Is this worth keeping Trout in an Angels uni?

[WallyWorld]

this team is bereft of talent at every level and maxed out budget-wise. It's like if you went bankrupt and still had a raw Ferrari sitting in the garage. You don't keep the Ferrari and try to survive on nothing - you sell the ****er and start over.

I feel like the people who want to keep trout no matter what fail to see what dire stairs this organization is in.

[ispy45]

Trout has full no trade

[tdawg87]

I'd rather keep Trout because he is the best player I've ever seen put on an Angels uniform.

Losing sucks but some things go beyond winning and losing, and getting to watch Trout play is one of those things.

Also, where is the guarantee that anything the Angels would get in a trade would help the team? They could pull in a hoarde of MLB-ready prospects who either flake out or become marginal players. Then we're in the same boat we're in right now, except our organization looks even more idiotic.

[stormngt]

this team is bereft of talent at every level and maxed out budget-wise. It's like if you went bankrupt and still had a raw Ferrari sitting in the garage. You don't keep the Ferrari and try to survive on nothing - you sell the ****er and start over.

I feel like the people who want to keep trout no matter what fail to see what dire stairs this organization is in.

Kind of like false of 2013 when all you guys say the team is in dire straights and a good ten years before they will ever come Pete again. Nine months later the Angels finish the regular season with the best record in baseball!

Or maybe it's reminiscent of April 2002 when the Angels were 6 -18 and nobody thought they could possibly think they can the division let alone win the World Series.

You are right. None of us can read the future.

[Taylor]

The Angels could trade Trout for five of the top prospects in the history of baseball, and none of them would pan out.

[stormngt]

I'd rather keep Trout because he is the best player I've ever seen put on an Angels uniform.

Losing sucks but some things go beyond winning and losing, and getting to watch Trout play is one of those things.

Also, where is the guarantee that anything the Angels would get in a trade would help the team? They could pull in a hoarde of MLB-ready prospects who either flake out or become marginal players. Then we're in the same boat we're in right now, except our organization looks even more idiotic.

How did the Marlins do with the Cabrera trade?

[tdawg87]

How did the Marlins do with the Cabrera trade?

Shitty.

[stormngt]

Shitty.

Point made. You don't trade Trout because you need more talent because the talent you get may not pan out. If we trade him it would be because we can't afford him or we are going to lose him his last year.

[Puget Sound Angel]

Trade Trout?

Everybody laughed.

[Angels_Make_Me_Drink]

Close this stupid thread.

[Stradling]

might as well with the terrible direction this organization is headed. While Harper is being surrounded with a real team

And yet last year with a better team they had a worse record than the Angels in a weaker division. That's weird.

[AngelsLakersFan]

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

 

It has to do with the commitment from ownership. If we aren't going to make a dramatic shift in the way this organization operates then we would be better off trading Trout.

 

What we should be doing is reinvesting in the team, and the organization as a whole. Trout is part of the solution, but if we aren't going to bring in new talent then what is the point?

[Docwaukee]

Here we go again.  Why is the assumption that whatever you'd get for Trout would actually make this team better long term?  

 

If you were to move him though, it's wouldn't be for just prospects.  Prospects are the most dangerous and risky bet in baseball.  It would actually be for a collection of established young players.  Guys like Bryant, Machado, Correa, Bogarts, etc.  You don't obtain players that might make you better in the future, you obtain the largest collection of value you could possibly haul.  

 

From the dogs it would be Puig, Urias, Seager, Deleon, Peterson

From the Cubs it would be Bryant, Schwarber, Kendrick, Russell, and Gleyber Torres

From the Red Sox it would be Bogaerts, Betts, Owens, Moncada, and others

From the Mets it would be Conforto, Matz, Syndergaard, d'Arnaud, etc.

From the Astros it would be Correa, Tucker, White, Bregman, Springer and McCullers.  

 

F prospects and future talent.  I would want current talent.  A haul so ridiculous it would absolutely decimate a solid young roster.  It would have to be so lopsided that no team would even remotely consider it.  On top of that, I would insist that the other team take Pujols and his entire salary.  So you'd need a stupid haul, and a team that can take on salaries of Trout and Pujols and you would need both of those guys to waive their NTC.  On top of that, even with a kings ransom, you'd still have to deal with considerable backlash and fan upheaval.  You would probably lose tremendous revenue regardless.  Seems realistic.  

 

Here is another way to think of it though.  Let's say you merely went the conventional route and traded Trout alone for a bunch of prospects and maybe an established you player or two.  Your net loss in team revenue would be insane.  Possible to the tune of 70-80 million dollars per season.  Close to a 40-50 million dollar delta per year.  Isn't revenue lost the same as money spent?  

 

So if you were going to take the hit on revenue to that level, wouldn't it make more sense to keep Trout and go out and spend that 50mil on players to help the team for the next 5 years?  

 

You only trade Trout in the second half of his walk year when it's clear you have absolutely zero chance of extending him beyond his current deal.  

 

The team has no intention of trading him ever.  It doesn't make financial sense, value sense, future sense, fan sense or common sense.  

 

Enjoy Mike Trout and hope they can get their crap together otherwise.  

[Catwhoshatinthehat]

Trout is signed through 2020 so the only way you think about moving him is in 2019 (if the team isn't competitive because he has more value being under contract longer) or 2020 if they aren't able to work out an extension because trading him for a massive package of players vs. getting a pick when he walks is a no brainer.  Between now and then let some of the big contracts come off the books (Weaver, CJ, Hamilton), try to improve the international scouting/signings, work through the draft and stop signing guys in their early 30's to deals that are 5 years or longer because you're paying them for what they did for another team and odds are by the end of it the contract won't have worked out for the team.  

Edited April 23, 2016 by Catwhoshatinthehat

[stormngt]

Of he didn't want our comments why did he make the post?

[tdawg87]

AJ I deleted your post by mistake because I'm a dumb shit. Hopefully another mod can restore it or you can just post it again.

I went to USC.

[Blarg]

Giving tdawg87 mod powers is like leaving a four year old in a room with a juice box and a hand grenade.

[tdawg87]

Giving tdawg87 mod powers is like leaving a four year old in a room with a juice box and a hand grenade.

Or like leaving a toddler at Toys R Us with a pocket full of Cheerios and cocaine.

And some porn

Edited April 24, 2016 by tdawg87

[Troutta here]

Trading Trout would be the dumbest thing the franchise has ever done (that's saying something), and it's borderline grounds for changing your fandom to a different team. 

[eligrba]

I didn't know Tony Regins posted on this site.

[CaliAngel]

Why is this even a thread?

[ABC]

Here we go again.  Why is the assumption that whatever you'd get for Trout would actually make this team better long term?  

 

If you were to move him though, it's wouldn't be for just prospects.  Prospects are the most dangerous and risky bet in baseball.  It would actually be for a collection of established young players.  Guys like Bryant, Machado, Correa, Bogarts, etc.  You don't obtain players that might make you better in the future, you obtain the largest collection of value you could possibly haul.  

 

From the dogs it would be Puig, Urias, Seager, Deleon, Peterson

From the Cubs it would be Bryant, Schwarber, Kendrick, Russell, and Gleyber Torres

From the Red Sox it would be Bogaerts, Betts, Owens, Moncada, and others

From the Mets it would be Conforto, Matz, Syndergaard, d'Arnaud, etc.

From the Astros it would be Correa, Tucker, White, Bregman, Springer and McCullers.  

 

F prospects and future talent.  I would want current talent.  A haul so ridiculous it would absolutely decimate a solid young roster.  It would have to be so lopsided that no team would even remotely consider it.  On top of that, I would insist that the other team take Pujols and his entire salary.  So you'd need a stupid haul, and a team that can take on salaries of Trout and Pujols and you would need both of those guys to waive their NTC.  On top of that, even with a kings ransom, you'd still have to deal with considerable backlash and fan upheaval.  You would probably lose tremendous revenue regardless.  Seems realistic.  

 

Here is another way to think of it though.  Let's say you merely went the conventional route and traded Trout alone for a bunch of prospects and maybe an established you player or two.  Your net loss in team revenue would be insane.  Possible to the tune of 70-80 million dollars per season.  Close to a 40-50 million dollar delta per year.  Isn't revenue lost the same as money spent?  

 

So if you were going to take the hit on revenue to that level, wouldn't it make more sense to keep Trout and go out and spend that 50mil on players to help the team for the next 5 years?  

 

You only trade Trout in the second half of his walk year when it's clear you have absolutely zero chance of extending him beyond his current deal.  

 

The team has no intention of trading him ever.  It doesn't make financial sense, value sense, future sense, fan sense or common sense.  

 

Enjoy Mike Trout and hope they can get their crap together otherwise.  

 

All the things I am thinking but have no desire to write. Someone please paste the above post in the next ridiculous "trade Trout" thread. 

[LAAFANofLA]

I thought we were done with these threads

[Ohtaniland]

AJ I deleted your post by mistake because I'm a dumb shit. Hopefully another mod can restore it or you can just post it again.

I went to USC.

another mod???? TDawg is a mod ???? Great to see that @ngelswin is an equal opportunity employer.

[tdawg87]

Not really. I just have mod powers.

It's like when they allow special needs children to be the bat boy.