Why Mike Trout’s new contract with the Angels is great and awful at the same time

Hail to the fish!

I’m giving absolute props to Mike Trout for reportedly reaching a record-breaking 12-year, $430 million-plus deal with the Los Angeles Angels. It’s refreshing to see a superstar of his clout show loyalty by signing with the team that drafted him, making it likely he’ll finish his career having played for only one franchise.

This comes under interesting circumstances as well. There was that rumor that in two years he would eventually join Bryce Harper with the Philadelphia Phillies. And then there’s the fact that the Angels haven’t been very good during Trout’s time there.

Some superstar players — cough, Kevin Durant — wouldn’t make such a commitment. It’s refreshing to see a superstar who wants to be the man for this team rather than sharing the spotlight with someone like Bryce Harper.

But there’s also a side to this deal that doesn’t make any sense at all. Why in the world are we still doing this thing where superstars get signed to deals that will ensue into their late thirties or beyond?

Both Trout and Harper are signed to deals that will take them to the age 39. I can guarantee you that some of that money will be thrown away for nothing toward the end. Yet, this appears to be what some franchises feel needs to be done to keep (or attain) superstars.

The same applies to San Diego and Manny Machado, at least to a lesser extent. At least he would be only 36 when his 10-year deal ends.

Therefore, Trout and Harper win. The Angels and Phillies lose.

Both squads finished 80-82 a year ago, missing the playoffs. Granted, Philadelphia should get a bump by adding Harper’s bat to its lineup, but is either squad anywhere near winning a World Series at this point?

I’ve heard some touting the Phillies as the team to beat in the National League East now that they have Harper, and that’s a reasonable projection. However, I’m not sure it’ll be enough to bring home a World Series trophy.

These aren’t the first ridiculously long MLB contracts that could prove detrimental. Heck, the Angels are still paying big bucks for Albert Pujols, who at 38 years old (he’s 39 now) hit a robust .245 last season. He has three more seasons to go and recently said he intends to play them out.

I remember when Pujols was the Mike Trout or Bryce Harper. He was unreal. Yet, now he’s an aging player with diminishing production. This is what you can look forward to with Trout and Harper. Father Time is undefeated, as they say.

For now, though, these mega contracts look smart to some. And in Trout’s case, it is nice to think he might just play his whole career for one franchise. But it’s a gamble, as he is widely regarded as the best player in the league, but also one we seem to never see in the postseason.

Trout’s taking a risk and a leap of faith and so are the Angels.

However, The Fish will have something to fall back on when it’s all over — stacks and stacks of cash. The Angels, meanwhile, will likely in the long run wind up hoping for some divine intervention.