Posted March 4, 201411 yr He should walk away from the $150 million or so that few of us can imagine turning down. Even with life-changing money on the table, Trout should tell the Angels that he'd rather go year to year instead. Trout has already passed the point of a serious injury wrecking his future earnings potential. At this point, Trout is just one single year away from arbitration, where his 2015 salary will be determined based on his career performance. And the reality is that he doesn't even have to be that good or healthy next year to land a really large payout in arbitration. For example, Giancarlo Stanton alright, alright.... read the rest of Dave Cameron's dumb article here at ESPN
March 6, 201411 yr The only reason I can see for Trout turning down that kind of money from the Angels is that the last few times they paid that kind of money, it hasn't worked out so well. Trout only has to look at Grady Sizemore to see what can happen down the road. I remember some who believed that he was the best player in baseball years ago, but a lot of good that's done for him in recent years.
March 6, 201411 yr It's much easier to say those kinds of things when you have no chance of ever being in that kind of position. If the Angels do offer him $150 mil +, he will accept. He'll still be young enough to get another big contract after that anyway.
March 6, 201411 yr Common sense if you aren't already super rich. Pujols could say no to 150. Trout? No
March 29, 201411 yr alright, alright.... read the rest of Dave Cameron's dumb article here at ESPN Because of Cameron's article Trout only got 140 mill instead of the 150 mill He should sue him for 10 mill
March 30, 201411 yr Common sense if you aren't already super rich. Pujols could say no to 150. Trout? No Looks like you were right
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.