moderately interesting comment re: Trout in Keith Law chat

[Ithaca]

Trout's leverage now for someone who is supposed to have none under the CBA, is pretty high just because he has presented the appearance of a transcendent player. The fact he has essentially called the Angels bluff by having another monster year puts incredible pressure on the front office to move.

If Moreno is going to give Pujols and Hamilton monster contracts, then he really needs to figure out something now for Trout. If he plays the “under club control” card on him next year, then I think this is going to end poorly for Moreno and the Angels.

By the end of the year Trout will have in two years become essentially the 7-8 best player in Angels history in terms of WAR. Best player south of Nolan Ryan by the eye test, although maybe I need to clean my rose colored glasses first.

If I was advising Trout I would come in with a 5 year demand with a player buy out at three years. I would come in right up front and tell them if you renew then Trout will leave no matter the offer as anyone with a brain knows that if he continues to perform at a high level the Angels will get killed with the highest ARB award in the history of baseball, and then watch him sign with the Yankees for the biggest contract in the history of sports.

The franchise would not recover in my lifetime.

Moreno as a media type business man has to know the loss of Trout under this type of circumstance would doom the club and cast a dark light on him with other players and with the fans for a very long time.

Trout needs to be the guy who goes to the HOF with an Angels Cap.

[Troll Daddy]

Angels don't need Trout to be successful ... the gloom and doom synopsis is a little overboard. It's a team sport as we all know and it takes 25 players to be successful.

 

Of course you'd like to lock up your marquee player.

[ten ocho recon scout]

Hypothetically speaking, If Mike Trout were to turn down a 10 year $250M deal, you would have to trade him ASAP just in case he gets seriously hurt and loses trade value before he bolts.

To be honest, and this will sound insane, but I think trout is probably looking for 300 mill. He'll probably want the bragging rights of being the first one...

And to be fair, with inflation, 300 would be (especially in the second half), similar to what the arod and pujols contracts were when signed.

Do you do it? Obviously its a huge gamble...maybe not worth it. That said, it would guarantee he's here his entire peak...that might be worth it.

But I agree. If you offer him something crazy but fair per the market, and he declines, trading him might be the way to go.

As ironic as it sounds, trading trout could make this team a hell of a lot better, being that we could rape another team for a huge return. (Emphasis on could, not saying I'm suggesting it).

[ten ocho recon scout]

Hypothetically speaking, If Mike Trout were to turn down a 10 year $250M deal, you would have to trade him ASAP just in case he gets seriously hurt and loses trade value before he bolts.

To be honest, and this will sound insane, but I think trout is probably looking for 300 mill. He'll probably want the bragging rights of being the first one...

And to be fair, with inflation, 300 would be (especially in the second half), similar to what the arod and pujols contracts were when signed.

Do you do it? Obviously its a huge gamble...maybe not worth it. That said, it would guarantee he's here his entire peak...that might be worth it.

But I agree. If you offer him something crazy but fair per the market, and he declines, trading him might be the way to go.

As ironic as it sounds, trading trout could make this team a hell of a lot better, being that we could rape another team for a huge return. (Emphasis on could, not saying I'm suggesting it).

[Troll Daddy]

No way in hell is Trout worth anywhere near $300M this early in his career. I even think $250M right now is a insane offer .

Edited September 14, 2013 by Troll Daddy

[SoWhat]

Pay the man what he's worth and keep him a lifelong Angel

[FireThemAll]

I threw my logic out there.  Can I ask you this, do you really think Trout would make more than 35 million a season if he was a FA this year?

 

Yes. Trout would get $35M per year right now if he was a FA

[Troll Daddy]

Yes. Trout would get $35M per year right now if he was a FA

LMAO!!!

[FireThemAll]

LMAO!!!

 

What part of my post is funny? Trout has had back to back 10 WAR seasons and is only 22. I guarantee you a team would pay him 35+

[NrM]

What part of my post is funny? Trout has had back to back 10 WAR seasons and is only 22. I guarantee you a team would pay him 35+

Trout would get 35 million a year for a short 2-3 year contract. I doubt he'd get that much for a 6+ year contract.

[YouthofToday]

If Trout were a FA after this season he would land a deal worth north of 10/$300 with an AAV no less than $30 million. Might even reach $400.

[Jay]

The Yankees would give Trout whatever he wants, can you imagine? The next Mickey Mantle. Talk about the face of MLB. The Angels just aren't in the same category. Trout's career with the Angels would be a footnote at best.

Edited September 14, 2013 by Jay

[stormngt]

Yes. Trout would get $35M per year right now if he was a

.

Can somone find out what the highest average per salaries are in history

Pujols is 25 million and he got that after ten years of being the best player Iin the game. Trout would get no more than 27 mil a year average.

[Ohtaniland]

The Yankees would give Trout whatever he wants, can you imagine? The next Mickey Mantle. Talk about the face of MLB. The Angels just aren't in the same category. Trout's career with the Angels would be a footnote at best.

 

So Mike Trout could eventually leave Anaheim (Disneyland) to sign with the Yankees just like Shaquille O'Neal left Orlando (Magic Kingdom) to sign with the Lakers because they were both Big Fish in a small pond?

[Troll Daddy]

Trout is a unbelievable talent but I'm not sure so he can carry a team like Vlad yet. He still hasn't proven himself under pressure conditions.

[YouthofToday]

Yes. Trout would get $35M per year right now if he was a

.

Can somone find out what the highest average per salaries are in history

Pujols is 25 million and he got that after ten years of being the best player Iin the game. Trout would get no more than 27 mil a year average.

How old was The Albert Pujols when Arte signed him? How old is Trout?

Arte has proven he is a terrible evaluator of talent when making massive player investments.

If Arod was younger when he reached FA for the first time he would have received an even larger deal.

Edited September 14, 2013 by YouthofToday

[tennischmp]

Yes. Trout would get $35M per year right now if he was a

.

Can somone find out what the highest average per salaries are in history

Pujols is 25 million and he got that after ten years of being the best player Iin the game. Trout would get no more than 27 mil a year average.

lol where do you get this random numbers from? 27 million? plus how would you know?

[ten ocho recon scout]

No way in hell is Trout worth anywhere near $300M this early in his career. I even think $250M right now is a insane offer .

I know where you're coming from, and I don't disagree off the bat.

That said, you can't think in terms of todays value. Look at your dodgers. The ownership paid a billion more than the next offer. They spent stupid money to make insane money.

Locking trout up to where it saves us money in 5 years isnt a completely stupid idea. Bottom line, he WILL be the first 30 a year player. It all comes down to when he signs as to how many years of it he gets.