Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Gizmo

Trout signs extension...6 yrs 144.5M

15 posts in this topic

Ken Rosenthal of FOX Sports confirmed that Trout's deal is worth $144.5 million. It will take him through his salary arbitration years and the first three years of free agency. The average yearly salary will be almost $24.1 million.

 

 

 

LINK

 

Pretty good deal for both sides imo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While Trout is probably the best player, $24 mil a year for a player with just 2 seasons under his belt seems crazy.  Obviously if he continues at the current level (or exceeds) and stays healthy, it's a great deal.  Still, it's a ton of money for such a young player.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While Trout is probably the best player, $24 mil a year for a player with just 2 seasons under his belt seems crazy.  Obviously if he continues at the current level (or exceeds) and stays healthy, it's a great deal.  Still, it's a ton of money for such a young player.

It's MLB bro. If I had a dollar for every MLB contract that didn't make sense, I'd be typing this from Tahiti with an umbrella drink in my hand ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's MLB bro. If I had a dollar for every MLB contract that didn't make sense, I'd be typing this from Tahiti with an umbrella drink in my hand ;)

 

Sad but true.  There were some pretty funny articles about the ridiculous Cabrera contract.  I guess Trout's next contract will be $40 mil a year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While Trout is probably the best player, $24 mil a year for a player with just 2 seasons under his belt seems crazy.  Obviously if he continues at the current level (or exceeds) and stays healthy, it's a great deal.  Still, it's a ton of money for such a young player.

 

I think the logic is, they're more likely to get a positive return on their investment. Trout is still pretty young and he hasn't hit his prime yet.

 

The alternative is for them to keep spending that kind of money on aging free agents who's best years are behind them(ie Pujols and Hamilton)...

Edited by soulflower

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

While Trout is probably the best player, $24 mil a year for a player with just 2 seasons under his belt seems crazy.  Obviously if he continues at the current level (or exceeds) and stays healthy, it's a great deal.  Still, it's a ton of money for such a young player.

 

 

It's better than whatever Miggy got for a 31 year old ballplayer.

 

Players should be paid for their current and future performance, not their past performance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm guessing, $18-20m per year

Angelos,will never pay that, or anything close to it. Angelos will not pay that when n his mind he can get 85% of Chris Davis' production for 15% of the cost of Chris Davis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Angelos,will never pay that, or anything close to it. Angelos will not pay that when n his mind he can get 85% of Chris Davis' production for 15% of the cost of Chris Davis.

I never said he would. The question was what it would take. Someone else might offer him $17.9m.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

$24 mil a year for a player with just 2 seasons under his belt seems crazy.

your reasoning is sound. the only reason I disagree with you, is because Trout had an MVP season in 2012. they he followed it up with an even better MVP season in 2013. one MVP season, by a young player, could be dismissed as a fluke. but, when he came back and topped it, he convinced me that he's a next level talent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's MLB bro. If I had a dollar for every MLB contract that didn't make sense, I'd be typing this from Tahiti with an umbrella drink in my hand ;)

 

And a morally compromised, barely legal Tahitian female in the other hand, no doubt. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Angelos,will never pay that, or anything close to it. Angelos will not pay that when n his mind he can get 85% of Chris Davis' production for 15% of the cost of Chris Davis.

I agree but Angelos did surprise me this offseason....

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  
Followers 0