Fresh Catch Trout

It's not your money. If Arte is willing to pay it he will. Doesn't matter whether you think he's worth it or not.

Just give him a blank check..lock him up..M500, M600, a Billion..hell, give him the franchise..who cares. Just do it so the hand wringing will stop.

those players aren't Mike Trout.  You can throw aging curves out the window as it relates to him.  I have no idea if he's going to hit .250/.375/.525 at the age of 38, but I like his chances as much as I like those chance for Nellie Cruz or Adrian Beltre.  

For the next 3 years, Trout will make 34.1 mil per.  He's entering his age 26 yo season which brings him through age 28.  Which is 102.3 mil.  
Let's say he's worth 450 mil over the remainder of his career.  Why not just spread that out over 13 or 14 years to take him through age 41 or 42?  That's 16 years at 552.3 mil or 34.5 per year.  At that point, it's more about the total amount as opposed to the AAV because you're gonna have him through the end of his career.  So just tack years on and help your CBT number.  
The numbers in that previous paragraph seem absolutely ludicrous but are they?  The real question is whether that money is even close to worth it for one player.  
Of that 16 years, the next 8 likely have surplus value.  It's the final 8/275 from age 34-41 where you have to consider what you are getting.  Current value of $/WAR is 10mil per.  So that's 55 WAR.  Will he produce 55 WAR over the next 16 years?  Personally, I think he'll avg. 7 WAR per over the next 8 years so you are already there.  If you avg 3 WAR over the next 8, that's another 24 WAR.  For a total of 80 WAR over the life of the deal.  That would put him at 134 for his career.  Or 6th all time.  It's hard to imagine him not getting to that with the current pace he's on.  
Mays put up 47.2 WAR from age 34-42.  
Mantle's career ended early because of his alcohol abuse but still avg'd over 3 WAR per in his age 34-36 seasons (his final 3)
Aaron had 38.2 WAR from age 34-32.  
The other thing that I know is on everyone's mind is that he'll age and decline like Pujols because we are seeing that right in front of us.  But I don't think that will be the case.  I think he'll decline more in line with the other inner circle HOF players.  Hell, there are players of way lesser caliber putting up 3 and 4 WAR seasons at age 34 and above.  I mean, look at Beltre.  
Whatever money over whatever number of years it takes to lock Trout up for the rest of his career will be worth it.  And that's not even taking into account the dollar value he bring for being mike Trout and the general value to the franchise.  

 

My thoughts exactly. He also has the luxury of snowbirding at his house in So. Cal if he gets tired of the shitty winter weather in Jersey. 

I think we can post-pone talk of a Trout extension until we see what Harper and Machado get next year. After that, an extension could happen, but I think Trout (or his agent) wants to see what those two contracts will be, as they'll be the highest in major league history, and Trout's extension will build from there. 
My guess is that Machado gets something like 10/$350MM or 12/$400MM, and Harper 10/$400-450MM or 12/$450-500MM - the range depending upon which version of Harper shows up. I think a Trout extension next year, which would include the two remaining years on his contract plus another ten, would be something like 12/$550MM.
@Dochalo , I hear you about prospects and such, but the thing is that Adell, Jones, and Marsh have not yet reached their peak trade value. Jones is close, but Adell and Marsh are still a ways a way. To trade them now or before seeing at least another year of minor league play would be trading low (not saying you are suggesting trading them, just commenting on the idea).

hes not going to leave, every day i am more certain

I actually like it. He can be a guy who has success in our home park. Throws ground balls. Saw him beat the Indians late last year live in Cleveland. He's got something left. No one should be hoping for Skaggs to come back then shrugging at this move. 
You can never have enough SP. Shoemaker, JC, Fister, Skaggs (presumably), Meyer/Chavez is good enough to kind of stay in it. Would look into what it might take to get Quintana, although I don't think we have anything they want. Nolasco gotta go.

I will only add that four years is a really long time in baseball. 
The Cubs won the World Series 3 years and 5 months after drafting Kris Bryant.

We all know that they can afford to sign Trout ... they're hoping Trout signs a team friendly extension before he becomes a free agent. 
If not, then I don't like our chances in free agency. 
7/266M extension with a three year opt out clause. That guarantees us six more seasons after this season. Trout can opt out at the age of 31 if he wants and still get a Mega deal. 
I think if you front load the contract a tad it may be tempting. 

LOLOLOLOL Avasail! Hit him in the noggin! Not a CF

LOLOLOLOL Avasail! Hit him in the noggin! Not a CF

cmon Maybin have a day ( I am on delay bc of stupid MLB TV

He may value things like stability and playing for one team his entire career like his favorite player growing up. 

This is worth talking about every day until it happens by the way 

Im not saying youre wrong, not by any stretch. But the "hes from the east coast" thing is really overblown. He (and his wife) are happy as hell in newport....
That wont be what it comes down to in the end. But the him being from jersey wont either.
The team definetely needs to build a tram around him and give him a chance to win here. Currently it doesnt look good, but there is still way more time to deal with the issue than people think.

Then no team can afford him except the Dodgers.  Very few other teams have that kind of tv contract and zero debt.  And all other teams will have to sign 24 other players.

What the fuck is your problem?  Everyone on here speaks in absolutes about Trout leaving, and it's cool.  I simply say of course they can afford him, because they can, as can the other 5 or so teams with $100 million annual tv contracts. 

Yes and yes.
Trout is potentially worth that using a basic $/WAR system under the current average value of $8M-9M. Trout is worth a lot more than $500M but let's be honest a MLB team is not going to pay more than they have too and giving Trout $500M would break the mold of any contract ever given before even though it doesn't actually pay him what he is worth simply because he is a totally unique player not unlike A-Rod when he signed his 2nd mega-deal. That contract set the bar for all other contracts that followed. However no team was going to pay him more even if their metrics (and those metrics were not nearly as prevalent as they are now) told them he was worth it.
There is something I am not getting through to you. The $8M-9M is an AVERAGE. Mike Trout is 5-7 standard deviations outside the bell curve. He breaks the bell curve even. But any MLB team, even the Dodgers and Yankees will not pay him $800M. They will take the highest free agent contract ever awarded and build a financial model that justifies paying him 20%, 30%, 40% (whatever they decide) more than the highest contract ever delivered. It would be highly unlikely that they'd go higher that about $500M simply because it would raise the bar too high for all players in terms of ask price on contracts. Notice how the best players have over the last handful of years have slowly slipped in to the $200M range and only one, Stanton, has crested $300M. Harper will break $400M. Trout could break $500M.
You also seem to place a lot of emphasis on his family. I think you are placing too much but I agree that he really loves them and that could definitely be a factor. I'm just saying that money and family don't always drive decisions. Living in California is great for the most part (depends on where you live of course). Trout has a place in Newport Beach so I think you'll be hard pressed to admit that it isn't a draw to live here. None of us are in his head or friends with him so unless we hear from a reliable source that Mike Trout is dying to go back to New Jersey or he's dying to play for Philly or New York, or he misses his family too much or his wife/fiancee likes Texas or he thinks that the Angels will never compete I think we should run under the assumption that it is a coin flip. I am sure that Eppler has communicated to Trout and Trout's agent what their long term rebuilding plan consists of and how they want to build a winning team around Mike, the team will leave nothing to chance in trying to retain him. I'm betting he stays.

Fully 100% disagree with you about our ability to afford him. I feel like everyone is trying to find an excuse for him not to stay which I just think is being awfully negative. Sure there are reasons he might want to go I'm not disagreeing with that but there are a lot of reasons to stay. It is not a foregone conclusion by any measure that he takes off for what some of you think are brighter lights.

The ONLY question I have is if Trout really "cares" about getting a ring?
I put that in quotes because OF COURSE he wants to get a ring. He plays to frickin' win a ring. He wants to win, and he plays to do his best. But what I mean by that, is if Arte is willing to pay him what he wants, and it's less than what's offered by other teams but he's happy here, and is okay with the possibility of not getting a ring, is that cool with him?
I think it might be.
I have a gut feeling that Trout puts the money, with these other types of situations, on the backburner. That kind of drive reminds me of Weaver. If he's happy where he is, and wants to stay here, he has more money than he'll ever need, and he might take less money to stay. I don't see Trout as a Boris kind of dude.
I feel like if he's happy to be an Angel, he will stay. He always has the chance to win (just like 2002) and will forever be the face of the Angels, and if it were me, that'd be pretty cool too.
 

That's too old for it to be a positive point for Trout.  If it's not going to be a retirement contract you'll have to up the $/per by quite a big margin and have the contract end while he is still in his prime so as to command a top tier contract.  It isn't going to happen because he will get retirement contract offers.  You have to go into it thinking you will be paying the biggest total dollar amount contract in history or just forget about it.  There will be no cutting corners or clipping coupons.  Also, it is in our favor to wait until his contract is nearly up to make offers because until the Angels demonstrate that they can build a team that can compete, why on earth would he consider signing here for any amount of money.

6 years/$240 million. A cool $40 mill per season.
Locks him down for a good long time (ten seasons counting this year) without breaking the Angels' bank, and also gives Trout a chance to be a free agent again at age 35.

If you're a baseball fan, I don't know how you just say "no". It's historic. To be able to say you were there for Pujols' 600th? Cmon. It would be neat as Hell. 
I tried to see Griffey's 500th and 600th.