3 teams with the pieces to get Mike Trout

"You do not move superstar players."

Billy Eppler, the Los Angeles Angels' first-year general manager, offered up that axiom when asked earlier this month about the possibility of unloading Mike Trout, and the 24-year-old himself has since laughed off the trade speculation, too.

Mired in fourth place in the American League West, however, with a whopping 10 players on the disabled list, the Angels' outlook for the 2016 campaign - ostensibly, a year they're built to contend in - looks increasingly bleak. With more than few bloated contracts on their payroll and a dismal farm system devoid of any elite talent, the future isn't all that bright in Anaheim, either. According to Eppler, no teams have called about Trout yet - one rival GM even suggested no club would be able to afford the acquisition cost - but that could change in the very near future if the Angels continue to flounder.

So who might actually pull the trigger and pony up for the four-time All-Star? Here are three teams that could do it:

Boston Red Sox

No organization is scarier than the Red Sox right now, not only because their active roster, laden with some of the best young talent in the majors, is scoring runs like a steroid-era club, but because even after sending three promising minor leaguers to San Diego last winter, they still have three or four of the game's top-20 prospects. Not many organizations have the kind of prospect capital that would enable them to overpay for Trout without parting with a single player on their 25-man roster, but the Red Sox - who have spent aggressively on the international market of late while doing an excellent job finding and developing domestic talent - do.

Enviably constructed for both present and future success, the Red Sox could unload their two best position-player prospects, Yoan Moncada and Andrew Benintendi, as well as their catcher of the future in Blake Swihart and still manhandle the American League for years with a core comprised of Trout, Mookie Betts, Xander Bogaerts, Jackie Bradley Jr., David Price, Anderson Espinoza, and Rafael Devers.

Texas Rangers

Having depleted their system last year to get Cole Hamels from Philadelphia at the trade deadline, the Rangers aren't exactly in the same position as the Red Sox, as paying for Trout would all but decimate their minor-league talent base. The thing is, the Rangers are, at present, a good team that might not need a ton of help from the farm in the coming years.

Blessed with young, cheap talent on their active roster (Nomar Mazara, Rougned Odor), productive veterans under contract for at least a couple more years (Yu Darvish, Adrian Beltre, Shin-Soo Choo), and plenty of financial wherewithal, the Rangers could exhaust what's left of their prospect capital for Trout and remain competitive for the next half-decade. By the time that competitive window closes, not only will their farm system have recovered, they might have anecdotes about winning that elusive first World Series title, too.

Los Angeles Dodgers

Before you argue that Julio Urias, the game's top left-handed pitching prospect, Joc Pederson, and Alex Wood might collectively provide as much value as Trout, for a fraction of the cost, consider two factors: 1) They probably can't; and 2) The opportunity cost of distributing those wins over three roster spots instead of consolidating them into one Mike Trout is significant.

On a team that doesn't believe in fiscal restraint - as the Dodgers shouldn't - Trout's salary isn't problematic, as it won't hinder them from eventually recouping the value lost in the trade on the open market, even if they have to overpay and erase any potential for surplus value. (Aside: What baseball fan living outside San Francisco, Colorado, Arizona, and San Diego wouldn't want to see the best position player of his generation share the field with the best pitcher of his generation?)