Mike Trout To Red Sox? Making Sense Of Whether Angels Would Trade Star

by

May 11, 2016

It’s a seemingly ridiculous, borderline ludicrous question. It feels crazy even just to ask.

But what would it take for the Los Angeles Angels to trade superstar Mike Trout?

The Angels are off to a miserable start in 2016. They enter play Wednesday six games under .500, and the injury bug won’t stop biting. Just last week, the Angels lost front-line starter Garrett Richards for the season after learning he needs Tommy John surgery. And the Halos also will be without shortstop Andrelton Simmons until July as he recovers from thumb surgery.

Also working against the Angels is the club’s general team-building over the last decade or so. The Angels have spent big money on high-priced free agents and have been aggressive in the trade market, leaving the club in an unenviable position of having a lot of money committed to aging players — for now — and not a lot in the farm system. For what it’s worth, Baseball America ranked the Angels’ farm system dead last entering the 2016 season.

That’s led some to wonder whether the Angels should consider trading the 24-year-old two-time American League MVP. On the surface, it seems preposterous. But if the Angels decide to blow it up — and trading Trout would mean they’re blowing it all up — he obviously would bring a massive return.

It’s hard to even imagine what it might take to acquire Trout. He’s one of the two or three best players in the game, and as mentioned, he’s young. He’s also relatively affordable, as he is signed through 2020 and is owed $30.5 million per season starting next season.

The list of teams who could even entertain the idea of trying to get the Angels to consider trading Trout is very small. In this hypothetical world, a trade partner would be a team with a strong farm system and/or good, young major league talent and pretty deep pockets.

MLB.com kicked around the unlikely scenario and came up with five teams who could trade for Trout: the Chicago Cubs, Boston Red Sox, New York Mets, Texas Rangers and Los Angeles Dodgers.

All five of those teams check off the would-be boxes, especially a team like the Red Sox. However, any such deal would be franchise-altering for Boston, an organization that has done a terrific job of stockpiling young assets at each level.

“For the Red Sox to be included in this type of trade,” MLB.com’s Jim Duquette wrote, “they would have to include top prospects like Yoan Moncada — the No. 5 prospect in MLB, per Pipeline — and Andrew Benintendi (No. 22), and then also throw in the likes of outfielder Jackie Bradley Jr. and lefty Eduardo Rodriguez, who would help the big league club now.

“That package would get them in the conversation with the Angels while Sox fans could watch a dream lineup of Mookie Betts, Dustin Pedroia, Trout and Xander Bogaerts for the next several seasons.”

Of course, Duquette’s proposed package — one that doesn’t even include Betts and/or Bogaerts — might not be nearly enough to secure a player like Trout. This almost certainly is a pie-in-the-sky discussion.

There are just too many factors going against the idea of trading Trout. He’s one of the best young players in baseball — have we mentioned that enough? And at just 24, Trout really hasn’t even entered his prime yet. So you could make the argument that the Angels — who have played in just three playoff games since Trout’s debut in 2011 — are only wasting Trout’s “pre-prime.”

Perhaps even more importantly, the Angels have a ton of money coming off the books very soon. Their nearly $165 million payroll is one of baseball’s biggest this season, but that all changes next season when contracts for players like C.J. Wilson and Jered Weaver — owed a combined $40.7 million in 2016 — are set to go away. At that time, the Angels could start adding pieces and build around Trout on the fly.

Of course, throwing money at free agents doesn’t fix the farm system, and a lack of talent in the minors is a burden when it comes to acquiring major league talent in trades. But even with all of that being said, Mike Trout is still Mike Trout.

One has to think the Angels will take their chances with him and whatever else they can find lying around.

Thumbnail photo via Robert Hanashiro/USA TODAY Sports Images

Previous Article

Patriots’ Malcolm Mitchell Too Busy Learning Playbook To Think About His Role

Next Article

Bill Belichick Imagines Tom Brady, Gronk, Julian Edelman As Lacrosse Players

Picked For You