Please do not put words in quotation marks that are your interpretation of what I wrote, rather than what I actually wrote. This is a violation of SDMB rules, and one that we take very seriously around here sometimes.
My actual position, if you give a shit, is that the top dollar rate (“Best player in MLB” rate, if you will) is too high, and the doublewhammy of signing one of the game’s best players at top dollar for a decade is too risky. The Angels are looking forward to the likelihood of Trout being “worth” (according the MLB custom) such a contract in a few years and (I speculate) they’ve decided “Thanks, but no thanks.” It isn’t hard to figure out exactly what I’m speculating, and I’m not saying that I agree with it, only trying to make sense of their position, which you’re content to simply freak out over and conclude that the LA team has gone collectively insane.