https://www.ocregister.com/2022/07/27/angels-mike-trout-dealing-with-rare-back-condition/
Totally sucks if it is long lasting. Can Ohtani play the field (I know, bad idea) if Trout has to DH?
I have often wondered if a team that could afford these deals nonetheless said "we will continue to spend as we have but under no circumstances at all will we ever have a deal that ranks in the top 10 in MLB contracts", and stuck to it, would that result in a better use of resources, in a save-us-from-ourselves kind of way.
I doubt it changes things overall. The owners can't exactly all decide to stop giving out big/long contracts (collusion) and the players would never agree to caps on salary or contract length in a CBA. Owners are going to continue to spend the money one way or another, and all it takes is one owner desperate for the one missing piece to keep setting the market that the rest are forced to follow in order to compete.
Unfortunately that seems to be a nearly annual statement when it comes to his injury luck and history:
Do we possibly see some shift across the board towards shorter contracts with higher AAV instead? Players still make a lot of money while owners are protected a bit. Lowers what a guy can guarantee to make, but if they stay healthy and productive there will be more contracts to be had.
While reading the numbers may sound crazy it may just be the answer.
Probably not without a change to the CBA. I think part of the reason teams do these super long deals is that the length somewhat moderates the AAV so it's less harmful to the luxury tax calculations. Higher AAVs might push teams up to and over the luxury tax more often, though with shorter deals they might be able to dip under more easily also.
I don’t think so, because the players don’t want that. The recent trend is for players to get extremely long deals - often with multiple player opt outs. It’s certainly in the players favor, but it only takes one team to agree to a deal and someone always does. Look at Soto or Devers; most seem ok with deals of ten years plus for each of these guys, right? Even though Trout is a perfect example of “shit happens”.
I'd argue the future of the sport belongs to some of the young players now (Soto, Tatis, Witt, Robert, Vlad Jr) + Ohtani. Trout is still the best player in baseball but he's 30 and I don't even think he's the most popular player on the Angels. Ohtani jerseys have outsold Trout, one of the best all-time players, for basically 3 years.
I agree (and would most definitely add Julio to the list), and you make a good point.
There a number of people who could have had a shot of that record if it were not for injuries.
Not like Trout. Through 2019 he was year after year setting the MLB record for "most war through age x" Then he fell behind in 2020 due to COVID and then the injuries hit.
Without looking up numbers, Griffey and Mantle immediately come to mind.
Griffey. 76.2 bWAR through age 30 season, 7.6 bWAR age 31 through age 40 season (Trout is in his age 30 season and currently has 79.9 bWAR, fwiw). I recall the vibe in the 2000s with Griffey was like what we're seeing with Trout... "oh, Griffey is on Sportscenter again, what did he hurt now?"
Yeah, like part of the reason the career WAR record is the career WAR record is because Barry Bonds (or Willie Mays) were really good for a super duper long time.
Yea, but no one really wants to talk about that because Trout is kind of boring and plays for the Angels. Yay, he was 20% better than these other guys. Griffey, now that guy was fun. Here's 21 minutes of Griffey hitting dingers which is way more fun than I've ever had watching Trout.
So he fell off the pace sooner than the others. Even the best players of all time in their 20s are a decent bet to drop off a cliff when they hit 30. I guess teams are pricing that reality into the AAV of these 10-15 year contracts, or they're just hoping to be bailed out by inflation or their own version of the Punto trade.
20% better according to WAR, which is a kind of bullshit number anyway. Baseball is entertainment and competition. Lots of walks and being really good at everything isn't as entertaining as watching someone who is really great at one thing. And the Angels haven't been competing for anything since he's been there. So mock all you'd like, but it's perfectly reasonable to rather watch Griffey play and beat the Yankees in the 1995 ALDS than watch Trout lead his team to another 78 win season.
Who can really disagree with someone’s preference for watching Griffey over Trout, but the Angels’ struggles for the last decade plus have nothing to do with Trout’s performance.
I got to thinking about this post as Wade Boggs is being discussed on the main board.
I've said it elsewhere, but there's a case to be made that the most well-known baseball player of the past 10 years is Tim Tebow.
Thank you for posting that video! Two things:
