CSS Button No Image Css3Menu.com

Click here to log in

Click here for forgotten password

Click here to subscribe

The First-ever Baseball Prospectus Futures Guide - now just $6.89 at Amazon ( bbp.cx/fg )

<< Previous Article

Raising Aces: Four of ... (06/01)

<< Previous Column

Pebble Hunting: The De... (05/30)

Next Column >>
Pebble Hunting: Bryce ... (06/04)

Next Article >>
Overthinking It: Bryce... (06/01)

Printer-friendly

June 1, 2012

Pebble Hunting

Twitter, Mike Trout, and Mark Trumbo

I keep thinking about this tweet.

mike trout might be the #angels best player. 1 competing gm said it was either him or trumbo. i'll take trout. #phenom
— Jon Heyman (@JonHeymanCBS) May 29, 2012

There’s so much in that tweet. Not capitalization. There is not capitalization, and there is not a named source, so those are things that are not in that tweet. But otherwise there is so much in that tweet. In that tweet, we learn that:

1. A general manager in the major leagues says that Mike Trout is better than Albert Pujols, right now. Not the more valuable property, or the guy with the brighter future, but is, right now, already better.

2. A general manager says that Mark Trumbo, a player whose flaws you are aware of, is roughly as good as Mike Trout.

3. A general manager says that Mark Trumbo, a player whose flaws you are aware of, is better than Albert Pujols. That the Angels just gave a 10-year contract to a first baseman who is, at best, his team’s second-best first baseman. That Mark Trumbo is better than Albert Pujols.

The rest of this article is restricted to Baseball Prospectus Subscribers.

Not a subscriber?

Click here for more information on Baseball Prospectus subscriptions or use the buttons to the right to subscribe and get access to the best baseball content on the web.

Already a subscriber? Click here and use the blue login bar to log in.

28 comments have been left for this article.

BP Comment Quick Links

code of conduct

Lindemann

I'm beginning to expect this level of writing when I click on your byline, Sam, and almost always I get it. Great to be a BP subscriber and get to see it multiple times a week.

Jun 01, 2012 04:04 AM

rating: 17

Karl Barth

But what I really want to know, Sam, is whether you think Mark Trumbo is any good as a ballplayer.

:-)

Jun 01, 2012 07:03 AM

rating: 5

km9000

If you say "Mark Trumbo" enough times, it starts to not make sense.

Trumbo and Trout's full names were used so often, it reminds me of how that's a crutch often used by football analysts ("Brett Favre this," "Brett Favre that"). But maybe it's more common than I realize. I've noticed Steve Nash is often referred to as only Steve Nash. (And that Dwayne Wade is often referred to as D-Wade, even though it takes more time to say than Wade, and he's not likely to be confused with other Wades in the NBA).

At least you didn't ape the football guys by saying that Mark Trumbo is a BASEBALL player, a rising star in MAJOR LEAGUE BASEBALL.

Jun 02, 2012 23:27 PM

rating: 1

km9000

Oh, and I enjoyed the blog by the Thrice guy. I'll need to sample them on YouTube.

Jun 02, 2012 23:29 PM

rating: 0

Richard Bergstrom

There's also a fourth option. Jon Heyman either misquoted the GM or forgot to include Pujols.

Jun 01, 2012 08:47 AM

rating: 0

kjgilber

I also think it's the nature of the tweet. It's quite possible the GM was considering the value of the property considering age/contract, etc., but this didn't fit into the soundbite.

Jun 01, 2012 09:01 AM

rating: 4

rbrianc

No I don't think Mark Trumbo is better than Albert or Trout.

But you can consider he's played 1B, 3B, and RF this year and he was also offered a scholarship to pitch at USC, so he'd be the best pitcher of the three. I'm sure Albert is a better 3B.

Jun 01, 2012 10:20 AM

rating: 1

John Douglass

I wish the most interesting part of the discussion and the biggest part of Heymann's tweet--Is Trout better than Pujols--had gotten more attention here.

The wild card in the equation, which I'd love to hear your opinion on Sam, is this: How good do you think Albert Pujols is today? IMO, he's deteriorating rapidly, losing over a quarter of his previous season's WARP each of the last two years, and on pace to lose 60% or so of last season's value this year.

Forget everything you know about the last 11 years, and put yourself in this situation on 6/1/01. Some typically dunderheaded national writer with a knack for putting his foot in his mouth says: "1 gm says pujols is #stlcards best player. i agree. #phenom" What's your reaction, in a lineup with McGwire, Edmonds, Drew, Lankford? Do we credit those four for what they've done in the past, or do we look at the right now/future?

Pujols won't hit 5.3 WARP this year. He'd have to go something like 325/420/580 to get there. And he's not that player anymore. That's not a comment on a flaw in PECOTA, but a comment in Pujols having a post-30 age curve that so far has proved to be a lot quicker than the norm for both the general population of hitters and the elite guys.

It's entirely possible that Heymann is absolutely right, and Trout is a better baseball player today than Albert Pujols. He plays elite defense at a premium position, has the unheard of speed to hit triples on line drives to left field, and is patient and talented at the plate.

Jun 01, 2012 11:04 AM

rating: 2

marcello

FWIW, ZiPS has Trout ending the season at 4.6 WAR and Pujols ending at 4.0 WAR. So, I'd say there's a pretty good chance Trout is the better player this year.

Jun 01, 2012 11:25 AM

rating: 0

SamMiller

BP staff

Yeah, ZiPS has had a crush on Trout since before the 2011 season. If I recall correctly, I think ZiPS projected Trout to be the best Angel in 2011, when he was just 19.

My own opinion: I'm not too worried about Pujols' seemingly accelerated decline, or, at least, I don't think there's a lot of evidence yet to suggest the normal aging curve doesn't apply to him. I think Pujols is probably one of the 10 best players in baseball right now, and Trout is probably one of the 30 best. That also means that if I'm off by just a little for each, then Trout would be, indeed, better than Pujols.

Jun 01, 2012 11:44 AM

John Douglass

I respectfully disagree. I don't believe there is any evidence (discipline stats, power, slash lines, WARP, TAv, baserunning, defense, literally anything meaningful) that shows Pujols is not a player in steady if not steep decline.

Jun 01, 2012 12:01 PM

rating: 0

Richard Bergstrom

Let me see if I understand this argument correctly.

140 plate appearances from Mike Trout from this year is more relevant than 221 plate appearances from Albert Pujols this year, ignoring Trout's 134 plate appearances from last year (where Trout "underperformed") and ignoring Pujols's 7250 plate appearances from his career.

Or, perhaps, Pujols's .906 OPS in an offyear last year when he battled a bad elbow, returned much sooner than expected is and still posted the 10th best OPS in the NL is, again, more relevant than Trout's .887 in the brief time he has been up this year?

That's the thrust of your argument, right?

Jun 01, 2012 17:33 PM

rating: 3

John Douglass

Wrong.

My argument is how Pujols has trended since the close of 2009, over 1572 PA of steady decline.

You say bad elbow, I say old guys have more nagging health problems keeping them off the field or from producing the way they did when they were young. You say off year in 2011, I say then explain how it looks statistically like a logical progression from 2009 -> 2010 -> 2011 ->2012 as he gets progressively worse each year. Are they all 'off years'? If so, isn't that support for my case rather than against?

You say 10th best OPS in NL, I say (if we must use it) that a 906 OPS last year represents a steady loss of about 100 points of OPS per year which he looks primed to equal or exceed this year. I can say same for literally every meaningful offensive stat. That Pujols is in steady if not steep decline.

What we're seeing from Trout is an indication of what we're going to see from Trout for the next decade. The same can be said for Pujols. That's my argument. And I tend to think that Pujols' performance over a very meaningful almost 1600 PA supports that wholly, and that Trout doing what, as Sam mentioned, only a set of HOF no-doubters have done, supports that side of the equation.

Jun 01, 2012 21:58 PM

rating: 0

Richard Bergstrom

You know, after 182 career plate appearances, Starlin Castro had a .944 OPS at the age of 20 in July 2010. While Castro has been a good hitter at a premium position, he has not kept up that level of production.

So, similar to Trout, it would be difficult for me to say I would prefer Castro (or Trout) to Pujols. I just can not say with any certainty that Trout's current level of production is sustainable.

Meanwhile, Pujols has been at or above that .900 OPS level multiple times. That deserves some weight.

Jun 02, 2012 09:56 AM

rating: 0

John Douglass

I think you're missing my point, respectfully, Richard. And that isn't what Mike Trout will be based on the significance of 180 PA. It's that the elephant in the room of this discussion is Pujols' last 1600 or so PA, which show a big fat steady downward slide. A 900 OPS for Pujols is a big big fall from where he was in 2009. He's at .693 right now and unlikely to hit that 900 this year. There's nothing to tell us his downward slide is going to reverse or slow. Could he have a crazy good outlier year in 2014 and OPS 1.000 again, sure. But that will be an outlier.

Mike Trout? It's about Rany's stuff on young guys (Trout is 5 mos younger than Nick Franklin, taken two picks later, and is the youngest position player from the 2009 draft in MLB by a long margin. Ackley, same draft, is 3.5 years older than Trout, who is hitting circles around Ackley and did hit circles around Ackley in the minors despite being 3.5 years younger.) It's everything KG has reported on Trout. It's how Trout dominated every level he played while at a very young age at each level. Mike Trout is an elite player with a huge future ahead of him. He could have OPSed .120 the last month and I'd believe that.

Jun 02, 2012 19:47 PM

rating: 0

Richard Bergstrom

I think I have an idea of your point. And yes, Pujols's best years are most likely behind him. The thing that I am not sure is being valued is that .900 OPS hitters are rare. Trout has not established himself as that kind of hitter, 180 PA just isn't enough.

Sure Trout's got great potential, but it's not guaranteed he will produce great results. You can consider the Castro example (who has done amazing things as a young player but is not a superstar) or those who have "failed" such as Jason Heyward. Just a few weeks ago, people were panicking about Mike Stanton (who has not hit for a .900 OPS over a full season). Meanwhile, even a diminished Pujols hit at that .900 OPS level.

In some ways, this discussion reminds me of the Joe Mauer argument from a few years ago where Joe finally had his power explosion so everyone thought he would be more valuable than Pujols in future years. Sure enough, he hasn't been.

Anyway, on the original subject of "who is the Angel's best player", I believe Pujols is likely to outproduce Trout for this year. I also believe that Pujols will keep pace if not outproduce Trout for the next few years. In 2015 when Trout hits 23 and Pujols hits 35, that'll probably be the inflection point where Trout definitively surpasses Pujols. But until I can see a season and a half of Trout's production at the major league level, I'll still take Pujols's declining production because I can see Pujols hitting that .900 OPS level for at least two more years.

Jun 02, 2012 21:10 PM

rating: 0

John Douglass

Who says Pujols is still a 900 OPS hitter? That's not how the aging curve works, where you take a big drop at 30, a big drop again at 31, then you flatline and your age 31 season becomes your reality for a while. The older a player gets, the more their drop as a rule will accelerate. Pujols is already in a decline that's more accelerated than should be expected of two populations: everyone, and elite hitters. He's not having an outlier like Adam Dunn's 2011. He's having a steady, multi-season decline that I think it would be short-sighted to think is just going to stop or slow down.

I won't be surprised if Pujols has another 900 or 1000 OPS year. But I'd be shocked if it were not an isolated season of maybe 530 PA with an out-of-line BABIP and a bunch of fence-scrapers that sticks out in what is an otherwise continuous downward trend. And I'll be equally shocked if we ever look back at the end of a season and say "Albert Pujols. Man, he was THE BEST this year." That ship has sailed.

Jun 03, 2012 08:53 AM

rating: 0

Richard Bergstrom

Well, it's called an aging curve for a reason. The declines are gradual. And it's not like 30 is the magic number where things start declining, nor does the "peak" always happen at 29.

The BABIP argument is interesting. Did you know last year he had a career low .277 BABIP and, so far this year, a .239 BABIP though his career numbers are at .309?

Again, I get curious why you dismiss sections of his track record when others get overly weighted. You seem inclined to suggest a "bounce back" would be because of luck but that his "decline" has nothing to do with it.

Jun 03, 2012 09:42 AM

rating: 1

John Douglass

The declines on the whole are gradual but they do accelerate as age advances. Pujols' own personal decline has not been anything even in the same time zone as gradual.

Albert Pujols circa 2001-2009, you get no argument from me. I'm not dismissing any of Pujols' track record. That's a straw man you're arguing with. You're dismissing the recent--and frankly, most relevant--part of it by relying more on the player he was 1600PA ago, and not the one he's become since the close of 2009.

Jun 03, 2012 09:56 AM

rating: 0

Richard Bergstrom

I explicitly did not dismiss last year's stats.

I explicitly stated that even a diminished Pujols posting a .900 OPS is rare.

I have also said that even his performance last year could've been affected by injury, stress over contract or even BABIP fluctuations.

I am saying that Pujols's career history make it more likely he will produce at that .900 OPS (if not better) and that Trout does not have that history, so he is less likely to produce at that level.

Yet, you dismiss Pujols's history while ignore Trout's subpar performance from last year. You think Pujols may have a lucky BABIP year and rebound with some good stats, ignoring that his BABIP this year (.239) and last year (.277) were below career averages. Yet, you ignore Trout's .372 BABIP so far this year. You dismiss that there are other 20 year olds who had hot months or hot half-seasons and didn't sustain that .900 OPS level. Heck, even Darwin Barney had a hot month.

You selectively use statistics then you say I'm the one making a straw man argument?

Anyway, I get the general idea. You like Trout, you don't like Pujols.

Jun 03, 2012 21:22 PM

rating: 1

Richard Bergstrom

As an addendum, Trout has a huge future ahead of him, but he isn't an elite player yet. Also, the Angels are built to win now. If it was a rebuilding team, Trout would be "more valuable" than Pujols, but he still wouldn't be "the best player" for another few years.

Jun 02, 2012 21:16 PM

rating: 0

John Douglass

Trout is playing every day on a team built to win now because Trout is a better player right now than the overpaid old guys clogging up LA's 25-man roster.

Jun 03, 2012 08:58 AM

rating: 1

Richard Bergstrom

I wish they used the same logic with Bourjos vs Wells.

Jun 03, 2012 09:36 AM

rating: 1

Nils J

Sam Miller = Mark Trumbo of baseball writing.

Jun 01, 2012 11:36 AM

rating: 1

WaldoInSC

That makes him a "heck of a" writer, just not the best on BP.

Jun 01, 2012 20:02 PM

rating: 0

Chucko

I'm going with the Kurt Vonnegut of baseball writing. Satire, history, observations of human nature. All we need is the sci-fi angle now, Sam! Perhaps a world in which Trumbo is better than Pujols accounts for that?

Heck of a read. Keep it up!

Jun 02, 2012 10:01 AM

rating: 0

Richard Bergstrom

On that note, I have about 50k words done of a sci-fi baseball novel.. :P

Jun 02, 2012 11:21 AM

rating: 2

jrbdmb

Unclear, is that a good thing or a bad thing? :)

Jun 01, 2012 12:24 PM

rating: 0

Sorry, fantasy subscribers cannot comment on exclusive premium content.

<< Previous Article

Raising Aces: Four of ... (06/01)

<< Previous Column

Pebble Hunting: The De... (05/30)

Next Column >>
Pebble Hunting: Bryce ... (06/04)

Next Article >>
Overthinking It: Bryce... (06/01)

RECENTLY AT BASEBALL PROSPECTUS Raising Aces: Splitting the Platoon: Lefty-P... Daily Hit List: Friday, May 24 Transaction Analysis: Demotion Pictures What Makes a Good Changeup? What You Need to Know: Searching for Jesus Eyewitness Accounts: May 24, 2013 Overthinking It: The Longest Plate Appearanc...	MORE FROM JUNE 1, 2012 Weekly Planner: Week 10 Resident Fantasy Genius: Adding Injury to In... Collateral Damage Daily: Friday, June 1 Daily Hit List: Friday, June 1 What You Need to Know: Friday, June 1 Overthinking It: Adam Jones' Unusual Breakou... The BP Wayback Machine: Taking a Step Back, ...
MORE BY SAM MILLER 2012-06-05 - BP Unfiltered: When a 13th Round Produces as... 2012-06-04 - Pebble Hunting: Bryce Harper's Toughest At-B... 2012-06-04 - BP Unfiltered: Bob Geren on Family Feud 2012-06-01 - Pebble Hunting: Twitter, Mike Trout, and Mar... 2012-05-31 - BP Unfiltered: About 3-, 4-, and 5-run saves 2012-05-30 - Pebble Hunting: The Decline and Fall of the ... 2012-05-25 - Prospectus Game of the Week: Bullpens, Banan... More...	MORE PEBBLE HUNTING 2012-06-08 - Pebble Hunting: The Best Pitches Thrown This... 2012-06-06 - Pebble Hunting: Bryce Harper and the Disappe... 2012-06-04 - Pebble Hunting: Bryce Harper's Toughest At-B... 2012-06-01 - Pebble Hunting: Twitter, Mike Trout, and Mar... 2012-05-30 - Pebble Hunting: The Decline and Fall of the ... 2012-05-23 - Pebble Hunting: How Josh Harrison Beats Just... 2012-05-21 - Pebble Hunting: Baseball and the F Word More...