Just walk him

[wildbillhiccup]

1 hour ago, mdbdotcom said:

No, I don't. They are spending a lot of money, but building a winning team doesn't seem to be part of the equation.

I mean in their defense they've had some bad breaks this season. Ohtani not being able to pitch...Skagg's unfortunate and unexpected death...Cody Allen's inability to get anyone out. I think the Angels also really handcuffed themselves financially with the Pujols contract. 

[Frobby]

So, over/under on how long it will take Trout to earn his $420 mm per fangraphs’ valuation method?    They have him at $53 mm so far this year, with more than 1/3 of the season remaining.    

[Chavez Ravine]

The BBC had this interview/story about Trout a bit after the Yankees-Red Sox series:

http://www.bbc.com/sport/baseball/48894773

Quote

 

He compares his first Major League appearance to something out of a video game.

"I felt like I was just a kid playing the Xbox or Playstation."

 

Quote

 

I asked Trout about his decision to stick with the Angels. Loyalty, for him, is a two-way street.

"I've built so many friendships here and met a lot of great people," he said. "They treat me right."

 

 

[Moose Milligan]

2 hours ago, mdbdotcom said:

No, I don't. They are spending a lot of money, but building a winning team doesn't seem to be part of the equation.

This just makes no sense.  I can't stand it when sports fans say things like that their team "wants to make money but doesn't want to win."  As a long suffering Redskins fan, this sentiment has been bandied about for years in regards to Dan Snyder. 

It only stands to reason that if a team is winning, they make more money.  We are witnesses to that very recently.  A few years ago, OPACY was packed.  We had playoff games.  They made more money than they did last year or this year, strictly just going off gate receipts, concessions sold, merch, etc.  In regards to Snyder, well, the stadium was half empty towards the end of last year, I wonder how he feels about it.

When teams win, they bring more fans, more attention and make more.  I am sure they Angels would love to have a winning team centered around Mike Trout.  

[Moose Milligan]

42 minutes ago, Frobby said:

So, over/under on how long it will take Trout to earn his $420 mm per fangraphs’ valuation method?    They have him at $53 mm so far this year, with more than 1/3 of the season remaining.    

At that rate...what, 5 seasons?  5 and a half?  

The thing with Trout is that he hasn't had THAT season yet where it's like...holy #$%^.  Like, Bryce Harper had that season a few years ago where he won the MVP.  The amazing thing about Trout is that he's had a whole career of just pissing excellence all over MLB but hasn't had those one or two career seasons.  I am not sure if he ever will either, because I don't see how he could get much better.  

[mdbdotcom]

5 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

This just makes no sense.  I can't stand it when sports fans say things like that their team "wants to make money but doesn't want to win."  As a long suffering Redskins fan, this sentiment has been bandied about for years in regards to Dan Snyder. 

It only stands to reason that if a team is winning, they make more money.  We are witnesses to that very recently.  A few years ago, OPACY was packed.  We had playoff games.  They made more money than they did last year or this year, strictly just going off gate receipts, concessions sold, merch, etc.  In regards to Snyder, well, the stadium was half empty towards the end of last year, I wonder how he feels about it.

When teams win, they bring more fans, more attention and make more.  I am sure they Angels would love to have a winning team centered around Mike Trout.  

I didn't say anything about them wanting to make more money and I don't follow football, so, you're 0 for 2.

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, Moose Milligan said:

At that rate...what, 5 seasons?  5 and a half?  

The thing with Trout is that he hasn't had THAT season yet where it's like...holy #$%^.  Like, Bryce Harper had that season a few years ago where he won the MVP.  The amazing thing about Trout is that he's had a whole career of just pissing excellence all over MLB but hasn't had those one or two career seasons.  I am not sure if he ever will either, because I don't see how he could get much better.  

Trout has had three years with a higher rWAR than Harper's holy #$%^ year.  That includes last year when Trout only played in 140 games.  (Fangraphs is even more pro-Trout).

[Tx Oriole]

1 hour ago, TommyPickles said:

If the Angels win one World Series during Trout's tenure then his deal was worth it. I think they will.  

 

I hope not. Sorry. I’m not a fan of the Angels.

[Jagwar]

O's pitchers should be fined $250 for every strike they throw to Trout. 

 

[Can_of_corn]

2 minutes ago, Jagwar said:

O's pitchers should be fined $250 for every strike they throw to Trout. 

 

If you ain't going to throw him a strike you might as well just IBB him.  He isn't going to chase three pitches in an at bat.

[O's84]

Trout is incredible.  The man just doesn't have "down" seasons.  Excluding his shortened rookie season (40 games), his low season WAR is 6.6 and that was a season where he missed almost 50 games.  So if you exclude that his lowest WAR is 7.6 .  Other than that he has two 9+ WAR seasons and three 10+ WAR seasons!

And yeah, he's finished top 5 in the MVP voting ever year but his rookie year, and he's finished in the top 2 in the MVP voting 6 times!  He also should probably have at least 2 more MVP's. 

So yeah, that guy is freaking awesome.

[foxfield]

3 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

You can try and fail.  I do think they are trying.

I agree. The Orioles went into last season “going for it” and failed pretty clearly. 

[bobmc]

10 hours ago, O's84 said:

Trout is incredible.  The man just doesn't have "down" seasons.  Excluding his shortened rookie season (40 games), his low season WAR is 6.6 and that was a season where he missed almost 50 games.  So if you exclude that his lowest WAR is 7.6 .  Other than that he has two 9+ WAR seasons and three 10+ WAR seasons!

And yeah, he's finished top 5 in the MVP voting ever year but his rookie year, and he's finished in the top 2 in the MVP voting 6 times!  He also should probably have at least 2 more MVP's. 

So yeah, that guy is freaking awesome.

He's also gone from four to five tools!  Had a 98.6 throw on a fly to the plate to nail Muncy the other night.

 

[tntoriole]

I would certainly walk him every time up. 

[Moose Milligan]

1 hour ago, Can_of_corn said:

Trout has had three years with a higher rWAR than Harper's holy #$%^ year.  That includes last year when Trout only played in 140 games.  (Fangraphs is even more pro-Trout).

I'm aware.  Maybe Harper was a bad choice, specifically because Harper and Trout are somewhat linked in the eyes of people. 

My point was that Trout hasn't had one season that stands head and shoulders above the rest, it's a very high level of consistent excellence.  Harper has one year that's clearly better than the rest.  I think most players have a career year or two.  Maybe three or four if they're lucky.  

Trout is in his age 27 season, approaching to be what's considered the prime age for a ballplayer.  It'll be interesting to see if he keeps stringing along seasons like he has or pushes it to another gear in his prime years.