Angels, Trout discussing six-year, $140M deal

[gotbeer]

Gotcha. I wonder if arte may end up offering s pujols type thing to trout (assuming we sign him now) when he hits FA. Ie, a partnership agreement after he retires. Maybe give him a perxentage share of the team. By that time, if the stsdium renovation and local area development goes through, id imagine even like a 3 percent share would be huge income.

 

They closed that loophole after Pujols signed his contract.

[Brandon]

Focus on the extremes if you want, but plenty of people disliked how the Angels handled his contract last year and didn't think the sky was falling.  There was no reason not to give him a nice raise last year that was in line with what other top rookies have gotten in recent years.  If they thought it didn't matter, and Mike Trout would be cool with another raise like that, they wouldn't have given him $1 million this year.

 

Agree to disagree.

 

I'd never give a one year full time player some significant pay raise. The system is in place for a reason and players accept that. I just find it funny how one year the Angels are cheap skates and the next they give him the largest pre-arb contract ever. None of us were there, but I have to think the way Trout handled it with professionalism that this was on the way, not to mention this is likely a package deal and precursor to this extension.

 

I mainly noted it jokingly, this place is knee jerk and forgetful of how many thought Arte was cheap or some of the other nonsense that was spewed (someone even called me a moron with no business sense or something along the lines of not knowing how to run a business) last year. I'm not shitting on the back patting parade, just making a joke the same way Mancini did above me.

[mancini79]

I'm with B here. There was too much criticism about Trout's raise last year on how it would affect his willingness to stay in Anaheim.

[ScottT]

They gave him a raise this year, despite the fact nothing really changed on the field or with his cost controlled status.  They did so for the same reasons they were criticized for not doing so last year... because he is a special player and they want to keep him happy.  

[gotbeer]

I'm with B here. There was too much criticism about Trout's raise last year on how it would affect his willingness to stay in Anaheim.

 

How Clubs Determine Pre-Arbitration Salaries

 

 

Just listening to what the team and Trout are saying, sounds like the Angels have a specific formula.

[Brandon]

They did so with the intention of signing him to an extension. Last year people wanted to give him an extension simply to keep him happy and not have him leave when his arb years are up. Quite the difference and also likely more financially feasible. I don't think people last year understood the long term financial plan of the team and simply had some irrational fear of their favorite player being mad or upset and wanting out asap.

 

I understand your point that whether it was last year or this year, the raise was the right thing to keep him, but don't see it the same way.

[ScottT]

They HAD a specific formula.