Timing of Trout and Organization Development

[Dtwncbad]

I think there have to be two big things on the minds of ownership and management.

1). having Mike Trout in an Angel uniform for his whole career

2). reaching a point where talent is grossly surging in the organization

I am guilty as anyone in wanting to not throw away 2017, but I have to believe ownership and management are trying to time these two things.  If they can stack up talent over the next couple of years to the point where the organization is at a peak of optimism going forward, and that coincides with Trout making a decision on staying or leaving through free agency, then they sand the best chance of achieving both.

For the Angels to keep Trout, he has to believe the best days are ahead and he doesn't want to miss those days after spending so much time with the Angels.  His legacy would be slightly damaged if he left and the Angels then went on to win without him.   Provided the money is close, I don't think he would want that to even be a possible story line.

So the key is to get the organization flush with young talent. . . 

I just have to hope they are competitive in the meantime, and I hope they have the nuts to make bold moves to accomplish this.  If the Angels are 7 games out at the trade deadline, I hope they have the guts to trade every expiring contract for prospects.

In the end, I want the Angels to win.  I can keep hoping for 2017 to be a miracle year, but I have to be patient and digest the reality that the big picture is more important.  It would be thrilling in 2-3 years if the Angels were bursting with young talent and extending Trout at the same time to be here through his extended prime.  Thrilling.

The Cubs have Bryant and a whole mess of other young talent around him.  They just won a ring and their best days still look to be ahead of them.  I am jealous.

I have to have patience.

[AngelsFanSince86]

The less competitive they are in the mean time, the more likely their farm system is to get flushed with talent.  Not that I hope for that.  Just something I wanted to point out.

 

My hope is that they draft well, that the guys they have already drafted make big strides and play to their potential, our pitchers come back from injuries and perform well, and that we get a few Kole Calhouns along the way.  If those things hold true we can stay competitive and still get solid talent from the farm.  And that means when that talent comes through it will push the Angels to the top rather than just bringing them out of the bottom in terms of competitiveness.

[nikkachez]

Need guys like Jahmai and Thaiss to come up and provide boosts to the organization in upcoming years, making a couple of free agent splashes would also help. Having some of his good friends (Garrett and Pujols) around would seem to help as well. My dream is a starting 9 of Trout, Jahmai, Kole, Andrelton, Moustakas, Cron/Thaiss, Pujols, and then a smorgasbord for catcher and second base in a few years. 

[Angelsjunky]

51 minutes ago, AngelsFanSince86 said:

The less competitive they are in the mean time, the more likely their farm system is to get flushed with talent.  Not that I hope for that.  Just something I wanted to point out.

This isn't really true, though, or at least beyond the first round pick. Yes, having a bad year gets a team a top 10 pick, but after that it comes down to savvy drafting. My point being, whether a team gets the #5 pick or the #25 pick doesn't decide whether the system is "flushed with talent." It might differentiate top prospects, but being flush has to do with intelligent drafting and scouting.

[ettin]

Agree with AJ here that growing the team and getting "flush with talent" is driven primarily and heavily by solid drafts. This team is built to compete this year, winning should always be priority #1 with the amount of payroll we carry and Eppler is clearly trying to win this season.

All that being said if we hit the trade deadline and we are behind by a significant number of games we will not be in a position to add any pieces at that time with how weak our farm system is so we will need to be close (I'm thinking within 5 games or so) if we want to not sell off. Even if we do sell off the players we have they will probably only bring back solid to good prospect(s) (not top tier) or role player types to supplement our team (which is fine).

Yes I am sure that Trout as we creep towards 2020 will look around at the state of the team and will make a decision that is best for his goals (whether that is a World Series, money, whatever) but I really think we have a great shot at retaining him in an Angels uniform for the rest of his career. One thing Jeter did say to Mike at one point was that he really enjoyed being in one uniform his whole career (and it wasn't specifically about the Yankees just a comment to him about stability). As we have already discussed ad nauseum in other threads I think a Mike Trout record breaking extension will happen in the near future (next year or 2018-2019).

[Angelsjunky]

As for Trout and remaining with the Angels long term, I see three options:

1. He loves being an Angel and will re-sign as long as the price is competitive and the organization is going in the right direction.

2. He's mixed and it really depends upon money and/or where the org is in a few years.

3. Deep down he's always planned on going back east and playing for the Phillies or Yankees and will leave no matter what.

With 1 all they have to do is write him a big check and keep heading in the right direction, which Eppler seems to be doing. The Angels can't do anything 3 as it is completely out of their (and our) control. 2 is where it is tricky and regardless of which option is more true for Trout, you have to assume that it is 2 - and that means focusing on building a long-term contender and being willing to give him the contract he deserves.

My guess is that 2 is the truest answer, but that he veers closer to 3 than 1, unfortunately.

[Junkballer]

I tend to think that Trout is an east coast guy and that will be a factor that will, to an unknown degree, sway how he feels about the Angels when he is free to choose from any offer.  That being said, there isn't much the Angels can do about that other than do their best to make playing here fun for him.  I doubt if he'll be looking at the health of the farm system, up and coming talent and he won't give a damn about the economics that limit Eppler to an internal 165m-ish cap.  I think he'll remember the years 2018-2020 for whether, in his mind, the Angels went all out to win a title.  I'm not advocating reckless spending nor am I advocating anything in this post but I do think that the Angels are handicapped by Trouts New Jersey roots and family location and will have to try to erase the memory of the clean peanut finding years by becoming somewhat of a powerhouse in order to keep him.

[gotbeer]

Trout is at the Eagles ballgame all the time.  Look at the Phillies organization.  Historically, they have spent with the big boys.  All of a sudden, they have a Marlinesque payroll.  They are accumulating top 10, and number 1 picks like crazy.  Again, you can stick your head in the sand, and not believe.  But to me, what the OP posted is exactly what the Phillies seem to be doing for the winter of 2020.

[Thomas]

16 minutes ago, gotbeer said:

Trout is at the Eagles ballgame all the time.  Look at the Phillies organization.  Historically, they have spent with the big boys.  All of a sudden, they have a Marlinesque payroll.  They are accumulating top 10, and number 1 picks like crazy.  Again, you can stick your head in the sand, and not believe.  But to me, what the OP posted is exactly what the Phillies seem to be doing for the winter of 2020.

Considering where the Phillies were this was the right thing to do regardless of Trout. But a side effect of being able to afford Trout as you said is a nice perk to the plan.

[AngelsFanSince86]

3 hours ago, Angelsjunky said:

This isn't really true, though, or at least beyond the first round pick. Yes, having a bad year gets a team a top 10 pick, but after that it comes down to savvy drafting. My point being, whether a team gets the #5 pick or the #25 pick doesn't decide whether the system is "flushed with talent." It might differentiate top prospects, but being flush has to do with intelligent drafting and scouting.

Yeah, that is why I said "more likely".  It all comes down to how you draft.  However, if you are a savvy drafter, you are going to end up with more talent when you have higher draft picks.  If you are poor at drafting, you are still most likely going to end up with more talent if you have higher picks.  That was my only point to his statement that he wants to remain competitive while also trying to flush the farm with talent.  Even if you draft intelligently, you still have a list of players you want and the higher your pick the more likely you are to get those players.

I do hope they stay competitive though and I hope that time shows us that Eppler is a savvy drafter.  I hope that Cron and Marte progress and that Jones and Thaiss can progress into top prospect status.  I hope that our pitchers can make good come backs and I hope that Trout is extended before his contract is up.  If all that happens the Angels will be an elite team a few years from now when the prospects hit the MLB, Trout is in his prime, all pitchers are healthy, and possibly a solid signing or two is made from the 2018/19 FA class.

We'll see.

 

[Troll Daddy]

Team first / Trout second

Trout is the face of the Angels but he's also the face of baseball. Angels should do everything within reason to extend his contract. It would be the greatest gift to the fans to see him retire with the Angels and wear our hat into the HOF. 

[Angelsjunky]

I just don't think we can rely too much on the first round pick. Several organizations have great farm systems but rarely get high draft picks because they rarely have bad years. The Red Sox come to mind. Before the Sale trade, the Red Sox had five prospects who John Sickels put in his year-end top 100 (the Angels have zero). Here is how the Red Sox got them, with Sickels' rankings at the end of 2016:

1. Moncada A, 2B. International singing.

6. Benintendi A, OF. 1st round, 7th pick, of 2015 draft.

10. Rafael Devers A-, 3B. International signing.

56. Michael Kopech B+, SP. 1st round, 33rd pick, of 2014 draft.

65. Jason Groome B+, SP. 1st round, 12th pick, of 2016 draft.

So three 1st round picks and two international signings. Only one of the picks was a top 10 1st rounder, Benintendi - and he was only 7th. Sickels now considers him the top prospect in all of baseball, by the way. All five of these guys would be considered the top prospect in the Angels organization, or at least Groome right there with Thaiss and Jones.

Anyhow, the Red Sox aren't perfect but that's a pretty nice group of prospects, two of whom got them one of the top starters in all of baseball. The point is, you don't need a top 5--or even top 10--pick to have a deep and strong farm system. You need good scouting and smart picks, domestic and international (the latter of which the Angels suck at).

[mrwicked]

9 minutes ago, Angelsjunky said:

I just don't think we can rely too much on the first round pick. Several organizations have great farm systems but rarely get high draft picks because they rarely have bad years. The Red Sox come to mind. Before the Sale trade, the Red Sox had five prospects who John Sickels put in his year-end top 100 (the Angels have zero). Here is how the Red Sox got them, with Sickels' rankings at the end of 2016:

1. Moncada A, 2B. International singing.

6. Benintendi A, OF. 1st round, 7th pick, of 2015 draft.

10. Rafael Devers A-, 3B. International signing.

56. Michael Kopech B+, SP. 1st round, 33rd pick, of 2014 draft.

65. Jason Groome B+, SP. 1st round, 12th pick, of 2016 draft.

So three 1st round picks and two international signings. Only one of the picks was a top 10 1st rounder, Benintendi - and he was only 7th. Sickels now considers him the top prospect in all of baseball, by the way. All five of these guys would be considered the top prospect in the Angels organization, or at least Groome right there with Thaiss and Jones.

Anyhow, the Red Sox aren't perfect but that's a pretty nice group of prospects, two of whom got them one of the top starters in all of baseball. The point is, you don't need a top 5--or even top 10--pick to have a deep and strong farm system. You need good scouting and smart picks, domestic and international (the latter of which the Angels suck at).

and they made the tough yet wise decision to jettison off their overpaid albatross contracts (nearly $300m off the books in one move), and suck for a year or two while they rebuild. 

[Troll Daddy]

Angels could always trade Trout now for some of the best prospects in baseball. Build a elite team to compete in 2021 and sign Trout as a free agent with the $100 million plus they save and Pujols's contract ready to expire. 

 who's in?

[ettin]

4 minutes ago, mrwicked said:

and they made the tough yet wise decision to jettison off their overpaid albatross contracts (nearly $300m off the books in one move), and suck forever a year or two while they rebuild. 

Fixed!

[Angelsjunky]

I'm not into trading Trout unless it is 2020 and the Angels are absolutely certain they can't re-sign him. He's the best Angel that most, if not all, of us will ever see in our lives.

That said, if it is mid-2020 and the Angels suck, maybe they should listen to offers.

[totdprods]

The Yankees and Phillies will be the ones to watch. Both will be able to offer hometown turf, hitter-friendly ballparks, and likely a legit shot at winning based on the current state of their farm. They'll likely have the payroll flexibility too. Conversely, they'll also likely have the farm systems and young players worth acquiring in a Trout trade, should that scenario become likely in a couple years.

That said, I really think it is just far too early to really speculate either way. So much can change in two years, let alone four. I don't feel Trout is tradeable under any circumstances until after 2018 at the absolute earliest. I don't think the team should engage in any extension talks until that time too - seeing the current state of the team, it'd almost be offensive to try and convince Trout to try and stay here right now, coming off as an obvious ploy to win him over solely with money. And while I don't mean to slight Trout in any way, we have seen how poorly long-term contracts work out for aging vets. I'll probably get shredded for this, but it may be worth it to wait a couple years to get a better idea at how Trout projects rather than risk doing the Pujols contract all over again. 

The key I think is maximizing Trout's future; be in by trading him at the right time or signing him to the most sensible contract/extension. Letting him walk or losing him in FA seems like an extraordinarily painful result. 

[gotbeer]

52 minutes ago, Angelsjunky said:

I just don't think we can rely too much on the first round pick. Several organizations have great farm systems but rarely get high draft picks because they rarely have bad years. The Red Sox come to mind. Before the Sale trade, the Red Sox had five prospects who John Sickels put in his year-end top 100 (the Angels have zero). Here is how the Red Sox got them, with Sickels' rankings at the end of 2016:

1. Moncada A, 2B. International singing.

6. Benintendi A, OF. 1st round, 7th pick, of 2015 draft.

10. Rafael Devers A-, 3B. International signing.

56. Michael Kopech B+, SP. 1st round, 33rd pick, of 2014 draft.

65. Jason Groome B+, SP. 1st round, 12th pick, of 2016 draft.

So three 1st round picks and two international signings. Only one of the picks was a top 10 1st rounder, Benintendi - and he was only 7th. Sickels now considers him the top prospect in all of baseball, by the way. All five of these guys would be considered the top prospect in the Angels organization, or at least Groome right there with Thaiss and Jones.

Anyhow, the Red Sox aren't perfect but that's a pretty nice group of prospects, two of whom got them one of the top starters in all of baseball. The point is, you don't need a top 5--or even top 10--pick to have a deep and strong farm system. You need good scouting and smart picks, domestic and international (the latter of which the Angels suck at).

you totally lost the Angels when you listed 2 people in the top 10 that were a result of international signing.  The closest the Angels will get to that is if they sign IHOP to be a advertising sponsor.

[Angelsjunky]

18 minutes ago, gotbeer said:

you totally lost the Angels when you listed 2 people in the top 10 that were a result of international signing.  The closest the Angels will get to that is if they sign IHOP to be a advertising sponsor.

Ouch. But lol.

[totdprods]

3 minutes ago, 70runner said:

Not trade-able but perhaps can opt-out of his contract now under Section 2855 of the California Labor Code.

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/how-mike-trout-could-legally-become-a-free-agent/

Meh. If he was Harper I'd be worried. Trout seems far too humble and down to Earth to make a move so blatantly attributed to going after more money - it'd contrast quite starkly with his public image. Even if it was doable I can't see that having any legs.

[70runner]

Saw the other thread so deleted it.  Interesting read anyway...

[Dugout]

 Drafts are often won or lost in the 5-10th rounds. Even I could pick a stud or two in the first 2 rounds.

Real scouting kicks in when you start drafting guys that were not so obvious how good they were gonna be

one day. So After Griffey, A-Rod, and Harper are gone there are still plenty of gems in the pile, we just need

our new amateur scouting director to find them.

[Brent Maguire]

I imagine Trout would love to test free agency, not because he wants to slight the Angels but because he'll have numerous teams throwing 400+ million dollars at him. That said, if the Angels have turned things around by 2018, the MLB club is competing and the farm is revamped, the team should be throwing a huge offer at Trout that he can't refuse.

It's easy to say he wants to go back East to play at home but if you're offered 450 million dollars over 10 years a year and a half before you reach free agency, is that easy to pass up? Obviously, his current 144.5 million dollar contract and his endorsements have set him up for life but I can't imagine he'll want to turn down a mega deal. Plus, he comes across as the type of guy who wants to remain with 1 team for a whole career(like his idol Jeter) so it may be an easy sell to lock him up for the rest of his career. 

Tots also brought up a very good point about waiting this out. The Angels have the best player in baseball locked up in his prime until 2020 on an extremely fair deal. As incredible as he is, what happens if he gets hurt before that time comes or he declines to be a 5-6 win player rather than a 9+ win superstar? That's not likely but it's possible. You run the risk of pushing towards that luxury tax every year for the foreseeable future by locking Trout up now and if he's declining by the time 2020 rolls around, well you're screwed. 

[arch stanton]

Giving Trout that much money puts the team in perpetual state of waiting for the GMJ/Wells/Hamilton contract to expire, financially speaking. Certainly they can work around it and he's as good a bet as any to be worth the money but it leaves a 10 year window with little margin for error. I don't think that's a bad thing as long as they don't get too gun shy about who else they're willing to pay.

[ELEVEN]

Should've gone for the 13 year deal when it was offered.