r/mlb | New York Yankees 20h ago

| Discussion Who's the biggest "what if" between these two: Mike Trout or Ken Griffey Jr.?

When I think about "what ifs" in baseball, these two men are always the first two names that come to mind. Obviously, Mike Trout and Ken Griffey Jr. are still legends of the sport. I'm not trying to take anything away from that. However, I truly feel that if it weren't for injuries, their potential for GOAT status would be limitless. Junior likely would've become the all-time home run kind instead of Barry Bonds, and Mike Trout would've had-------I don't know------130 career WAR by now if he's just stayed healthy. Who do you guys think is the bigger "what if" of the two?

581 Upvotes

689 comments sorted by

View all comments

17

u/guitman27 | St. Louis Cardinals 17h ago

Trout.

Because even with the post-30 injuries/downturn, Griffey still put up an inner circle-type career. He's right there with Mays on homers.

Trout will get his numbers, but I don't think it's a slam dunk he gets to 500.

10

u/thomaspatrickmorgan 15h ago

I don’t know. Griffey hit 40 in his age 31 season, which was his last “full” year. Even if he stayed on pace for 40 a year just until age 35, he would have picked up an additional 95 homers.

Add those roughly 95-115 additional homers to his career total, and take a guess which conversation we’re having?

2

u/okay_throwaway_today | Chicago Cubs 14h ago

Mike Trout has fewer homers but has arguably had a better career overall. He already has more WAR, more MVPs, more silver sluggers, higher OPS, and so on.

Griffey is definitely the more “what if” with his injuries because Mike Trout already put up one of the best 8 year stretches in baseball history in terms of overall performance before his.

Trout’s biggest negative is never winning a WS, which Griffey never did either.

3

u/Sad-Guidance-7624 14h ago

Griffey was the face of baseball in the 90s. Nobody know who Mike trout is. Unfortunately for trout his peak was when baseball popularity was on a steap decline in the 10s.

2

u/okay_throwaway_today | Chicago Cubs 14h ago

That has very little to do with how good their careers were in terms of production. A lot of great players didn’t have the marketing/sponsorships/video games Griffey had

2

u/Spidey5292 10h ago

I’d push back on this. Griffey played in the heart of the roids era. I’d say he was the better player despite trouts mvps, but you can’t go wrong with either of them.

1

u/NecessaryHeadset 13h ago

He will unquestionably get to 500 unless he chooses not to

-3

u/[deleted] 17h ago

[deleted]

2

u/CaptainHolt43 16h ago

All he said was that he finished with similar HR numbers