Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Saturday, March 02, 2013

Angels renew Mike Trout’s contract for $510,000; agent stunned

... when Trout was assigned a salary of $510,000 on Saturday, a mere $20,000 above the major league minimum, after winning American League rookie of the year honors and finishing second in voting for most valuable player last season, Craig Landis was stunned.

“During the process, on behalf of Mike, I asked only that the Angels compensate Mike fairly for his historic 2012 season, given his service time,” Landis, who represents Trout, said in an email. “In my opinion, this contract falls well short of a ‘fair’ contract, and I have voiced this to the Angels throughout the process.”

Los Angeles El Hombre of Anaheim Posted: March 02, 2013 at 04:30 PM | 297 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: angels, mike trout, shocked, shocked

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 1 of 3 pages  1 2 3 > 
   1. Justin T is going to crush some tacos Thursday Posted: March 02, 2013 at 06:13 PM (#4379274)
This guy should probably pull his head out of his ass.
   2.     Hey Gurl Posted: March 02, 2013 at 06:22 PM (#4379276)
What is this, 1960? Random 4th line plugs in the NHL make more than Mike Trout.
   3. bobm Posted: March 02, 2013 at 06:34 PM (#4379283)
FTFA:

Some organizations reward young players for superb seasons. Derek Jeter was renewed after winning rookie of the year in 1996, when the New York Yankees more than tripled his salary, from $130,000 to $550,000.

After Albert Pujols was selected National League rookie of the year and finished fourth in MVP voting, the St. Louis Cardinals bumped his salary from $200,000 in 2001 to $600,000 in 2002.

The Angels, under second-year General Manager Jerry Dipoto, are obviously taking a different tack, as evidenced by their renewal of Trout's contract. But that is their prerogative.


   4. Pat Rapper's Delight Posted: March 02, 2013 at 06:47 PM (#4379289)
Can wait to see him on the Yankees.
   5. Bob Tufts Posted: March 02, 2013 at 06:53 PM (#4379292)
The Angels had leverage due to the pre-arbitration status of Trout - and they used it. The management/strategic question to ask is was the use of the hammer now when when you have total power a wise move for the long run?

As for Landis' quotes, they were measured compared to what he could have said. But Craig (# 1 draft pick by the Giants in 1977 with a $ 100,000 bonus) is the son of outfielder Jim Landis and knows how the process works. When Craig and Trout get the power (partially via arbitration and fully via free agency), the Angels' GM at that time will be reminded.
   6. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: March 02, 2013 at 06:55 PM (#4379293)
Mindnumbingly stupid.

Throw the kid $1 million.
   7. cmd600 Posted: March 02, 2013 at 07:02 PM (#4379294)
When Craig and Trout get the power (partially via arbitration and fully via free agency), the Angels' GM at that time will be reminded.


And he would be reminded of that even if gave Trout $20 million this year.
   8. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: March 02, 2013 at 07:15 PM (#4379300)
And he would be reminded of that even if gave Trout $20 million this year.

But now, Trout will take glee in using his power.
   9. Gamingboy Posted: March 02, 2013 at 08:32 PM (#4379325)
How much money is Mike Trout actually worth?

"Mr. Moreno, you and I are gonna be partners."
   10. cardsfanboy Posted: March 02, 2013 at 08:40 PM (#4379326)
And he would be reminded of that even if gave Trout $20 million this year.


Exactly, I know it's best to imagine that it would be nice if teams would do what's "right" but it's not like players have a history of rewarding teams who treat them well.

All the Angels did is make it easier for Trout to leave the team in 6 years, and for the fans to say "I understand why he left them".
   11. JJ1986 Posted: March 02, 2013 at 08:50 PM (#4379329)
What is the most that any second year player (aside from those who've already signed extensions like Longoria) has made?
   12. asinwreck Posted: March 02, 2013 at 09:04 PM (#4379332)
Does Trout angle to do what Lincecum did and forego a multi-year deal to cash in once he's arbitration eligible? He has some waiting to do...
   13. Swedish Chef Posted: March 02, 2013 at 09:08 PM (#4379333)
If Trout said "give me 10 million or I'll retire" (salary negotiation like it was done back in Ruth's day), what would the Angels do?
   14. KronicFatigue Posted: March 02, 2013 at 09:20 PM (#4379336)
Giving the kid a taste at this stage would cost the Angels nothing in terms of "real" money. Is there very likely that 6 years from now he'll forget the extra 500k you tossed him this year? Probably. But if there's a 1% chance this leaves a bad taste in his mouth and put the Angels in a worse position to sign him, why risk it?

For that matter, he should be the CF "just because". Keep your best player happy.
   15. booond Posted: March 02, 2013 at 09:36 PM (#4379342)
If Trout said "give me 10 million or I'll retire" (salary negotiation like it was done back in Ruth's day), what would the Angels do?


Play without him. Does he have another source of employment that will pay him half a million a year? I'm not saying I agree with the Angels. They should've paid him a good sum for a second year man - one million, maybe a little more - but they can't negotiate with a gun to their heads.
   16. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: March 02, 2013 at 09:43 PM (#4379344)
Marlins renew Stanton for peanuts.. At least the Angels are paying players with their own money, this is shameful.
   17. Misirlou has S.C.M.O.D.S Posted: March 02, 2013 at 09:49 PM (#4379345)
Giving the kid a taste at this stage would cost the Angels nothing in terms of "real" money. Is there very likely that 6 years from now he'll forget the extra 500k you tossed him this year? Probably. But if there's a 1% chance this leaves a bad taste in his mouth and put the Angels in a worse position to sign him, why risk it?


But it's more than that. Give him a million now, and you can't pay him less than that next year. Then his next year salary will be based off of that, and so on until free agency (assuming it gets that far. Point is, an extra half mil now may end up costing them many millions more over the next 5 years. Still, relative chump change in the overall scheme of things, but considerably more than a mere half mil.
   18. Drexl Spivey Posted: March 02, 2013 at 09:49 PM (#4379346)
I kind of wish that a competing league existed to jump in and sign players like Trout and and Harper.
   19. Misirlou has S.C.M.O.D.S Posted: March 02, 2013 at 09:51 PM (#4379347)
I kind of wish that a competing league existed to jump in and sign players like Trout and and Harper.


They'd never go.
   20. cmd600 Posted: March 02, 2013 at 09:58 PM (#4379349)
Giving the kid a taste at this stage would cost the Angels nothing in terms of "real" money. Is there very likely that 6 years from now he'll forget the extra 500k you tossed him this year? Probably. But if there's a 1% chance this leaves a bad taste in his mouth and put the Angels in a worse position to sign him, why risk it?


Is the 500k going to save you that much later on? You could probably convince me that's the case as he goes through his arb years, that he'll be more likely to settle or agree to arb year buyouts, instead of taking you to the mat every time you go in front of an arbiter. But when it comes time for him to test FA, I'm not seeing how he'll take anything but the biggest deal out there, making any goodwill you attempt to purchase worth nothing.
   21. Jack Carter, calling Beleaguered Castle Posted: March 02, 2013 at 09:59 PM (#4379350)
Giving the kid a taste at this stage would cost the Angels nothing in terms of "real" money. Is there very likely that 6 years from now he'll forget the extra 500k you tossed him this year? Probably. But if there's a 1% chance this leaves a bad taste in his mouth and put the Angels in a worse position to sign him, why risk it?


If there's a 1% chance it puts the Angels in a worse position to sign him, one way to think about it is that the Angels need only pay Trout less than $50 million extra when it's time to sign him to make not tossing him an extra 500k the right move.

And what Misirlou wrote in post 17. If this ends up costing the Angels $5m, what leverage does that give them? Is Trout really not going to the highest bidder?
   22. cmd600 Posted: March 02, 2013 at 10:02 PM (#4379351)
They'd never go.


The USFL threw enough cash at Herschel Walker, Reggie White, Doug Flutie, Jim Kelly and Steve Young. This alternate baseball league will get players, especially if MLB owners are dumb enough to keep thinking they can pay so little. Whether the league would last is a completely different story.
   23. Ivan Grushenko of Hong Kong Posted: March 02, 2013 at 10:09 PM (#4379354)
Shouldn't the agent be trying to get Trout a long term deal now at least through his arbitration years? I'd think something like that would make both sides feel warm and fuzzy.
   24. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: March 02, 2013 at 10:14 PM (#4379356)
I kind of wish that a competing league existed to jump in and sign players like Trout and and Harper.


They'd never go.

Harper's already signed through 2015. He made $500,000 last year, and will make $2,000,000, $2,150,000 and $2,250,000 for the next three years. He's also said that he wants to finish his career as a Nat, and given all factors I wouldn't bet against it.
   25. cmd600 Posted: March 02, 2013 at 10:19 PM (#4379357)
Harper's already signed through 2015. He made $500,000 last year, and will make $2,000,000, $2,150,000 and $2,250,000 for the next three years. He's also said that he wants to finish his career as a Nat, and given all factors I wouldn't bet against it.


Well sure, already signed guys wouldn't go, but the next 19 year old good enough for the majors could make a lot more than that if there was a second league. And I'll take that bet as soon as the Dodgers let his agent know what they'd be willing to pay for his services.
   26. Morty Causa Posted: March 02, 2013 at 10:29 PM (#4379365)
Do away with MLB's anti-trust exemption and make all players free agents.
   27. Der-K and the statistical werewolves. Posted: March 02, 2013 at 10:40 PM (#4379366)
Facility and market issues make an alternate major league very, very tough for baseball in this day and age.

I do think this was a little pennywise, pound foolish myself.
   28. Ray (RDP) Posted: March 02, 2013 at 10:50 PM (#4379371)
Some organizations reward young players for superb seasons. Derek Jeter was renewed after winning rookie of the year in 1996, when the New York Yankees more than tripled his salary, from $130,000 to $550,000.

After Albert Pujols was selected National League rookie of the year and finished fourth in MVP voting, the St. Louis Cardinals bumped his salary from $200,000 in 2001 to $600,000 in 2002.


These aren't really "rewards." The team is getting the player for millions less than his market value. Which is certainly their right under the CBA, but let's not pretend these teams went above and beyond here, to any meaningful degree.

But everyone should remember, the next time the media gripes about "greedy ballplayers," that these players often make far less than their market value for several years. If Trout gets hurt next year, he is effectively screwed, even if the Angels were to give him $1 mil now.
   29. tfbg9 Posted: March 02, 2013 at 10:59 PM (#4379374)
The established MLB players making 4 million per 1.0 War had a hand in setting-up a pay scale system that doesn't award early excellence, but does reward veteran mediocracy and averageness.

Tough noogies Mr. Trout? And I'm not saying what Moreno's doing here isn't shortsighted, penny-wise, etc.
   30. Arbitol Dijaler Posted: March 02, 2013 at 11:03 PM (#4379376)
If Trout gets hurt next year, he is effectively screwed


You mean he'd have to finish college and get a shi**y job like us? :-(
   31. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: March 02, 2013 at 11:04 PM (#4379377)
Shouldn't the agent be trying to get Trout a long term deal now at least through his arbitration years? I'd think something like that would make both sides feel warm and fuzzy.

Sure, but if I'm Trout, I don't sign away a single FA year.

   32. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: March 02, 2013 at 11:06 PM (#4379378)
If Trout gets hurt next year, he is effectively screwed

There are very, very few career ending injuries for position players.
   33. Rafael Bellylard: Built like a Panda. Posted: March 02, 2013 at 11:07 PM (#4379379)
Do away with MLB's anti-trust exemption and make all players free agents.


Do away with the minimum salary while you're at it.
   34. PreservedFish Posted: March 02, 2013 at 11:14 PM (#4379382)
These aren't really "rewards." The team is getting the player for millions less than his market value. Which is certainly their right under the CBA, but let's not pretend these teams went above and beyond here, to any meaningful degree.


It would probably be meaningful to the player. $300k is not chump change.
   35. Morty Causa Posted: March 02, 2013 at 11:17 PM (#4379383)
Do away with the minimum salary while you're at it.

That's a thought, too.
   36. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: March 02, 2013 at 11:20 PM (#4379384)
It would probably be meaningful to the player. $300k is not chump change.

Good point.

Trout only go a $1.2M bonus. An extra few hundred grand might well be meaningful to him right now.
   37. tfbg9 Posted: March 02, 2013 at 11:20 PM (#4379385)
Wait, you mean the United Mine Workers don't have it set-up so the 1st-3rd year miners make $3500-5000 per year, and the senior vets make $200,000-250,000?

What the hell were they thinking?
   38. tfbg9 Posted: March 02, 2013 at 11:30 PM (#4379390)
I think the players should make it a point when the next CBA is being hammered-out to toss a bone to the MiL'ers if possible. They're the ones, the MLBPA, that can really force concessions from ownership that'd help their lesser-skilled lower-rung bretheren.

It'd be a helluva PR move. Get my attention at least.
   39. OCD SS Posted: March 02, 2013 at 11:38 PM (#4379395)
Do away with MLB's anti-trust exemption and make all players free agents.

Do away with the minimum salary while you're at it.


The minimum salary is not the issue, #29 has it. Do away with the player's union altogether if you're going to strip MLB down to a pure market.
   40. Walt Davis Posted: March 02, 2013 at 11:39 PM (#4379397)
The established MLB players making 4 million per 1.0 War had a hand in setting-up a pay scale system that doesn't award early excellence, but does reward veteran mediocracy and averageness.

Well, the system was set up nearly 40 years ago before all but a few of the current players were born. True, most of the current vets have been around for 1-2 renegotiations and could have pushed for changing it but it's not like they set out to create this system. And of course with every CBA, the min salary goes up.

It would probably be meaningful to the player. $300k is not chump change.

This is presumably one of the main attractions to the player of the early buyout. Salvador Perez made $750 last year and will make $1 M this year. But that is one very team-friendly contract.

Sure, but if I'm Trout, I don't sign away a single FA year

If the price is right, there's no harm in doing this. As is, he'll hit FA at 26, no major harm in that being pushed back to 27-28.



   41. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: March 02, 2013 at 11:45 PM (#4379399)
If the price is right, there's no harm in doing this. As is, he'll hit FA at 26, no major harm in that being pushed back to 27-28.

$30M per year? That's what you'd have to offer for him to think it was a good deal for his first FA year, I'd think,
   42. Matt Welch Posted: March 02, 2013 at 11:52 PM (#4379404)
But Craig (# 1 draft pick by the Giants in 1977 with a $ 100,000 bonus) is the son of outfielder Jim Landis and knows how the process works.

Which is funny, because Peter Bourjos is a dead ringer for Jim Landis, and Craig Landis is also complaining about Trout moving to LF to make way for Bourjos!
   43. Matt Welch Posted: March 02, 2013 at 11:59 PM (#4379406)
For that matter, he should be the CF "just because". Keep your best player happy.

I prefer to keep your best player healthy, and your best team on the field. Both of which goals are better served by putting Trout in LF & Bourjos in center.
   44. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: March 03, 2013 at 12:04 AM (#4379411)
I prefer to keep your best player healthy

Since when is CF a risky position to play? Given that he's a natural CF, I'd say he's more at risk in LF.
   45. tfbg9 Posted: March 03, 2013 at 12:24 AM (#4379425)
Butch Huskey says LF is more unhealthy.
   46. Yastrzemski in left. Posted: March 03, 2013 at 12:46 AM (#4379434)
So he'll make a little more than 10x the national median this year. Boo hoo. Kid's going to be a zillionaire.
   47. Dan Posted: March 03, 2013 at 12:53 AM (#4379438)
Since when is CF a risky position to play? Given that he's a natural CF, I'd say he's more at risk in LF.


I think it's very interesting that the Angels and Nationals are both doing the same thing here. Each has a very young superstar capable of playing a good CF, and both teams are choosing to move the player to LF to keep him healthier. Maybe CF is being viewed as a risky position, at least in the long term. And when you think of guys who played CF in the majors from 19 or 20 or 21 onward, it does seem to have some truth to it. Griffey's legs fell apart. Andruw's knees went bad (partially due to the extra weight he started carrying, but how much due to all those innings in CF too?). Carlos Beltran also starting having significant knee issues in his 30s. Sure, there are some counterexamples, but it definitely looks like teams are starting to view it as a risky position for superstar hitters.
   48. valuearbitrageur Posted: March 03, 2013 at 12:58 AM (#4379444)
There are very, very few career ending injuries for position players.


If Super Joe Charboneau knew how to use a computer and wasn't too drunk to type, he'd have something to say to you right now.
   49. valuearbitrageur Posted: March 03, 2013 at 12:59 AM (#4379447)
So he'll make a little more than 10x the national median this year. Boo hoo.


No one is crying for Mike Trout, they are just astounded at how dumb the Angels are.
   50. Jack Carter, calling Beleaguered Castle Posted: March 03, 2013 at 01:00 AM (#4379448)
They'd never go.

The USFL threw enough cash at Herschel Walker, Reggie White, Doug Flutie, Jim Kelly and Steve Young. This alternate baseball league will get players, especially if MLB owners are dumb enough to keep thinking they can pay so


We're at a different stage for salaries, though. To be competitive a new league might need 8 teams, and to field major league caliber competition with a few stars, payroll for the league would have to top half a billion a year. Would existing stadiums, the second tier of them that aren't beholden to ML teams, then seat enough people to make the new league profitable? I suppose a lot of it comes down to the tv contract. I'm also sure someone's done the math on this in great and elaborate detail...
   51. valuearbitrageur Posted: March 03, 2013 at 01:11 AM (#4379456)
We're at a different stage for salaries, though. To be competitive a new league might need 8 teams, and to field major league caliber competition with a few stars, payroll for the league would have to top half a billion a year. Would existing stadiums, the second tier of them that aren't beholden to ML teams, then seat enough people to make the new league profitable? I suppose a lot of it comes down to the tv contract. I'm also sure someone's done the math on this in great and elaborate detail...


8 teams made up of top minor league and pre-arbitration major league talent might be interesting.

Imagine Trout and Harper ripping up those leagues while picking up $10M per for a couple years until they finally become MLB free agents. They both would have shots at 60-60 in a 140 game season. And the leagues could probably field teams for less than $30m per year.
   52. PreservedFish Posted: March 03, 2013 at 01:17 AM (#4379460)
Sure, there are some counterexamples, but it definitely looks like teams are starting to view it as a risky position for superstar hitters.


Both teams also have superior defensive centerfielders. The Nationals didn't acquire Denard Span in order to keep Harper healthier.
   53. The Yankee Clapper Posted: March 03, 2013 at 01:18 AM (#4379461)
I think the players should make it a point when the next CBA is being hammered-out to toss a bone to the MiL'ers if possible. They're the ones, the MLBPA, that can really force concessions from ownership that'd help their lesser-skilled lower-rung bretheren.

The Minor Leaguers aren't in the bargaining unit. Can't do it, other than some provisions covering those with MLB service being sent to the minors.
   54. The Yankee Clapper Posted: March 03, 2013 at 01:22 AM (#4379463)
The Nationals didn't acquire Denard Span in order to keep Harper healthier.

Less wear and tear on Harper was an idea that appealed to the Nationals. Not the whole reason, or even the main one, to get Span, but it was a consideration.
   55. Jim Wisinski Posted: March 03, 2013 at 01:28 AM (#4379466)
I think giving Trout $1 million would be excessive compared to the norm for players, even very good ones, still in their years of team-determined salary. It is surprising and unusual though that they're essentially giving him the standard raise after such an incredible year, I think teams typically give players some kind of reward for performance like that. Maybe it won't matter in the end but it does seem silly for the Angels to be so stingy like that.

Not really related to the situation here but I'm reminded of another odd story about a player after his first season. Rocco Baldelli had a solid first season for the Rays and finished third in the ROY voting; a nice rookie season but nothing spectacular that would make you expect a bonus from the team. The Rays gave him their standard raise, from $300k to $320k, but in the offer sheet they gave the players in their first three seasons included a small bonus (5k I think) if they actually signed the contract (the team could set the salary at whatever they wanted but the players had the option of not actually signing the offer though it wouldn't change anything). Baldelli refused to sign the offer and the only comment he made to the media was something like "My agent and I disagree with the team's offer". That was back when he was still represented by Boras. That always seemed like a bizarrely pointless thing to do, throwing away even a small amount of money to make an entirely insignificant protest.

Edit: Looked it up on Cots and it was actually a $20k bonus that Baldelli forfeited by refusing to sign the offer. Even more ridiculous.
   56. PreservedFish Posted: March 03, 2013 at 01:28 AM (#4379467)
..
   57. Dan Posted: March 03, 2013 at 01:37 AM (#4379471)
Both teams also have superior defensive centerfielders. The Nationals didn't acquire Denard Span in order to keep Harper healthier.


What Yankee Clapper said in post #54. They knew Harper was a capable CF before they went out and got Span. If they didn't want to move Harper to LF to save his legs, they could have acquired a bigger bat for LF or even stuck with Morse for LF for another year. There's definitely an element of wanting to save Harper for the long term by putting him into LF instead of CF in the Nationals' moves.

And the Angels made the decision to trade Kendrys Morales rather than Bourjos, probably partially to move Trout to LF specifically. Rather than DHing Trumbo and playing Trout in LF with Bourjos in CF, the Angels could easily have traded Bourjos, and gone with Morales at DH and a Trumbo - Trout - Hamilton OF.

Neither team was pushed into this by a rigid roster; each team made specific moves to push these guys into LF.
   58. Dan Posted: March 03, 2013 at 01:46 AM (#4379475)
I think giving Trout $1 million would be excessive compared to the norm for players, even very good ones, still in their years of team-determined salary. It is surprising and unusual though that they're essentially giving him the standard raise after such an incredible year, I think teams typically give players some kind of reward for performance like that. Maybe it won't matter in the end but it does seem silly for the Angels to be so stingy like that.


$1M might be unprecented specficially, but there's a history noted in the article of similarly excellent first year players getting raises to over 2 times the minimum salary in their second seasons. One of the given examples is Pujols getting a raise to $600k when the league minimum was $200k. Pujols was making three times the league minimum, while $1M for Trout today would be just over twice the minimum salary. Jeter got a raise to over four times the minimum in his second year. $1M today is probably less than Pujols or Jeter were making if you adjust for salary inflation in MLB over the past 17 years.
   59. Jim Wisinski Posted: March 03, 2013 at 05:28 AM (#4379625)
Related to my #55, I just saw that Jeremy Hellickson declined to sign his contract due to him being offered $508k instead of the maximum of $510k that the Rays are giving out this year to pre-arb players. As a result he's forfeiting the $5k bonus for signing the contract and will actually make $503k in 2013. He is also a Boras client.

I personally don't get either side of this; I don't see the need for the Rays, back in 2004 or now, to add a "signing bonus" or whatever you want to call it to the contract when it's entirely up to them what they pay the player. Who really cares if they agree to sign or not? On the player's side, why throw away any amount of money on a useless protest? I get Boras' angle (he prefers that his clients don't have a chummy relationship with team management and possibly be more inclined to accept a little less money in the future) and I doubt it's a coincidence that bother players I know of that did this were clients of his at the time but why do the players go along with the charade?
   60. cmd600 Posted: March 03, 2013 at 06:32 AM (#4379641)
57 - but we also have to consider how poor trumbo and morse are in the OF. They arent your run of the mill below average corner OFs. If each put up a -20 i wouldnt be the least bit shocked. The nationals and angels arent just putting their stars in "safer" positions, theyre aligning their defenses to save a lot of runs
   61. shoewizard Posted: March 03, 2013 at 07:49 AM (#4379646)
The guys calling Jerry Dipoto or Angels management "mind numbingly stupid" are ill informed. Thats simply not true. Furthermore, if I were to apply that tag, I'd be more inclined to apply it to Trouts agent, for publicly poisoning the waters.

Who knows what he considered "fair" and where they were in the negotiations ?

Note:

“The $510,000 salary was not the result of a negotiated compromise between Mike and the Angels,” Landis said.


Exactly. What is Landis' version of a compromise ? For all we know he was pushing for a 1.5 or 2.0 Million dollar deal, and as has been pointed out upthread, the accumulative effect of that down the road could be quite a large sum.

Who know what was the tone of the negotiations, and what stance Landis took ? By his tone in the quotes, my guess is he probably took quite a strong, and ultimately beligerant stance. He probably overshot his demands based on Trouts "historic" season, and when the team exercised their leverage to get his ass in line, he spouted off to the press.

Think about it. Arter Moreno isn't cheap. He isn't poor. The Angels have money. So the LOGICAL conlucsion is there is a lot more going on here than is presented in the article. At the end of the day, in business you have to judge people by their actions. This "action" by the Angels indicates clearly there is an issue with the agent, not the player.

My other guess is somewhere down the road, Arter Moreno pony's up and gives his GM the dollars necessary to keep Trout long term.
   62. Walt Davis Posted: March 03, 2013 at 08:15 AM (#4379652)
This "action" by the Angels indicates clearly there is an issue with the agent, not the player.

"We don't like your agent so we're gonna pay you $100,000 less than we would otherwise, sorry about that"? I'm not seeing it.
   63. Jose Is The Most Absurd Thing on the Site Posted: March 03, 2013 at 08:34 AM (#4379655)
This will have zero effect on Trouts decision to stay once be hits free agency.

Frankly if I wereTrout I'd be looking for the Longoria deal right now. Because of his youth he can forgo a couple of FA seasons and still hit the market at 28. Sign a deal now and get the security then he still will have his shot at becoming the first 300 million dollar player.
   64. shoewizard Posted: March 03, 2013 at 08:54 AM (#4379657)
"We don't like your agent so we're gonna pay you $100,000 less than we would otherwise, sorry about that"? I'm not seeing it.


C'mon Walt, you know thats not the way it works nor is that what I'm saying.

It's very simple. They couldn't come to agreement with the agent. Nobody pays an extra 100K , or any amount above the minimum, without the agent and player signing off on it as AGREEING to it. If they don't agree, the club can then exercise their right and just renew the contract.

Sometimes it hurts down the road, (see Prince Fielder), sometimes it doesn't, (See Carlos Gonzalez).

The fact is you and I don't know what Landis was pushing for or demanding, but clearly the Angels gave up the negotiation, and just renewed him knowing full well there would be a negative reaction, both in the press, and between the Team and Agent/Player. I mean really, do you or anyone else think they do not know there will be a negative reaction ? So WHY would they take that route. The answer is self evident. They were too far apart to get in agreement with Landis. So Landis must have been pushing for a very high number.

Again.....judge by the actions, and don't assume that somebody is "stupid".....even if you are not clearly "seeing it".

   65. Bob Tufts Posted: March 03, 2013 at 09:23 AM (#4379659)
Which is funny, because Peter Bourjos is a dead ringer for Jim Landis, and Craig Landis is also complaining about Trout moving to LF to make way for Bourjos!


And Craig Landis and Chris Bourjos (Peter's father) played in the same outfield in 1980 in Phoenix (the Giants' AAA team at that time).
   66. Bob Tufts Posted: March 03, 2013 at 10:05 AM (#4379664)
And if my memory serves me right, Craig Landis played right field exclusively, while Chris was moved to left field for the 1980 season.
   67. Misirlou has S.C.M.O.D.S Posted: March 03, 2013 at 10:06 AM (#4379665)
Imagine Trout and Harper ripping up those leagues while picking up $10M per for a couple years until they finally become MLB free agents.


You can't acquire MLB service time by playing in another league.
   68. Fancy Pants Handles lap changes with class Posted: March 03, 2013 at 10:13 AM (#4379668)
Frankly if I wereTrout I'd be looking for the Longoria deal right now.

The Longoria contract was the biggest heist in the history of major league baseball. Why would a player want to emulate that?

Also, it was signed like a week into Longoria's major league career, not after just putting up an all-time great season. If Trout's agent can't get a contract that is orders of magnitude higher than that, Trout really should fire him. Out of a cannon. Into the sun.
   69. Dan Posted: March 03, 2013 at 10:34 AM (#4379673)
Longoria also plays for the small market Rays, not a team that signed Pujols to a 10 year $240M contract and then turned around and paid Josh Hamilton $125M. He just put up a season that was better than anything Hamilton ever did. If I'm Trout or his agent, I'm looking to go year to year through arbitration and looking for the kind of money Ryan Howard got in his arb years ($10M, $15M, $19M). In comparison, Longorias arb year salaries are $2M, $4M, $6M.
   70. spycake Posted: March 03, 2013 at 10:37 AM (#4379675)
Shoulldn't Trout and his agent be mad at the union? They obviously negotiated this deal. It's pretty rare for a player to do anything above their CBA obligation, hence why the Gil Meche retirement was unusual. I don't see why we should hold teams to a higher standard.
   71. calhounite Posted: March 03, 2013 at 10:57 AM (#4379681)
The best place to keep a hitter healthy is right field. Most hitters are right handed and most pull the ball, so can take naps out there.

Milton Bradley used to do it all the time.
   72. bobm Posted: March 03, 2013 at 11:08 AM (#4379683)
http://m.ocregister.com/sports/trout-497608-year-angels.html

SECOND-YEAR PAY

Although there is precedent for former Rookies of the Year such as Albert Pujols and Derek Jeter to make multiples of the minimum in Year 2, over the past five seasons the reigning rookies of the year have averaged just 21 percent over the minimum.

Player (Year 1-2) Year 1 Year 2 Pct. raise Pct. over min.
Derek Jeter ('96-'97) $130,000 $550,000 (renewed) 323% 405%
Kerry Wood ('98-'99) $170,000 $690,000 (signed) 306% 533%
Albert Pujols ('01-'02)       $300,000 $600,000 (signed) 100% 100%
Ryan Braun ('07-'08)     $380,000 $455,000 (renewed) 20% 17%
Dustin Pedroia ('07-'08) $380,000 $457,000 (signed)          20%               17%
Geovany Soto ('08-'09) $401,000 $575,000 (signed) 43% 44%
Evan Longoria ('08-'09)*    $500,000 $550,000 (signed)108%
Chris Coghlan ('09-'10) $400,000 $475,000 (signed) 19% 19%
Andrew Bailey ('09-'10) $400,000 $435,000 (signed) 9% 9%
Buster Posey ('10-'11) $400,000 $575,000 (signed)        44%               39%
Neftali Feliz ('10-'11) $402,000 $457,150 (signed) 14% 10%
Craig Kimbrel ('11-'12) $419,000 $590,000 (signed) 41% 23%
Jeremy Hellickson ('11-'12) $418,400 $489,500 (renewed) 17% 2%

   73. bobm Posted: March 03, 2013 at 11:29 AM (#4379685)
http://m.ocregister.com/sports/trout-498013-percent-year.html

As expected, the Angels could not reach an agreement on a 2013 one-year contract with Mike Trout, so they renewed his contract for $510,000, which is just 4 percent over the major league minimum of $490,000.

Over the past five seasons, the reigning Rookie of the Year was paid an average of 21 percent over the minimum for his second year. Trout made $482,500 last season, although he didn’t earn that much because he spent a month in the minors. His new salary represents a 6 percent raise.

Trout was “disappointed,” according to agent Craig Landis, who released a statement on behalf of his client.

"In my opinion, this contract falls well short of a 'fair' contract and I have voiced this to the Angels throughout the process," Landis said.

Angels general manager Jerry Dipoto said Trout’s salary was based on an objective scale the club uses to pay players with less than three years of service time. That scale is weighted heavily on service time, rather than performance.

“Craig and Mike have a right to their opinion and we don’t begrudge them their feelings,” Dipoto said. “We love Mike. Mike’s a big part of what we’re doing here, obviously, now and hopefully for many years to come. But we’re operating within the parameters of the (Collective Bargaining Agreement) as it’s been set up. It’s a system that rewards service time in the 0 to 3 years class, and we’ve opted to operate within those parameters.”
   74. Steve Parris, Je t'aime Posted: March 03, 2013 at 11:53 AM (#4379687)
If I'm Trout or his agent, I'm looking to go year to year through arbitration and looking for the kind of money Ryan Howard got in his arb years ($10M, $15M, $19M). In comparison, Longorias arb year salaries are $2M, $4M, $6M.

Howard was a Super 2, so his arb years were 10, 15, 19, and 20. For these purposes he's not a bad comp for Trout because he was an immediate star, winning ROY and then MVP the following year. The Phillies renewed him for 900K after his MVP year (up from 355K). Whether that bought them any good will is questionable - they went to a hearing the following year for Howard's Super 2, and lost. Howard of course signed multi-year deals with the team afterwards, so the relationship was never irreparably fractured (though he obviously didn't give them much of a hometown discount).
   75. Greg K Posted: March 03, 2013 at 12:04 PM (#4379691)
The best place to keep a hitter healthy is right field. Most hitters are right handed and most pull the ball, so can take naps out there.

Milton Bradley used to do it all the time.

True, but merely anecdotal. For every Milton Bradley, Magglio Ordonez, Larry Walker, J.D. Drew that has a long, healthy career by virtue of playing RF you've got guys like Bobby Abreu, Sammy Sosa, Tony Gwynn and Gary Sheffield who just don't have much of a career after 5-6 years of playing RF.
   76. Joey B. has reignited his October #Natitude Posted: March 03, 2013 at 12:21 PM (#4379697)
What is this, 1960? Random 4th line plugs in the NHL make more than Mike Trout.

Ooooh, boo-f*ckin hoo. He got paid a signing bonus of over 1.2 million dollars before he took his first professional swing, and by the way, he was seventeen years old at the time.

This is how the system works in the game, by agreement of the players and the owners: a kid has to put in his dues for a few years and prove himself before he gets paid the permanent life-changing CEO compensation money. Just get over it.
   77. puck Posted: March 03, 2013 at 01:12 PM (#4379722)
Who was the last pre-arb player to hold out? I remember Fernando Valenzuela doing it (and he eventually got a pretty big deal, $300,000+ when the minimum salary was more like $40,000).
   78. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: March 03, 2013 at 01:26 PM (#4379730)
The guys calling Jerry Dipoto or Angels management "mind numbingly stupid" are ill informed. Thats simply not true. Furthermore, if I were to apply that tag, I'd be more inclined to apply it to Trouts agent, for publicly poisoning the waters.

I'll say it again. The Angels are being mind-numbingly stupid.

They have a 20 y.o. who is the best player in MLB, and they just pissed him off to save a few hundred grand. It's pure stupidity.

Why would Trout care about "poisoning the waters" with the Angels? He can go to arb, and probably beat them every time. He can then sign with 29 other teams when the time comes. There won't be any other players like Trout for the Angels to sign.
   79. alilisd Posted: March 03, 2013 at 01:41 PM (#4379737)
There are very, very few career ending injuries for position players.


If Super Joe Charboneau knew how to use a computer and wasn't too drunk to type, he'd have something to say to you right now.


In case you weren't just looking for an opportunity to make a Joe Charboneau reference, the fact you had to go back 30 years to find someone is strong support for his statement.
   80. PreservedFish Posted: March 03, 2013 at 01:47 PM (#4379740)
I don't see the need for the Rays, back in 2004 or now, to add a "signing bonus" or whatever you want to call it to the contract when it's entirely up to them what they pay the player.

Really? You reward employees for doing a good job. I know that baseball has weird unique economics, but still.
   81. BDC Posted: March 03, 2013 at 02:23 PM (#4379763)
What player, in the last 15 years or so, has been most exploited by the salary system? Somebody like Brandon Webb would seem to come closest. He earned $12.5M over three years in the 2000s when he was a great pitcher; he was greatly underpaid for a few years before and greatly overpaid for a few years later, but overall he earned (coincidentally) $31.5M for 31.5 WAR, which seems like a bargain for Arizona, although $31.5 million is hardly the poorhouse for Webb.

More common are pitchers like Ubaldo Jimenez or Scott Kazmir, who were woefully underpaid with their first team and have since been cashing big checks for being terrible with their second.

You'd figure the phenomenon of being totally ripped off would be less common among position players, who are less likely to blow a gasket after 2 or 3 great early years. Grady Sizemore might be the "most exploited" position player. He got paid peanuts for being an outstanding all-round player early on with Cleveland, and then earned only modestly well as he fell off the map: $28M overall for 26.5 WAR. And that, too, is over $27M more than most people earn in a lifetime.

I don't have a strong opinion about how much Trout should get, but I doubt that many players are severely screwed by the current deal. Examples like Sizemore and Webb, who failed to cash in at the ultra-mega level, are relatively too bad, but then neither one of them could play baseball well after a very young age. There's a reason non-great lesser stars like Johnny Damon make over $100M in their careers; they're employable for a long, long time.



   82. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: March 03, 2013 at 02:28 PM (#4379764)
This is how the system works in the game, by agreement of the players and the owners: a kid has to put in his dues for a few years and prove himself before he gets paid the permanent life-changing CEO compensation money. Just get over it.


It works that way through the agreement of "players", but not players like Trout, who didn't have any say in the rules on pre-arb compensation until he actually made it onto a ML roster.
   83. Russlan is fond of Dillon Gee Posted: March 03, 2013 at 02:29 PM (#4379765)
The Cardinals gave Pujols a big raise after his first year and he left the first time he was a free agent. Giving Trout a big raise now is unlikely to make a difference when the time comes, he'll go to the highest bidder in all likelihood.
   84. Squash Posted: March 03, 2013 at 02:41 PM (#4379769)
The Cardinals gave Pujols a big raise after his first year and he left the first time he was a free agent. Giving Trout a big raise now is unlikely to make a difference when the time comes, he'll go to the highest bidder in all likelihood.

But he did sign a very team-friendly extension with them earlier, giving up many of his free agent years. The Cardinals made out like absolute bandits on Pujols - the Angels would love for Trout to do what Pujols did.

Furthermore, if I were to apply that tag, I'd be more inclined to apply it to Trouts agent, for publicly poisoning the waters.

Just again since we go through this every time there's an agent comment, these agents aren't saying anything without the approval of the client, tacit approval at least.
   85. Joey B. has reignited his October #Natitude Posted: March 03, 2013 at 02:55 PM (#4379778)
It works that way through the agreement of "players", but not players like Trout, who didn't have any say in the rules on pre-arb compensation until he actually made it onto a ML roster.

True, but irrelevant. Every union works this way; the new members have to abide by whatever agreement is in place at the time. He can almost certainly have a voice in the next CBA if he wants it.

If Trout continues to perform at anywhere remotely close to last year's level, he's going to become one of the highest paid players in history, if not the highest, so the whining is absurd. In the meantime, he's just going to have to find a way to eke out a hardscrabble living on his paltry $510,000 salary this year. Maybe he can apply for food stamps or something.
   86. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: March 03, 2013 at 02:56 PM (#4379779)
The Cardinals gave Pujols a big raise after his first year and he left the first time he was a free agent.


He left because they lowballed him after previously signing a long extension on very team-favorable terms.
   87. Gold Star - just Gold Star Posted: March 03, 2013 at 03:05 PM (#4379784)
What player, in the last 15 years or so, has been most exploited by the salary system?
A little further back, buut I recall reading that Jack McDowell lost tens of millions due to Reinsdorf's finessing of the salary structure. Something along the lines of unexpectedly sending him to the minors at an opportune moment.
   88. BDC Posted: March 03, 2013 at 03:41 PM (#4379802)
McDowell on Reinsdorf:

Fans don't know this, but not only was I never offered a multi year contract, I was never even offered a one year deal! The Sox just automatically took me right to arbitration three years in a row (Author's Note: McDowell won one of those salary hearings) They just didn't negotiate with me. Did that piss me off? Yes.


McDowell possibly was underpaid (though he too earned more than $28M for 25.6 WAR, in the 1990s, and he was a good but overrated pitcher). He probably had grievances relative to the rest of the league. And he was a bit ill-starred. Had the Sox kept him in the majors all along, he would have been a FA in the strike winter of 1994-95, not the best of times. His highest-earning years (quite good ones for the era) were the strike years, which cost him still more; and then, after signing a decent but unlavish 2-year deal with Cleveland, he stopped being a good player at the age of 30. Everything went wrong that could have, and he still earned $28 million.
   89. Zach Posted: March 03, 2013 at 03:45 PM (#4379805)
I personally don't get either side of this; I don't see the need for the Rays, back in 2004 or now, to add a "signing bonus" or whatever you want to call it to the contract when it's entirely up to them what they pay the player. Who really cares if they agree to sign or not? On the player's side, why throw away any amount of money on a useless protest?

On the contrary, the protest is stronger if you give up some money in order to make it. Anybody can mutter darkly when it doesn't cost them anything to do it; passing up a little money sends the signal that you're actually pissed off.

I think you might be underestimating the psychological effect of actually having a handshake and a little signing ceremony. It represents an end to the bargaining process and gives both sides the chance to chill out. If you never sign a contract, when do you abandon the feeling that you really ought to be getting a million bucks (for example) and anything less is unacceptable?
   90. puck Posted: March 03, 2013 at 03:48 PM (#4379807)
More common are pitchers like Ubaldo Jimenez or Scott Kazmir, who were woefully underpaid with their first team and have since been cashing big checks for being terrible with their second.

In Ubaldo's case, it's the same contract. (Though the Indians picked up the $5.75M option for 2013.) He was upset the Rockies did not extend the deal like they did with Tulo, then it ended up he was hurt in some way--he had lost velocity which has not returned with Indians.

The contract probably worked out fairly well for both sides (well, for the Rockies, not the Indians) despite Ubaldo being upset. He had security in the event of an injury. While he has not had an injury-ender, he's not looking too good.
   91. Swedish Chef Posted: March 03, 2013 at 03:51 PM (#4379811)
If Trout continues to perform at anywhere remotely close to last year's level, he's going to become one of the highest paid players in history, if not the highest, so the whining is absurd.

The whining is a shot across the bow that the Angels have to take seriously just because Trout is so great, two-bit players don't complain, they have nothing to gain from it. But the Angels can't just ignore Trout.
   92. greenback calls it soccer Posted: March 03, 2013 at 03:54 PM (#4379812)
But he [Pujols] did sign a very team-friendly extension with them earlier, giving up many of his free agent years.

It's a bit more complicated than that. Pujols signed a long-term deal during the mini-collusion period. His pay during the would-be FA years of that contract was comparable to what the Yankees agreed to pay A-Rod net of the Rangers' contribution, so his contract was supposed to have been at the ceiling for what players would get under the "new normal." Obviously baseball's austerity period didn't last that long though.
   93. A Random 8-Year-Old Eskimo Posted: March 03, 2013 at 04:10 PM (#4379825)
He can go to arb, and probably beat them every time.

This is pure nonsense. You have no idea who would win an arbitration hearing without comparing the salaries that were filed.
   94.     Hey Gurl Posted: March 03, 2013 at 04:30 PM (#4379838)
His Agent, meanwhile, needs to get as much as he can before he gets replaced by Scott Boras, so I can see why he'd be annoyed.
   95. Squash Posted: March 03, 2013 at 04:37 PM (#4379840)
It's a bit more complicated than that. Pujols signed a long-term deal during the mini-collusion period. His pay during the would-be FA years of that contract was comparable to what the Yankees agreed to pay A-Rod net of the Rangers' contribution, so his contract was supposed to have been at the ceiling for what players would get under the "new normal."

Is that true? The problem with that scenario is that it assumes a lot of perfect information on all sides. Pujols wasn't on the market - he had no idea what other teams might offer him, and the Cardinals probably weren't whispering to him there was collusion going on so he might as well take this as he wasn't getting any more. It's probably inevitable that collusion may have had some effect in there, but that extension was predominantly about him wanting to be a Cardinal/La Russa player regardless and being willing to forgo some money to make it so.
   96. Swedish Chef Posted: March 03, 2013 at 04:38 PM (#4379841)
This is pure nonsense. You have no idea who would win an arbitration hearing without comparing the salaries that were filed.

If the team is forced to file a salary in line with what the player wants, he wins no matter who "wins" the hearing.
   97. valuearbitrageur Posted: March 03, 2013 at 05:00 PM (#4379854)
Think about it. Arter Moreno isn't cheap. He isn't poor. The Angels have money. So the LOGICAL conlucsion is there is a lot more going on here than is presented in the article. At the end of the day, in business you have to judge people by their actions. This "action" by the Angels indicates clearly there is an issue with the agent, not the player.


Might be even simpler than that. The Angels might be working on a long term deal for Trout right now, and they don't want to make it easier for him to say no. An extra half million "bonus" now might make it incrementally harder to get him signed to a team friendly deal this summer.
   98. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: March 03, 2013 at 05:08 PM (#4379860)
This is pure nonsense. You have no idea who would win an arbitration hearing without comparing the salaries that were filed.

If the team is forced to file a salary in line with what the player wants, he wins no matter who "wins" the hearing.

The Chef provides the answer. If Trout goes to arb, the team offers are going to smash the Howard/Lincecum awards.

Might be even simpler than that. The Angels might be working on a long term deal for Trout right now, and they don't want to make it easier for him to say no. An extra half million "bonus" now might make it incrementally harder to get him signed to a team friendly deal this summer.

Then they miscalculated, b/c Trout and his agent are obviously pissed off.
   99. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: March 03, 2013 at 05:25 PM (#4379871)
True, but irrelevant. Every union works this way; the new members have to abide by whatever agreement is in place at the time.


He isn't allowed to join the union before he reaches the majors, but is nonetheless subject to terms negotiated by that organization for several years of his professional career, until he reaches that level. That is unfair, and atypical of the way unions normally operate. If players were allowed to join the MLBPA as soon as they turned pro, the MLBPA membership would probably do a better job of serving the interest of younger players.

If Trout continues to perform at anywhere remotely close to last year's level, he's going to become one of the highest paid players in history, if not the highest, so the whining is absurd.


Donald Trump has plenty of money, but that doesn't mean I'm allowed to stick my hand in his pocket and steal his wallet. Fair is fair, even for the rich.
   100. Joey B. has reignited his October #Natitude Posted: March 03, 2013 at 06:07 PM (#4379884)
Donald Trump has plenty of money, but that doesn't mean I'm allowed to stick my hand in his pocket and steal his wallet. Fair is fair, even for the rich.

I have no idea what the hell you're talking about; you're spouting a bunch of meaningless nonsense.
Page 1 of 3 pages  1 2 3 > 

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
robneyer
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogNo, Alex Gordon wouldn't have scored an inside the park home run
(97 - 12:15am, Oct 31)
Last: SuperGrover

NewsblogMadison Bumgarner, World Series legend - McCovey Chronicles
(103 - 12:15am, Oct 31)
Last: SoSHially Unacceptable

NewsblogNewest Hall of Fame Candidates Announced
(50 - 12:15am, Oct 31)
Last: Howie Menckel

NewsblogSend Alex Gordon! | FiveThirtyEight
(74 - 12:15am, Oct 31)
Last: Lance Reddick! Lance him!

NewsblogOT: Politics, October 2014: Sunshine, Baseball, and Etch A Sketch: How Politicians Use Analogies
(4784 - 12:02am, Oct 31)
Last: The Yankee Clapper

NewsblogFull Count » Red Sox sign Koji Uehara to 2-year contract
(8 - 11:44pm, Oct 30)
Last: the Hugh Jorgan returns

NewsblogOT: Monthly NBA Thread - October 2014
(623 - 11:37pm, Oct 30)
Last: Howie Menckel

NewsblogFielding Bible
(2 - 11:24pm, Oct 30)
Last: Russlan is fond of Dillon Gee

NewsblogOT: NBC.news: Valve isn’t making one gaming console, but multiple ‘Steam machines’
(1020 - 11:23pm, Oct 30)
Last: DJS and the Infinite Sadness

NewsblogAngell: The Best
(16 - 11:21pm, Oct 30)
Last: Jarrod HypnerotomachiaPoliphili(Teddy F. Ballgame)

NewsblogOT:  October 2014 - College Football thread
(544 - 11:11pm, Oct 30)
Last: Lance Reddick! Lance him!

Hall of MeritMost Meritorious Player: 1960 Discussion
(9 - 10:22pm, Oct 30)
Last: Chris Fluit

Newsblog2014 WORLD SERIES GAME 7 OMNICHATTER
(1442 - 10:22pm, Oct 30)
Last: S.F. Giangst

NewsblogThings we learned from the 2014 playoffs
(10 - 10:18pm, Oct 30)
Last: Walt Davis

NewsblogA Visit to Madison Bumgarner Country, and a Proud Father's Home - NYTimes.com
(1 - 10:06pm, Oct 30)
Last: The Anthony Kennedy of BBTF (Scott)

Page rendered in 1.1474 seconds
52 querie(s) executed