Jump to content
  • Welcome to AngelsWin.com

    AngelsWin.com - THE Internet Home for Angels fans! Unraveling Angels Baseball ... One Thread at a Time.

    Register today to comment and join the most interactive online Angels community on the net!

    Once you're a member you'll see less advertisements. If you become a Premium member and you won't see any ads! 

     

IGNORED

At what point do we lock Mike Trout up for life?


Recommended Posts

Good point Reveille, which is why I think an appropriate contract after 2014 for both sides would be say 6 years for $100 million.

Wells' contract ends after 2014, and thus that money can be used towards Trout's new deal.

Trout would then still only be 29 (30 in mid-season) to start his new contract after the 6 year contract concludes.

 

But, they should make sure to pay him several million in 2014, instead of just a million, if he continue to hit like this.

That would make negotiating the next contract easier.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

pujols first contract with the cards was 7/100 with an option of 16mil.  15mil is deferred til 2020. 

 

he had three years in the majors before he signed the deal.   Both were of similar (reported) ages at the time of their rookie years.

 

I think Trout will get 8/120 with a 25mil option and a 4-5mil buyout. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i like to see a well-established pattern, so i'd wait until after next season to start offering one of these mega-deals to him.

 

my running joke on here has always been 7/120. i'd start there with trout and see what he's looking for - but not until after next season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i like to see a well-established pattern, so i'd wait until after next season to start offering one of these mega-deals to him.

 

my running joke on here has always been 7/120. i'd start there with trout and see what he's looking for - but not until after next season.

I don't think the Angels will offer Trout a long term extension until after Vernon Wells is off the books due to luxury tax implications. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

isn't Vernon off the books for luxury taxes because he no longer is on the team?

Cash considerations sent to other teams in trades count against the luxury tax. Angels will be paying 1/3rd of Wells salary this year an almost all of it next year. Payouts were structured this way to help the Yankees get under their own luxury tax next year. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cash considerations sent to other teams in trades count against the luxury tax. Angels will be paying 1/3rd of Wells salary this year an almost all of it next year. Payouts were structured this way to help the Yankees get under their own luxury tax next year. 

Well in that case offer Trout a long term deal at the end of this year; just keep 2014 salary low enough to keep us under the salary cap.

 

The longer we wait to sign him long term, the less incentive he will have to sign with us.  Thus the more likelihood we lose him to FA.

 

I say lock him up sooner than later.  Just structure the contract appropriately.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well in that case offer Trout a long term deal at the end of this year; just keep 2014 salary low enough to keep us under the salary cap.

 

The longer we wait to sign him long term, the less incentive he will have to sign with us.  Thus the more likelihood we lose him to FA.

 

I say lock him up sooner than later.  Just structure the contract appropriately.

 

Structuring the contract to get around the tax is actually a loophole that only works in trades, not players on your team.

 

In general the tax is based on the average value of the contract, not the amount paid year by year. You don't get around it by backloading. If we offer Trout a 10 year $160M contract after this year, it counts against the Angels for $16M even if the payouts are structred to only actually give him league minimum in 2014. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd start at 10/180. It puts Mike and his agent's balls in a vice and basically says "here is 18 million a year for the next decade. You can take that, or make half that in arbitration in two years."

12/180, frontloaded

 

If you expect to incur luxury tax penalties it's better to frontload

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...