Angels renew Trout @ 510K. Agent mad?

[angelduck]

i suspect he isnt the average the 2nd year player...nobody KNOWS he isnt.

 

What? Are you trying to say Trout is the average second year player? How many second year players win ROY and should've won the MVP? He's the best player in baseball. You're argument is that we don't know what he will do next year...you can say that about anyone. Every player in baseball gets paid off of what they've done in the past; not the future (in most cases). In the past, Trout has won ROY and posted an 11 WAR season. The guy was worth 30 million+ last season.

[Wallerrrr]

How many 11 WAR seasons has anyone in the history of the game had? Not very many...

 

Trout is the best player in baseball and is making PBK money...that is fricken stupid. I'd be bitter if I was Trout

 

you b*tch about everything tho bro...so nothing new here.

$500k at 21 years old and in only his 2nd yr in the majors is nothing to sneeze at. In a year or so compare the contract of Trout and Bourjos...they wont be comparable

[Wallerrrr]

What? Are you trying to say Trout is the average second year player? How many second year players win ROY and should've won the MVP? He's the best player in baseball. You're argument is that we don't know what he will do next year...you can say that about anyone. Every player in baseball gets paid off of what they've done in the past; not the future (in most cases). In the past, Trout has won ROY and posted an 11 WAR season. The guy was worth 30 million+ last season.

 

re-read what i wrote. did i say Trout was the avg 2nd year player?

[angelduck]

you honestly think this will impact contract talks in 5 years or so?

i dont.

 

like i said...after another year of solid production then offer him the BIG contract...from a team standpoint that seems the smarter route

 

I think it might, and it's dumb to even take the risk. He's a generational type talent. Why risk it? I don't think they should have offered him a BIG contract this offseason. All I've said is that they should pay him a couple million more than the average second year player. He's earned it.

[Wallerrrr]

I think it might, and it's dumb to even take the risk. He's a generational type talent. Why risk it? I don't think they should have offered him a BIG contract this offseason. All I've said is that they should pay him a couple million more than the average second year player. He's earned it.

and from a team standpoint, after another year of production, there will be no doubt and it will be a smarter and safer investment.

[A Priest walks into Aybar]

Seems like they could have paid him a little more, considering what he means to the club... and that Harper is getting more money. But his time will come and will no doubt get extended for big money before his club control is up.

[ScottT]

Bryce Harper signed a 5 year contract that started in 2011.  Not comparable.  

[Brandon]

Problem #1: Most rookies do not win rookie of the year. Most rookes who win rookie of the year do not get serious consideration for MVP. Most rookies are not widely considered to be in the conversation for best player in baseball in their first season.

 

Problem #2: Some rookies who outperform their rookie contracts do get bumps. Pujols, Jeter, etc. Even Braun, who's bump was considered low, got a 16% increase. Braun's rookie year was not at the level of Trout's. I posted a link to Jeff Fletcher from the OCR's article on this. He gives a list of comparable players - Trout ranks at the bottom of pay bumps. The issue isn't whether the CBA requires a bump (it doesn't), the issue is that there *is* precedent for it and the Angels are saying the only precedent that matters is their precedent on payment by seniority (ie. First year players only receive a certain preset amount, regardless of quality of performance).

 

Problem #3: It's dangerous because these guys aren't robots. Sometime in the next few years, Trout will most likely be offered a long term deal by the Angels. If he does not like the way they've treated him in comparison with how other teams treat their players, he may decide this is an organization he does not wish to stay with. That may or may not happen. But why risk it?

 

Problem #4: It sets a bad precedent for first year players. They know coming into the Angels organization that even if they have an MVP level season, they will still be paid less than the same player having the same season on another team (Cardinals, for instance, gave Pujols 600,000 his second year when the minimum was 200,000 - Pujols had a good season, but probably still not quite as good as Trout's).

 

Problem #5: "It's not dangerous, it's the economic system of baseball. You don't see players giving back money to the owners when they don't perform."" In a word: Huh? What are you talking about? Does your employer require you or your coworkers to 'give back money' if any of you don't perform? Or, if you are an employer, do you require employees to 'give back money' when they don't perform? This statement seems nonsensical to me, and I'm lost as to why you even included it.

 

Let me clarify: Not suggesting they pay him 20 million, or even 5 million. But even bumping him up to 1 mil/1.5 mil would send a positive message that they appreciate his contributions. And it's laughable to suggest Arte can't afford that.

 

#1. Winning RoY does not guarantee success (up until the past five seasons look at the RoY's for both leagues and see guys like Bob Hamlin, Bobby Crosby, and Eric Hinske) and that you should just reject contracts. If conversations were worth a dollar amount, sure.

 

#2. There is also precedent that RoY players don't pan out and at the same time those players have nothing to do with Trout or his contract. If you simply base a business model around precedent you get what happened with the NFL and their CBA that now has a rookie cap. Like you said, the CBA doesn't require a bump, the team could do whatever it wants with regards to any additional pay.

 

#3. This whole portion is ridiculous. In your previous bullet you list a handful of players getting a bump but just iterated him getting treated in comparison to other rookies....if he was treated the same he wouldn't get a bump. I am glad you have insight to Trout and his feelings, even though he has indicated a few times other wise. Someone posted the Weaver example and with the way the Angels throw out heavy contract offers to premium players I really doubt they are going to take a lowball approach down the road.

 

#4 This is also ridiculous and your personal opinion than factual, it also relates to the bullet above. Players are more interested in playing well and staying up in the show rather than what their pay bump may potentially be if they have an above average rookie year.

 

#5. You are indicating someone with a signed contract should get pay above what they signed. I doubt you are also in other threads saying players with bloated contracts should give it back. 

 

If Arte simply gave out money simply because he can, I doubt he would be a billionaire. Your suggested business practice is a failing business model.

[ScottT]

He gave it out to Vernon Wells.  That's the absurdity of this in a nutshell.  We aren't talking about $80 million, $20 million, or even $2 million.

[AngelsAndRamsFan]

Well said Brandon. 

[Wallerrrr]

love the way Wells factors into EVERY conversation about a player...lol

[Erick McClendon]

Disrespectful by Dipoto and ignores past precedent in showing acknowledgement of last year's ROY win and general understanding that Trout was baseball's best position player last season.

Precedent:

http://m.ocregister.com/sports/trout-497608-year-angels.html

That's why Landis is ticked. 20,000 is a joke. Even 600k would be an improvement over 500k.

Dipoto has already ticked off Hunter (5 mil. offer reportedly) and Haren (6 mil. reported) by low balling them.

Now he's ticking off our best player of last year by basically treating him like a replacement level player.

Dipoto said this will not affect his ability to sign Trout in the future. Don't count on that, Jerry. That's why Pujols came here and Hamilton left Texas: their organization took them for granted. When Trout is a FA, someone is going to come in with a blank check and an offer to play CF and Trou will be gone.

Really upset with Dipoto today. Had a chance to send a message. Well, he did: We do not value our homegrown talent.

Dude WTF are you talking about. Texas and STL did not want thier 31+ yr old players at the money they got. Not disrespect just fiscal responsibility. As far as Trout goes what happened to him is nothing new. Just the fact that his agent bitched is what made it newsworthy. I never heard Neftali Feliz's agent whine after he won ROY and was getting paid slightly above players Min. ofcourse Trout had a great year but the Angels have no reason to go above what they are allowed to pay him

[ScottT]

Wells is relevant when illustrating what kind of money is being talked about.  It is penny pinching.  Why risk affecting future negotiations, everyone asking Trout about this.... over so little money? 

[angelduck]

Dude WTF are you talking about. Texas and STL did not want thier 31+ yr old players at the money they got. Not disrespect just fiscal responsibility. As far as Trout goes what happened to him is nothing new. Just the fact that his agent bitched is what made it newsworthy. I never heard Neftali Feliz's agent whine after he won ROY and was getting paid slightly above players Min. ofcourse Trout had a great year but the Angels have no reason to go above what they are allowed to pay him

 

Comparing Trout to Neftali Feliz...Hahahahahaha

[Brandon]

sh*t, really. half a million is nothing to sneeze at. like i said in another thread....if he puts up another season like he did in 2012 THEN offer him the fatty contract...

 

I wouldn't give him the fatty just yet, just another pay bump. It sucks for players that do come out of the gate blazing like Trout has potential to, but the biggest leverage clubs have is club control.

 

I definitely lock him up and offer him a huge contract to keep him a long time Angel around his arb years. Or maybe just handle it similar to Lincecum and give him hefty year salaries before locking him up long term (or maybe like Lincecum performance drops off and not throwing out the long term contract early is the smart business plan)

[Wallerrrr]

Wells is relevant when illustrating what kind of money is being talked about.  It is penny pinching.  Why risk affecting future negotiations, everyone asking Trout about this.... over so little money? 

 

the trade was made for Wells, we have to pay it. The team has Trout and can pay them what they chose to at this point...they dont HAVE to break the bank for him. How is waiting to see if he continues his amazing production a bad move? Why offer a crazy @ss contract now with only one season under the belt when you dont have to? From a business standpoint, if you dont have to invest why would you? Why not wait for another solid season before you break the bank? That makes sense...its business..the team has plenty of time to lock him up and pay him..there is no rush..unless you are an armchair GM of course.

[Erick McClendon]

Comparing Trout to Neftali Feliz...Hahahahahaha

You must have skipped reading comprehension in elementary school. Not comparing them, just saying that regardless of his rookie year performance that the MLBPA set it up like this so he should whine to them as opposed to the Angels...

[Justabitoutside]

you are bitter and you aint no trout

 

 

you are bitter and you aint no trout

Ok. This made me laugh.

[Wallerrrr]

I wouldn't give him the fatty just yet, just another pay bump. It sucks for players that do come out of the gate blazing like Trout has potential to, but the biggest leverage clubs have is club control.

 

I definitely lock him up and offer him a huge contract to keep him a long time Angel around his arb years. Or maybe just handle it similar to Lincecum and give him hefty year salaries before locking him up long term (or maybe like Lincecum performance drops off and not throwing out the long term contract early is the smart business plan)

agreed

[ScottT]

the trade was made for Wells, we have to pay it. The team has Trout and can pay them what they chose to at this point...they dont HAVE to break the bank for him. How is waiting to see if he continues his amazing production a bad move? Why offer a crazy @ss contract now with only one season under the belt when you dont have to? From a business standpoint, if you dont have to invest why would you? Why not wait for another solid season before you break the bank? That makes sense...its business..the team has plenty of time to lock him up and pay him..there is no rush..unless you are an armchair GM of course.

 

They didn't have to make the trade and pay Wells.  I've never suggested offering Trout a crazy @ss contract now.

[m0nkey]

I already penciled him in leaving for an east coast team. When he's a free agent

[ScottT]

The Angels' angle is that they treat all their young players the same.

 

Does anyone think Mark Trumbo, Peter Bourjos, or Erick Aybar would be upset if Trout got $750k?  Trout's season was so great, it isn't like future players could reasonably expect a raise like Trout got. 

[bloodbrother]

What's the problem here? All of this won't mean anything in the end. They will lock up Trout to a long term deal. Relax folks

[bdavis621]

I wish I had a job right now. Been unemployed for a year and a half and can't find anything. I certainly wouldn't cry over someone giving me a half a million dollars.

[ScottT]

Are you a skilled baseball player?