Mike Trout Declares A Hardline Punishment For PEDs

How many 22-year-old sports commissioners are you aware of? Judges? Lawmakers? Political pundits? Editorialists?

None. That’s how many. This is the inherent problem with giving weight to Angels’ star Mike Trout’s opinion as to what should happen to players who use performance enhancing drugs in baseball. He thinks they should be banned for life. Trout shared his views with Boomer Esiason and Craig Carton yesterday and it made moderate headlines because of his status as the new face of baseball and his emerging greatness. Without Trout being such a huge star, no one would pay attention to what he says. They definitely wouldn’t listen to him if he was just a run-of-the-mill 22-year-old making an uninformed statement without having the education or life experience to back them up.

This has nothing to do with age discrimination, but these are the kinds of things young people say from a position of self-anointed knowledge based on a misplaced, inexperienced view of life. Whether it’s due to the safety of not having many responsibilities; because the bulk of one’s life is still in front of him or her; or having been asked a question that was probably not appropriate to be answered by someone so young, the reply has to be put into the context of the person who’s giving it. Trout is not in a position that other people would be in when coming to a determination of an appropriate punishment.

When a player is this talented, he has a tunneled view of life in how it relates to him. It’s the conceit of youth. Trout was in the majors at 19, an MVP candidate at 20 and a superstar at 21. He seems to think that everyone should do it clean because he’s doing it clean. Life doesn’t work that way though. What Trout is saying that any player who is trying to keep his career, earn a paycheck and do what many others are doing to keep his job should be banished for life. It’s akin to chopping off a thief’s hand for stealing a loaf of bread to feed his family. The punishment doesn’t fit the crime. Players have failed tests due to over-the-counter supplements that they didn’t realize had banned substances in their ingredients. Should they be banned forever? What about a 15-year-old kid from the Dominican Republic who grew up without shoes and used a milk carton as a glove taking a pill not knowing what it is, going only on the advice of a middle-aged white guy telling him that it’ll send him to the big leagues in half the time? Does he get suspended for life?

When Trout is 30, then maybe he’ll understand that he’s not going to have all the energy in the world to play 162 games, run hard on every play and do things that most players only dream about and still be able to live the off-field life of a guy just out of his teens. Perhaps he’ll have an injury someday—someday soon—that makes him realize that his gifts are extremely fragile and they can be taken away in an instant. Then he might be willing to do whatever is necessary to get back on the field and perform.

Trout is still waiting for his mega contract. He’s making $510,000 this season. It’s a lot of money for anyone, especially a guy who’s 22. As far as athletes go, it’s not a lot of money. When factoring in his production, it’s nothing. As long as he stays healthy, he’ll get a $250-300 million contract when his free agency comes up. Trout received a significant bonus of $1.215 million when he was drafted by the Angels. Not every player can say that. Not every player has Trout’s abilities. It’s not a simplistic situation where there should be an across the line penalty regardless of the circumstances and that penalty certainly shouldn’t be decided upon by a guy who’s in his second full year in the big leagues, no matter how great he is.

Share|

//

Mike Trout’s Contract and the Needless Uproar

There’s been an absurd uproar and reaction of shock that the Angels chose to renew Mike Trout‘s contract for $510,000. This is strange considering that the constant storyline surrounding athletes is how overpaid they are. For the most part, it has little to do with their performance. Players who are at the top of the baseball pay scale like Albert Pujols, Alex Rodriguez, Joey Votto and Felix Hernandez are the examples given of players who are either not going to fulfill their paychecks with extended production into their late 30s or are considered anomalies and accused of PED use if they do perform.

In the realm of public perception, they can’t win. Of course they win in their bank account, but through no fault of their own, no matter what they do, it’s not going to be good enough.

Pujols’s contract is called a backend nightmare because he’s going to be paid $59 million two seasons after his 40^th birthday.

A-Rod is breaking down physically, has $114 million due him with the very real possibility that the Yankees will eventually cut their losses of him and his constant sideshow of embarrassing drama, paying him to leave. They won’t even have the benefit of the extra income they thought they, as an organization, would accrue as A-Rod broke home run records. He probably won’t break the records at all and if he does, they’re sullied beyond all recognition due to his admitted PED use and recent allegations that their use has been ongoing.

Votto will be 30 in September and his 10-year, $225 million deal doesn’t kick in until 2014. He’ll be paid $25 million annually from age 35-39 and $20 million at 40. Plus Votto’s playing for a mid-market club, the Cincinnati Reds, for whom that contract might preclude them from putting commensurate talent around him.

Hernandez is a pitcher whose prematurely announced contract was put in jeopardy by red flags found in his elbow during his physical. By the time the contract news had been strategically leaked, neither he nor the Mariners could back out and protective language was inserted to shield the Mariners if he gets hurt.

Those who take down-the-line contracts to remain in their current venue are so rare that it’s a worldwide stunner when they make the decision that they don’t need to be the highest paid player in the world and that $85 million can buy just as much stuff as $200 million. Jered Weaver and Evan Longoria are players who have made that choice. They’re a rarity.

No matter where you stand on the issue of athletes’ pay, the way baseball functions can be manipulated to advantage the player, the club, or they can come to an agreement to share the risk with a preemptive, long-term deal. Once a player has exhausted his amateur eligibility, he’s at the mercy of the organization that drafts him. For the first three years of their major league careers, they’re paid at the whim of the team. The next three years they’re eligible for arbitration. Then they can become free agents. If they choose to do as Longoria did and sign a contract to give up their opportunity at arbitration and have their first couple of years at free agency bought out with guaranteed years and options, they can have a nice nest egg of $10-20 million regardless of whether if they flame out as players or become stars. It’s a gamble they take. It’s a gamble the team makes. It applies to everyone from Trout to the last player taken in the draft who manages to make it to the big leagues for a cup of coffee or is a late-bloomer and has a 20-year career.

You wouldn’t know that, though, from the indignant reaction to the Angels deciding to renew Trout’s contract for $510,000. Does Trout’s near-MVP season in 2012 have any bearing on the Angels’ decision to raise his salary by $28,000 from what he made as a rookie? Should it?

The Players Association makes the rules for all the players and it’s the players who instituted these rules. It allowed MLB to implement draconian constraints on newly drafted players because of the proffered reason to cut down on the huge signing bonuses amateurs receive. But the real, primordial reason is a “screw those guys” attitude that permeates established players and would, in a financial form of plausible deniable hazing, let the drafted players work their way up to making big money. It’s long been a point of contention for veteran major leaguers to see some kid taken at number 5 in the draft being handed an automatic $8 million bonus for nothing other than being a good amateur or having great tools. They dealt with it the best way they knew how. Of course it blew up in some of their faces as solid pitcher Kyle Lohse is sitting out because no one wants to give up the draft pick to sign him.

Eventually it affects everyone. These are the rules. The Angels aren’t beholden to an abstract code of right and wrong. They don’t have to give Trout a long-term contract extension if they don’t want to and they renewed his contract for an amount determined on their own volition. They don’t have to apologize or explain.

If Trout plays even 75% as well as he did in 2012, he’s going to get a $200 million contract from the Angels or someone else. He’ll have his freedom in five years. For now, he’s tied to the club that drafted him and that club can pay him whatever they choose to pay him under the parameters of the basic agreement. They decided on $510,000 and that’s what he’ll be paid. Or maybe they’re already planning a long-term contract to pay him for the next 6-8 years and buy out his arbitration years and free agency. Until that happens, his salary is what it is.

Is it fair?

Is it unfair?

It’s neither. These are the rules. It’s not slave wages and there’s no reason for the explosion of public ridicule for the Angels operating within the pay structure in Major League Baseball.

Share|

//