Trout/Herschel Walker

[Lou E Ville]

By the way, the title of the show was "Top 10 gambles in NFL history". It was a pretty interesting show if you are an NFL fan.

[Lifetime]

I can think of two or three teams who would give him that contract.

If he isn't signed to a long term deal before he makes it to free agency, I can see a contract of that magnitude if he maintains production. But that is an unlikely scenario. More likely he will sign a lucrative long term deal that buys out a few of his club control years and into his FA years. It won't be Pujols big though. Pujols contract will not keep them from being able to extend such an offer to Trout. Now once that first big contract is up, if he is still the player we expect him to be, I'd expect a monster contract from someone but there seems to be a bit of a changing tide coming in mlb regarding these big late career monster contracts, so we'll see. 

[Ohtaniland]

There's no thinking outside the box. If the Angels keep putting a bunch of garbage around Trout he will leave anyway.

[Lifetime]

Yes chicken little

[Lou E Ville]

Look at what the Rangers got for Teixeira.

[Lifetime]

After 5 years. 

[austin724]

The Angels aren't going to trade Trout. Why do people come up with these bizarre posts? And why are we worried about something that will happen 4 to 5 years from now?

[Lou E Ville]

And where the hell was I?

[HaloMagic]

Trading Trout is not the answer. So I wouldn't do it.

However, if it was the answer then yes, I would.

[maximus p]

After 5 years. 

Pretty much this is the reason.  Football draft picks make an immediate impact.  BB prospects take years and may never pan out (Brandon Wood says hello).

[Inside Pitch]

There's no thinking outside the box. If the Angels keep putting a bunch of garbage around Trout he will leave anyway.

There is no shortage of myopia either.  

 

If this team is still floundering in two years, and the talent on the farm system isn't any better.   If they are no closer to being competitive and if Trout is still putting up HOF numbers then youll likely be able to get just as much for him and be better able to address the team's needs.

 

Thinking short term is what killed this team, it's what they need to avoid doing in the future.

[HaloMilliVanilli]

The other apples/oranges thing about this scenario is that when trading for picks in football, it's blind.  You don't know what players will be available in a draft at that spot, nor if the player taken will pan out.  With baseball, you have a little more control because you can ask for certain players at positions of need, or certain high profile/upside players.  But ultimately, there are no guarantees that the players would fulfill their potential and make the trade worthwhile.  Just because a few trades have worked out historically doesn't make it worth doing necessarily, because way more trades have failed where prospects were involved for established major leaguers (especially potential HOF'ers).

[Angelsjunky]

I appreciate the speculative nature of this thread, but I'll give you six reasons why trading Trout is a godawful idea in almost every situation unless its either A) an overwhelming offer, or B ) his walk year and he says he wants to "test the market" - then you field offers.

 

The six reasons? Dallas Trahern, Burke Badenhop, Frankie De La Cruz, Cameron Maybin, Andrew Miller, Mike Rabelo

 

Who are these nobodies? OK, Maybin has been pretty decent - but do you even recognize the other five? Maybe Andrew Miller?

 

They're the six players the Detroit Tigers sent to the Florida Marlins in 2007 to get the current reigning AL MVP and best hitter the game has seen since Albert Pujols in his prime: Miguel Cabrera.

 

Now if the Nationals offered Harper, Rendon and Strasburg or Zimmerman, you've got to pause and at least think about it (and anyone other than an Angels homer like myself would take that trade). But those are all proven major leaguers. I suppose where it gets interesting is if, say, the Cardinals offered Shelby Miller, Oscar Taveras and Carlos Martinez, that gets a bit trickier. Miller is a young stud, Taveras is one of the best hitting prospects in baseball, and Martinez and excellent pitching prospect. But there's more risk than in the obvious hypothetical Nationals trade.

[SoWhat]

I'd ask for Wacha over Martinez. Btw, for the people saying it'll never happen, I obviously know that. I'm just throwing out a list of players I'd want in return for Trout.

[stormngt]

If trading Mike Trout could bring you three upgrades in the lineup and a starter, would you do it?

 

The Dallas Cowboys traded their one marquee player and it won them three Super Bowls, basically.

 

Trade partner: A team like the Mets, desperate for a superstar to escape the Yankees' shadow, or the Phillies or even Orioles?

 

I love Trout. He's only played a year and a half and he's already my all-time favorite Angel. But would you rather be the Twins that won two World Series in the late 80s/early 90s, or the Joe Mauer Twins, selling lots of merchandise of that one player but not winning anything?

 

Just starting the conversation, since this season isn't going anywhere. If we could improve ourselves at third, short and first (leaving Pujols at DH) and get a number two starter, we could move Calhoun into Trout's spot in left.

I would trade trade if it netted us a No 1, 2, and 3 starter.  Not a 3b and 1b!

[stormngt]

"He's the foundation of your lineup and you want to build around him," Scioscia said of Pujols.

 

 

Yep it's time for Trout to ask for a sign and trade deal to an east coast team that's ready to build around him. I would hate to see him leave but a deal similar to what the Cowboys did would be good for Trout and the Angels. Win-win situation. 

Sign and trade?  I taken you been watching too many NBA games and not enough baseball.

 

And only a greedy Prima Donna would care that Scioscia says a team is build around another player!

 

You must actually be a true NBA fan and not MLB fan.  After all, it is in that league where franchises do build around greedy malcontent athletes that worry about who the team is build around.  Remember Kobe Bryant and Shaquille O'Neil.  Kobe couldn't play with Shaq because he wanted to be the focus on the team.  And Howard signed with Houston because the Lakers was Kobe's team.  As far as I know, baseball is too much of a team sport for their players to care about such silliness!

[stormngt]

 r.  The longer the Angels wait the more likely it is that he will wait it out until he hits FA.

That is the key right there.  The 180 million deal needs to be offered next year.  If  not, then they better be prepared for 200 million the following year.  IF Trout turns it down in year 5 then we should try to hit the lotto by trading for him.  You won't get as much for him.

 

If the Angels wait to make the extension in year 4, 5, or 6 of his contract then Trout would have already struck millions in arbitration  and there is a greater incentive to wait to FA.

 

Angels need to make the offer next year.

[Ray McKigney]

If trading Mike Trout could bring you three upgrades in the lineup and a starter, would you do it?

 

The Dallas Cowboys traded their one marquee player and it won them three Super Bowls, basically.

 

Trade partner: A team like the Mets, desperate for a superstar to escape the Yankees' shadow, or the Phillies or even Orioles?

 

I love Trout. He's only played a year and a half and he's already my all-time favorite Angel. But would you rather be the Twins that won two World Series in the late 80s/early 90s, or the Joe Mauer Twins, selling lots of merchandise of that one player but not winning anything?

 

Just starting the conversation, since this season isn't going anywhere. If we could improve ourselves at third, short and first (leaving Pujols at DH) and get a number two starter, we could move Calhoun into Trout's spot in left.

 

Wrong sport. 

[Docwaukee]

First off, my starting point may be different than some, but I content that Mike Trout is or at least will be a generational/historical talent. 

 

Think Mickey Mantle, Stan Musial, Walter Payton.  Maybe not quite Michael Jordan, but Kobe, Bird, Olajuwan, Gretsky, Lemieux.

Not Hershel Walker.  Hershel was a good player, but not even close to Trout's level on a relative basis.

 

Maybe I am overstating the historical significance of his talent, but I personally think we are witnessing a player that will be considered among the top ten all time once everything is said and done, and he's on our team. 

 

There is not a package of players that could be sent in the Angels direction to make up for what he will bring to this franchise over the next ten plus years. 

 

A little closer to home for those that remember, think Nolan Ryan. 

 

I just want to also remind everyone, that he's still shy of his 22nd birthday.  In other words, he's likely to hit his peak in 5 years and he's arguably the best or one of the top 3 players in the game. 

 

There is absolutely zero chance that they won't pay him any amount to keep him here.  None.

 

Hershel Walker's equivalence is closer to someone like Jered Weaver.  If you could move Jered for a package that would net you a #1 starter, an Allstar 3bman and C, then sure. 

 

But here's the nit.  Not only were the Vikings dumb enough to send over what they did, but the Cowboys hit unprecedented home runs with each and every draft pick.  That is just plain dumb luck. 

 

So in equivalent terms, they would have to trade Trout for about 5 players, all of whom would have to perform at an Allstar level in order to make the deal even remotely similar.  It would mean trading him for guys that would become Justin Verlander, Clayton Kershaw, David Wright, Joey Votto, and Robinson Cano. 

 

There likely isn't that kind of future talent available if you included half the teams in baseball. 

 

A couple of other things:

MLB doesn't have a salary cap and we ha no idea how much money Arte actually has to spend. 

 

Second, if we are looking out for the best interest of the franchise, is there any scenario where not having a future HOF player is better than having one?  Bear in mind, I am working under the assumption that Arte will do whatever he needs to to keep this player on the team for the next 10-15 years.

This franchise has the resources to to change their fortune dramatically from year to year as opposed to waiting for a group of players to be ready over a span of 4-5 years.  Yes, they have to make better decisions and focus on rebuilding the farm, but that doesn't have to start with trading away a historical talent. 

[bloodbrother]

I wish you could like a post more than once. Doc, you nailed EVERYTHING there. Summed up everything perfectly

[Ray McKigney]

 

Think Mickey Mantle, Stan Musial, Walter Payton.  Maybe not quite Michael Jordan, but Kobe, Bird, Olajuwan, Gretsky, Lemieux.

Not Hershel Walker.  Hershel was a good player, but not even close to Trout's level on a relative basis.

 

 

I put Gretsky in the same class as Michael Jordan. Maybe even higher. He is hands down, without question the best to ever play his sport. There is no other player in any sport that can claim that. Arguably Jordan. But, besides him, no one's even close.  

[Docwaukee]

I wish you could like a post more than once. Doc, you nailed EVERYTHING there. Summed up everything perfectly

Thanks bb.  I have been a fan of baseball in general and in particular the Halos from the time that can recall any lifetime memories whatsoever.  Spanning nearly 40 years.  I have dedicated countless amounts of time to playing, watching, and reviewing the game from a historical standpoint.  I have what most would likely consider an unnatural passion for the game (like many of us here). 

 

I have never seen a player like Mike Trout.   AROD, Griffey and Pujols come close, but the steroid cloud taints that for me.  Maybe 10 years from now I will feel different.

 

I would honestly call in to question my willingness to remain an Angel fan if they traded him. 

[Docwaukee]

I put Gretsky in the same class of Michael Jordan. Maybe even higher. He is hands down, without question the best to ever play his sport. There is no other player in any sport that can claim that. Arguably Jordan. But, besides him, no one's even close.  

yeah.  true.  he's in a category by himself.  Ruth and Jordan are in that category as well.  Trout isn't quite at that level. 

[Lou E Ville]

Great post, Doc. I just wanted some discussion, and you stated the "when hell freezes over" case perfectly.  

 

Like I've said, Trout is already my favorite Angel ever, even over Salmon. I just remember that feeling in 2002 and the way this team is screwing everything up, I'm not getting that vibe that we can get there again. We're like the Autry Angels again, only most of his players didn't fall off a cliff as soon as they signed with us.   

 

Jim Rome once said after the Dodgers traded Piazza, "You DON'T trade a Hall-of-Famer!" Also, my Rams once traded their Trout. Eric Dickerson put up Trout like numbers his first two years. They soon became the second best team in the NFL and then came crashing back to Earth.

[Chimi]

The problem with this is, even if people were in favor of it, it's near impossible to get a similar trade done in MLB.  What the Cowboys got for Hershel Walker was astronomical.  I'm not even entirely sure if you could do those types of trades in the baseball as I don't recall one.  The Cowboys received 5 players and 8 draft picks.  That's just crazy to even think about.