Should the Angels try to sign Trout now to a 10 year contract?

[mancini79]

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slug=ys-maurybrownarbitration011910

 

 

In general.  You give Trout $25-30 million in arbitration, and it will be an enourmous tsunami sized ripple through all future arbitration cases.  Guys who are only half as good as Trout, may then say they are worth $15 million in arbitration.  Howard set the bar, and every arbitration case uses that bar.  If the Angels gave Trout what he wanted, it could make arbitration years unaffordable for teams.  

 

Article was written in 2010 and history has proven a lot of it false. Buster Posey settled for $8m in arbitration and that's after winning MVP. He later signed for an extension paying him 9yrs/$167m.

Edited September 2, 2013 by mancini79

[stormngt]

You think that was just some made up number? Every good player in the league is making 25 million per year now through FA, for 1 WAR as a player, that nets you about 4.5 million dollars. Trout was worth 45 million last year, and will be worth 44 this year according to fWAR http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=10155&position=OF#value. 

Baseball salaries don't work that way.  Players are grossly under paid for three years.  They are probably paid fairly for the next three years.  Then they are grossly over paid after that.

 

You can't base a salary number on Trout based on what his worth is in terms of wins.  The fact is he is only guaranteed 500 k next year.  That means for the Angel interest they will not pay him the 30 million a year.  No team would give him that over the long term.  Trout has the incentive because he won't have to wait another four years for the big contract.

[stormngt]

That's not for anyone but Trout to decide.

No kidding, that is why i said "probably would get it done".  Its called speculating.  It is done all the time on this board and throughout society.

[stormngt]

Through the first two years of significant action, offensively who was the better player?  Trout or Howard?  

 

This is the problem the Angels will face.  Players are not superstars forever.  It's a question of when their declines begins.  And as I posted a while ago, when you look at superstar players, their shelflife is usually no more than 8 years, sometimes 10.  Unless you are chemically enhanced.  Look at the stats of any superstar, count up their prime years, and not their decline years.  Trout is in year 2, and I'd rather pay him one year short, than 2+ long.    

 

Baseball is an unpredictable sport.  

 

I would rather pay him 2 years too long to make sure you have him for the entire 8-10 years of his prime!

[mancini79]

No kidding, that is why i said "probably would get it done".  Its called speculating.  It is done all the time on this board and throughout society.

 

BS!

 

"Proclamation" is more like it.

[ten ocho recon scout]

Trout is still young enough that a 8-10 year deal still has him hitting FA agency at an age where he could sign a second contract.

As far as 'why would he do it', the guaranteed money he would make makes it worth it. Jumping from 500K to 15-20 is more lucrative than geting nickle and dimed over the next 4 years. Sure, he would make more in 2018 as a FA, however a lot can happen in that time.

I fully believe he gets signed long term this winter. Again, to those doubting he will, he would have absolutely siggned one last winter. Nothing has changed. I doubt his agent/finance guy would have him turn down a long term 200 million deal when he still has arbitration, and FA is still a few years away.

[yvangelfan]

Artie should hand him a piece of paper and ask him to write down what he wants. And give it to him.

[Docwaukee]

After this year, trout has a year of potential min salary and three years of arb. Nothing is guaranteed. There is no stability unless he continues to perform. He likely will, but he might not. He has to pay a bit to offset some risk. The halos give long term stability for what would be a discount if he were to continue performing at the same level.

That said, give him whatever he wants.

[mancini79]

Artie should hand him a piece of paper and ask him to write down what he wants. And give it to him.

 

Should he write it on a Del Taco napkin?

[kevinb]

Sure you try. It be very interesting to see if Trout would want to. And if he stays with current agents. Boras is right around the corner and looks like he is gonna try and get Harper a 12 yr deal.

[mancini79]

If the Angels are going to extend Trout, they better do it before Harper's deal. Because whatever Boras squeezes out of the Nats will set precedent for Trout's deal.

[kevinb]

If the Angels are going to extend Trout, they better do it before Harper's deal. Because whatever Boras squeezes out of the Nats will set precedent for Trout's deal.

I wonder how long it'll take Boras to get Trout as a client. If Boras gets one for Harper thats huge. Being in So Cal and having Boras down the street will be hard to pass up. If I was an athlete Boras would definitely be my agent.

[YouthofToday]

Arte better sign Trout long term before figuring out how to clean-up the mess he created with Dipoto and Scioscia.

And by long-term I mean at least 8 years -- nothing less.

[Angels]

Trout would be pretty stupid to accept a 10- or 12-year contract if he's trying to maximize his earnings.. He'd be 32-34 when that expires. By then, he may be past his prime and unable to get the kind of contract he can get if he were to sign for 7 or 8 years. He would be 29-30 and in his prime, and right in line for another mammoth-sized 10-year deal to finish his career off.

 

8/160 is what I would offer him. And if Trout were smart, he'd take it. Why wait until free agency when you're 26 to sign a 10-year deal that would take you until your 36? Sign a huge 8-year extension now, then get another massive contract while you're still in your prime at 29-30 to finish off your career.

[fan_since79]

Artie should hand him a piece of paper and ask him to write down what he wants. And give it to him.

 

LOL, like that insurance company. "Name your price, Mike."

[fan_since79]

If the Angels are going to extend Trout, they better do it before Harper's deal. Because whatever Boras squeezes out of the Nats will set precedent for Trout's deal.

 

Not only Harper, but also Kershaw. The Dodgers should be extending him really soon, and those salary numbers could be to the moon. Of course he's a pitcher, but he's also, like Trout, a young superstar with enormous upside who can lead a team for many years. 

 

Trout's price goes up with every one of these contracts. 

Edited September 2, 2013 by fan_since79

[Stradling]

Who in their right mind says no the OP's question?

"No we shouldn't try and sign the best player in baseball that is 22 years old to a ten year contract".

[tdawg87]

Who in their right mind says no the OP's question?

"No we shouldn't try and sign the best player in baseball that is 22 years old to a ten year contract".

 

There were surprisingly quite a few. Though I guess it shouldn't be too surprising because in the other Trout thread people said Cabrera is a better player.

 

Then there was pimp who was just trolling as usual.

Edited September 2, 2013 by tdawg87

[stormngt]

If the Angels are going to extend Trout, they better do it before Harper's deal. Because whatever Boras squeezes out of the Nats will set precedent for Trout's deal.

 

That is very true.  It is another argument that the extension has to be this fall and the first thing the Angels do in the off season.  In fact, why wait....start the negotiations right now!

[seenoevil]

HELL YEAH !!!!!!

 

I SAY 15 !

[sneaky_flute]

I honestly would offer him a contract of 450 million for 18 years. He'd be stupid to turn that down.

[seenoevil]

A possible top 10 greatest player of all time...

 

 

LOCK HIM UP!

[eligrba]

Money will not be the reason Mike Trout leaves the Angels.  If he wants to stay, I'm sure Arte will oblige.

[ettin]

So I haven't even read all of the pages but I have said this previously: Sign him to a 20 year record shattering contract. 20 years/$500 million.

 

1) Shatters any contract in the history of baseball.

2) Makes him an Angel for life.

3) On the assumption he enters the Hall of Fame, he enters it as an Angel.

4) Allows you to build the team around him knowing he is here forever.

5) Pay him more in his age 25-32 seasons and then taper the value down on the front side (first two years) and the back side (last 9 years or so).

6) The Angels have their face of the franchise for two decades.

7) The Angels will spend $25 million per season for a player who has the greatest potential in possibly the history of baseball. When you count inflation in $25 million per year is a bargain for his talent level.

[Ohtaniland]

So I haven't even read all of the pages but I have said this previously: Sign him to a 20 year record shattering contract. 20 years/$500 million.

 

1) Shatters any contract in the history of baseball.

2) Makes him an Angel for life.

3) On the assumption he enters the Hall of Fame, he enters it as an Angel.

4) Allows you to build the team around him knowing he is here forever.

5) Pay him more in his age 25-32 seasons and then taper the value down on the front side (first two years) and the back side (last 9 years or so).

6) The Angels have their face of the franchise for two decades.

7) The Angels will spend $25 million per season for a player who has the greatest potential in possibly the history of baseball. When you count inflation in $25 million per year is a bargain for his talent level.

 

The face of the franchise is Albert Pujols. Just ask him.