Sign in to follow this  
Griffey's Corner

What Is The Most You Would Pay Mike Trout Before You Traded Him?

152 posts in this topic

Just curious. He is 27 now. Has 2 years left on his deal. Personally I would go as high as 6 additional years and go as high as $35 million a year. So 6/210. This would take him up to age 35.

 

I probably would not go above $35 million a year.... maybe $40 million a year if it was just for 1-2 more years on top of his current contract.

 

If you don't pay him enough money than the alternative is you have to trade him for some stud prospects and I suppose use the money saved to go out and hire 2 Justin Upton types.

 

This is not a question of what the Angels will do or what you think will happen.... just a question on if you were the owner what is the maximum you would go too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mike will be making $33 million at the end of this contract....That is your starting point.

I would guess something like 6 year at $250-270 million  That averages between $40 and $45 million per year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does OP know what Trout makes now ? 35 million is your max ? Then kiss Trout goodbye. 

People really need to let go of the idea that trading Mike Trout will result in the return of a near Mike Trout.  There’s a very solid chance that a trade wouldn’t even bring an all star back to the Angels.   Trading him is just barely a step above letting him walk with a comp pick at the end of 2020.

There is no grey area here.  The Angels are fucked if they don’t re-sign him.  10 years 400 million and all kinds of post career perks  if that’s what it takes. 

Think about this way.  Does anyone believe that the Blue Jays would trade Vlad Jr. for him straight up ? Or that the Braves would trade Acunà.  Or that the Nationals would trade Juan Soto ?

i suspect that they would not. 

Edited by UndertheHalo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its not my money.

But seriously, that contract won't be enough, Griffey. He's going to be paid more--both per year and total contract--than any player ever. Right now the records are:

$35.5 million per year (Kershaw)

$325 million total (Stanton, 13 years)

To start, we have to speculate on what Machado and Harper will get. We won't know until they actually sign, but it will likely be as much or more than Stanton but in fewer years. Let's say that they both get somewhere between 10/$325M to 12/$400M. 

Trout will make more.

Trout is currently making $34.1M per year, through 2020, his age 28 season. I think an extension adds 8-12 years. Let's just say ten. 

So how to rework Trout's 2 years at $34M to 12 years?

The bare minimum will be 10@$35M per year = 10/$350M. But I think realistically you add two years and have to expect at least $40M per year average, so 12/$480M. Add in some bonuses and incentives we're looking at 12/$500M. That's my prediction, with a four-year opt out and probably weird clauses and stipulations that befit one of the greatest ever. Maybe he gets some deal that guarantees him $450M but can earn him $500-600M.

What would I pay him if I'm Arte? As much as it takes...within reason. But I might start thinking twice once we got over 12/$500M. But I'd guarantee that much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Angelsjunky said:

Its not my money.

But seriously, that contract won't be enough, Griffey. He's going to be paid more--both per year and total contract--than any player ever. Right now the records are:

$35.5 million per year (Kershaw)

$325 million total (Stanton, 13 years)

To start, we have to speculate on what Machado and Harper will get. We won't know until they actually sign, but it will likely be as much or more than Stanton but in fewer years. Let's say that they both get somewhere between 10/$325M to 12/$400M. 

Trout will make more.

Trout is currently making $34.1M per year, through 2020, his age 28 season. I think an extension adds 8-12 years. Let's just say ten. 

So how to rework Trout's 2 years at $34M to 12 years?

The bare minimum will be 10@$35M per year = 10/$350M. But I think realistically you add two years and have to expect at least $40M per year average, so 12/$480M. Add in some bonuses and incentives we're looking at 12/$500M. That's my prediction, with a four-year opt out and probably weird clauses and stipulations that befit one of the greatest ever. Maybe he gets some deal that guarantees him $450M but can earn him $500-600M.

What would I pay him if I'm Arte? As much as it takes...within reason. But I might start thinking twice once we got over 12/$500M. But I'd guarantee that much.

I hope you’re wrong 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You offer him 10/400 and if he doesn’t take it, you consider a trade maybe

what they need to not do is make some lowball offer like 6/200 that gets laughed at by him and his agent.

they really need to make a fair offer right off the bat and I think they will

the fact is he’s making a lot of money right now and still deserves a raise. And he’s srill going to be at his peak. So you have to offer him the money and the term

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, GrittyVeterans said:

You offer him 10/400 and if he doesn’t take it, you consider a trade maybe

what they need to not do is make some lowball offer like 6/200 that gets laughed at by him and his agent.

they really need to make a fair offer right off the bat and I think they will

the fact is he’s making a lot of money right now and still deserves a raise. And he’s srill going to be at his peak. So you have to offer him the money and the term

I agree, but it will be quite easy not to lowball if they wait for Machado and Harper. You invite Trout and his agent into the office and say, "Manny and Bryce got X and Y; you're better, and deserve more. Here's what they got, plus Z% more."

In a way it doesn't matter what that "Z"  is, as long as it is more than X and Y. That's your starting point: more than X and Y.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, WeatherWonk said:

F*ck, I always sucked at solving linear equations with THREE variables, AJ.............

Haha, but this is really simple. Let's say:

Harper gets: 12 x $33M = $400M (roughly).

Machado gets: 10 x $35M -= $350M. 

Trout gets at least 12 x $35 = $420M, which is the best of both Harper and Machado. 

That's the offer, the starting point - which you'll end up going above and beyond. But you start with more than Harper/Machado...as long as it is more, no offense will be taken.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We'll know more after Harper & Machado cash in. He's definitely worth more than both of them. I don't think Trout only plays for the money; however, if he was a Boras client and ONLY looking for the top payday, he'd have to be looking at least $10 million average per year more than either of those guys.

Mike Trout Porn Alert!!!

He came up a little before Harper & Machado. He's got a higher career WAR than both of those guys COMBINED! (63 to 60.5)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Troll Daddy said:

Step one: See if he open to extension talks 

Step two: Talk to his agent about length of contract, opt outs, money, perks, etc. 

Step three: Set up a meeting at Del Taco

And what if his agent says, "let's meet at Jersey Mike's, instead"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Griffey's Corner said:

Just curious. He is 27 now. Has 2 years left on his deal. Personally I would go as high as 6 additional years and go as high as $35 million a year. So 6/210. This would take him up to age 35.

 

I probably would not go above $35 million a year.... maybe $40 million a year if it was just for 1-2 more years on top of his current contract.

 

If you don't pay him enough money than the alternative is you have to trade him for some stud prospects and I suppose use the money saved to go out and hire 2 Justin Upton types.

 

This is not a question of what the Angels will do or what you think will happen.... just a question on if you were the owner what is the maximum you would go too.

I would make him an Angel for life. Something like 12 years/400 million (33 million a year).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, WeatherWonk said:

And what if his agent says, "let's meet at Jersey Mike's, instead"?

Then you give him an extra $10M a year for being smart enough to eat at Jersey Mike's instead of Taco Bell, thus giving a much better chance at surviving long enough to finish the contract.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Angelsjunky said:

I agree, but it will be quite easy not to lowball if they wait for Machado and Harper. You invite Trout and his agent into the office and say, "Manny and Bryce got X and Y; you're better, and deserve more. Here's what they got, plus Z% more."

In a way it doesn't matter what that "Z"  is, as long as it is more than X and Y. That's your starting point: more than X and Y.

this is true although I disagree with your estimates of what Machado and Harper will get.   Agree that the total amount needs to be more than Stanton and the AAV more than Kersh.  

We all know that both Harper and Machado are better than Jason Heyward who got 8/$184.  

Heyward for age 20-25 - 29.8 bWAR .  
Harper for age 19-25 - 27.5 bWAR (with a few games left)
Machado for age 19-25 - 33.0 bWAR (with a few games left).  
Stanton for age 20-24 (ages prior to extension) - 21.3 bWAR - so one less season than Machado and two less than Harper.  Plus, his deal included buying out two years of arb that included age 25, 26 for 15.5 mil  So the deal is really 11/$310 starting from age 27.  

So let's consider a few things:

First and foremost.  I don't think teams are going to pay $30+ mil for those guys age 33-36 seasons.   I think the market has changed.  The Cano, Fielder and Pujols deals are certainly a factor in that thought process.  
An interesting consideration is advanced defensive metrics.  Machado is not a good SS and Harper is not a good OFer.  Poor defense ages poorly.  
Both have had some excellent seasons but also some head scratchers.  
Machado is likely more valuable but Harper had Boras.  However, Boras got his ass kicked last year.  
Who's gonna pay 300-400 mil for one player relative to their current situation?  
AL East. Boston - maybe, but I kinda doubt it relative to their current payroll, success without said player and what they're gonna have to pay a bunch of their young guys soon.  NY - same as boston but a little more likely for Machado cuz they're the yankees.   They could trade Andujar for a pitcher.    
No one in the AL central - CWS could be a dark horse for one of them.  that would actually drive up their price big time.  
No one in the AL west (the Angels have their $400 mil guy.  they aren't getting another that's close)
NL West - the dogs might but they're fairly savvy these days and they will likely extend Kersh.   The Giants can probably afford it but they have to know they're circling the drain and headed toward a rebuild.  
NL Central - Cubs and Cards are candidates.  Cubs are already staring at going well past the lux tax if they pick up all their options.  Cards actually make a lot of sense for either.  They've got very good young pitching, payroll space, and could use a young punch to the middle of their lineup.  Probably my top pick for where one ends up.  My guess is Harper because I don't think the Cards have a great relationship with Lozano anymore (Pujols and Machado).   They have no Lozano rep'd players right now.  
NL East - I could see the Nats retaining Harper.  I think Atlanta could be in play for either and of course Philly is in play as well.  

I think you have to ask yourself if any of those scenarios end up with one of those guys making $400 mil.  I think $300 will be the absolute max.  

That said, I think Trout will get an AAV of 37m.  I think he'll get a 9 year extension with an opt out after 3 yrs.  So 9/333.  
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Griffey's Corner said:

Just curious. He is 27 now. Has 2 years left on his deal. Personally I would go as high as 6 additional years and go as high as $35 million a year. So 6/210. This would take him up to age 35.

 

I probably would not go above $35 million a year.... maybe $40 million a year if it was just for 1-2 more years on top of his current contract.

 

If you don't pay him enough money than the alternative is you have to trade him for some stud prospects and I suppose use the money saved to go out and hire 2 Justin Upton types.

 

This is not a question of what the Angels will do or what you think will happen.... just a question on if you were the owner what is the maximum you would go too.

Lol.  Ya.  No big deal. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this