Edit: Beaten. But man that just makes he think. Did he not think he could another 100 million dollar contract? Or is it cuz the way the market has been for anyone over 30?
Last edited:
Do people really want the Phillies to go total 90s Yankees and outplay for Mike Trout? Come on guys that just isn't fair.
I dont get the point of the Angles paying Trout $400m. They are going to be bad with or without him. Move him for a ton of prospects and hope you hit on a bunch.
They have made the playoffs once with Trout, if they have the money to compete every year why arnt they?
Are the Angles better off with the Phillies top 5 or 6 prospects plus all that money to spend on Fa's or with Trout? They have clearly tried for several years now to build a team around this great player and so far it has not worked for whatever reason. Who knows maybe you are right and they just hold on to him no matter what and hope they can get the rest of the team figured out. I just cant seem them doing a better job surround Trout with talent once he is the highest paid player in baseball.
Farhan should go back to the Dodgers. Giants don't deserve him!Giants CEO looking real good.
http://m.tmz.com/2019/03/01/larry-baer-giants-san-fransico-ceo-wife-altercation/
It's literally trading peak Barry Bonds. Like, no. Are you high? No. The man is arguably having the greatest career YoY so far through his time in the majors EVER. He has a compelling, legitimate argument that he is equal to peak Bonds.Mike Trout is worth like 9 wins alone. You trade him for prospects and sign some FAs there's not a chance in hell you make up that difference.
I'm not even sure what prospect package you would ask for for any number of years of Mike Trout in his 20sIt's literally trading peak Barry Bonds. Like, no. Are you high? No. The man is arguably having the greatest career YoY so far through his time in the majors EVER. He has a compelling, legitimate argument that he is equal to peak Bonds.
The reason he will never be traded despite the Angels likely never winning anything with him there is because there is no possible way they will ever get equitable value, they'd need to literally get two baseline career value HoF players back just to break even. And even just from a fan perspective, if my team traded Mike effing Trout in the prime of his career for a bunch of prospects I would renounce that shit immediately and never go to another game.
Plus I challenge the premise that they've made any real effort to put a quality team around Trout. They really haven't.
There isn't one, unless someone goes insane and offers you like, the entire top-15 of a top-3 farm system and even then.I'm not even sure what prospect package you would ask for for any number of years of Mike Trout in his 20s
The Angels being bad is one of those things I don't understand
I remember reading somewhere that Ohtani was a Pujols fan growing up. Maybe Pujols' contract wasn't all bad?
at this point you should have that gif voice activated. "Alexa, post Self Induced Ball Busting Combustion GIF."Here's what I wanted to post, but couldn't find it on my phone last night:
Here's what I wanted to post, but couldn't find it on my phone last night:
No team in the history of baseball has added 3 all stars to their team in the same offseason before the phils did it this offseason.
I remember reading somewhere that Ohtani was a Pujols fan growing up. Maybe Pujols' contract wasn't all bad?
I can't tell if this is sarcasm or not. Either is understandable.Yeah, I guess paying 17 million per WAR so far has really paid off dividends with those 3 years of 100k per WAR or so off a totally different guy. Especially since that number is probably going to go up 5 million over the next 3 years.
god i hope not
I would laugh them out of the office if all they're offering is 10 years, $350 million and I'm Mike Trout.
Reading an article about the Yankees that was greenlighted by Bill Simmons and finding yourself agreeing with every word of it is a pretty fucking depressing state of affairs
Handing out a ten year deal to an elite player, who is only 26 and would be massively improve the team, isn't dumb. But hey, Hal needs a new yacht.as long as the team isn't handing out dumb contracts to the Jacoby Ellsbury's of the world I'm fine with how they conduct business. and they did take on Stanton's contract so they aren't afraid of big contracts.
They only took on Stanton's contract because they assumed (correctly, but not by as much as they probably originally thought) it would be cheaper than Harper or Machado, especially with Jeter subsidizing some of it. The Stanton trade, in hindsight, was Hal's "Let them eat cake" moment.as long as the team isn't handing out dumb contracts to the Jacoby Ellsbury's of the world I'm fine with how they conduct business. and they did take on Stanton's contract so they aren't afraid of big contracts.
Handing out a ten year deal to an elite player, who is only 26 and would be massively improve the team, isn't dumb. But hey, Hal needs a new yacht.
They only took on Stanton's contract because they assumed (correctly, but not by as much as they probably originally thought) it would be cheaper than Harper or Machado, especially with Jeter subsidizing some of it. The Stanton trade, in hindsight, was Hal's "Let them eat cake" moment.