You are viewing the chat in desktop mode. Click here to switch to mobile view.
X
Live Chat With Tim Dierkes
powered byJotCast
Tim Dierkes
2:00
Today, I imagine we'll be answering a lot of Mike Trout questions!  Before we dig into his contract and its context, let's celebrate the fact that the game's best player will play most of or his entire career with one team.  That's always a win for the sport.
Tyler
2:01
What are the odds Trout get traded during his contract like ARod and Stanton did?
Tim Dierkes
2:01
I'd put those odds around 15%.  Those two were special circumstances.
Orioles
2:01
Does Bryce Harper regret signing with philly now that trout won’t be going there ?
Tim Dierkes
2:01
No, I don't think he cares much or based his decision on that at all.
Nick Leyva
2:02
All the people (fans) saying Harper's comments expedited this deal by LA are crazy, right?  One did NOT have to do with the other, right?
Tim Dierkes
2:02
No way.
Jimmy
2:02
Do you think Trout got assurances the Angels would build a competitive team around him?
Tim Dierkes
2:02
I would have to think it was a significant point of discussion.  We'll see if that comes up at the press conference.  It would help if Arte would actually raise payroll meaningfully.
John
2:02
Now that trout has been signed forever. Do you think teams are kicking themselves not going after harper?
Tim Dierkes
2:03
Well, I think it does accentuate the rarity of Harper and Machado being free agents at the age they are.  You just don't have the opportunity to snag this type of player with just money every year.
KO
2:03
Do you imagine Bryce is as salty about this as people are thinking today?
Tim Dierkes
2:03
I don't think Bryce is even 1% salty about this.
Mike
2:03
The 2020 free agency is kind of boring now.... (unless betts holds out until then)
Tim Dierkes
2:04
You're talking to the wrong guy - I never find free agency boring.
Matt
2:04
Does Betts top 400 mm now?
Tim Dierkes
2:05
I think I threw around some numbers in a recent chat.  An open bidding scenario helps Mookie - Trout obviously didn't have that - as well as teams not having to sign him two years out.  Plus, there could be at least a little bit of inflation in player salaries over the next two years, even though they did just go backwards two winters in a row.
Do I think he tops $400 mil though?  I do not.
Average Fan
2:05
Imagine your team brings in their closer in the 9th of a one-run game.  He doesn't have it that day and can't find the strike zone.  Walks the first two batters.  Now you have no choice but to sit back and watch him walk the bases loaded with no outs before you can bring someone else in to try to win the game.  Would anybody really be happy with that?
Tim Dierkes
2:06
No one would, but that's also a bit of an edge case.  I believe that even without the impending three-batter rule, most teams would leave an established closer in for a third batter even after walking two guys on eight pitches.
sam
2:06
MT is a GREAT player. BUT no player is worth $220,000 per game. That amount can purchase 4 REALLY GOOD PLAYERS.
Tim Dierkes
2:07
This might be trolling, but yeah, Trout is easily worth $36MM a year for the amount of value he provides.
Lunar verLander
2:07
I know it isn't Mike Trout related, but the Altuve extension still kind of boggles my mind. A team that normally doesn't hand out long term extensions gave one to a player who had a career year (and therefore was negotiating from a position of strength) represented by a person who almost never goes for mid-term extensions...that's weird, right? I know it was only a year ago, but it still seems weird...right?
Tim Dierkes
2:08
YES!!!  I was putting together a list of the recent megadeals, whether free agency or extensions, and Altuve stuck out like a sore thumb.  The deal was very, very un-Astros like and I think there's a good chance it comes back to bite them.  And it was not necessary.
Peter
2:08
Does anyone top 430mm? Do the Mets go with Vargas as the #5 starter?
Tim Dierkes
2:10
It is now time for me to launch a PSA!  Please inform all of your friends.  When the story on the Trout deal broke, the $430MM figure was splashed around.  In ESPN's headline, prominently in the article, and I imagine on SportsCenter.  But $430MM was never the number, it's more likely just an agent trying to frame the contract in his favor.  This is a $360MM contract extension.  Trout did 9% better than Bryce Harper did.  Trout is closer to Harper's deal than to $400MM.
2:11
Most of us thought 10/400 was around what Trout would get.  For a player who is so transcendent, the thinking was that he would do more than inch the ball forward on contracts.  But he did not.  And that's a choice by the player and there's nothing wrong with it, but I also don't want to pretend that Trout shattered Harper's deal or the $400MM barrier.
tad2b13
2:11
Is the Trout signing good news for Mookie's coming free-agency? Thanks Tim.
Tim Dierkes
2:12
Yes, I'd say pulling Trout off the market is beneficial to Mookie.  I have not checked out the 2020-21 free agent class in depth yet though.
Gio George
2:12
Mike Trout is the face of baseball and looks really good for staying with the Angels.
Tim Dierkes
2:13
I don't know that he is the face of baseball.  He's an awesome player who does not have an electric personality.  But yeah, I like that he stayed.
Greg
2:13
Who is the big name that people will tie to the Yankees now that Trout is locked up now?
Tim Dierkes
2:13
Maybeeee...Lindor?
Colby
2:13
Didnt Trout cut himself way short?  I know it was largest deal ever by a good margin, but i see no way the Phillies werent prepared to spend more "stupid" money on Trout.  10 year $400 million.  He is worth every penny.
Tim Dierkes
2:15
From the players union standpoint, yes, he cut himself short by a good amount.  He's just so much better than Bryce Harper to only get $30MM more.  From a Mike Trout standpoint...you're a surefire Hall of Famer who earned over half a billion dollars.  I imagine at that point, the possible additional $50MM you MIGHT have gotten two years from now, possibly playing for a team/city you didn't prefer, wasn't worth waiting.
Jake
2:15
I HATE the three batter rule.  It damages the fabric of the game.
Tim Dierkes
2:16
I read something, maybe from Mike Petriello, that this rule would have affected each team maybe once per week in 2018.  That's worth keeping in mind.  No one likes rule changes affecting outcomes, but I also don't know too many people who like seeing lefty specialists face one batter, sandwiched by commercial breaks.
Personally, I reserve the right to sit back, watch how the rule affects the game, and then decide whether I like it.
NY bias??
2:17
Listening to NY sports talk theyre saying Judge is the face of MLB and should get a contract like this RIGHT NOW!  To me, this sounds completely insane - Judge is not yet quite the face of MLB and has only performed at a high level for a year and a half?  and he's older?  Maybe I'm missing something but right now, i dont think you can compare Judge to Trout...am I mistaken here???
Load More Messages
Connecting…