Rosenthal: The Angels don’t want to trade Mike Trout — so they need to make him an offer

[Jeff Fletcher]

21 minutes ago, Troll Daddy said:

Cool your jets ... this is just a baseball message board. No need to go into a rant lol Fletcher covers the team I follow him on Twitter. Just trying to see what he might know and share with us.

tight race  

 

I took it as that, not any kind of challenge. 

On this particular issue, I’m basing my opinion on these facts....

1. Any owner who has Mike Trout would want to keep him. It’s good business. Arte also seems to be loyal and likes names (Pujols, Hamilton) so I can’t see why he’d draw a financial line in the sand with Trout.

2. I know Trout, to some degree. I think he likes the Angels and I think he really believes they are doing what they can to win. I also think he’s smart enough to know that there are really only two places who can guarantee that you’ll win because they’ll always do whatever it takes: the Yankees and Red Sox. And he doesn’t seem to be the kind of guy who would really want that type of attention or scrutiny. 

If the Angels make him a fair offer sometime in the next 15-18 months, I think he’d probably take it. I certainly can’t say with 100 percent certainty but if I had to pick an outcome, I’d pick that one. 

Edited September 8, 2018 by Jeff Fletcher

[Docwaukee]

Initially I felt like this season was an important indicator of our future and whether Trout would sign here long term.   But that's just terrible logic on my part.  

If Trout is going to sign a 10 year deal with an opt out, then it's really about what the team is going to be during 2020-2023.  But let's not kid ourselves, it's also important what everyone else in our division will be during that time and I like our chances for that window if we can retain Trout.  

I think we've got as strong of an argument as any team that has the financial resources to sign him.  

So it's gonna come down to Mike wanting to play here.  

I do think he gives the halos at least 3 more years on top of his current deal ie a big time deal with an opt out.  I'd love to see the halos stretch that opt out to 4 years.  

I think we'll see the Machado and Harper deals get set and then I think Arte will come over the top of both for an appropriate record deal.  

  

 

 

[Glen]

1 hour ago, Jeff Fletcher said:

I took it as that, not any kind of challenge. 

On this particular issue, I’m basing my opinion on these facts....

1. Any owner who has Mike Trout would want to keep him. It’s good business. Arte also seems to be loyal and likes names (Pujols, Hamilton) so I can’t see why he’d draw a financial line in the sand with Trout.

2. I know Trout, to some degree. I think he likes the Angels and I think he really believes they are doing what they can to win. I also think he’s smart enough to know that there are really only two places who can guarantee that you’ll win because they’ll always do whatever it takes: the Yankees and Red Sox. And he doesn’t seem to be the kind of guy who would really want that type of attention or scrutiny. 

If the Angels make him a fair offer sometime in the next 15-18 months, I think he’d probably take it. I certainly can’t say with 100 percent certainty but if I had to pick an outcome, I’d pick that one. 

This post made my nipples blast.

[Blarg]

Better than viagra. 

[Glen]

Just imagine the next five years with Trout and Ohtani. That would be great.

[Stradling]

2 minutes ago, Glen said:

Just imagine the next five years with Trout and Ohtani. That would be great.

It’ll happen.  

[IEAngelsfan]

1 hour ago, Glen said:

Just imagine the next five years with Trout and Ohtani. That would be great.

I think that will be one of the selling points to Trout.  The Angels will have him and Ohtani as the base to build around with.  When you include Simmons and any other target players they bring in, that starts to look like a formidable offense.

I'm getting excited! 

[WeatherWonk]

On 9/6/2018 at 10:34 PM, Troll Daddy said:

Why would any team make a trade like you suggested for two years and $70M for Trout. You’ll never get a fair value from any team imo. 

 

If you were a team that felt it was only ONE BAT away from going to the WS, you might consider it.

At least it isnt an expensive, LONG TERM contract. And you just might get an inside track on re-signing him, if he likes the atmosphere.

[Troll Daddy]

3 hours ago, WeatherWonk said:

If you were a team that felt it was only ONE BAT away from going to the WS, you might consider it.

At least it isnt an expensive, LONG TERM contract. And you just might get an inside track on re-signing him, if he likes the atmosphere.

You be the GM of any team ... what would you give up for Trout’s contract 2yrs/$68M knowing the Angels have to get plus plus value in return.

[WeatherWonk]

1 minute ago, Troll Daddy said:

You be the GM of any team ... what would you give up for Trout’s contract 2yrs/$68M 

There are five teams that might be one player away from a WS , and who could improve their outfield, AND who could afford that contract for two years. That was my premise.

The Astros, the Dodgers, the Red Sox, the Yankees and the Cubs. I think the Phillies and the Braves are 2-3 years away, at least.

But I am not familiar enough with their entire 40 man rosters, or their farms, to suggest a trade. I just know that the Red Sox could replace JBJ, the Yankees have Gardner entering free agency and Hicks is gone in 2020, the Astros could replace Marisnick or Reddick, ANY of the Cubs outfielders and ANY of the Dodgers outfielders.

Of course, Trout is good enough to replace ANY of the outfielders on ANY of these teams but the Red Sox and the Yankees have outfielders that are untouchable because they are under control for a while still. 

The Astros are not hitting nearly as well this year. Their offense could certainly use the boost. But the Angels would be foolish to trade him within their division.

[Stradling]

No you’ll be called crazy because you are trading Trout and picking up a pretty big contract in return in Myers.

[BackUpTheTruck]

Just now, Stradling said:

No you’ll be called crazy because you are trading Trout and picking up a pretty big contract in return in Myers.

As opposed to Trout's big contract? With all of those pitching prospects we get in that trade, we could trade for Vlad Jr. or something.

[BackUpTheTruck]

@Stradling

Would you do that trade (in theory) if Upton and Renfroe were swapped?

[Stradling]

2 minutes ago, BackUpTheTruck said:

@Stradling

Would you do that trade (in theory) if Upton and Renfroe were swapped?

I don’t know enough about the Padres to say yes or no, but on the surface i would say no.  

[ettin]

On 9/8/2018 at 11:25 AM, Glen said:

This post made my nipples blast.

So no different than any other day.

[Troll Daddy]

Nationals should of traded Harper at the deadline ... they were in a tough spot. If the Angels ever do trade Trout ... 2020 trade deadline is the most likely time to trade him if the team is out of contention. 

[Lou]

26 minutes ago, Troll Daddy said:

Nationals should of traded Harper at the deadline ... they were in a tough spot. If the Angels ever do trade Trout ... 2020 trade deadline is the most likely time to trade him if the team is out of contention. 

@EnglishCop ?

[Ray McKigney]

16 minutes ago, Lou said:

@EnglishCop ?

 I'll take this one. Have, damn it!

[Troll Daddy]

39 minutes ago, Lou said:

@EnglishCop ?

If I’m being honest

[UndertheHalo]

I don’t understand the point of signing Trout and giving him an opt out after 2 or 3 years.  This uncertainty, even 2 years out is a headache now.  Why would they want to set themselves up for that win or else shit.  I doubt Mike Trout wants that.  I’m certain the Angels don’t.  I believe he will resign.  I believe it’s going to a 8-10 year deal in the 380 to 400 million range.  Arte Moreno is going to make Mike Trout his partner and I think it’s going to happen sometime in the next 6 months. 

Edited September 10, 2018 by UndertheHalo

[arch stanton]

3 hours ago, UndertheHalo said:

I don’t understand the point of signing Trout and giving him an opt out after 2 or 3 years.  This uncertainty, even 2 years out is a headache now.  Why would they want to set themselves up for that win or else shit.  I doubt Mike Trout wants that.  I’m certain the Angels don’t.  I believe he will resign.  I believe it’s going to a 8-10 year deal in the 380 to 400 million range.  Arte Moreno is going to make Mike Trout his partner and I think it’s going to happen sometime in the next 6 months. 

I like the idea of the 3 year opt out. It keeps him here for his peak years, gives him financial security with the freedom to bail if he doesn't like what he sees from the franchise. It always sounds great on the surface but locking yourself into an unbreakable 10 year relationship creates unnecessary expectation on both sides

[Lou]

On September 7, 2018 at 10:29 AM, well_red said:

there are basically zero baseball reasons for trout to agree to an extension this offseason.  there will also be a giant elephant in the room all next year if they put an offer on the table and he doesn't sign or drags his feet, that will be brought up in every press conference etc.  personally think they are better off seeing how the first half plays out next year.

I agree 

[yk9001]

7 minutes ago, Lou said:

I agree 

Ah, this is the good stuff.

[Blarg]

On 9/7/2018 at 7:41 AM, Troll Daddy said:

Any type of extension offer for Trout will come from Arte Moreno. Arte has given out two ten year contracts since he brought the team. Imo the Scioscia contract was a win for him and obviously the Pujols contract was a disaster for him. 

Will Arte be gun shy giving out another ten year deal? I think a 8 year extension, which keeps Trout in a Angels uniform until age 37, would be the limit with zero opt outs. If Trout wants opt outs I would try to reduce that to a 5/6 year extension. 

Trading Trout won’t happen period ... nor should it imo. 

 

Really wasn't far off. No opt outs and Trout is going to be an Angel two years longer than what Troll Daddy posted. The rest of you hacks that said trade Trout were wrong.