3 reasons why an offseason Mike Trout trade makes no sense for the Angels

Trading Mike Trout would be a foolish decision.
Los Angeles Angels v New York Mets
Los Angeles Angels v New York Mets / Jim McIsaac/GettyImages
facebooktwitterreddit
Prev
3 of 3
Next

3) MIke Trout's contract is too expensive for the LA Angels to get anything worthwhile for

The Angels cannot trade MIke Trout just to trade the contract. Getting rid of the remaining seven years at roughly $250 million total would be nice, but trading Mike Trout just to clear cap is not what should happen.

The only way the team should really consider trading Trout is if they can get a legitimate return. This can mean either MLB players or prospects, as long as the value makes sense. The chances of this happening are almost zero without the Angels eating most of the contract.

The Angels could follow what Steve Cohen did when he traded Max Scherzer and Justin Verlander at the trade deadline when he ate a ton of money in order to get top prospects in return, but the Angels are unlikely to do this with Trout.

Trout still has seven years left. Do you really expect Arte Moreno to eat likely well upwards of $100 million total over the course of the next seven seasons to watch Trout play elsewhere just so the Angels can get a lottery ticket prospect in return?

The way for the Angels to get a satisfying return for Trout would be if they got rid of the money and got a prospect or two back. That simply won't happen, making it virtually impossible he gets moved without a demand.

manual