I Wanna Be Like Mike (Trout)
It’s amazing to write about baseball through the lens of a singular player like Mike Trout. The sheer totality of his excellence is fun in a way that just wouldn’t be true if you looked at all of his skills individually. Trout is an above-average outfielder, sure, but that isn’t all that fun by itself. He has great plate discipline — so too, though, does 2019 Jason Heyward, and he doesn’t spark the same kind of joy as Trout. No, the fun is that there’s basically no category you can come up with where Mike Trout isn’t good.
This got me to thinking: would it be fun to have a player who was like Trout, except not to quite the same degree? I don’t mean in the broad player value sense — in a way, every player in baseball is just a worse version of Trout. No, I mean someone who’s good at everything across the board in the same way that Trout is — just, a little less.
Trout hits for power, so our mystery player will need to hit for good (but sub-Troutian) power. Scratch both Joey Gallo and Jose Altuve from the list. They have to have an excellent eye at the plate and be judicious with their swings; sorry, Javier Baez, but the ride ends for you here. They need to be an above average baserunner, but not the best of the best — J.D. Martinez and Trea Turner both fall at this hurdle.
To work out this highly unscientific study, I started with stats from 2017-present for everyone who qualified for the batting title in at least one of the three years. This lets me cast a wide net without picking up someone whose prime isn’t happening now. First, I looked for players who were worse than Trout in a few categories: ISO, OBP, SLG, BsR/PA, BB%, and K%. (At this point in the search, I learned that Trout has a higher ISO than Aaron Judge, and I mean, wow.)
Next, I filtered out anyone who was below-average in any of those categories. Nelson Cruz made it this far, but his baserunning misadventures rule him out. Yoan Moncada is incredibly fun, but you can’t strike out 30% of the time and be Trout-ian. Aaron Judge doesn’t make it for the same reason. Just like that, the mini-Trout cohort is down to eight players. I didn’t say it was going to be easy to fit so many different categories.
Already, we’ve whittled this down to a pretty talented group of players. The average wRC+ in this group is 136, with a .272/.375/.510 triple slash line. To remove more names, we’ll have to dive into some aesthetic preferences. First, I removed everyone who was below average at their primary defensive position. I considered removing everyone further down the defensive spectrum than Trout is, but I decided that someone playing a really smooth first base could be Trout-esque, but a butcher in the outfield probably wouldn’t be. So long, Rhys Hoskins and Matt Carpenter.
To rule out the next batch of not-Trout-enough batters, I took a detour into the building blocks of plate discipline. To me, you see, Mike Trout’s genius at the plate goes further than just the fact that he walks a good amount and doesn’t strike out. That’s obviously great, but the way he does it is what makes Trout most fun to watch. Trout basically doesn’t swing at pitches outside the strike zone. His chase rate is annually one of the lowest in baseball. At the same time, when he does swing, he makes an above-average amount of contact; he’s Mike Trout, after all. He’s good at everything.
Add those two factors up, and Trout has an enviable swinging strike rate — it’s not quite the best in baseball, but it’s close. Here we leave Michael Conforto, Kris Bryant, and Cody Bellinger — maybe at this time next year, all three of these dynamic young hitters will merit another look, but for now there’s too much swing-and-miss in their profiles. For a slightly different reason, Paul Goldschmidt is also out — he’s borderline by swinging strike rate, but swings so much more frequently than Trout that I’m ruling him out on a technicality.
For those of you counting at home, eliminating Goldschmidt gives us a winner. Only one player remains in our Trout-ian gauntlet — a multi-dimensional threat with speed, power, and patience, though less of each than Trout. Where would the fun be in revealing this player right away, though? Instead, reader, let’s make it interesting. Mike Trout has a 185 wRC+ from 2017-2019. Our mystery player clocks in at 138. Let’s regress Trout’s numbers 55% of the way to league average to see what Trout-like stats might be at a 138 wRC+ level. Then, it’s time to play a guessing game.
Before we run the stats, I’d like to point out that this is extremely non-scientific. The pages of FanGraphs are home to some rigorously-conducted studies of sustainability and player value. This is not one of those studies. This is Fun With Math, Mike Trout Edition. On to the data! One of these players is Mike Trout, only worse by 55% relative to average in every batting category. One is our mystery player:
| Player | BA | OBP | SLG | ISO | BB% | K% | BsR/600 PA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Player A | 0.276 | 0.381 | 0.510 | 0.233 | 13.5 | 20.4 | 2.2 |
| Player B | 0.291 | 0.390 | 0.485 | 0.194 | 12.8 | 22.4 | 3.5 |
Now, both of these players are great! There’s no shame in either line. Which one, though, is Trout? One has an on-base advantage. One has a little more power. Both are clearly better than average at everything, though neither overwhelmingly so in any one area. Just to muddle things up a little more, let’s fold in some plate discipline stats. This time, we’re only regressing half of the numbers. Contact rate and swinging strike rate are fairly unambiguous in terms of what you want — a higher contact rate and lower swinging strike rate are better. Swing rates aren’t quite so clear, so I’ll leave those numbers alone. Remember, as always: no science is being done here.
| Player | O-Swing% | Z-Swing% | Contact% | SwStr% |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Player A | 20.4 | 60.0 | 80.5 | 8.5 |
| Player B | 20.5 | 61.1 | 79.0 | 8.1 |
Do you have a guess? The two lines are strikingly close, which is a good thing given the aim of this project. You’re welcome to think about it for a moment before coming up with a guess, but honestly, it’s probably going to be hard. If I’m doing my job, these lines shouldn’t give one player away too obviously. Here is a GIF of Trout giving a thumbs up (another plus tool) to watch while you ponder.
Alright, fine, you want answers. Player A, the .276/.381/.510 line, is regressed Trout. That’s right: even pushed 55% of the way towards league average, Mike Trout slugs over .500. He’s a baseball freak, remember? Regressed Trout has a higher 2017-2019 ISO than Christian Yelich and Michael Conforto; a higher OBP than Alex Bregman and Matt Carpenter. 45% of Mike Trout is an All-Star every year.
That just leaves our mystery player. Who has all the stat-sheet-explosion goodness of Trout, just with a little less awesomeness packed into each stat? If Mike Trout is 10 pounds of baseball skill in a five-pound bag, who’s seven pounds stuffed into the same bag? Well, I have a confession to make. The timeframe in this study wasn’t picked randomly. I had a sneaking suspicion as to who the answer would be, and he burst onto the scene in 2017; hence the 2017-present window on statistics.
Who is mini-Trout? None other than Tommy Pham, the do-everything Rays outfielder. Steals and home runs? Pham’s got you. Walks and defense? Check. The whole package isn’t Trout-level, because no one is that good, but the value accrues in a decidedly Trout-y way. Miguel Cabrera, Josh Donaldson, Bryce Harper, and Mookie Betts have all made runs at the throne and fallen short of passing Trout. Pham may never reach that stratosphere, but he has all those guys beat when it comes to being like Trout in the broadest sense.
Perhaps the best part about this comparison is the ways in which Pham and Trout are different. In this case, though, I’m not talking about on the baseball diamond. As we’ve already covered, there’s not much to distinguish them stylistically there. No, I’m talking off the field. Trout is soft-spoken; Pham is outspoken.
Both of them made contract headlines this offseason — Trout signed a record extension to remain with the team he’s always played for, while Pham won an arbitration dispute against the Rays. Rob Manfred bizarrely called Trout out for not marketing himself enough; Pham, meanwhile, publicly wished that more fans would show up at the park to see the Rays market themselves.
But don’t let these diverging paths blind you to the fundamental similarity between the two. Every offseason, Mike Trout seemingly eliminates a shortcoming in his game. Can’t hit high fastballs? Give him an offseason. Is his defense slipping? Not anymore. Trout is a devoted student of the game, and he’s matchless when it comes to correcting any flaws, however small.
One look at Tommy Pham’s offseason activities will tell you all you need to know about his own devotion to the game. He’ll buckle himself into a harness for insanely fast treadmill bursts. He’ll play winter ball in the Dominican to work on his swing. He’ll run sprints with LeVeon Bell to work on his quickness. If it might make him better at baseball, Tommy Pham is there for it.
At the end of the day, no one is Mike Trout. His overarching and wide-ranging greatness is truly without match. If you want to watch an All-Star-level player with a Trout-like game, though, you’re in luck, because there’s exactly one of those in baseball. If you wish Trout was a little more quotable, even better: Tommy Pham is the entertainment, both on and off the field, that you’ve been craving.
Ben is a writer at FanGraphs. He can be found on Bluesky @benclemens.
The correct answer here is Nick Senzel.
Now, if the question was about round greatness,….
I was feeling super smug about guessing Rendon as he kept not getting eliminated at every hurdle. Oops! This was a pleasant surprise of a post.
Rendon was eliminated for striking out too infrequently- but yeah he qualifies on every other axis.
I was thinking it was going to be Michael Conforto as a very, very, very poor man’s Trout. Like a homeless man’s version of Mike Trout, which is still a good player.
One other area where Trout and Pham are very different:
Mike Trout, at age 27 years and 9 months, has already accumulated a Hall-of-Fame level of WAR (67.1)
Tommy Pham, at age 27 years and 9 months, had just lost his rookie eligibility, with 173 career PA and 1.6 career WAR.
Among other things, Mike Trout is a world-beater at making the rest of us feel old and unaccomplished.
Yeah, but most of those years Pham was playing without correct contact lenses.
First guy I thought of was Mitch Haniger. Surprised he was not even close enough to at least warrant having to be eliminated.
He was eliminated at the baserunning step, as he has a below-average BsR (and marginally below-0 UZR in this sample). That said, he was quite close to qualifying. Other notable people who were close: Matt Chapman (strikeouts above average, though trending Troutier by the day), J.T. Realmuto (doesn’t walk enough), Marcus Semien (ISO too low), Alex Gordon (ISO too low).
Haniger is a good call, though. I’m looking back through the data now and he was close on multiple axes.
I’m glad he got discussed because I’ve often thought of him as a Trout-very -lite ~five tool player. I should also note that UZR and DRS disagree strongly on Haniger’s defense – by DRS he is well above average: 14 DRS vs. -.7 UZR from 2017-19.
No one cares, but I was proud of myself. Right here, “Already, we’ve whittled this down to a pretty talented group of players. The average wRC+ in this group is 136, with a .272/.375/.510 triple slash line. ” I guessed it was Pham. That and a dollar will get me a cup of coffee (from McD’s).
Weren’t you paying attention? Coffee? We got spaghetti!
So, what you’re saying is, Mike Trout is so good that if you put out one of his eyes he’s still a 4-win player.
So is Cyclops Mike Trout a HoF’er?
No, but blind Mike Trout would still judge a better strike zone than C.B. Bucknor
Love the concept, but think I got lost along the way. Why is Gallo removed for not having enough power? Or Trea Turner removed for being a below average base runner?
Other than getting lost along the way regarding the methodology, really fun stuff!
Perhaps Turner lost on the “but not the best of the best” regarding baserunning?
Yeah, sorry if that wasn’t clear, but the ideal mini-Trout can’t be better at Trout than anything, or below average at anything, so Gallo and Turner were eliminated for excelling too much.
Better *than* Trout *at* anything jeez Ben.
Haha, I thought this was from another commenter and thought it was a pretty dickish way to correct poor Ben!
EDIT – Ben already answered this
My guess was Michael Brantley.
I was thinking Freddie Freeman the whole time. Maybe his baserunning or defense isn’t close enough?
Probably both, lol.
Freeman was close! He actually struck out marginally less than Trout in the sample, which eliminated him on the first pass. I considered throwing him in anyway, but he’s such a free swinger that I was going to knock him out in that step regardless. He has some Trout-like surface level stats (and honestly is a decent baserunner and first baseman) but gets to the value by swinging a ton instead of never.
I have always thought ‘12-‘15 McCutchen was underrated for basically being Trout-lite.
He had a legitimate argument for being the best non-Trout player but because his profile was similar to Trout (but clearly worse) he got easily dismissed and Miggie was the only real comparison.
It is a classic example of ‘dominated alternative’ in behavioral economics.
Where’s Benintendi shake out?
He missed on ISO (too low) and strikeout rate (too low). Decent Trout-lite comparison though. If he could add a little power he’d look very Pham-ish
I love Tommy Pham! Therefore this exercise is good and correct.
I was a little surprised that Rendon didn’t make it. Also, the New Yoan Moncada, who only strikes out ~23% of the time, might be a decent comp too.
It’s interesting how closely the kinda-Trout list results in a lot of underrated players – the guys who do a lot well, but don’t blow you away in any single way:
Haniger, Pham, Rendon, Goldschmidt, Freeman, Moncada, Carpenter, Conforto, Brantley, 2019-McCutchen, injured Mike Trout, etc.
I actually thought of Pham immediately, so the smug smile on my face when I was right stretched from ear to ear.
He came to mind because someone, I forget who, brought up the concept of a Trout-Lite season after Pham’s miraculous 2017. AJ Pollock’s 2015 was another example: a do-it-all center fielder having a great season, but not quite as great as Mike Trout, because, well, they’re not Mike Trout.
How did Betts get cut? That was my guess.
ISO over the three year period, perhaps?
Betts (and Yelich) got cut for baserunning (they’re too good), and Betts strikes out a lot less than Trout as well. Both pretty close though.
Idk why I guessed Jose Ramirez.
Ben,
A fascinating article, once again. I just finished reading Malcolm Gladwell’s “Tipping Point” for at least the second time. You could think of Trout’s quality is like a tipping point of MLB players. That is Trout is significantly better than all others in the show. Gladwell explains that small increases in a number of important variables (Gladwell’s included “stickiness”, “law of the few” and “Power of Context”) make for huge changes (tipping points). The corollary is that Trout is just a bit better than others in a large number of criteria (plate discipline, power, ISO, OBP et alia). As we railed in our methods class: “there’s a great article in that”.
Dang Ben.
I should have guessed. Full disclosure, Ben’s only Cardinal Jersey has Pham on the back. Ben, did you just put us through all of this geek-drivel-paralysis-by-analysis-minutiae to make us all agree that Tommy Pham is the next coming of Albert Pujols? Or did you want the value of your only Cardinal jersey to reach a tippling point😜.
2008 Carlos Beltran is a great comp. He was criminally underrated because of his overall excellence and lack of a single standout skill. The baserunning probably gets him eliminated, but it’s more due to his excellence at avoiding getting thrown out than it is volume of steals (fun fact: Beltran may be the most frequently successful base stealer of all time, with 312 steals against just 49 CS, it’s hard to say because CS wasn’t kept as a stat for a long time).
2008 Beltran
.284/.376./500, 9.8Bsr, 20.0% O-Swing, 64.1% Z-Swing, 86.3% Contact, 5.6% SwStr
Trout – 55%
.276/.381/.510 , 2.2Bsr, 20.4% O-Swing, 60.0% Z-Swing, 80.5% Contact, 8.1% SwStr
I would guess Nolan Arenado or Lindor are close
“but you can’t strike out 30% of the time and be Trout-ian.”
unless you actually are Mike Trout, who won the 2014 MVP award with a 30% strikeout rate.
26.1%