Why Trout would agree to an extension NOW.

[fan_since79]

1 hour ago, UndertheHalo said:

Uhh, because maybe next year he destroys his knee ?  Maybe he wants to get it over with ? 

There is risk assosciated with passing on potentially  380 million dollars of guaranteed money. 

 

Gonna be more like $400-450 million when the Yankees and Phillies, among others, get into it.

But yes, the smartest move is to extend him now for $380 million, nine years. So he gets his 40 mill per which is what he deserves.

 

Edited September 7, 2018 by fan_since79

[UndertheHalo]

9 minutes ago, fan_since79 said:

Gonna be more like $400-450 million when the Yankees and Phillies, among others, get into it.

But yes, the smartest move is to extend him now for $380 million, nine years. So he gets his 40 mill per which is what he deserves.

 

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again.  I don’t believe anyone is getting 40 million AAV.  I’ll believe it when I see it. 

[Angel Oracle]

1 hour ago, Troll Daddy said:

If he destroys his knee the Angels are screwed big time. I don’t think any of us like long term contracts. 

Isn't this franchise due for some freaking good luck for a freaking change?

[Angel Oracle]

13 minutes ago, UndertheHalo said:

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again.  I don’t believe anyone is getting 40 million AAV.  I’ll believe it when I see it. 

It does seem too large, but Trout himself is already making some $34 million/season from 2018-2020.   Even just 18% more takes him to $40 million.

[UndertheHalo]

2 minutes ago, Angel Oracle said:

It does seem too large, but Trout himself is already making some $34 million/season from 2018-2020.   Even just 18% more takes him to $40 million.

Ya but 18 to 20 % is a lot when you’re talking about a guy already making top money in the league.  It’s about the years I think.  I’m sure hell get close to 40 million.  Surpass it, I don’t see it.  Not even for Trout.   I think 37-38 million AAV is likely. 

We’ve got FS79 talking about 45 million.  Not going to happen. 

Edited September 7, 2018 by UndertheHalo

[stormngt]

2 hours ago, UndertheHalo said:

And yes of course if he cares about winning with the Angels, getting paid and having his situation squared away provides cost and roster certainty that helps the club. 

Theres a lot of reasons for him to sign now.  Both obvious and subtle. 

At the end of the day, Trout will be an Angel if he wants to be here.  Money isn’t going to be the issue.  If he wants to go east.  That’s what he wants.  There’s nothing the Angels can do about that.  Better to figure it out now and decide a course of action.  I think most everyone here agrees with that assesment. 

Exactly!  That's why I believe that if Trout declines an extension it would be a message that he will be leaving as a free agent.  Therefore we should trade him if he rejects an extension.

[Tank]

2 hours ago, floplag said:

IF hes truly serious about winning here, he should re-up now to let the other players know hes going to be here thats its ok to come here and build something.  

i think the obvious answer is so that he and i can continue to have lunch together on mondays.

[Troll Daddy]

Guaranteed money would be the reason or maybe he has a fondness for the Angels

 

[Troll Daddy]

16 minutes ago, stormngt said:

Exactly!  That's why I believe that if Trout declines an extension it would be a message that he will be leaving as a free agent.  Therefore we should trade him if he rejects an extension.

Difficult to trade Trout unless he wants to be traded ... he may follow in Harpers footsteps

[Angelsfan1984]

1 hour ago, floplag said:

Why was i thinking more like 270ish?  guess thats my bad.  Which also makes it even worse an idea though. 
You give one guy that much there is nothing left to build around it unless you have unlimited funds, which we do not 

How often do teams get to say they have the best player of a generation? Especially for the entirety of their career.

[floplag]

1 hour ago, Lou said:

I don't understand this point 

payroll is finite, simple. 

[floplag]

4 minutes ago, Angelsfan1984 said:

How often do teams get to say they have the best player of a generation? Especially for the entirety of their career.

I would rather way we won some titles personally.  Id rather they be with him than without, but the last few years have not been enjoyable baseball

[Angelsfan1984]

5 minutes ago, floplag said:

I would rather way we won some titles personally.  Id rather they be with him than without, but the last few years have not been enjoyable baseball

I agree. I just think that they could pay the dude and still put a contending team on the field. I think it has more to do with other aspects of the team than giving trout a few more million a season for long term. Trout is a beast, unfortunately he doesn't pitch or manage the BP. I mean maybe he can and we wouldn't even need a manager

[floplag]

2 minutes ago, Angelsfan1984 said:

I agree. I just think that they could pay the dude and still put a contending team on the field. I think it has more to do with other aspects of the team than giving trout a few more million a season for long term. Trout is a beast, unfortunately he doesn't pitch or manage the BP. I mean maybe he can and we wouldn't even need a manager

If that were true wed already have 3 titles this decade   
He is a beast, thats why he would have value, we as an org, and he as a player, need to make some long term decisions in the next few months 

[Angelsfan1984]

6 minutes ago, floplag said:

If that were true wed already have 3 titles this decade   
He is a beast, thats why he would have value, we as an org, and he as a player, need to make some long term decisions in the next few months 

Unfortunately I don't know if he would accommodate taking a little off the top to spread it around to make a better team, simply because of how those resources have been allocated. I think they need to get a lot more serious about spending on areas that will translate to actual wins. The starters and bp need to be addressed instead of giving guys like Cozart contracts like that. No more spending on mediocrity. Either bring up a rookie who can contribute or trade for a non one year wonder like cozart or non 30 something year old who was good 6 years ago.

[VariousCrap]

If I was the Angels, I'd offer him 10/380 with a player opt out option after five years.  If he declines it, you trade him.  Plain and simple.

 

 

 

[stormngt]

59 minutes ago, Troll Daddy said:

Difficult to trade Trout unless he wants to be traded ... he may follow in Harpers footsteps

If he doesnt want  be traded he would sign the extension. 

Harpers agent was Boros.  Outside of Weaver all of his clients test free agency.  If he goes the Harper route it's the Angel's front office fault.

[Lou]

2 hours ago, floplag said:

payroll is finite, simple. 

that doesn't explained how signing Trout for that amount results in us having nothing left. 

[Lou]

1 hour ago, stormngt said:

If he doesnt want  be traded he would sign the extension. 

Harpers agent was Boros.  Outside of Weaver all of his clients test free agency.  If he goes the Harper route it's the Angel's front office fault.

he may not want to be traded because he wants to hit free agency without having to bounce between teams 

[floplag]

17 minutes ago, Lou said:

that doesn't explained how signing Trout for that amount results in us having nothing left. 

We already have issues in that regard and its a higher value?

[Docwaukee]

1 minute ago, floplag said:

We already have issues in that regard and its a higher value?

he'd only make about 4-5 mil more per year than he does now and we've actually got money coming off the books. 

[Lou]

2 minutes ago, floplag said:

We already have issues in that regard and its a higher value?

about what, $5 million? that's going to leave us with nothing left? 

i strongly disagree 

[Lou]

or what doc said 

 

[floplag]

2 minutes ago, Dochalo said:

he'd only make about 4-5 mil more per year than he does now and we've actually got money coming off the books. 

and how would 5 mil more affect our cap space?  whats would be left to improve the club?  
why are we even having this discussion it should be obvious, i think some of you are letting what you want cloud your logic. 

[WeatherWonk]

5 hours ago, floplag said:

Sorry this somehow posted too soon for those who saw half the post, lol...

I was going to put this as a reply in another thread, but i though it would get more visibility as a new thread.

Weve seen a lot of talk and opinions about trading Trout, and one comment that struck me was that there were zero reasons for Trout to sign an extension now, as opposed to next year or waiting it out till FA.  

And there is one reason he should sign now, and that is is he is truly serious about winning HERE. 

IF he is truly serious about winning as an Angel, and he believes in the plan the front office is trying to work, then signing now makes perfect sense.  It tells the fans, and more importantly other FA that the club may try to get to play along side him that he isnt bolting in 2 years.

Think about it, if you are lets say Manny Machado, and the Angels approach you about a 6-8 year deal or whatever, part of that appeal is playing along side Trout.  It certainly isnt becasue we are winning anything of late, so why would those guys come here knowing he might not be here in 2 years and the team goes into the shitter?

IF hes truly serious about winning here, he should re-up now to let the other players know hes going to be here thats its ok to come here and build something.  

So, conversely, if he doesnt sign now, by your way of reasoning, he ISNT truly serious about winning here?

I think Mike Trout will be serious about winning wherever he goes. It's just seriously less likely that the Angels will be a winning team between now and 2020. Beyond that, no one can predict  how our farmhands develop. 

Even in the near term, at the likely time that the Angels will pursue an extension (mid 2019), he wont know if Calhoun or Simmons will be part of the Angels future. He wont know if Ohtani will ever be an effective pitcher again. That's three of the top five players on the current Angel roster (Trout and Upton being the other two). Whether the Angels will be an over .500 team is very much up in the air. This doesnt even address our biggest bugaboos, starting and relief pitching.

But imagine the excitement of joining an organization with a boatload of young talent like the Yankees, Phillies, the Red Sox or the Braves. He would likely have chances at the playoffs for multiple years, before some of them become free agents.

I think it not likely, from a competitive perspective, that he returns. Our odds of being seriously competitive are not great.