Is this worth keeping Trout in an Angels uni?

[WallyWorld]

I'm starting to lean towards no. I think I'd be in favor of trading every player of value, including #27. This franchise needs a reset button. And Trout is amazing but I'm starting to feel like he's not Mickey Mantle. Fielding a patched together mediocre team hoping to catch lightning in a bottle every season for the next 6 years doesn't sound like a smart plan.

I'll gladly eat shit come July if the Angels are in first and Trout is hitting .300 with 25 HRs but I think we all know that's a pipe dream.

[Stradling]

You'd be leaning wrong

[WallyWorld]

You'd be leaning wrong

You can see the future? When do we become good again?

[bloodbrother]

How unwatchable would this team be without Trout?

[Stradling]

I have no idea when we will be good again, but I've waited my entire life to have a generational hall of fame player to come up from our minors.

[WallyWorld]

How unwatchable would this team be without Trout?

It'd be horrendous. But at least there'd be a horizon.

Besides, is it much fun to watch now?

[WallyWorld]

I have no idea when we will be good again, but I've waited my entire life to have a generational hall of fame player to come up from our minors.

I think he'll be a hall player but I'm having my doubts as to whether he's really a once in a generation player.

And I don't think that's worth stalling our franchise for a decade.

Edited April 23, 2016 by WallyWorld

[Jason]

It's a legit question and nobody wants to see Trout in another uniform. If the team is still crap when his contract is over he will depart and the Halos will have nothing to show for it. If some team gave up a load of legit, young talent for him they would have to look at it. Hopefully some guys play above their heads and get some post season wins instead.

[bloodbrother]

This kind of question shouldn't seriously be discussed until 2018 IMO. You don't look to move Trout when you still have 5 more seasons of his services. If by 2018 the team still hasn't made the playoffs/still stinks, it's something you have to then seriously and unfortunately consider

[Season Over]

They'd be wise to trade their generational talent away for a nice prospect haul. It worked splendidly for the Marlins with Miguel Cabrera.

[RallyPanda]

The guy has 4 great seasons and you're ready to run him out of town after 2 bad WEEKS?

[IEAngelsfan]

The guy has 4 great seasons and you're ready to run him out of town after 2 bad WEEKS?

You must be new here.

 

Welcome!

[mulwin444]

Haha...not this crap again.

No, you don't trade Trout. Angels have a very rare asset - a sure thing. If you want a competitive team in the near future, you keep attempting to shed the crap, make better choices in trades and FA signings, build the farm through drafting, and hopefully at some point leverage financial resources towards the international market. Trading Trout is essentially telling the general fan "we longer care" no matter what questionable haul he's traded for...

[ABC]

People who want to trade Trout, or even entertain the idea, have no fight in them.

[maximus p]

This kind of question shouldn't seriously be discussed until 2018 IMO. You don't look to move Trout when you still have 5 more seasons of his services. If by 2018 the team still hasn't made the playoffs/still stinks, it's something you have to then seriously and unfortunately consider

Yes 2018.  IIRC 2018 supposed to be a good FA class (if that can be predicted that far in advance).  That is the point where Arte' makes a decision to resign him to the end of his playing days or trades him.  They either spend the money or retool with a Hershel Walker type load for him.

[tdawg87]

I think he'll be a hall player but I'm having my doubts as to whether he's really a once in a generation player.

And I don't think that's worth stalling our franchise for a decade.

I'm interested in seeing what you consider a "once in a generation" player if you have doubts about Trout being one.

[QuinlansMinion]

No point in trading Trout for a group of prospects who most likely wont pan out.  

 

Either build around him, or watch him lead the s*** show for 4 more years until you trade him for whatever you can get at that point.  

[gurn67]

You don't move Trout unless you try to negotiate with him for an extension with a couple of years left on his current deal and he says he will not talk about signing a contract until he tests the free agent market.

[Angel Oracle]

Wait until 3-4 years from now, and re-assess.

Pros - a trade by then could bring a big haul like the Cowboys trading Herschel Walker for a boatload of talent.

Cons - first potential homegrown HOF player should not be dealt.

[stormngt]

I'm starting to lean towards no. I think I'd be in favor of trading every player of value, including #27. This franchise needs a reset button. And Trout is amazing but I'm starting to feel like he's not Mickey Mantle. Fielding a patched together mediocre team hoping to catch lightning in a bottle every season for the next 6 years doesn't sound like a smart plan.

I'll gladly eat shit come July if the Angels are in first and Trout is hitting .300 with 25 HRs but I think we all know that's a pipe dream.

IThis is absolutely stupid to suggest trading Trout when he has five more years of club control. In fact it's tiring readiNguyen these threads so often.

[stormngt]

You can see the future? When do we become good again?

I miss April 2014 when I kept reading how we are ten years away from being any good. Then we win 98 games.

Can you read the future? You know for certain we are going to struggle for the next five years?

[stormngt]

It's a legit question and nobody wants to see Trout in another uniform. If the team is still crap when his contract is over he will depart and the Halos will have nothing to show for it. If some team gave up a load of legit, young talent for him they would have to look at it. Hopefully some guys play above their heads and get some post season wins instead.

Then let's discuss this his last year of his contract.

[Angelsjunky]

I can't imagine a situation where I'd ever "gladly" eat shit.

 

To be serious, though, here's the problem with the "Trout for a million prospects" fantasy. Trout is the best player in baseball. Even if Harper has equaled and surpassed him, and Machado is catching up, he's still a superstar, the best player the Angels have ever had and the best player they'll likely have in decades or more. A package that would actually be worth it would be something like three grade A prospects and two grade B prospects. Not many teams have that kind of wealth, and even that hoard is borderline. There isn't a team, or many teams, who could field a package that would be worth it. Not only do you have to find a team that has the talent, but also a team that can afford him.

 

Actually, I hate to say it but the one team that comes to mind that is a pretty good match is the Dodgers. They have two great prospects in Corey Seager and Julio Urias. You start there. Then you add in Jose DeLeon, which gives you three of the top 14 prospects in baseball according to John Sickels. Then you throw in maybe Alex Verdugo and Yusniel Diaz, two young OF prospects. So for Trout, you get a potential star SS/3B (could slot over to 3B), a future staff ace in Urias, a guy who is almost ready to be a starter now in DeLeon, and two future good+ outfielders.

Would the Dodgers do it? Maybe, maybe not. If you offer Trout now, they probably couldn't refuse.

 

But here's the bigger question to consider: What would trading Trout do to the attendance and the fan-base, regardless of how many prospects the Angels get in return? Can you imagine the shitstorm? We'd all miss Trout, but knowledgeable fans might warm up to such a hoard of prospects. But the average beer-swiller? Not so much. I'm not sure Arte wants to weather that storm, and the potential loss in millions.

 

Trout is not only a great player, but a franchise player - a big name like the Angels have never really had. This is why, when it comes down to it, Arte (or whoever owns the Angels in the future) will never trade him as long as he's performing, and will do everything possible to keep him around (and paid).

 

Now let's say its June of 2020, Trout hasn't signed an extension and the Angels are sucking. Then you consider trading him. But now, with almost five years left on his contract? It won't happen.

[Second Base]

Seriously, how many GM's survive trading away a Mike Trout?

 

Any GM stupid enough to trade Mike Trout in his 20's will never be welcome in a major league front office again.  In my limited experience with front office staff, I've reached the conclusion that they generally like their jobs, and the pay.

[Blarg]

WallyWorld has taken idiocy to the next level.