Pretty compelling argument here...cant say I disagree
And that reality prompts the obvious question: is it time to think about trading Mike Trout?
You never want to be in a position where you’re potentially thinking about trading one of the greatest players of all time. The Angels should want Mike Trout to retire having worn only their jersey, and go into the Hall of Fame as a lifelong Angel. When you have a +10 win player, you should want to take advantage of his greatness and put a winner around him.
But the Angels have tried that, and thanks to some bad decisions that have long-term consequences — the Albert Pujols contract still has another $140 million left after this season — it’s not entirely clear that the team can actually do that. Their farm system isn’t just the worst in baseball; it’s the worst that anyone can remember in some time. If the Angels keep Mike Trout, and just keep trying to surround him with decent free agents while trying to build back up the prospect base, there’s a pretty good chance they’ll be a 75 win team for the remainder of his contract, and then they’ll have to convince him to re-sign another contract with a franchise that spent six years failing to provide him with adequate support.
Maybe Trout just loves the Angels so much that he’d do that. But wallowing around .500 for a few years for the hope that Trout eventually chooses to pass on joining teams with better rosters and more money for the right to stay with a team that wasted his prime seems like a bad bet. And if they make that bet and then he still leaves, then all they’ll have done is put off the inevitable, while squandering the ability to rebuild the franchise entirely in the meantime.
It’s not a decision the Angels want to be faced with, but Richards injury should force them to at least consider the possibility that the best path forward for the franchise is to blow this thing up. Trading Mike Trout would not only bring back an incredible return in young talent — imagine the package the Dodgers could put together — but would also allow the team to admit that it’s time to pivot, focusing on loading up with as many young players as possible, spending big on international free agency and the draft instead of throwing $15 to $20 million at another pitcher at the end of his career who might not be good enough to help anyway.
This isn’t a foolproof plan, of course. Teams have traded away superstars to enter rebuilding cycles, only to see the young players they load up on all fail, and have ended up without a present or a future. Trading Trout isn’t so obviously the right move that the team should just take any offer on the table. Maybe Billy Eppler and his staff can figure out how to spend that $40 million effectively this winter, putting a winner around Trout instead of trying to build one without him.
But at this point, with 2016 likely another lost year and 2017’s ability to bounce back being put into question as well, it’s time for the Angels to at least start thinking about what a Mike Trout trade would look like. And if the Dodgers or Red Sox want to overwhelm them with a crazy package of young talent, then they should at least have that discussion.
The Angels were already on the tipping point, needing some things to go their way in order to justify their continued attempts at contention. Losing Richards is a significant blow not just because of how good he is, but because of how fragile the Angels hopes were. At this point, without their ace, the Angels should also start thinking about what life might look like without Mike Trout.
And that reality prompts the obvious question: is it time to think about trading Mike Trout?
You never want to be in a position where you’re potentially thinking about trading one of the greatest players of all time. The Angels should want Mike Trout to retire having worn only their jersey, and go into the Hall of Fame as a lifelong Angel. When you have a +10 win player, you should want to take advantage of his greatness and put a winner around him.
But the Angels have tried that, and thanks to some bad decisions that have long-term consequences — the Albert Pujols contract still has another $140 million left after this season — it’s not entirely clear that the team can actually do that. Their farm system isn’t just the worst in baseball; it’s the worst that anyone can remember in some time. If the Angels keep Mike Trout, and just keep trying to surround him with decent free agents while trying to build back up the prospect base, there’s a pretty good chance they’ll be a 75 win team for the remainder of his contract, and then they’ll have to convince him to re-sign another contract with a franchise that spent six years failing to provide him with adequate support.
Maybe Trout just loves the Angels so much that he’d do that. But wallowing around .500 for a few years for the hope that Trout eventually chooses to pass on joining teams with better rosters and more money for the right to stay with a team that wasted his prime seems like a bad bet. And if they make that bet and then he still leaves, then all they’ll have done is put off the inevitable, while squandering the ability to rebuild the franchise entirely in the meantime.
It’s not a decision the Angels want to be faced with, but Richards injury should force them to at least consider the possibility that the best path forward for the franchise is to blow this thing up. Trading Mike Trout would not only bring back an incredible return in young talent — imagine the package the Dodgers could put together — but would also allow the team to admit that it’s time to pivot, focusing on loading up with as many young players as possible, spending big on international free agency and the draft instead of throwing $15 to $20 million at another pitcher at the end of his career who might not be good enough to help anyway.
This isn’t a foolproof plan, of course. Teams have traded away superstars to enter rebuilding cycles, only to see the young players they load up on all fail, and have ended up without a present or a future. Trading Trout isn’t so obviously the right move that the team should just take any offer on the table. Maybe Billy Eppler and his staff can figure out how to spend that $40 million effectively this winter, putting a winner around Trout instead of trying to build one without him.
But at this point, with 2016 likely another lost year and 2017’s ability to bounce back being put into question as well, it’s time for the Angels to at least start thinking about what a Mike Trout trade would look like. And if the Dodgers or Red Sox want to overwhelm them with a crazy package of young talent, then they should at least have that discussion.
The Angels were already on the tipping point, needing some things to go their way in order to justify their continued attempts at contention. Losing Richards is a significant blow not just because of how good he is, but because of how fragile the Angels hopes were. At this point, without their ace, the Angels should also start thinking about what life might look like without Mike Trout.
