Do you agree with this article?

[beatlesrule]

http://www.sbnation.com/mlb/2016/2/11/10966968/mike-trout-trade-angels-lol-no

 

 

I have a hard time believing that they would never trade Trout.  If he got tired of ownership and losing, he would want out.  If that's the case, why wouldn't you trade him?  I am not stating that I want them to but I think it's silly to think they wouldn't under certain circumstances.

[Chuck]

Yes, I agree that they shouldn't trade him.

 

But I'm concerned with Eppler at the helm as I really have no clue what his direction of the team is.

 

If you're Arte, you'd NEVER trade Trout if you're eventually planning on selling the team. 

[Homebrewer]

I would, on the other hand, trade Arte for non-meddling owner that was hell bent on winning a WS.

[Turd Ferguson]

I would never say never, but I'm not sure any team would ever be willing to pay what it would take to land Trout. 

[Hollyw00d]

I would trade arte for any owner in the league right now. Except loria. Maybe.

[floplag]

There are no absolutes.  

 

Do i want to trade him, no, but I for one am far more concerned with the name on the front of the jersey than the back.

 

I want to team to succeed with him, but it comes down to one simple thing... whats best for the org as a whole?

[Stradling]

I wouldn't trade him. Imagine being the guy that trades Trout? Would you want that on your resume? The truly great ones don't get traded. A-Rod was one of the few great ones to get traded, then we found out he was a PED user.

[seenoevil]

I can envision Trout throwing ultimatums to the Angels, he has the juice to do it. Kobe wanted his roster upgraded or he was out / post shaq / pre gasol years

[wopphil]

There is no need to trade him. He is so young that he will still be good when the team is ready to compete again (assuming a rebuild). But you gotta lock him up before Harper hits free agency. I'd say rip up his old deal and offer him 12/360.

[Second Base]

The thing about this is, he really can't be traded because whichever GM that traded him will have effectively ended his career as a GM. He'll always be known as the guy that traded Mike Trout. He'd be a front office pariah.

Not to mention a trade like that would bring along with it a Ruthian curse to the Angels.

Having said that, we have a precursor. A-Rod was a 9 win player and Texas traded him for Soriano (a 4 win player), Joaquin Arias (utility infielder) and 67 million in salary relief. Not exactly the mega-package you're looking for. Same with Miguel Cabrera's trade. Underwhelming.

So no matter what the package is, it isn't enough. Not only does no team have the necessary prospect value to equate acquiring potentially the greatest player ever, but the Angels couldn't possibly recoup the amount Trout brings in from merchandising and just plain putting butts in the seats.

For better or worse, Trout is not tradable.

[Vegas Halo Fan]

I doubt that the Angels would ever seek to trade Trout, but if he wanted out it would probably be counterproductive to say no. Keeping a player who doesn't want to stay won't lead to anything good.

Edited February 12, 2016 by Vegas Halo Fan

[beatlesrule]

That's what I'm getting at. If Arte continues with this new way of thinking, Trout might want to not play for an owner like him anymore. Do you just let his contract run out and lose him for nothing? I would really hate to waste a once in a generation player but this off-season sure hasn't bode well for the future.

[Stradling]

I can envision Trout throwing ultimatums to the Angels, he has the juice to do it. Kobe wanted his roster upgraded or he was out / post shaq / pre gasol years

Not that you'll discuss this but I'll ask anyway, what in Trout's history makes you think he would ever give the Angels ultimatums? What makes you think Trout has a similar personality to Kobe? I think you might be projecting a little bit.

[ABC]

Yes, I agree that they shouldn't trade him.

 

But I'm concerned with Eppler at the helm as I really have no clue what his direction of the team is.

 

If you're Arte, you'd NEVER trade Trout if you're eventually planning on selling the team. 

 

Imagine how badly Eppler will get bent over by the other GM if he were to ever negotiate a Trout trade. Add in Arte's meddling and Sosh's old school instincts and it'll make the MCab trade look like a winner. 

[Angel Oracle]

Yes, I agree that they shouldn't trade him.

But I'm concerned with Eppler at the helm as I really have no clue what his direction of the team is.

If you're Arte, you'd NEVER trade Trout if you're eventually planning on selling the team.

. + infinity

Keeping a payroll reasonable is admittedly very important.

So is keeping a player that will make the team attractive to prospective owners.

Don't even think about it for 3 years. Then see how things are going in December 2018.

Edited February 12, 2016 by Angel Oracle

[Angel Oracle]

There is no need to trade him. He is so young that he will still be good when the team is ready to compete again (assuming a rebuild). But you gotta lock him up before Harper hits free agency. I'd say rip up his old deal and offer him 12/360.

It would only add $6 million AAV towards the threshold for 2016, and would only take your own star player to his age 35/36 season.

[DMVol]

.....Don't even think about it for 3 years. Then see how things are going in December 2018.

^^^This^^^.....no reason to worry about this right now.....Trout could get hurt badly, we could get lucky with a FA signing (if we ever do that again) or a trade....let's play ball for a couple of years before we worry about it....

[wopphil]

It would only add $6 million AAV towards the threshold for 2016, and would only take your own star player to his age 35/36 season.

As absurd as it sounds, even something in the realm of 13-14 years and $400 mil could be okay for the team.

To put the numbers in context, Zack Greinke is getting $34 mil per through his age 37 season. Paying Trout (a far more valuable player) the same annual salary, through the same aged season, puts you at 14/476. At 12/360+, the Angels would be getting a bargain.

[gotbeer]

One possibly two year from FA'cy, and it's obvious that he isn't going to sign and extension and is going to bolt for either Baltimore, Philly, or NY. 

 

Then you would have to be the most idiotic organization ever not to trade him for a boatload of prospects. 

[Stradling]

As absurd as it sounds, even something in the realm of 13-14 years and $400 mil could be okay for the team.

To put the numbers in context, Zack Greinke is getting $34 mil per through his age 37 season. Paying Trout (a far more valuable player) the same annual salary, through the same aged season, puts you at 14/476. At 12/360+, the Angels would be getting a bargain.

While it may be a bargain it is still a huge risk. Is it a risk they should consider, probably, but a risk none the less. I doubt they let Trout ever get to free agency as long as he is healthy.

[Mark68]

I could see it being contemplated if circumstances dictated a full rebuild. On the one hand, trading Trout would go a significant way toward that rebuild, but on the other hand, I don't think we'd ever be able to get full value.

[totdprods]

Could it be possible we balked from spending big money this year because Arte is already kicking around offering Trout another extension in the near future? That doesn't seem likely but when you look at Moreno's involvement with major FAs and that insane extension he gave Scioscia, it's not impossible. I'm talking something Artecrazy - 10 yrs/$375, 15/$400. May be another reason why he's tried to keep below the luxury tax line, he knows he may be adding heavily to it soon. Would be a good PR/fan morale move too.

[Angel Oracle]

Except that a redone contract would not add that much to the team payrolls or team AAVs for 2016-2020, maybe $6-$9 million/season extra tops?

 

I would wait though until after 2017/2018.

Edited February 12, 2016 by Angel Oracle

[totdprods]

Except that a redone contract would not add that much to the team payrolls or team AAVs for 2016-2020, maybe $6-$9 million/season extra tops?

I would wait though until after 2017/2018.

His current contract has an AAV of 24 (6yr/144)

A 10/375 (reasonable) would be an AAV of 37.5 - so, add 13.5m to luxury tax.

[Angel Oracle]

True, I was looking at the 15 years/$400 million example though.

But 15 years after 2017, even for Trout, would be 3 too many years.