WAR, and The Battle For Baseball's Soul
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 29 ก.ย. 2024
- To enter in the giveaway use registration code "MTC" and receive $10 off your first order!
link: www.pristineauc...
Enjoy WAR, and The Battle For Baseball's Soul! Subscribe to Made The Cut for more mlb content!
#mlb #baseball #mlbvideos #baseballvideos
Script written and researched by Mac Douglass
To enter in the signed Jacob DeGrom jersey giveaway use registration code "MTC" and receive $10 off your first order!
link: www.pristineauction.com/register
Jesus Christ loves you
You’re argument with Pujols makes no sense. You essentially said that because he was playing in an era with more offensive production, his WAR was lower, but that’s exactly what the stat aims to accomplish. If runs are more common, someone who produces a certain amount of runs is less valuable. Barry Bonds also had objectively better statistical seasons during Pujols during this time, and no stat has a steroid adjuster lmao. You’re reaching with this whole video
11:41 you make the argument that division isn't taken into account. How do you think WAR will be affected by the new MLB schedule plan which is to make every team play every team, and will inherently remove some division games?
You guys gotta stop being ignorant about steroids, they were and are still widely used… by all of them. They stand to make a lot of money by taking them and the testing is a joke
Even willful ignorance is bliss.
Yeah Pujols played in an era with so many other power hitting 1st basemen. Miggy, Howard, Helton, etc. every team seemed to have a 1st baseman hitting 40 homers.
The tigers had two in 2012 and 2013
It’s crazy how stacked the 1st base and 3rd base positions are
Teixeira on the Yankees too
Dunn
Pujols was never caught using steroids. We don't know for sure if he used or not. The second half of his career, his production dropped off a cliff
Armchair statistician here (mathematician actually, but who's counting?)
The thing you're wrong about at 10:50 is that 55/11 = 5, so your theoretical player would have 5 WAR rather than 11. Now, it's a well known fact that the best way to get people to comment on your video is to make a math mistake, so I assume this was intentional on your part and I've been tricked into interacting, so was it _really_ a mistake? The world will never know.
Thanks for the video! The insight that really stuck with me is making sure we don't use WAR to compare players between eras. I agree. Babe Ruth deserves the highest WAR - he was simply that much better than the other players in the league at that time. His records are so intimidating because the worst and the best player in the league are so much closer together now in our modern game with our advanced understanding of the game and the human body. Babe Ruth wasn't the best player in history, not even close, but he was the most /dominant/ player in history, and that is what WAR seeks to capture imo.
Uh babe Ruth definitely is the best player of all time
@@Angel_prrrr Definitely the best player? No. He was definitely ONE Of the best players and you could argue he was the best, but there are many that will disagree with you on who was the best. In baseball there are too many great players for everyone to agree on who was the best.
@@Ffollies Ruth was on his way to being a hall of fame pitcher before he he went to the outfield, where things.........happened.
Highest OPS+, 2nd highest OBP, highest SLG% and the best lefty in the AL during his days as a hall of fame level starter.
Yup, he's the greatest ever allowed to play in MLB.
End of story.
@@blaseblah204 you put most hitters now in the game then and they're absolutely crushing everything.
I knew it was coming This is eternal discussion :-) Mays would have overtaken Ruth if there had not been the Korean War. He had the highest WAR. Prototype of 5 tool player, The Catch, values huge. Still the all-time leader with 7,095 Outs
Pujols’ WAR is not low lmaoooo. He’s 2nd all time at his position behind Lou Gerhig. Also Trout isn’t being done dirty. He has the highest WAR per 162 games out of any center fielder ever.
I'm of the opinion that all stats prior to integration are invalid. Babe Ruth was boosted by the fact that a significant portion of the best players were racially barred from competing
At 5:06, when you say, "You'd be hard-pressed to find another player who really exposes the shortcomings of the stat quite like Pujols," you have another player who exposes it even more, Yadier Molina. fWAR is better than bWAR, but we have yet to see a formula that accounts for things that the great catchers do.
War was never designed to compare players from different eras. It was designed to compare players in the same year. That's why so many parts are recalculated every year. 10 war this year should not be compared to 10 war even just last year. As things do change. Counting war is just to compare how good a player has been over their career compared to others in the same time period. Ruth was hitting more home runs than entire teams in the 1920s. No one will ever be able to that. I don't think war will get smaller for top guys going forward by that much more. But the worst players are way better than they used to be.
@breadandcircuses8127 The skill gap has decreased due to better scouting, more people playing baseball in the world, and racial integration. When the MLB as a whole is more talented, it's harder for the best players to stand out as much.
WAR is a correct metric. But it is bad for the game as far as fun goes. Its killed stealing bases, bunting and a lot of other minor things that take away the fun of the game. But to say it didnt represent Pujols correctly is incorrect. He has a 88.8 fwar putting him 27th all time. He is a top 10 talent all time, but careers are measured the entire span of said career. He is the modern day Griffey. HOF first half, bad second half. His final 10 years he had a total 4.2 WAR. Thats not WARS fault. Neither is Griffey's 3.9 WAR over his final ten years. Blame planter factitious and torn hamstrings, not WAR.
you are right about Pujols injuries, Pujols was suffering in his early Cardinals days but was young enough to overcome it, Pujols just like Griffey are 1st ballot hall of famers in my opinion, and Pujols did finish his career with over 100 War, pretty good
This is a terrible argument. "I don't like WAR because I like a player who played in a context of offense that makes me think he's better historically than he actually was." This is the whole purpose of context-adjusted statistics, you can say the same about ERA+ or -, OPS+, wRC+, anything that is context-, era-, and park-adjusted. You're just re-hashing all the same, tired, BS arguments old-timers have been regurgitating for decades. "My favorite player is better because everyone else was obviously cheating." For claiming that WAR makes too many assumptions you sure make plenty yourself.
You really believe Pujos and Trout never juiced? 😂
As a long-time baseball fan, I've always kind of disliked the obsession with stats. I like the old-school approach of looking at basic stats like AVG, OPS, RBIs, etc, and watching how they play season to season.
The thing about Pujols is that WAR didn't fail him. Looking at players through their first 11 seasons, Pujols is third all-time in terms of WAR. I don't know how WAR could've cheated him if it says he was better than every single player but two in history. While WAR has faults, its a really good tool for comparing players across eras as long as you use other metrics as well and contextualize WAR (like how maybe the reason for older players' inflated WAR totals is that they didn't let Black people play).
yeah he's also the 2nd best 1B all time by war only behind lou gehrig which i don't think most people would have a problem with lol
The thing that bugs me about Albert's WAR is the 1B penalty. He was so much better than the vast majority of 1B (pretty much everyone not named Keith Hernandez), but on top of that, he wasn't even a 1B for the beginning of his career.
What would his WAR been if he had stayed as a 3B or LF (he was moved to 1st due to an injury in his throwing arm)? It always seems like the Bill James defensive adjustments are more art than science.
@@EthnHayabusa It may have been worse if he stayed in LF or 3B since negative defensive value is possible
@@EthnHayabusa Problem is, we dont know how good a defensive 3b he would have been. I estimate his WAR would increase about 8.5 if he had stayed at third base his whole career and been an average defensive third baseman. But that likely wouldn't have been the case
@@EthnHayabusa
His lack of arm strength and mobility would have been exacerbated probably would have spent way more time on the DL .
I think Ichiro also deserves a mention. His peak years in MLB were also during '01 to '10 and he also stuck around long enough to accumulate statistical milestones. And his WAR is also deflated for a number of reasons. His fClutch score from '01 to '10 (6.20) was the second highest in MLB in that time span, which isn't factored into fWAR.
He wasn't as good as Pujols or Trout, but he wasn't that far off.
Good point
He was very, very far off.
Different player though right?
His WPA is actually lower than you expect given his offensive runs above average, that might be at least slightly due to ichiro hitting leadoff though
His era adjusted stats aren't as good as they should be bc of steroid users
War is the most useless stat ever. It puts trout way ahead than he should be. There was a communicator who said we witnessing the greatest player of all time mike trout. Trout not even top 30. 9:46 yeah I left, they put him ahead than he should be
The video fails to mention the obvious - pre Jackie Robinson era ‘compare’ statistics are not just flawed - they are impossible.
Wins Above Replacement can’t mean anything in a league where a Willie Mays would not have even been allowed to play.
All statistics are tools. You can't build a house with just a hammer. And you can't evaluate a player with only WAR. I think both Pujols and Bonds are in the top 15 all time. For those who are going to cry about Bonds and steroids, consider this. Over any 9 year period of a players career, there are 7 players who had an OPS+ greater than 180. Bonds was one of them. BEFORE he started doing steroids. Pujols is not one of those 7.
I like the point you made about division adjustments and defensive positioning. I think outs above average could lead to more accurate WAR estimates and I wonder if sites like baseball reference and Fan Graphs would ever consider adjusting for divisions. That’s a good idea imo.
As someone who just got into baseball and was confused by some of these “statistics”.. I’m so glad to learn that some of them are just porn for math nerds
I'm on team FWAR...
As in "F#$k WAR: The stat that is becoming the backbone of the sport, yet there are three differentversionsof it!? How?"
Because a human body doesnt consist of just the backbone. Sure its one of the most important sections of the body, but a human has a heart, skull, lungs, etc. Same thing with baseball stats. Its not just the backbone that's important but all the peripheral stats around it.
Hmm. I think if you understand WAR beyond the surface level, you won't come to the conclusion that it underrates Pujols, because it compares him to other first baseman. Otherwise you would have to say that WAR massively overrates, say, Ozzie Smith, because his traditional batting stats don't look so good compared to the whole league.
WAR rates Albert Pujols the 4th best 1B of all time. Is that not fair to him? Seems fair to me.
I think this video is a bit misleading. WAR is a better stat than you're letting on. We as baseball fans have an unfortunate habit of disagreeing or finding something "wrong" with any stat that doesn't conform to our biases. The point you make about Babe Ruth is fair. Outlier seasons are certainly less common than they used to be, but from the '60s onwards it does a pretty good job comparing between eras. However, I think also the fact that the Babe was so much better than his peers is the precise reason why we consider him to be the GOAT. I also want to say there is no such thing as the "mythical replacement player." The replacement player formula stays almost exactly the same throughout history because it is not arbitrary. A team of replacement players always account for a winning percentage of about .294. This keeps it relatively stable throughout history. I agree that WAR is not perfect, but if you know what you're looking at, it does a great job keeping our biases in check. Pujols is a great example. Instead of looking at his WAR and saying "this seems low," if you look at the component pieces it makes a lot more sense. Good video tho. Reply if you want more clarification.
Found the armchair statistician lol
Nah I feel you dawg; I think for me and others, it’s just that are we really supposed to believe they go back and do these equations and all that for players Pre 70s or even 60s without tailoring with it to represent those biases? Feel me? If ppl feel Babe is the goat, which I don’t - as he’d struggle greatly against today’s pitchers - they’ll make his WAR substantially higher or stats that we really only have as word of mouth thrown at us to keep this idea that he’s the best ever. If that makes sense. No way he accounted for that many wins his whole career & there’s no footage of it? Please
Sabermetrics are garbage.
It overrates defense and CANT correctly compare 2 players that play different positions
@@ParamoreFAV3well there isn't footage of it because people didn't have ceras all over the place. Or TV sets to need broadcasting. So saying them not having footage of what happened then is literally stupid.
I agree with the analysis that WAR is useful, but it definitely has its limitations. Still, until someone comes up with something better, WAR is something I'll always look at.
I saw the marlins man in the video. What makes it even more surreal is that I'm really good friends with him
that dude is 😐
The problem is so many people see WAR as the end all be all of stats and they don’t understand that it’s really not. People refuse to acknowledge the flaws and they also refuse to acknowledge that it cant account for intangibles such as what affect a player has on a team, leadership qualities and other things.
Listen, we don’t believe Babe Ruth accounted for that many wins & he was definitely not the baseball player Mike trout is - there’s a whole misconception about his career & how he was 2 way. The man never pitched & hit simultaneously, ever but yet they’ll have you believe he was. Mf played in the early 1900s, we don’t believe most numbers about these players
Ypur understated war puns and references make this video next level.
"War, war never changes."
Baseball statisticians: "Well, about that."
I wish what we are shown on
the video would better relate to what is being spoken by the narrator.
So, by this video, we speculated that Scot Rolen is a Hall of Famer???? Lol
You use the same pattern of inflection for every sentence you speak regardless of what is being said.
BWar over everything not because I like math but because I like their website sorry
Of the three versions of WAR which one is the best and most accurate?
Is there a way to basically place a player of a different era in the current one? Like what would Babe Ruths WAR be if he had the stats he did today? I don't think it would really mean a whole lot because he didn't play against the same players but just curious.
They attempt to make "weighted" stats that average out players for every year, and then spit out a number to quantify that player's offensive/pitching value. These stats are not perfect, they all have shortcomings, but the + stats (ERA+, OPS+) are *generally* very good stats to use yo compare guys from disparate eras.
This one example sums up my beef with WAR and all the sabermetrics...Don Mattingly has a career 43 WAR. Don Mattingly won 9 Gold Gloves yet the defensive metrics have him as a below average defender, despite winning 9 gold gloves. If his defensive metrics actually mirrored reality, his war would be above 50. Also, one year Brett Gardner had a higher WAR than Mike Trout. Let that sink in for a second.
Gold gloves are a popularity contest. Jeter has 5 and didn't deserve a single one. War is notoriously inaccurate for first base defense.
He has negative because the defensive spectrum pegs first base as really easy, also gold gloves are a terrible accolade to base actual defensive prowess. See Derek Jeter.
Rafael Palmeiro won the GG in 99 and only played 28 games at 1st.
@jakebrake3000 Obviously there's no perfect measurement, and you're bringing up the example considered the worst award ever given out in history, but fine. If you want to discount Gold Gloves as meaningless then take Ozzie Smith and Brooks Robinson out of the Hall of Fame because that's the only reason they're in. I'm not hating on either player, im just saying. Gold Gloves either matter on a resume or they don't.
@@dazed1nyc advance metrics love Robinson and Smith. I never made the argument anything was meaningless. But when a person starts strawmaning it's pretty indicative they aren't real confident in whatever argument they were trying to make.
These are some of the worst arguments against WAR I have ever heard...
EDIT: There are many flaws in the WAR stat but those flaws not only exist, but also are way worse in traditional stats
Diatribe, AB would approve, put that shit on.
use total run value instead it tells the story better
Been watching this channel as a highlight hub for years now- I watched the same evolution of content happen with baseball doesn’t exist, and I’m so happy to see the personal deep cut videos man. This is some high quality gourmet stuff!
😂 war is just a great fan stat overall in my opinion
Pujols a non-cheater? Not according to some, including Jack Clark.
I’ve been checking out your videos today, but this one got my sub. Not cuz of the topic (I’m a weirdo that likes content about stuff I know nothing about) but because of your writing. You are super clever and I hope you implement your humor as much as you want,, don’t hold it back, it doesn’t take away from the informative aspect whatsoever. Good stuff bududdy
Then black letter angels jerseys are sick af
Bonds and Aroid disgraced the WAR stat
Shouldn’t have watched video while I’m drunk. I say we do it the old fashioned way. Player hit big bomb? Player good. Player no hit big bomb. Player no good. Numbers hurt head, my sleeo
I’m just a outside observer I don’t follow it much, but your argument that it’s no good during years where baseball has higher office, seems incorrect. Because if the player has better office with the entire league, or a.k.a., the above average player has better offense, that seems like a perfect measurement to me. Or at least it shouldn’t affect it. And the same goes for if a player has an amazing season, comparatively, I mean you’re basically arguing against the core fundamental equation of the stat
What you’re talking about is a players legacy, or combined stats. Those actually don’t take into consideration, higher, or lower offense of yours.
You also just compared Pujols to Alex Rodriguez, but the problem is shortstop has a completely different average player than first base. The stat is wins above replacement. Not wins above generic average every day player.
@@Ryan-mq2miExactly
This video is a strawman !
Cutthroat trout is pretty dope
WAR doesnt care about how good a player is. it gives an estimate of how much value a player provided to a team. so yes a shortstop that played in an era where shortstops couldnt hit would provide a lot more value than a shortstop who played an era where they could hit bc we need to think of the production that the team would get if that player had to be replaced
One major problem here is that there is no reason to absolve Pujols from steroid suspicion. We simply don't know.
Tony Gwynn my GOAT
I agree
all you can ever do is compare players to their eras, in any sport. give the respect to older players it was a different game and world. take that talent, raise it up now of days and you'll probably get the same result.
Honestly I was expecting you to mention that the Angels suck, which *should* drag down Trout and Pujols' WAR values (as well as Ohtani if you want to touch pitchers).
Imagine a person with an enchanted bat that, if they are the one swinging it, they'll hit a dinger every time they swing at a pitch. Now pull a random team from a high school and stick them in the majors and then put magic bat guy in as the DH. Magic bat guy will get four dingers a game and score four runs because he bats first in the order. All the high schoolers will strike out or ground out every at-bat, and the high school pitchers will give up dozens of runs a game to major league opposition. His team goes 0-182 in the majors.
How much WAR is magic bat guy worth? The correct answer is zero because he won zero games, but a replacement level player in his stead wouldn't have won any games either. Never mind the fact that he's the best batter in all of history and makes Barry Bonds look like a high schooler, his WAR is zero because he gets zero wins. Because the Angels have been so bad for so long, there's a lot of games where Trout, Pujols, and/or Ohtani would have pushed a team of replacement players to victory but the Angels still lost because the rest of the team is worse than replacement level.
Let's hypothetically say that Pujols didn't use PEDs, and it is a coincidence that he went from a shortstop when he was signed to a DH in his later seasons, and that players who also never served one game of suspension for PEDs were all using, WAR isn't the only stat where he suffers for that. He is fourth on the home run list, because Bonds is ahead of him there. You can't say Bonds hurts his WAR while pretending he doesn't hurt his counting stats.
As for the Ruth vs. Trout comparison, we don't care about talent, we care about production. There are thousands of guys who had talent, but if they didn't produce, it doesn't matter. When we say that Ruth is better than Trout, it means that his production was that much better than the production of that era. That is all that matters.
Finally, your criticisms of WAR aren't the ones being made by the old-heads. They don't understand it, and don't want a stat that even tries to do what WAR tries to accomplish. Rarely is an on-line argument about WAR about the math. It is always about mythical "clutch" players, and the old guys who use the "eye test." They talk about RBI and other stats that we know aren't worth anything in evaluating a player. WAR is a step in the right direction of taking subjectivity out of the game, and if we are looking at coming up with a better stat that does that, I am right there with you. If we are attacking WAR so old guys can pretend Tony Gwynn was better than we now know, that is where I get skeptical.
I enjoyed the goofy side tangents
WAR WHAT IS IT GOOD FOR
Fantastic Analysis!
So you’re saying that, allthough they are good players, Trout and Pujols are vastly overrated? Thanks, I’ve been saying that for years now
Mike Trout's 176 OPS+ would like to speak with you
mike trout's top 7 ops of all time would like to have a word
I thought replacement player meant a hypothetical league average player across all stats
A league average player will probably be worth about 2 WAR in a full season
The average player is not being replaced.
i cant believe people think pujols made it to 700 homeruns without juicing even tho when he first started he was built just like everyone else that was juiced up and played with them
How?
Fog of war
Nice 👍
The WAR is definitely an important indicator. However, the wOBA is more meaningful. If I have both values, he is the first benchmark. Sometimes the WAR is a lot worse and the player hits you hard :-) FIP with rookies, with the pros you don't pay so much attention to it anymore
While Babe Ruth wasn't twice as good as Pujols, or Trout, he definitely pushed the sport to another threshold (because of how much better he was than the competition at the time), so in a way, Pujols and Trout are as good as they are due, in part, to how good Babe Ruth was back then.
first
Great video
“What exactly is that war good for” was a brilliant cultural throw back usage. Kudos to that writer. Well done.
Great video. It gives a little insight to something that I've tried to avoid digging too deeply into.
Some observations as a Cardinal fan:
1. WAR wasn't relied on as heavily in the 2000's as it is now, in terms of MVP voting. Pujols was in the top-5 in MVP voting every year of his first tour with the Cardinals EXCEPT 2007. (We was 9th) and must have had a (relatively) bad year, right? Well, no. He was #1 in WAR in the National League that year.
2. WAR tells you a lot, but maybe the finest baseball player I've ever seen, Yadier Molina, has a relatively low WAR, compared to other position players. So WAR is like a bikini. It shows a lot, but not everything.
3. Ozzie Smith is #1 all-time in defensive WAR. But, he played in an era of mostly defensive specialists at shortstop. His dWAR would have to be much higher (I think) if he'd played against today's bigger, slugging shortstops.
"So WAR is like a bikini. It shows a lot, but not everything."
And it hides the best parts. 🤣
@@zciliyafilms5508 I am honored to be your first like on this comment.
must be nice for baseball fans to have a measurable number to use for who the baseball goat is xD
KUDOS!!!!---WAR is a forumla, and being formulaic means "produced in accordance with a slavishly followed rule or style; predictable." Foolishly relying on algorythms is an another example OF OVER-RELIANCE ON A FORMULA. , especially because Al Gore ain't got no rhythm.
Loved all the double entendres and little quips. music comes up-- "WAR-- what is it good for--absolutely nothing, say it again"--Also, you cast your net wide and caught more than "Cut Throat Trout." MADE SOME GREAT GENERAL POINTS, TOO
This is why WAR should never be the end all be all. Great video btw
Some of the relativity issues like league/defensive positioning/etc are interesting to me.
“Greatness” in the game of baseball is relative by its nature. It doesn’t really matter how that player theoretically would perform in some other set of variables. It just matters what a player does where he is.
Greatness is still an eye test. The stats can help support the cause, but they can’t BE the cause
Ppl still think Yankee stadium is hitter friendly
Just like people still think dodger stadium is pitcher friendly
Yankee stadium is left handed home run hitter friendly, and completely unfriendly for everything else. That is because it was designed to so that.
It is for Houston.. 💪
@@jaimelannister1797 LA's ridiculous lineup skews that park's ratings.
Chavez Ravine IS a pitcher's park.
Has been for about 55 of LA's 61 seasons there.
1979, 1984, 1988, 1991, 2006, 2007, 2022 are the only 7 seasons since LA has been in Dodgers Stadium that there have been more runs scored in LA home games than on the road.
Many years the teams' overall road run total is significantly higher than at home.
Dodger Stadium is the definition of a pitcher's park.
@@blaseblah204 shouldn’t OPS+ adjust for that though?
It's a good thing all that steroid use only affected Albert's peers' WAR and not their HR, RBI, or average, else this might be a general problem with the era and not one particular stat.
Yeah it’s really sad how other people using steroids prevents you from hitting home runs
@@origen6758 You stupid? His WAR is lower because it accounts for league average hitting statistics which were inflated. He's not saying Pujols couldn't hit.
Seems to me that WAR is really meant to be an analytical tool to be used by scouts and front office when dealing with drafts, trades, and signing players. Beyond that, we should focus on that stats that are about their actual performance and results
Right😂 now war is everything in baseball
I figured out a long time ago that WAR, while a fun stat is hilariously over complicated, I usually use RAA if I ever want to know how good a player is at a glance, and I just use intuition of pitchers because, well, there is absolutely no good one number stats for them especially not WAR (poor Felix Hernandez is so underrated by WAR)
what makes him underrated?
@@catbelugagaming584 He has a monstrous amount of runs allowed but not many earned runs because of being a groundball pitcher that “put too much pressure on his defense” so despite league leading ERA and innings pitched seasons he never lead the league in pitchers WAR
Pujols and Trout are the top 2 players of all time
You know nothing about baseball.
Mays, Aaron, Ruth, Williams, Cobb
@@anielloa5275 Aaron had almost 1,000 more at bats than Pujols , Pujols wracked up tons of seasons of over 180 hits with high home runs and low strikeouts, compare that to the low skill high strikeout high hr and not that many hits guys, I'll take Pujols all day
Love the vid, some great points. HOWEVER, Ruth was that good. He IS twice as good as elite players from today, if not more. All of his accomplishments were achieved in an era where essentially every aspect of a baseball player's life on and off the field was more difficult, from grueling cross country bus rides to dead balls to rediculously hitter-unfriendly ballparks. Ruth was so dominant, hitting more home runs THAN ENTIRE COMPETING TEAMS DID, that he changed the way the game was played and approached. Ruth also sustained this excellence over an almost unbelievable period of time, straight mashing across the entirety of his 20+ year career (11 of those seasons with 40+ HR). Ruth's hitting record is only marred statistically by the FACT HE WAS ALSO A GREAT PITCHER and focused on that for the first five years. Over 2503 career games spread across 22 seasons, he was a career .342 hitter (!!!!!!), 206 OPS+ (!!!!!!), 1.164 OPS (!!!!), .474 OBP, 2214 RBI, and oh yeah - 714 homeruns.
Mike Trout could not carry the Babe's jock strap, its insulting to compare them, particularly if we're talking cumulative careers. Besides comical disparities in output, one's a 4x World Series champion and 7x pennant winner in an era where only two teams made the postseason, and the other has led his team to ONE playoff game (that they lost). GTFO with this bullshit lol.
PS- Also, Ruth was a PED user, he once missed a game after a bad reaction to an injection made of hormones from sheep testicles lol.
That sheep story is hilarious. Also, this is why I hate using WAR as a single measuring stick, it's far better to look at counting stats, then look at rate stats, and maybe some weighted stats if you feel so inclined. I dont need to know how many Wins above replacement Babe Ruth had to know he was good, he's Babe fucking Ruth.
maybe you only hear it bc you do baseball vids, but i’ve never once heard someone say, “but…WAR”
Well they both did a whole lot of losing as Angels so.....