How About a 12 Year Deal for Trout?

[Brandon]

500 years/ 1 mil per

[Jim]

If it's a ten year deal with an opt out in 7 years, then yes it is.

If he signs a contract with the Angels, it will be this one, and it will be done sometime during the next off-season. If not, you may as well get ready to eventually say farewell. 

[Ohtaniland]

Mike Trout should just tell Arte the following;

Arte I like it here and I would like to stay but......

1) I need to buy a house in OC and I would like some sort of financial security now so give me a 4 year $100M deal.

2) Market me and make tons of money.

3) I will do my part on the field while you have 4 years to fix this team and make it competitive while you put together a finacial plan to keep me here long-term.

4) If I play those 4 years to my potential and the team still sucks, I'm leaving.

[Troll Daddy]

Mike Trout should just tell Arte the following;

Arte I like it here and I would like to stay but......

1) I need to buy a house in OC and I would like some sort of financial security now so give me a 4 year $100M deal.

2) Market me and make tons of money.

3) I will do my part on the field while you have 4 years to fix this team and make it competitive while you put together a finacial plan to keep me here long-term.

4) If I play those 4 years to my potential and the team still sucks, I'm leaving.

Makes no sense when Arte can keep him for half that much without a 4 year contract.

[Ohtaniland]

Makes no sense when Arte can keep him for half that much without a 4 year contract.

Yep he'll be gone for sure if Arte chooses that plan.

[Mudville]

The day we were eliminated from making the playoffs in 2012, they interviewed trout after the game. He sounded like his favorite dog just died. You can tell he has a strong desire to win and make it to October. I'm sure 2013 was a very tough year for him, playing well and doing so much and having to be teammates with Blanton and madsen.

 

He never saw Madsen so I guess that wasn't that disappointing.

[Jim]

Reality check time ... I'm guessing that Arte will start with a low ball offer since he has the upper hand for the next four years.

6 years / 80M or 9 years / 150M

I think you're on the right track, and when the time is right (next off-season) I think Arte will make a legitimate offer. I really don't believe Arte will low ball too much in fear that he might be viewed as being more interested in the deal than Trout himself. 

 

Assuming Trout is ok with calling So Cal his home for the next 7-10 years. A 10 year contract with the option to renegotiate in 7 at anywhere between 22-25 mil a year sounds about where they'll end up. The negotiations will likely be centered more around incentives and how the contract gets loaded, than overall amounts

[Jim]

Mike Trout should just tell Arte the following;

Arte I like it here and I would like to stay but......

1) I need to buy a house in OC and I would like some sort of financial security now so give me a 4 year $100M deal.

2) Market me and make tons of money.

3) I will do my part on the field while you have 4 years to fix this team and make it competitive while you put together a finacial plan to keep me here long-term.

4) If I play those 4 years to my potential and the team still sucks, I'm leaving.

Why would you give a player 100 million guaranteed over the next four years when you already have said player for those same four years at the cost of arbitration?

[Mudville]

I don't understand. Were you in favor of #5's deal at age 32? Weaver's when he was in his late 20s?

If we wait till Trout is a FA dude could easily command a minimum of 10 years.

If we wait until he is almost a FA he will want either a very short term contract (without any free agent years) or a 10 year deal.

So by not going 7-8 years now youre essentially stating you are fine with him walking at age 27 (as I doubt you would go more years if forced).

 

Trout is 22 right now. 7 years makes him age 29 and 8 makes him 30 at free agency. That is around the same time most guys hit their free agency years and sign their last really big contract.

 

He is an athlete so going long term is only a risk for the club not the player. Once Trout gets the financial secure contract the club is hoping he doesn't go injury string like Nomar and Chavez did. If he doesn't there is another big paycheck, if he does then he still retires early and leaves the game rich as hell. That is why as a ball club you have to think long enough but not disastrously long. 12 years could be disastrously long.

 

You need only to look at Chavez's career as a similar situation. He started his career at age 21 and by 22 was established himself as one of the premier players at his position. In the following 12 years he only had 4 full time seasons and by age 29 he was basically done. He has bounced around as a bench player for the last 7 years and can't even stay healthy for that.

 

So I can see why the Angels would want to tread lightly with all of these long term contracts, it does not matter how good  a player is today, there are walls and guardrails, knockdown pitches and unforeseen off the field accidents waiting to happen. 7-8 is safe, 10 is stretching your luck and 12 is tempting fate.

[Mudville]

Mike Trout should just tell Arte the following;

Arte I like it here and I would like to stay but......

1) I need to buy a house in OC and I would like some sort of financial security now so give me a 4 year $100M deal.

2) Market me and make tons of money.

3) I will do my part on the field while you have 4 years to fix this team and make it competitive while you put together a finacial plan to keep me here long-term.

4) If I play those 4 years to my potential and the team still sucks, I'm leaving.

 

This is really a stupid post.

[Ohtaniland]

This is really a stupid post.

 

Why because 4) could happen. 

[Mudville]

Why because 4) could happen. 

 

It could not happen. The Angels would not make a 4 year deal that nullifies their club control for what would be free agency money without buying up any free agency years. It is just plain stupid in concept.

[Ohtaniland]

It could not happen. The Angels would not make a 4 year deal that nullifies their club control for what would be free agency money without buying up any free agency years. It is just plain stupid in concept.

 

A 12 year $300M+ contract is also stupid in concept.

[Mudville]

I never argued it was a good one. That was Scott Boras leading that charge to the cliff's end.

[YouthofToday]

A 12 year $300M+ contract is also stupid in concept.

Real convincing perspective...

[mancini79]

If Trout is going to be offered a 7-10 yr contract at $250m+, then you might as well wait til a yr or two away from Free Agency. If he wants to play in Anaheim, he will take that kind of offer today or in a couple years. At least the Angels will have a few more years to make sure Trout is worth that contract. I think it's best to keep Trout focused on playing baseball rather than throwing him extension offers of that caliber so early in his career. There will be a place and time for that in the near future.

 

I think the current state of the franchise will play little significance on whether Trout stays or goes. If he wants to Win, he should go to a team where the ownership is committed to winning. It's also important to play in a city where he WANTS to play. A lot can happen to any franchise in 7-10 years. A player may join a winning franchise, then within a year or two the tides quickly change. It's rare to see any team be competitive for such a long time. Crawford thought he picked a winning team when he went to Boston. He ended up hating his time there and the team went to crap. Boston then trades a payroll dump to the Dodgers and all of a sudden Boston are champs. When Crawford signed his contract with Boston, he never considered he would be a Dodger 2 years later. Today Carl would say picking Boston was the wrong decision and was fortunate the Dodgers bailed him out. Then you have guys like King Felix, Weaver and Lee that placed a higher importance on WHERE they played. Regardless of what happens in their careers, they know they made the right decision. Oh, and they still are filthy rich.

[Troll Daddy]

"Money can't buy you love"

 

I prefer players who want to be on the team. I wouldn't lose any sleep if Trout was all about the money and left for greener pastures. I just don't think he is all about the money but if he bailed it would be for other reasons.

 

If Trout doesn't sign a extension this season ... I hope Arte gives him a bigger raise this time.

 

Edited November 17, 2013 by Troll Daddy

[fan_since79]

I would not do a 12 year deal for a pitcher. Signing perhaps the best 23 year old position player in the 150 year history of the game through his age 33 season is, well....

 

You must be talking about Ted Williams, with his 1.147 OPS at age 23.

 

 

...on top of his .406 average and 1.247 OPS a year earlier.

Edited November 17, 2013 by fan_since79

[Oz27]

Mike Trout should just tell Arte the following;

Arte I like it here and I would like to stay but......

1) I need to buy a house in OC and I would like some sort of financial security now so give me a 4 year $100M deal.

2) Market me and make tons of money.

3) I will do my part on the field while you have 4 years to fix this team and make it competitive while you put together a finacial plan to keep me here long-term.

4) If I play those 4 years to my potential and the team still sucks, I'm leaving.

Even Tony Reagins laughs at garbage like this.