I've been resisting it, but...we're gonna lose Trout

[stormngt]

22 minutes ago, Dochalo said:

why does he owe that to the team?  It's been a mutually beneficial relationship.  Probably more one sided toward the team and Arte making a ton of money off their golden goose.  

Arte has to do what's right for the franchise and Mike Trout has to do what's best for his business/brand long term.  If that means to keep the halos on the hook as a potential suitor, then so be it.  

I wouldn't blame him for that at all.  

It's called loyalty.  Maybe you haven't heard of it.   You must not think Trump is a guy with great character.  Because a guy with character would let his current team know if he intends on leaving.  I personally dont think he is that type of a dick!  

 

[Stradling]

4 minutes ago, Ron Mexico said:

If Trout says No to a Extension do the Halos trade him or do they go the Nationals route with Harper and let him walk for nutin? I don't think there is any question you have to trade him if he says No and get someone's top 6 prospects plus MLB starting pitching.. 

This isn’t real life.  

[Stradling]

24 minutes ago, Ron Mexico said:

What's real life to you ?

It’s not pretending the Angels can get a teams top 6 prospects AND MLB pitching.  Could you get 6 prospects for Trout, sure.   Maybe 3-4 will be in the top 100.   

[Docwaukee]

1 hour ago, stormngt said:

It's called loyalty.  Maybe you haven't heard of it.   You must not think Trump is a guy with great character.  Because a guy with character would let his current team know if he intends on leaving.  I personally dont think he is that type of a dick!  

 

You obviously haven't heard of a dictionary because you clearly don't know the definition of loyalty.  He's leaving.  He needs to be loyal to his business/brand.  An evaporating skill.  

How is he a dick if he's more concerned about the long term health of his family vs the future success of his former team and giving a billionaire an opportunity to further pad his pockets?

If he came out and clearly stated that he wanted to play for the Angels and had no interest in any other team, do you think the Angels would use that to their advantage?  You can bet Trump's muskrat helmet they would.  

[Docwaukee]

7 minutes ago, Stradling said:

It’s not pretending the Angels can get a teams top 6 prospects AND MLB pitching.  Could you get 6 prospects for Trout, sure.   Maybe 3-4 will be in the top 100.   

that's probably about right.  He's worth double what Realmuto fetched.  There are probably two teams that could pay that out without damaging the mlb club.  

actually, I am not sure about that now that I think about it.  I would want the best young player from any team plus at least 3 top prospects.  

[Tank]

18 hours ago, Lou said:

Trout isn't going anywhere 

What assurances can you give us? I mean, are you playing xbox with him or does your neighbors cousins barber cut Mikes hair? We need to know!

[UndertheHalo]

Mike Trout isn’t going to go free agency and then come back to the Angels.  The writing will be on the wall.  They need to sign him in the next 12 months or it’s probably not going to happen.   

[m0nkey]

There’s so much talk nationally about him going to philly that it just makes sense he’ll end up re-signing. 

 

And if he leaves, I look forward to everyone saying the angels dodged a bullet by avoiding a long term contract with an aging player. 

[m0nkey]

3 hours ago, stormngt said:

It's called loyalty.  Maybe you haven't heard of it.   You must not think Trump is a guy with great character.  Because a guy with character would let his current team know if he intends on leaving.  I personally dont think he is that type of a dick!  

 

Teams don’t have loyalty. A player will sign a contract with a team, expecting to stay there the duration of the contract yet the team will trade their ass the second they get a favorable deal. 

[floplag]

14 hours ago, Dochalo said:

@floplag

thanks for the small apology

your welcome

[stormngt]

17 hours ago, Dochalo said:

You obviously haven't heard of a dictionary because you clearly don't know the definition of loyalty.  He's leaving.  He needs to be loyal to his business/brand.  An evaporating skill.  

How is he a dick if he's more concerned about the long term health of his family vs the future success of his former team and giving a billionaire an opportunity to further pad his pockets?

If he came out and clearly stated that he wanted to play for the Angels and had no interest in any other team, do you think the Angels would use that to their advantage?  You can bet Trump's muskrat helmet they would.  

Wow, this is the stupidest  comment I have ever read.  

DO NOT TELL ME I DONT KNOW THE DEFINITION OF LOYALTY!  I have been preached the value of loyalty by my father who has had incredible success in sports because of his commitment to loyalty.  I have taken those values and had personal success on the basis of loyalty.  

Second please follow the entire thread before commenting on it with such great disdain!  Trout is not disloyal if he signs with another team.  I have never suggested that!  He does not owe loyalty to the Angel's to sign an extension.  

He does owe the Angels the loyalty to let them know that for good of his family he is looking to leave for another franchise.  Yes he would be disloyal if he plans on leaving yet does not inform the Angels.  And yes I think he is disloyal and a dick if he intends on leaving and still block a trade by the Angel's.  (This has been the premise of the conversation)

I do not think Trout is disloyal or a dick.  I believe the Angel's will give them their best offer.  Trout will probably sign the extension because I believe Trout likes playing for the Angels.  However Trout could tell the Angel's no thanks and the Angel's should look to trade him.  And I do not think Trout will be a dick and exercise his no trade clause.

 

Please understand the details before commenting!

 

 

[Lou]

[Docwaukee]

54 minutes ago, stormngt said:

He does owe the Angels the loyalty to let them know that for good of his family he is looking to leave for another franchise. 

no.  he doesn't and it doesn't make him disloyal.  

I think you are misusing the term as it pertains to the given example.   In this case it would be somewhat courteous for him to tell the team but if he feels like it weakens his bargaining position or leverage then he could choose not to and I don't think he should be faulted for it.  

you've gotten riled up about nothing.  I've made no insinuation about whether you are a loyal person because it's not relevant and I don't care.  

 

19 hours ago, stormngt said:

It's called loyalty.  Maybe you haven't heard of it.

this was your original statement.  

agree to disagree or you can continue to get personal and get put in time out.  

[Lou]

too late, doc. I already said DAAAAMN!

[AngelsLakersFan]

1 hour ago, stormngt said:

  And I do not think Trout will be a dick and exercise his no trade clause.

Why is he a dick if he exercises his contractually negotiated no trade clause?

[Troll Daddy]

18 hours ago, Stradling said:

It’s not pretending the Angels can get a teams top 6 prospects AND MLB pitching.  Could you get 6 prospects for Trout, sure.   Maybe 3-4 will be in the top 100.   

The Mariners would gladly trade their six top prospects and throw in a ML pitcher. 

[m0nkey]

I love storm

[stormngt]

18 minutes ago, Dochalo said:

no.  he doesn't and it doesn't make him disloyal.  

I think you are misusing the term as it pertains to the given example.   In this case it would be somewhat courteous for him to tell the team but if he feels like it weakens his bargaining position or leverage then he could choose not to and I don't think he should be faulted for it.  

you've gotten riled up about nothing.  I've made no insinuation about whether you are a loyal person because it's not relevant and I don't care.  

 

this was your original statement.  

agree to disagree or you can continue to get personal and get put in time out.  

Let understand your point:

If Trout decides he wants to play closer to home or if he feels he cant win with the Angels and wants to sign elsewhere, you are saying it's perfectly fine for Trout to veto any trade (even though he plans on leaving anyway) or you are fine that he leads the Angel's on and let them think the team has a chance to extend him 

That isnt disloyal to you?

[stormngt]

17 minutes ago, AngelsLakersFan said:

Why is he a dick if he exercises his contractually negotiated no trade clause?

Do you ever read the entire context?

He is a dick if he decides he no longer wants to be an Angel.  And he then enforces his no trade clause.  

In this scenario Trout is leaving anyway.  The only reason for him to exercise the no trade clause is because he wants to screw the Angels!

THAT IS WHY HE WOULD BE A DICK!

[Tank]

storm, it might be time to step outside and play with the three dimensional people for a little bit, buddy.

[floplag]

30 minutes ago, stormngt said:

Do you ever read the entire context?

He is a dick if he decides he no longer wants to be an Angel.  And he then enforces his no trade clause.  

In this scenario Trout is leaving anyway.  The only reason for him to exercise the no trade clause is because he wants to screw the Angels!

THAT IS WHY HE WOULD BE A DICK!

That isnt 100% true.  If we tried to trade him to Seattle for example, not where he wants to be geographically speaking, he likely would use his power to block it, versus us trading him to Philly.   I wouldnt consider that a dick move at all. 
I also dont think if he leaves its him saying he doesnt want to be an Angel per se, that would depend on the why.  If its about lifestyle, so be it, if its because we arent winning, well thats on us.  

[AngelsLakersFan]

42 minutes ago, stormngt said:

Do you ever read the entire context?

He is a dick if he decides he no longer wants to be an Angel.  And he then enforces his no trade clause.  

In this scenario Trout is leaving anyway.  The only reason for him to exercise the no trade clause is because he wants to screw the Angels!

THAT IS WHY HE WOULD BE A DICK!

So if the Angels try and trade him to another place he doesn't want to play, and he has negotiated the ability to block that trade that makes him a dick? Just because you don't want to work for your current employer it doesn't make you a dick for turning down a situation you find less desirable.

[Jay]

2 minutes ago, AngelsLakersFan said:

So if the Angels try and trade him to another place he doesn't want to play, and he has negotiated the ability to block that trade that makes him a dick?

It would probably be as a one-year rental but that's a different subject...

 

[HaloCory22]

1 hour ago, stormngt said:

Let understand your point:

If Trout decides he wants to play closer to home or if he feels he cant win with the Angels and wants to sign elsewhere, you are saying it's perfectly fine for Trout to veto any trade (even though he plans on leaving anyway) or you are fine that he leads the Angel's on and let them think the team has a chance to extend him 

That isnt disloyal to you?

I don't think that's disloyal. He's just using one of the tools provided to him in the contact extension the Angels gave him. Shouldn't have given him a no trade clause if they were worried about that to begin with. Which makes me believe Trout has zero intention of doing that and never gave the Angels any intention of doing that when he signed the deal.

 

If he's leaving for sure and we have a trade in place to lock down a few pieces and he decides to veto it then oh well. It'll suck, sure, but he's more than earned the right to do that at this point. Not like it's Josh Hamilton's contract we're trying to deal away.

[fan_since79]

3 hours ago, Ron Mexico said:

This would be the Nightmare of All Nightmares, It would set The  Halos  back for years to come...

If you want a nightmare, stick around as a fan for forty years.

 

But we did win the World Series. That's the only thing that's kept me sane.