Bill James on trading Trout

[T.G.]

Who is that?

[Angelsjunky]

39 minutes ago, ettin said:

So I do believe this, when it comes to Trout, but this was also a similar argument that was made prior to extending Albert Pujols (which I think was, in hindsight, a mistake for a 1B/DH type of player).

Well, there were two huge differences:

One, Trout was younger. Even if we buy Pujols' official age (I don't), then he was given a contract for his age 32-41 seasons. Trout's 12 year contract was age 27-38.

Two, when Trout was extended for the 2019 season, there was no sign of decline. In fact, 2018 was his best hitting year.

Pujols was going to be 32 in 2012, and had shown signs of decline as early as 2010 (I once researched this, and his performance was diminished from about May through July of 2010, then he finished hot to bring his numbers back up) - or at least clearly in 2011. Trout had just turned 27 in late 2018 and got that 12-year contract in March of 2019...so five years younger than Pujols, or a three-year difference if you account for age and contract length. So it was kind of as if Albert was given 7 years instead of 10.

And none of that considers the possibility that Albert is actually 2-3 years older than advertised. The infamous interview where he got his age "wrong" didn't come out until after that contract, but there were rumors before. But Arte was desperate to make a big splash, and also wanted his Hispanic superstar to drive ticket sales.

[floplag]

Well, hes not wrong, but its moot unless Trout wants it to happen.
To be clear, i dont want it to happen, i want this team to make a run wih him, and extend Ohtani and do what it takes to get to the next level, BUT.. if ownership isnt willing to do that then yes, you consider both him and Ohtani. 
No, youll never get value, but what you get will have a lot of value and will certainly be better than nothing.
There are teams that would jump at the chance, and frankly i think he deserves that chance if were not willing to give it to him.
This team needs to either take the next step, or rebuild, this wishy washy in the middle things is achieving nothing.  And at this point i have no faith that Arte is even considering taking any steps based on his actions in recent years.
All that having been said, he wont do so as it would hurt revenue, which i beleive is all he really covets, not winning.   
We thought we got a savior owner, we got played.   Unril he proves me wrong, this is where i am. 

[Angelsjunky]

2 hours ago, Second Base said:

What you're referring to without knowing it are micro adjustments versus macro. Trout needs to make smaller adjustments right now, just like he would when he's slump busting. But changing his entire game, he doesn't need to do that right now, at age 30. 

And no, Willie Mays wasn't facing that kind of velocity. The documentary "fastball" that indicated Walter Johnson threw 104-107 mph side arm for 200 pitches a game was laughably inaccurate and has been proved as such. Most people don't realize this, but his first died tests in 1912 measured Walter Johnson to throw an 84 mph fastball multiple times, and this was thought to be the fastest pitch ever thrown. The modern inaccuracy as it were was not understanding the speed of film and microseconds missing between moving pictures of old film. Even going back to Koufax, who people thought threw the ball harder than anyone ever was likely sitting 93-95, not the 99 that was inaccurately measured. Given the variables you could subject anywhere from 4-11 mph off those readings. And that's the elite velocity of his day, the 1960's, which made up the majority of Mays' career (he played until 1973). So to say Mays faced pitchers that threw 95 is misleading. He may have faced one or two. The vast majority threw 85-90. Even looking back to the 1980's, the average fastball was around 88. In the 1990's it was 92. In the early 2000's it was 93. Today, the average is still around 94, but the difference is there are more outliers throwing 100 than there ever were because of the rise of the reliever. 

So to suggest Trout is facing velocity that's 5-10 mph harder than Mays at minimum, is accurate. It's probably choose to 10-12 mph harder. Now obviously Mays has to deal with unnatural ball movement from everything they lathered on the ball back then, but if we're strictly talking a high fastball, the difference is pretty stark. 

Alright, fair enough. I haven't looked into speeds in as much detail as you. I do think, however, that one clear aspect of baseball history is the back and forth between pitchers and hitters. Pitching goes up, then hitting adjusts (or MLB adjusts - like reducing the mounds in the late 60s, or the smaller ballparks of today).

So some of this might just be unlucky timing for Trout. This year has seen offense down, and Trout is coming back after an injury hiatus. 

But still...whether we're talking about micro or macro adjustments, Trout doesn't seem to even be making the micro ones, thus his extended slumps. As I illustrated in another post, in previous years--I used 2019, his last full year as an example--his slumps were very short, and even when he was slumping he was taking walks, so he didn't have as many "zero value games" in which he never got on base. Now his typical bad game is 0-4 with 3 Ks and no walks; in 2019 and before, it might be 0-3 with a walk and an SB, so he was still creating two bases.

But my point is that on one hand you say he's declining right now, but on the other he probably won't need to make a big adjustment until he's 34 or so. 

What I'm saying is I'm not sure he's actually declining, but his problem may mostly be psychological. As I also pointed out in that other thread, he's actually having a higher percentage of huge games this year than in 2019...so his great games are as good (or better) than ever, and more frequent, but his lows are just a lot lower and more extended...and the most obvious culprit is the huge decline in walks. He's on pace for about 70 this year, assuming he keeps his pace and plays 140 games. Normally he'd be in the 110-120. That's 40-50 fewer walks than expected.

[Angelsjunky]

21 minutes ago, True Grich said:

Who is that?

Sigmund Freud.

[T.G.]

35 minutes ago, Angelsjunky said:

Sigmund Freud.

Can he pitch?

[Second Base]

2 hours ago, Angelsjunky said:

Alright, fair enough. I haven't looked into speeds in as much detail as you. I do think, however, that one clear aspect of baseball history is the back and forth between pitchers and hitters. Pitching goes up, then hitting adjusts (or MLB adjusts - like reducing the mounds in the late 60s, or the smaller ballparks of today).

So some of this might just be unlucky timing for Trout. This year has seen offense down, and Trout is coming back after an injury hiatus. 

But still...whether we're talking about micro or macro adjustments, Trout doesn't seem to even be making the micro ones, thus his extended slumps. As I illustrated in another post, in previous years--I used 2019, his last full year as an example--his slumps were very short, and even when he was slumping he was taking walks, so he didn't have as many "zero value games" in which he never got on base. Now his typical bad game is 0-4 with 3 Ks and no walks; in 2019 and before, it might be 0-3 with a walk and an SB, so he was still creating two bases.

But my point is that on one hand you say he's declining right now, but on the other he probably won't need to make a big adjustment until he's 34 or so. 

What I'm saying is I'm not sure he's actually declining, but his problem may mostly be psychological. As I also pointed out in that other thread, he's actually having a higher percentage of huge games this year than in 2019...so his great games are as good (or better) than ever, and more frequent, but his lows are just a lot lower and more extended...and the most obvious culprit is the huge decline in walks. He's on pace for about 70 this year, assuming he keeps his pace and plays 140 games. Normally he'd be in the 110-120. That's 40-50 fewer walks than expected.

Yeah, I see the same thing. And extended slumps are a sign of aging. Saw it with Torii, saw it with Pujols, saw it with Upton. So maybe you're right. I think there's a psychological aspect to it, as you noted. Maybe it's all adding up and Trout is ready to move on. 

[AngelsLakersFan]

4 hours ago, ettin said:

So I do believe this, when it comes to Trout, but this was also a similar argument that was made prior to extending Albert Pujols (which I think was, in hindsight, a mistake for a 1B/DH type of player).

I think it was just a bad deal for Albert Pujols. Already getting fat, older than he said he was, bad attitude etc.

[AngelsLakersFan]

3 hours ago, Angelsjunky said:

Alright, fair enough. I haven't looked into speeds in as much detail as you. I do think, however, that one clear aspect of baseball history is the back and forth between pitchers and hitters. Pitching goes up, then hitting adjusts (or MLB adjusts - like reducing the mounds in the late 60s, or the smaller ballparks of today).

So some of this might just be unlucky timing for Trout. This year has seen offense down, and Trout is coming back after an injury hiatus. 

But still...whether we're talking about micro or macro adjustments, Trout doesn't seem to even be making the micro ones, thus his extended slumps. As I illustrated in another post, in previous years--I used 2019, his last full year as an example--his slumps were very short, and even when he was slumping he was taking walks, so he didn't have as many "zero value games" in which he never got on base. Now his typical bad game is 0-4 with 3 Ks and no walks; in 2019 and before, it might be 0-3 with a walk and an SB, so he was still creating two bases.

But my point is that on one hand you say he's declining right now, but on the other he probably won't need to make a big adjustment until he's 34 or so. 

What I'm saying is I'm not sure he's actually declining, but his problem may mostly be psychological. As I also pointed out in that other thread, he's actually having a higher percentage of huge games this year than in 2019...so his great games are as good (or better) than ever, and more frequent, but his lows are just a lot lower and more extended...and the most obvious culprit is the huge decline in walks. He's on pace for about 70 this year, assuming he keeps his pace and plays 140 games. Normally he'd be in the 110-120. That's 40-50 fewer walks than expected.

What’s the definition of decline? Trout is performing worse than he has previously, is that not decline?

Also I wonder how much those 20-30 fewer walks are affecting the offense. Guys like Walsh are probably coming up without a runner at first far more often than in years past.

[Stradling]

7 hours ago, 79CAAman said:

He shouldn't be!  He has like over $37 million reasons not to be be.  If the face of the franchise looks "checked out".  This is huge.

This is so stupid. He doesn’t look checked out. 

[Stradling]

Oh and every team can afford Trout or Ohtani’s salary. 

[tdawg87]

Just now, Stradling said:

This is so stupid. He doesn’t look checked out. 

I've seen several people say that. 

I think we're seeing the first legitimate sign of his decline, and some aren't willing to admit that. He's 31 in a few weeks. He isn't who he was 3-4 years ago. And that's normal. 

[tdawg87]

3 minutes ago, Stradling said:

Oh and every team can afford Trout or Ohtani’s salary. 

These are two completely different statements.

[Stradling]

1 minute ago, tdawg87 said:

These are two completely different statements.

Ohtani’s next salary

[tdawg87]

Just now, Stradling said:

Ohtani’s next salary

Still. 

It's a matter of giving out the richest contracts in history. 

You're right that every team can afford them. But the A's aren't signing Ohtani. Nor are the Marlins. Or the Orioles, etc...

There's likely 4-5 teams who can realistically own these contracts, and one is the Angels. 

I know this isn't the point you were trying to make but I felt like being a butt.

[Angelsjunky]

We're not really going to know if Trout is legitimately declining until maybe a month or two into next year. Let's see how he finishes the rest of this year, and then he starts next. All players oscillate, even great ones. Trout has been unusually consistent - even for a great player.

Players also sometimes adjust around Trout's age, and have a second peak. Look at Willie Mays.

But really, there's a huge range between Mays/Aaron--both of whom maintained peak levels past 35--and Ken Griffey Jr, who was done as a star around Trout's age.

But my main point is that I'm not ready to call it either way. There are lots of factors at play that could make it seem like he's declining, but he's not: especially the psychological stuff (this year being so disheartening), but also the fact that he played half a season worth of games over 2020-21.

 

[Swordsman78]

Guys are overthinking this.  Trout has 4-5 very good (all star) years left and there is no other player in sight that the Angels can grab that would have a better WAR rate over the next 5 years.   I agree that he has a longer glide path than the typical player.   Most of the people encouraging a Trout trade, are other team supporters (Yankees) who want Trout on their team.  Don't let those guys manipulate your thoughts on Trout.

Arte will not let Ohtani go.  At all costs.

Then its up to the GM and coaches to figure out the best formula around those guys.

Angel Needs:

1.  Legit lead off guy (with good wheels) with a high OBP to put pressure on the defense.  Ever notice that Altuve always seems to get on base, and then steal second? 

1b.  #2 hitter that can make good contact and move runners over.

2. Power hitting 3b and LF as the 5-6 hitters.

3.  A strong 3rd starter to compliment Ohtani and Sandoval

4. RHP and LHP middle reliever that can go 3 innings.

5.  2-3 Utility guys that can play IF and OF and don't strike out alot.

6.  Stay relatively healthy.  How do starters who get the entire offseason to get healthy, show up to camp and get injured in April and May with season ending injuries

 

[T.G.]

The narrative surrounding the possibility of trading Trout (no matter how unlikely) isn't going to go away.  It comes with the territory when a player of his magnitude plays on a team that struggles for wins, let alone making the postseason.  The narrative around his eventual decline isn't going away either.  Nothing lasts forever, especially in sports.  Time will tell with Mike Trout.

I'm just going to enjoy every game Mike Trout plays in an Angels uniform for however long that lasts. 

[70runner]

Suspect the checked out perception is frustration over the teams remarkable downslide after the positive start, along with more lengthy slumps.  Trout would be the last guy on the roster to check out.  The only thing a Trout trade would accomplish is to change the team identity from "large contracts, small results" to the "team that traded the best player in baseball". 

[Sully151]

20 hours ago, tdawg87 said:

 

There's likely 4-5 teams who can realistically own these contracts, and one is the Angels. 

 

And the others either make or are in the hunt for the playoffs every year.

[ScottM]

Bill James is correct. If you're running an organization, you have to be honest about what you face. This org is an absolute mess right now. From the MLB to the DSL, we're in the worst position we've been in for a long long long time. If someone offers you a package of 4-5 young high upside guys for Trout, you have to consider it if Shohei is willing to sign. Trout will still likely be an Angel in the Hall of Fame and, let's face it, he doesn't look thrilled to be on this team. It could be the recent this organization needs. Start with locking up Ohtani and then build a team around him. 

[Angels 1961]

On 7/15/2022 at 5:07 PM, Angelsjunky said:

We're not really going to know if Trout is legitimately declining until maybe a month or two into next year. Let's see how he finishes the rest of this year, and then he starts next. All players oscillate, even great ones. Trout has been unusually consistent - even for a great player.

Players also sometimes adjust around Trout's age, and have a second peak. Look at Willie Mays.

But really, there's a huge range between Mays/Aaron--both of whom maintained peak levels past 35--and Ken Griffey Jr, who was done as a star around Trout's age.

But my main point is that I'm not ready to call it either way. There are lots of factors at play that could make it seem like he's declining, but he's not: especially the psychological stuff (this year being so disheartening), but also the fact that he played half a season worth of games over 2020-21.

 

Mays and Aaron did not face pitchers throwing 95 to 100 all the time. Different era now plus with shifts. If halos trade Ohtani this off-season Trout will not have any protection in the lineup. 

[IheartLA]

The Trout is done threads come up every year it seems like, Scioscia said it best in 2018 when Trout was "struggling" out of the gate. Quit worrying about Mike. 

We have 10-15 shit players on our 25 man roster and people are concerned about one of the top 5 players in the game. Let's worry about the real riff raff.

[tdawg87]

2 minutes ago, IheartLA said:

The Trout is done threads come up every year it seems like, Scioscia said it best in 2018 when Trout was "struggling" out of the gate. Quit worrying about Mike. 

We have 10-15 shit players on our 25 man roster and people are concerned about one of the top 5 players in the game. Let's worry about the real riff raff.

We can worry about all of it.

[TroutField]

7 minutes ago, tdawg87 said:

We can worry about all of it.

He’s making the point that if we don’t put a team around Mike that his production or lack of production doesn’t matter. Have you been watching since 2010