | 0.402 | 0.590 | 41 | 172 | 9.0 | 38.5 |
| 2016 | 24 | Steamer | 0.307 | 0.410 | 0.585 | 37 | 175 | 9.2 | 47.7 |
| 2017 | 25 | S. Bando ’69 | 0.283 | 0.372 | 0.547 | 36 | 154 | 7.7 | 55.4 |
| 2018 | 26 | M. Mantle ’58 | 0.295 | 0.426 | 0.595 | 46 | 187 | 8.8 | 64.2 |
| 2019 | 27 | C. Yastrzemski ’67 | 0.335 | 0.423 | 0.689 | 60 | 194 | 11.1 | 75.3 |
| 2020 | 28 | J. Drew ’04 | 0.291 | 0.412 | 0.538 | 29 | 162 | 8.6 | 83.9 |
| 2021 | 29 | N. Cruz ’10 | 0.317 | 0.406 | 0.588 | 23 | 170 | 4.9 | 88.8 |
| 2022 | 30 | L. Dykstra ’93 | 0.292 | 0.400 | 0.484 | 22 | 143 | 6.8 | 95.6 |
| 2023 | 31 | W. Mays ’62 | 0.294 | 0.367 | 0.618 | 53 | 163 | 10.5 | 106.1 |
| 2024 | 32 | J. Robinson ’51 | 0.326 | 0.399 | 0.544 | 25 | 155 | 9.0 | 115.1 |
| 2025 | 33 | L. Smith ’89 | 0.315 | 0.411 | 0.576 | 29 | 166 | 8.1 | 123.2 |
| 2026 | 34 | J. Edmonds ’04 | 0.288 | 0.395 | 0.608 | 39 | 168 | 8.3 | 131.5 |
| 2027 | 35 | C. Jones ’07 | 0.320 | 0.401 | 0.578 | 29 | 163 | 6.9 | 138.4 |
| 2028 | 36 | R. Clemente ’71 | 0.342 | 0.364 | 0.546 | 17 | 148 | 6.5 | 144.9 |
| 2029 | 37 | M. Schmidt ’87 | 0.283 | 0.371 | 0.534 | 34 | 139 | 6.1 | 151.0 |
| 2030 | 38 | J. Morgan ’82 | 0.281 | 0.391 | 0.456 | 18 | 143 | 5.2 | 156.2 |
| 2031 | 39 | D. Evans ’86 | 0.238 | 0.346 | 0.453 | 33 | 121 | 3.8 | 160.0 |
| 2032 | 40 | D. Winfield ’92 | 0.288 | 0.370 | 0.528 | 37 | 140 | 3.8 | 163.8 |
| 2033 | 41 | C. Fisk ’89 | 0.293 | 0.353 | 0.514 | 18 | 129 | 3.4 | 167.2 |
| 2034 | 42 | S. Musial ’63 | 0.258 | 0.327 | 0.430 | 14 | 98 | 1.2 | 168.4 |
* * *
This has been nothing more than a silly, fun thought experiment. I’m aware of how absolutely insane it is. It’s crazy!
But, is it?
It is. But, hey, sort that table by seasonal WAR real quick. Two of the top four seasons have already happened. The fifth is Trout’s 2016 projection. Number seven has already happened, too. We didn’t ask Trout to do much more in a single season than what he’s already done four times. We didn’t even ask him to do anything that hasn’t been done before! All of these seasons have actually happened, most of them by players far inferior to Mike Trout. He even suffered a season-ending injury at 29! He doesn’t have to have a Bonds season, a Ruth season, a Williams season, a Gehrig season or even an Aaron season. Hell, we even gave him a Dykstra, a Smith and a Cruz in his prime years and still found a way for him to come out on top.
It’s absurd, I know. Never gonna happen! Like, no way. But, be honest. For a brief second, you considered it, didn’t you?
August used to cover the Indians for MLB and ohio.com, but now he's here and thinks writing these in the third person is weird. So you can reach me on Twitter @AugustFG_ or e-mail at august.fagerstrom@fangraphs.com.
This is the most ridiculous article ever, which also makes it the best
hidden in the wall of text:Author made ARod hit almost 100 more homeruns…
Sounds reasonable.
This was the main point of the piece, really.
For a little extra ridiculousness add in the rest of Babes career WAR, and he is at 180.8 since he has another 12.4 pitching WAR. This is the reason no one may ever catch him in total career WAR since 2 way doesn’t happen anymore.
Yep! Hard work, vitamins and a sweet, sweet right-handed swing.
Mike Trout Fact:
Trout should become the Angels’ all-time WAR leader sometime next year. At age 24.
He needs 7.5 WAR to pass Chuck Finley. Angels’ all-time batting leader will only take a couple months, but #1 Angels player ever does require another Troutian season.
that’s a legit lol
Hey Apple Man and Camera Man, throw this guy at Cistulli for Fan Graffs Audio plz
August your articles are getting so awesome
Loved this. Next in series: What Bartolo Colon needs to do to tie Cy Young.
Ahhh…but you leave out Ruth’s pitching. His 12.4 career WAR pitching makes his total WAR = 180.8. Note Ruth is still in the top 8 all-time win percentage as a pitcher (min 1000 IP) and has one of the best postseason pitching lines of all time.
One could argue that if Ruth had remained a pitcher, he may have made the HOF just on his pitching.
Trout will become a pitcher at age 50, in comparison to Jamie Moyer.
Perhaps he hangs around the BoSox bullpen and picks up a knuckleball from Tim Wakefield, Jr, and he has the last six years of Hoyt Wilhelm’s career working out of the pen. It would still eave him short of Ruth as Wilhelm was worth 11.3 WAR in his ages 43-49 seasons… but if he jumped to the national league, he could play the outfield on his off days like Julio Franco, which would give him another 1.3 WAR over those same ages 43-49 seasons. Then just to be fair, let’s give him Minnie Minoso’s eight ABs in his ages 50-54 seasons, which brings him back down to a flatfooted tie with the Babe.
Hey, now. We have a large enough sample size of Ruth’s pitching that we should use his rWAR or RA9-WAR!
Those put him at 189 and 193.8, respectively.
He’s like Hercules, or something.
Yea, but imagine how much better Trout’s numbers would be if he only faced whites and the majority of the league made so little they had to work a winter job.
Imagine if I had access to the type of training that Mike Trout has today.
Imagine if you had access to the variety of tubular meat products that are available now!
But so would everyone else….
Imagine how worse the negro leagues pitchers would look if they had to face Mike Trout.
Yeah, it isn’t like WAR is designed to account for the era a player played in…..oh wait.
I think it’s a near certainty that Ruth would have made the HOF as a pitcher. In 1916 he beat Walter Johnson 6 times head to head!!! Holy Krikes Batman!!!
That was fun. Thanks.
I can’t wait until 2019! and i love the fact he will would basically lock up a trip to Cooperstown at the age of 27
At age 45 he can be julio Franco for 1.2 more WAR
Age 43-44 he plays in Japan
Maki Trout
And Hiroshima’s team renames itself.
A-rod ain’t got nothing’ on me.
Yes, he does. He apologized for his crimes against baseball, and took his due punishment for them. Unlike you.
Here’s an idea. Maybe Ruth’s career WAR is bullshit. Let’s see, didn’t have to play against entire segments of the population because MLB was racists. Hit when pitchers probably topped out in the low-80s. Players were probably using oven mitts to field. Stop using Babe Ruth as the standard. He couldn’t play today’s game. If you want a true standard, use Barry Bonds.
And don’t give me that ‘roids shit. Eveybody was on ‘roids in that era and none of them could touch Bonds.
Hey, if you invent a time machine, I would be VERY happy to assemble 50 of the greatest baseball players of all time for a 15-game series to decide who is the GOAT. VERY happy to do that. Would I love to see Mike Trout bat against Satchel Paige? Hell yeah. Just invent a time machine please.
Don’t look back. Mike Trout might be gaining on you.
Fosho.
zzzzzzzzzzzz
WAR is all about what you did relative to your peers in a given year, not about who was the best of all time across eras.
You are a very stupid man.
Um, but that’s what this article is about, using WAR to determine who might be the best of all time across eras; and that’s what bigboisteve is saying, that Ruth’s WAR is tainted because of who he played against. “Smart Person.”
Fun article, thanks August. It’s awesome that we get to watch this guy play and even think about a new GOAT in baseball.
Sorry meant that for LittleBoiSteve
That wasn’t very smart.
Always gotta be one guy that has to be THAT GUY…
There’s always more than one of us.
He was talking about me, though.
Who has two thumbs and hates the fact that the author envisions a future where Mike Trout plays for the Boston Red Sox?
Everyone knows that Trout is going to end his career with the Yankees.
Just once I’d like to see this argument used to *add* Josh Gibson into the GOAT discussion instead of removing Babe Ruth from it. There’s an argument that’d be more worth having than this tired one.
Since we’re cherrypicking fantasy scenarios, let’s put Ruth in a fully integrated league and add Cool Papa Bell and Josh Gibson to his team. 325 WAR. You’re right. It is more fun to make things up rather than accept reality.
Your logic: Everyone in Bonds time used steroids (including Bonds) > but Bonds was much better than everyone else.
Our logic: Everyone in Ruth’s time only faced off against whites, slow throwing pitchers, and bad outfielders (including Ruth) > but Ruth was much better than everyone else.
OP has a legitimate argument, even if he buried it in pointless hostility and sat Barry Bonds on top for good measure.
Steroids, if used more or less across the board, raise the bar for every player, regardless of talent. Everyone from utility infielders and long relievers to Barry Bonds sees a substantial spike in their true talent level, but the people who are in the league and their relative abilities are largely unaffected.
Segregation, on the other hand, doesn’t affect the talent level of the individual players but does significantly cut down on the competition they face. Something in the area of half the players who played in Ruth’s era would have been replaced by superior players, raising the level of competition substantially without affecting the talent of the white players good enough to keep their jobs. Ruth would have been facing substantially better pitchers, and he would be compared to a substantially better group of contemporary hitters, but he himself would have been the exact same player. The inevitable result is a substantial reduction in productivity relative to league average and replacement level.
I know that WAR is king around here, but WAA would seem to be a better measure for GOAT. After all, does being mediocre for a season really add to your GOAT resume?
Two problems with this:
a)different players respond differently to PEDs;Bonds appears to have been a high responder, whereas ARod might want to get a refund from Biogenesis;
b)in Ruth’s time, just about every white American who had talent for baseball played the game–that isn’t true now. While I suspect the overall competition was lower during Ruth’s time, it’s very difficult to prove that, given that since his time so many other pro sports have emerged and siphon off many of the most talented athletes. With foreign-born players, the pool is much larger today, but so is the league.
b) just isn’t true. Many couldn’t afford to play the game because the salaries were such a pittance.
The only thing more ridiculous is the contract that Mike Trout signs after the 2020 season, when he is a 29-year-old Free Agent
And even that contract is less ridiculous than the one he would have had if he hadn’t tied up his first three years of FA with his current contract.
I’m so glad you wrote this, because it’s popped into my head every week or two this fall, and at least twice, I’ve jotted down imaginary WAR totals for a full Trout career. It is a fun fantasy.
But also impossible.
Because Babe Ruth’s 168.4 WAR does not include his value as a pitcher.
Babe Fuckin’ Ruth. Every other fact in all of baseball just goes to illustrate how great he was.
If you transported him in his prime to today’s game he would strike out 300 times and he’d be replacement level.
If he was born ~25 years ago, he’d have had all the benefits of the advancements that have occurred since he played, and he’d most likely still be an incredible baseball player. Would he accumulate the highest WAR in history? Probably not, but he wouldn’t be as bad as you claim.
Not if he was born in 1989 and grew up with all of the medical/nutritional/social/educational advantages Bryce Harper had.
I’ll have four Grand Slams please.
And a side of bacon.
Would you like hot dogs with that Babe, or a chicken salad sandwich?
I’ll have four plate of bacon please.
And a side of beer. And more bacon.
Give us all the bacon and eggs you have.
Wait, wait. We’re worried what you just heard was, “Give us a lot of bacon and eggs.” What we said is, “Give us all the bacon and eggs you have.” Do you understand?
“If you transported him in his prime to today’s game he would strike out 300 times and he’d be replacement level.”
Yeah, well if you transported Mike Trout and Barry Bonds to 1925 and had them swing 45-ounce bats and use mittens for gloves – with no agents, traveling by train, and making one-twentieth as much money – I doubt they’d have a smooth transition, either.
Babe Ruth did it. Nobody else has. Babe Ruth was a two-time twenty-game winner. He had a twenty-nine-inning scoreless streak pitching in the World Series.
Nobody else ever did that before. Nobody else did it at the same time. Nobody else has done it since.
So, if it were that easy to hit 60 HR’s in a season or pitch 320 innings and a couple shutouts in the World Series, everyone would have done it.
I don’t care what people say: Babe Ruth’s accomplishments in baseball stand alone. Best SLG all-time. Best wOBA all-time. Best wRC+ all-time. .342 career BA. .474 career OBA.
And a 94-46 W-L record, two 300+ inning seasons, two twenty-win seasons, and an ERA title. And a 3-0 record in the World Series with a twenty-inning scoreless streak, two complete games, and one shutout.
Case closed.
One of my favourite baseball facts:
The worst batting season Babe Ruth ever had, in which he played more than 100 games, he was worth 5.2 WAR.
.288/.448/.537 with a 157 wRC+, 22 homers (125 games)
.275/.369/.488 with a 136 wRC+, 26 homers (151 games)
The first line is Babe Ruth’s worst fullish season. The second line is 2015 Kris Bryant.
Actually Barry Bonds wouldn’t have been allowed to play in the majors if he was transported to 1925.
yeah but he would also have access to modern alcohol, and modern hot dogs, and modern strippers, and modern porn. I mean with all that he probably would just give up on baseball altogether.
my conclusion: it’s pointless to ask what ifs, his numbers relative to his era were astounding
What kind of busted priorities do you have if you’ve got a time machine but you’re using it only to settle stupid baseball arguments?
Baseball arguments are the best things to use Time Machines on.
Right? There’s horse races too, and Cubs World Series wins to collect on.
Look, if you are going into the past, it’s traditional to at least TRY to kill Hitler, okay?
You realize everyone gets the point you’re making, and it’s a point that’s been made by many others, and made much more eloquently, y’know?
Fine, what if babe Ruth lived as a youngster in the 2010s, and grew up and orphan doing nothing but playing elite travel baseball and not worrying about school stuff?
How good would he be?
These comments are just stupid. We all realize that if you transported “name of modern athlete” to an era 80-100 years prior, they would destroy them, right? It’s called progression of the athlete from a genetic standpoint and also training, mechanics, learning from the previous generation, etc.
It’s the same BS as those that say “Put Jim Brown in the NFL in 2015, and he’s a 3rd down back.” Just duckin fumb.
Not only a troll, but a stupid, uneducated troll.
“He ranks 32nd all-time, one spot below Ken Griffey Jr. and two spots ahead of Johnny Bench. His career still has another 15 years.”
This made me shake my laugh and chuckle…unreal if his career plays out like this.
I actually think Griffey is a better comp for Trout that Mantle, Mays, etc.
Ew, you have him as a member of the Red Sox. Barf.
How is defense value determined for the likes of ruth, and cobb, and anyone that played before about 2010?
Retrosheet play-by-play data, I believe. Real simple batted ball type/zone calculations. Definitely big error bars on those.
How big will Trout’s neck be if he plays until he’s 42?
Trout goes into his final September with a 168.4 career WAR. He’s old, and tired, but relieved. He’s made it. He’s going to surpass Babe Ruth, of all people. He took out Honus Wagner, Ty Cobb, Willie Mays, and Barry Bonds; sort of an Elite Four of baseball, one could say. Suddenly, a figure emerges from the clubhouse door.
“Hey!” exclaims Bryce Harper. “I was looking forward to seeing you, Trout! My rival should be strong to keep me sharp. While working on my stats, I looked all over for powerful approaches and techniques. Not only that, I assembled slash lines that would beat any pitcher type!
“And now! I have a career WAR of 168.5! Trout, do you know what that means? I’ll tell you!
“I am the most powerful baseball player in the world!”
Bryce: I came when I heard that you beat the elite four, but when I got here, you already lost to Trout. Do you understand why you lost? You have forgotten to treat your teammates with trust and love. WIthout them, you will never become GOAT again.
168.6 WAR-caliber comment
Excellent Comment, but it’s going to be Carlos Correa
3879 items, and more to beat!
To be a baseball master is mah DESTINYYYY!
Holy crap. I read that Bryce Harper quote, and couldn’t place it at first, but something stirred deep in my mind. I knew I had read that before. After about a minute of staring, it dawned on me (and also I think I saw the Elite Four reference).
Thank for the beautifully incorporated nostalgia gut-punch.
What this article fails to take into account is that Tom Tango’s son develops a new WAR formula that requires a significant adjustment in all previous values. When the dust settles, Trout
a) still trails Ruth by 3-4 WAR, so can’t make it
b) passed Ruth the year before, so he retires in mid-season as soon as he learns this.
I love the Internet so much right now
I know there isn’t reliable fielding data from the 30’s but we’ve all seen pictures of babe ruth and heard the hotdog stories….theres no way those defensive ratings are correct. I’m mentally docking him 20 WAR
20’s…fat fingered that
No one will give you credit for self deprecating fat jokes here, in this context.
Sorry to disappoint you, but Ruth had a very good reputation as a defensive player in his younger years (pre-1928). He even played some center field.
I hear his arm was okay
Most of the pictures we have of Ruth are from late in his career, when he was really packing the pounds. In his younger days, he was a stocky but fit professional athlete. I don’t doubt he was at least a decent outfielder, and obviously his arm would’ve been a weapon in right field.
I don’t know about that. What I’ve read describes him playing whereever the park was smallest: RF in Yankee Stadium and LF in Fenway.
Being a decent outfielder doesn’t require you to have range. From what I’ve read, he couldn’t cover a lot of ground, but he had fantastic reads and an obviously great arm.
@a eskpert
Fair point, and I’m willing to trust the ratings on these pages as at least more useful than my impression because they’re at least consistent to all players from before the modern tracking era.
If his arm was such a weapon, I think teams would sacrifice range for keeping the arm in right. But as the recent post here about 100 mph throws from the outfield demonstrated, the skills that are effective on the pitching mound do not play the same way in the field.
I have a quesion rearding comparing new era WAR vs a guy likes ruth’s war..
Much of Trouts WAR is based off the fact that he is terrific defensively.
How do compare that to a guy who played in the 20s and 30s and we have no record of defensive data.
sorry if this question is stupid I’ve just always wondered
Most of Trout’s WAR is actually from being one of the best hitters in the game. He would only lose a couple WAR from being an average right fielder or something.
To answer your question, though, we DO have records of defensive data from back then. It’s just limited to putouts, assists, and errors. There also exists play-by-play data indicating the general part of the field to which a ball was hit. These can be combined to see how many plays a fielder made and about how many we could have expected him to make. It goes without saying that the error bars on these old defensive figures are enormous, but they are better than nothing.
I spent this entire article waiting for the Musial season. Not surprised it was the final one.
Great read. I would love to see one for Bryce Harper now
Why?
lol
It might be fun to do a pitcher one, though role changes might make it a little tougher.
No adjustment for my WAR years? Dammit!
Williams had accumulated 34.4 WAR through his age 23 season, including back to back 10.6 WAR efforts. He then spent the next *three years* in WWII, returning to post seasons of 10.9 WAR (age 27) and 9.9 WAR (age 28). Then he lost most of two more years in his early 30s to serve in Korea.
FWIW if you subtract the seasons Williams missed (ages 24-26, plus age 32 and 80% of age 33) from Trout’s numbers above, he still beats the Splinter 128.1 to 123.1.
Mike Trout can’t fly the damned plane! Big negative WAR adjustment right there, pal!
Trout is fish in a barrel to me.
My though experiment: combine the best years of Ruth with the best years of Bonds. Ruth started at age 19 and Bonds finished at 42, so it matches up pretty well. I combined Ruth’s pitching and hitting exploits in his younger years, although I ignored his scattered single game appearances after 1919. Here is the table:
Age Player Year WAR Dingers
19 Ruth 1914 0.0 0
20 Ruth 1915 2.4 4
21 Ruth 1916 5.4 3
22 Bonds 1987 5.3 25
23 Ruth 1918 6.7 11
24 Ruth 1919 9.9 29
25 Ruth 1920 13.3 54
26 Ruth 1921 13.9 59
27 Bonds 1992 9.6 34
28 Ruth 1923 15.0 41
29 Ruth 1924 12.5 46
30 Bonds 1995 7.7 33
31 Ruth 1926 12.0 47
32 Ruth 1927 13.0 60
33 Ruth 1928 10.6 54
34 Ruth 1929 7.8 46
35 Ruth 1930 10.5 49
36 Bonds 2001 12.5 73
37 Bonds 2002 12.7 46
38 Bonds 2003 10.2 45
39 Bonds 2004 11.9 45
40 Bonds 2005 0.7 5
41 Bonds 2006 3.2 26
42 Bonds 2007 3.2 28
Total WAR: 210.0
Total HR: 863
Ruth years: 14
Bonds years: 10
Oddly enough, their careers didn’t mesh as well as I hoped. Ruth’s three less than ridiculous years is his prime were 1922, 1925, and 1929, although the last one was kind of ridiculous. But Bonds only really picked up the slack in 1992 as 1995 was shortened by strike and he was injured in 1999. Also, Bonds’ injury year in 2005 coincided with the exact year Ruth stopped being good.
It is also worth noting that if you take the lesser year from each of the two, you still end up with 133.8 WAR, which is just behind Hank Aaron for seventh all time.
I loved this so much. Thank you. Great job.
Sad face time: Somewhere on the Internet, some did this exact same exercise after the 1997 season with Griffey.
Or after some of the crazy crap Eric Davis was doing in 86 and 87.
86 = 27 HR, 80 SB
87 = 37 HR, 50 SB
Eric Davis?!?!
86 = 4.7 WAR, 24yrs old
87 = 7.1 WAR, 25yrs old
fwiw, Davis’ cumulative WAR through his age 23 season (2.2) was a little lower than Trout’s…
I wasn’t looking at WAR, just recalling some of the hoopla surrounding Eric Davis and some of the things he “might” accomplish during his career.
There was a legit discussion whether he would be the first 50-50 guy, and this was before Canseco became the 1st 40-40 guy.
I just thought it was cool that in two of his early seasons he hit 64 HR and had 130 SB. That’s impressive.
It’s these kinds of articles that really opens one’s eyes to just how great this kid has been and how great his and Harpers careers might just be.
Can you please write in who Trout finishes 2nd to in MVP voting each future season?
And let’s project when Trout passes Mays, who has the record for most times led the league in fWAR – MVPs = 8. Trout is at 3 now.
He finishes second to me a couple of times.
Me!
Mike Trout won’t ever beat me on this.
Aside from the general insanity of the article I do find Trout’s ability to shift from a 80 point difference between OBP and BA to a 20 point difference and then back to an 80 point difference to be quite impressive. Apart from that the sheer HR numbers in some of the individual seasons are a little silly; put Trout in the Steroid Era then sure I can see him hitting 65 or what have you but even 55 would be a bit shocking in the near future.
He’s Mike effin Trout. He can basically do anything he wants to. He could sell out for power and hit 60 home runs, he could sell out for contact and hit .380, or he could sell out for walks and have an OBP of .600.
I’ve always wondered what Barry Bonds might have done if he’d been born 10 years later. What if his epic 1993 season, when he had a 1.136 OPS one year before offense went through the roof, had occurred a decade later? By the time he got fed up with guys like McGwire and Sosa and started playing by their rules, he was actually past his prime.
If Bonds had been born 10 years earlier he would have lost about 10 WAR but doubled his chance of going to Cooperstown.
Yeah, I changed the names around a lot to try and obtain the most realistic progression of numbers I could. The wRC+’s progress very well I think. The slash lines are the one thing in the piece I wish would have turned out better. Tried to do my best to work the narratives around them to make them a bit more “believable” but yeah, I agree. Wish I could have avoided the Clemente season in particular, but alas
Still a lower career OBP than Edgar.
Yeah, Willie works much better than Mantle. Mantle spent 2/3 of his PA batting lefty, and couldn’t stay on the field.
MANTLE AND MAYS, BABY!
the absurd part is just how far he has to go to get to Bonds……imo. It’s hard to imagine seeing a player better than him, given his longevity and ability.
He catches Ruth in position player WAR at the age of 42, then shows up at Fenway Park in spring training of 2035 as a knuckleball pitcher, so he can catch Ruth’s pitching WAR, too.
“None of you guys know this, but for the last five years, I’ve been working out in the off-season with Tim Wakefield,” said Trout. “Tim being here is why I signed with the Red Sox in the first place, even though I had better offers from the Moscow AK’s and the Sydney Thylacines. I knew I wouldn’t be able to hit like that forever; hell, even Babe had to stop in his early 40s. But that’s no problem for a knuckleball pitcher.”
Babe Ruth was the best baseball player THAT EVER PLAYED, OR EVER WILL PLAY. Mike Trout is a Superstar but he might be passed very soon by Bryce Harper or Carlos Correa.
Could be… but please note that Harper is currently #12 all-time through 22… I think you know who #1 is… spotting 10.1 WAR to Trout is a tough deficit out of the gates…
Doubt it!
So, Where would Willie rank if he hadn’t lost 80% of his age 21 season, all of his age 22 season to military service? If you want a true comparison with Trout, remove those years from Trout’s stats.
I like being That Guy, but dude, you aren’t even being That Guy like even remotely close.
Baseball nerding-out is the funnest way to nerd-out. Fun read, great article August.
The real fact is – – –
When Trout is nearing 40 and about to break most MLB records, he is going to want to do an Ichiro and pitch. He tweeks his elbow and is never the same.
Arguments will take place through history whether he hurt himself from pitching or just age caught up to him
Dave Cameron-esque monkey cage rattling…nice work!
It’s going to be funny when Trout finally passes Babe Ruth’s career WAR total and finally ends up where he belongs… in second place right behind Harper’s 190 WAR career.
This comment was already made, but funnier
You know you just jinxed the hell out of Mike Trout.
In the time it took me to read this article and the comments with it, Mike Trout added 0.7 more WAR to his career total
Mike Trout gains WAR by looking at baseballs, just like I gain weight by looking at beer.
From now on I’m gonna drink my beer blindfolded.
A little girth never hurt nobody.
Well, yes, walks add value, and if you look at beer while munching on chips…
Mike Trout comes out of spring training with 2.4 WAR.
In case anyone was wondering, I took the totally unnecessary step of obtaining the PA and AB of each of these seasons so that I could calculate some of mythical Trout’s other career rates. Here they are:
Career slash line: .299/.390/.552. It just barely misses rounding to .300.
wRC+: 158
Hits: 3661
I have this spreadsheet so if I think of more to post I’ll do it.
Edit: I took the even more unnecessary step of exporting the actual values instead of calculating them. I don’t know if I had a mistake in my first one or what, but with the better one I get 3714 hits and a .303/.400/.541 slash.
Actually, looking again, I only see 667 homers…
crap, i forgot that August adjusted the raw numbers to current day. Well, so I guess the original counts were right, with Trout just missing the .300 mark.
This is so awesome. If you can pull stuff as weird as this off the offseason will be a lot more fun.
WAR to say who is ‘all that’? hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
More like Fungraphs, amirite?
“Realizing that he still needs more than 40 homers to surpass all-time home run king, Alex Rodriguez…”
Of course you’d throw that little nugget in there.
Even if I can get myself to imagine the batting numbers, as Trout goes from a durable, speedy CF to an aging, plodding LF, I see the WAR numbers taking a much bigger tumble. Manny Ramirez had a comparable age 31-34 stretch to what’s projected here for Trout, and Manny averaged 5 WAR over those seasons, not 9.
yeah, because his defensive numbers are some of the worst of all time. Trout will most likely never come close to those numbers. Some of them are bad, some of them are because UZR doesn’t know how to handle the wall in Fenway, but take a look at those defensive numbers.
Agreed about the Monster. Manny could be bad out there, but not THAT bad. Thing is, this article has Trout going to Fenway too! So he could wind up at the mercy of the same weird WAR inputs that Manny encountered.
Anyway, all that aside, if you replaced Manny’s dWAR with that of an average LF, that only gets you up to just over 6 WAR per year from age 31-34 (since some of that bad dWAR is positional adjustment). Still a far cry from this article’s Trout storyline. Not only does Mike have to age like one of the greatest hitters of all time, he ALSO needs to age extremely well in all other facets of the game. Straining… imagination… rrgh!
This was fascinating and fun. The next 10 years or so are very believable- even conservative, maybe. It’s the Morgan/Evans/Winfield/Fisk ending that seems a little farfetched. Trout won’t have access to the greenies that generation feasted on.
Also, given the change in the quality of a replacement-level player, I’d argue that Trout doesn’t need 168.4 WAR to pass Ruth. This is arbitrary, but I’d guess something like 100-120 puts him in that class. Bonds, on the other hand…
I kinda want to see this happen
I love a lot of the articles posted on this site but this was definitely one of the most entertaining I’ve read over the years (very rarely do I feel compelled to comment, so that says something). I realize that this is only interesting when applied to especially historic/unusual players who were especially historic/unusual while young, like Trout, but still hoping for more like this in the future.