When Bryce Harper was called up in 2012 there was a a big kerfuffle among his supporters and his detractors on how he compared to this young phenom for the Angles named Mike Trout. Bryce backers kept noting that Mike Trout had played 40 games prior to 2012 (plus had the beginning of the year while Bryce was in the minors). They also noted the age difference as Trout was actually on the way to turning 21 while Bryce would be 19 all season. Basically they were grasping for any explanation how their phenom could end up playing second fiddle to this other one. Mike Trout would end up hitting .300+ with 30 HRs and stealing 50 bases while Bryce was heading toward .274 20 and 11. They kept it up the following year but after Bryce basically matched his numbers and Trout traded some steals for a lot of walks the fight was over. Mike Trout was the better player.
He still probably is. Trout's going to steal more bases (at a great success rate) and he's a slightly above average fielder in center while Bryce is a slightly below average in right. Those things matter. However as of the end of that homer barrage a few days ago, Bryce is currently sitting with better offensive stats than Mike Trout
Bryce : .303 / .449 / .664
Trout : .289 / .396 / .562
It's still early and things will still swing but if Bryce can keep this up this comparison will finally be something it never was before, reasonable to make. Would you want the all around player - above average at everything, or the dominant offensive presence who frankly isn't really bad at anything? That's a fun argument to have.
Trout guys may try to tell you Bryce's numbers are definitely going to fade. Yes the HR/FB rate of 32.4% will drop, but how far? The .347 BABIP might indicate some luck (though he was at .352 last year) but he is hitting everything hard, making great contact (in the zone contact % best of his career), swinging and missing less than he ever has, and identifying strikes and balls better than he ever has (or ever has tried to) before. There's a dip in homers coming. Everything else? I can't be so sure.
If Bryce keeps this up, hell even if the SLG drops .100 pts because of the expected HR rate slowdown, he'll have a better age 22 year than Mike Trout did in his 22-23 year, and that's not taking into account the ever disappearing offense for the sport as a whole. Trout has never hit this well (OPS 1.100+) this late into a season. Bryce is forging his own path.
That's not saying Trout hasn't set lofty goals. He's hit over .325 for a season. Hit 36 homers in a year, drove in 111 guys, almost hit 40 doubles. He's carried a 1.000+ OPS into late September (2013). He hit 10 homers in a month (July 2012). He got on base half his PAs in a month (August 2013). That's impressive considering he's been in the majors all of 3 full seasons. But he's never hit like Bryce is now, on pace for 14 homers and 32 RBI in May. That pace is silly but I'm just saying.
I'm not sure Bryce will every top the average (that's not really how I see Bryce) but everything else? That's in play, that's in play right now. Let's make this a bar argument worth having.