Skip to content

Update: Angels and Mike Trout agree on six-year, $144.5 million contract extension

Mar 28, 2014, 10:21 PM EDT

mike trout getty Getty Images

MLB.com’s Alden Gonzalez is reporting that the Angels and outfielder Mike Trout are close to finalizing a contract extension worth $144.5 million over six years. [Update: The Angels official Twitter confirms the deal. The team will make an announcement on Saturday.]

Trout is currently eligible for arbitration for the first time after the season, so the extension would cover all three arbitration years and the first three years of free agency.

Trout was the runner-up in AL MVP balloting in each of the last two seasons, losing both times to Miguel Cabrera of the Tigers. Cabrera made headlines yesterday when he agreed to a ten-year deal worth $292 million, with eight years and $248 million of it being new.

The average annual value of Trout’s reported extension, in excess of $24 million, doesn’t touch Cabrera’s AAV of $31 million.

  1. elwaysagenius - Mar 28, 2014 at 10:22 PM

    Underpaid

    • syphermce - Mar 28, 2014 at 10:58 PM

      Maybe when you compare it to other players salaries but I will never say $24million a year to play baseball is “underpaid.” All the players are way overpaid but that’s how sports are these days.

      • clydeserra - Mar 28, 2014 at 11:00 PM

        Vlad? Vladimir Lenin? Is that you?

      • elwaysagenius - Mar 28, 2014 at 11:05 PM

        Definitely in respect to other players. He probably could’ve pushed the Angels to pay him the same AAV for 4 years, or for the same 6 years he probably could’ve surpassed Miggy’s AAV

      • campcouch - Mar 29, 2014 at 12:07 AM

        it looks like he got a fair deal considering his years in the league. If he was a longer tenured vet producing the same numbers,he’d command one of those $200+ mil deals. Besides,if LAA is starting to slide in 6 years,he’ll be able to move on and still be young enough to reap a larger deal. and perhaps he’s likes being in Anaheim. He could’ve waited and definitely found a ball club who would pay him more.

      • bigharold - Mar 29, 2014 at 12:17 AM

        “All the players are way overpaid but that’s how sports are these days.”

        Not if you consider the amount of revenue they help generate. Owners are fabulously wealthy already and generally got that way because they were paid handsomely for their endeavors. I see no reason players should be rewarded similarly. For all the so called “bad FA signings” there are twice as many payers that are under paid. The proof is that even with these outrageous contracts that are being bandied about MLB is doing fabulously. Even all those teams that are “losing money” are still doing great because they are only losing money thanks in part to accounting and business slight of hand AND franchise valuations are going through the roof.

        I much rather a few players be “overpaid” than already wealthy owners become even more wealthy. Besides, nobody ever paid a nickel to see an owner do anything.

      • skerney - Mar 29, 2014 at 1:07 AM

        Baseball players create enormous value. Players are underpaid. Our menial “trade-labor-for-equivilent-cash” values system does not apply to baseball economics.

      • klingonj - Mar 29, 2014 at 7:31 AM

        there is a great line from the movie “North Dallas Forty” that goes “Every time I call it a game, you call it a business. And every time I call it a business, you call it a game.”

        you could compare minimum wage here with people in the Philippines and call minimum wage overpaid.

      • kyleshabram - Mar 29, 2014 at 12:06 PM

        DOH! clicked report instead of reply! my bad mang!

        I was gonna say “stop whining!”

  2. Carl Hancock - Mar 28, 2014 at 10:30 PM

    Trout has all the leverage. He shouldn’t give the Angels any more than 2 years of his free agency years.

    • drewsylvania - Mar 28, 2014 at 11:07 PM

      He’s not a free agent anytime soon; he doesn’t have all the leverage.

    • bigharold - Mar 29, 2014 at 12:21 AM

      “Trout has all the leverage.”

      No, since he was going to be under team control the next three years. When he gets to FA and he’s still only 27, .. then he’ll have all the leverage.

      • clydeserra - Mar 29, 2014 at 12:43 AM

        if he is giving up 3 FA years, he has more leverage than the angels team control years. His first arb award won’t be for $23M, but it would be close, his second would be more, and his 3 FA years would be over $30M.

        I don’t get this contract from trouts standpoint.

      • bigharold - Mar 29, 2014 at 12:57 AM

        “I don’t get this contract from trouts standpoint.”

        $140+ mil and security. Sure, he’s sign for 3 years of his FA but he’s not “.. giving up..” three years. He’ll make less than he might have but for three years before his FA he’ll get a lot more than he would have otherwise. And, $140+ mil is $140+ mil. It is not out of the question that before he ever got to FA he might have a career ending injury or one that severely hampers his ability. Now, he already has a contract that is bigger than 99.5% of all contracts. And, if it for 6 years he’ll be 27 when he becomes a FA again. Then he can go for the 10-12 year $350-400 mil contract.

        From that stand point young Mister Trout’s standpoint is looking just fine.

      • ezthinking - Mar 29, 2014 at 2:46 AM

        “Trout has all the leverage. He shouldn’t give the Angels any more than 2 years of his free agency years.”

        That’s what I thought.

        Sincerely,

        Grady Sizemore

      • twinfan24 - Mar 29, 2014 at 10:27 AM

        I have to disagree with clyde in the fact that I don’t think a first time arbitration eligible player would get anything close to $23M. They likely would have settled anyway, but I think $10M would have been about the most he would have gotten as first time eligible, regardless of how great he plays. Granted, we will now never know, but I think he got a very, very good contract and will still be young enough when it is over to get another huge deal if he plays well.

  3. chill1184 - Mar 28, 2014 at 10:34 PM

    Smart move of the Angels for locking this kid up

  4. phillysports1 - Mar 28, 2014 at 10:37 PM

    Nooooooo !!! I had high hopes seeing him in a Phillies uniform in 2-3 years :(

    • kcroyal - Mar 28, 2014 at 10:44 PM

      You mean in 12 to 15 years?

  5. Mark - Mar 28, 2014 at 10:38 PM

    Why would Trout give up any of his FA years? Let alone 3 and a fourth with the option? He could be making 35-40M easy for his free agent seasons.

    • djpostl - Mar 28, 2014 at 10:50 PM

      Only thing I can think is he still gets a bite from FA again at age 28 or so.

      • 1943mrmojorisin1971 - Mar 28, 2014 at 10:54 PM

        Makes sense. $145 mil used smartly and he’s set for life, why wouldn’t he take the money when it’s there. He may have all the raw talent in the world but life, and especially baseball is unpredictable. Plus, like you said, he would get his go-around with free agency around the prime of his career and be in line for a second ludicrous payday.

      • clydeserra - Mar 28, 2014 at 11:01 PM

        he was set for like in June of 2012.

        He must not like money or something.

      • Mark - Mar 28, 2014 at 11:11 PM

        With a 7th year team option, he’ll be a FA around 29.

      • djpostl - Mar 28, 2014 at 11:15 PM

        A 30 year old kind of chubby guy with zero defensive value just got a deal taking him thorugh age 41 (with options tacked on back) totalling at least 248M in new money.

        I am sure he noticed that.

      • bigharold - Mar 29, 2014 at 12:28 AM

        “… $145 mil used smartly and he’s set for life,”

        One could stick it in a pillow case and bury it in his yard and still be set for life with $145 mil, .. unless of course one is Allen Iverson.

      • djpostl - Mar 29, 2014 at 10:41 AM

        Or Antoine Walker. Or Andre Rison. Or Mike Tyson. Or….oh damn, we’re starting to get the picture =P

    • stabonerichard - Mar 28, 2014 at 10:52 PM

      He’ll hit free agency well ahead of ARod, Pujols, Miggy when they got their blockbuster deals and, in the meantime, $145M is a decent safety net.

      • Mark - Mar 28, 2014 at 11:06 PM

        No, he won’t. A-Rod was in his age 24 season when he left the Mariners, so a FA at 25.

      • stabonerichard - Mar 28, 2014 at 11:16 PM

        I was referring to the largest contract ARod has signed during his career, which happened when he was on the wrong side of 30.

    • paperlions - Mar 29, 2014 at 10:05 AM

      He’s getting over $32M per FA year (the last 3 years of the deal). The first 3 take care of his arbitration years, which probably would have gone something like $10M, $15M, $20M. Leaving $99M for the 3 FA years. Plus, the deal only goes through his age 28 season, setting him up for one more long-term mega deal.

      Trout didn’t give a discount, he essentially got 6 years guaranteed of about what he would would make if he continues to be healthy and fantastic, and got it 4 years before he’d be a FA.

      • stex52 - Mar 29, 2014 at 12:43 PM

        He is not a giant corporation, needing to maximize profits for shareholders. He is a human being who just got a guaranteed payout that will make his grandchildren very wealthy. What could possibly be wrong with that?

        If he turns out to be one of those guys who measures his relative worth by contract size, he gets a chance in his late 20’s at his peak. Right now, why wouldn’t he take the deal?

      • unclemosesgreen - Mar 29, 2014 at 12:57 PM

        What paper said.

  6. andreweac - Mar 28, 2014 at 10:40 PM

    MVP!

  7. 1harrypairatesties - Mar 28, 2014 at 10:41 PM

    ESPN says they signed him to a 6-yr deal.

  8. chacochicken - Mar 28, 2014 at 10:41 PM

    Mike Trout continues to amaze me. 140 is still massive wealth but Mikey is just happy to go out and give 110%. He genuinely loves baseball.

    • uyf1950 - Mar 28, 2014 at 10:45 PM

      He’s going to love it even more when he’s 29 and eligible for FA and still in the prime of his career.

      • jcmeyer10 - Mar 28, 2014 at 10:48 PM

        He sees the contracts they give to 30+ year olds. If he never hits a ball again he makes 160 million dollars. If he can keep it up, he will make more than Miggy!

      • chacochicken - Mar 28, 2014 at 11:02 PM

        He’s probably giving up at least 50-60 million for those 3 FA years. Giving huge discount to the Angels.

      • missthemexpos - Mar 28, 2014 at 11:03 PM

        Could be the first 1/2 Billion dollar contract if he is a healthy free agent at age 29.

      • uyf1950 - Mar 28, 2014 at 11:27 PM

        @ chacochicken, I don’t think it’s that big of a discount. Considering it’s a AAV of just over $24MM per. there is no way Trout would have averaged $24MM per for his 3 arbitration eligible years. It’s a savings for the Angels don’t get me wrong but probably more in the neighborhood of $25MM in total over the life of the 6 year deal.

        But keep in mind there is a risk for the Angels. They have to hope that Trout remains healthy now, Before this extension they had no such risk.

    • unclemosesgreen - Mar 29, 2014 at 12:54 PM

      No sir, he’s not giving up anywhere close to that kind of money. Ken Rosenthal’s estimate of Trout’s arb. years looked like: 12/16/20 million. I think that’s the best estimate I’ve seen. Paperlions & quint were both right in that zone as well in their estimate.

      What Trout has done is essentially trade 3 FA years for some insurance against disability or other performance devaluation. He gets a $5 million bonus right now, and a nice salary for next season when he could have easily been re-upped for another million.

      At the very worst, if absolutely everything went his way health and performance-wise, I think he may have left between $10-15 million on the table. At worst. When you compare that opportunity cost with the chance to get a large chunk of cash up front and the ability to get the whole shooting match guaranteed, it really seems quite reasonable to me.

  9. uyf1950 - Mar 28, 2014 at 10:44 PM

    This is apparently a very good time to be a Major League baseball superstar.

    • 1943mrmojorisin1971 - Mar 28, 2014 at 10:57 PM

      Generally a very good time to be anywhere in the bourgeoisie….the rich keep getting richer and the guillotines are nowhere in sight.

    • genericcommenter - Mar 28, 2014 at 11:00 PM

      I think it’s always been a good time to be a superstar. It’s also a good time to be a 5th OF or UT IF or marginal starter.

    • 18thstreet - Mar 29, 2014 at 12:31 PM

      As Verlander said, it’s a good time to be an owner, too.

  10. slaugin - Mar 28, 2014 at 10:47 PM

    He’s 22 so he will be in his prime in time for his next contract. By then Salaries will be even more inflated and he will get 10 yr deal that will put Miggys contract to shame

  11. sisisisisisisi - Mar 28, 2014 at 10:55 PM

    Trout agent must be on the Angels payroll.
    Worst contact EVER in the history of MLB.

  12. bearwithjetpack - Mar 28, 2014 at 11:01 PM

    What a deal for the Angels. Trout definitely could have pushed for more.

  13. chargrz - Mar 28, 2014 at 11:23 PM

    If Trout were a FA he could command 50 Mil a year easy.

  14. baseballisboring - Mar 28, 2014 at 11:25 PM

    Makes more sense for the Angels that they’re getting 3 of his FA years instead of 2, which is what it originally looked like when they discussed it earlier. He’ll be underpaid throughout the life of this contract, but YOU try and turn down 144 million. Seriously, try it.

    • infieldhit - Mar 28, 2014 at 11:33 PM

      If I turn it down, how much will I be making the next few years?

      Regardless, I’m glad to see Trout not feel like he had to break the bank here, even if everyone is stunned he didn’t. It’s also possible that he’s already experienced the pressure on/off the field of being a star player, and just didn’t want the burden of playing up to a monster contract (yet).

  15. toodrunktotastethischicken - Mar 28, 2014 at 11:40 PM

    It’s downright scary to think what he can potentially be making in free agency come age 28 if the production keeps up.

  16. quintjs - Mar 28, 2014 at 11:57 PM

    So at 40/60/80% arbritartion rates, it equates so something like 12/18/24 for arbitration years and 30m for the 3 FA years – which equals $144m.

    So before people go on and on about underpaid they need to remember he isn’t close to a free agent. This contract values him at a $30m a year player, and then reduced for arbritration rates.

    Smart deal for both sides really as a lot of these are. Angels get some free agent years and cost control, Trout gets a huge safety net (which I don’t know how as a kid if someone wants to guarantee you $140m you say no) and gets to be a free agent at a still young age where he can make Miggy/ Pujols/ A-Rod money.

  17. phillysports1 - Mar 28, 2014 at 11:59 PM

    Stop hating on Miggy .

  18. favrewillplay4ever - Mar 29, 2014 at 12:14 AM

    Very good signing by the Angels. And we don’t often hear those words together in the same sentence. Not since the first Weaver contract, anyways.

  19. echech88 - Mar 29, 2014 at 1:10 AM

    “Mike Trout is so stupid!”

    – People who will never see $144M in their lifetime, much less have it offered to them in exchange for 3 extra years of playing baseball in one of the most beautiful parts of the country.

    $144M of injury security from 2 years of performance AND free agency at age 29. Yeah, what an idiot.

    • sethcohenplayedsomeball - Mar 29, 2014 at 11:01 AM

      Beautifully stated echech88!

      In homage and agreement with your “most beautiful parts of the country”(which I sincerely agree with, you can’t go wrong out there!), a poem that I posted a couple months back. Cheers: )

      To play some ball in So Cal I dream
      League minimum LOOGY for any team
      Hit the drive thru at In-N-Out
      Civic Center for No Doubt
      Sorry ladies but I’m no star
      Get my batter then to the bar
      Undeniable sun surf and sand
      Happiest man in all the land

  20. mottershead1972 - Mar 29, 2014 at 2:54 AM

    A bird in the hand… Ask Nomar bout that

  21. renaado - Mar 29, 2014 at 2:57 AM

    Truly deserves it.

  22. theebbandflow - Mar 29, 2014 at 4:40 AM

    Has anyone checked on Bryce Harper’s ego?? I really hope it’s alright.

    • renaado - Mar 29, 2014 at 4:51 AM

      Harper’s a punk. Guy needs to blow off some steam.

  23. onbucky96 - Mar 29, 2014 at 5:35 AM

    WTF? How dare the Angels sign Trout until he’s 29. That is not part of the Yankees master plan. Long live The Evil Empire…

    • renaado - Mar 29, 2014 at 5:46 AM

      ? Your statement probably needs more than this punctuation mark of mine to answer for that kind of statement of yours.

    • nbjays - Mar 29, 2014 at 8:20 AM

      Since when did the Yankees master plan include signing anyone under age 30? I’d say he’s right on track to be in pinstripes. He gives the Angels 6 awesome years for the money, possibly a one-year extension at the end, then, at age 30, the Yankees offer him a billion dollars for the next 10 years, during which he goes all Pujols on them — Angels Pujols, not Cardinals Pujols.

  24. sepoko - Mar 29, 2014 at 8:19 AM

    Paying anyone a salary is contingent on taking that amount of money from someone else. Fans at the park contribute, advertising and TV revenue are major sources of the $ needed to pay the players. Those of us that can’t afford to attend in person still toss in a few bucks through our cable TV bills, as well as the price we pay for products purchased from the advertisers. When think “It’s not my money”, think again. May not be much but your money is supporting the salary structure of all professional sports.

  25. mightyoak - Mar 29, 2014 at 9:34 AM

    “a kind of chubby guy with zero defensive value” You are delirious. Best non-juiced hitter I ever saw and probably the best defensive first baseman in the league. If you can play third, first ain’t an issue. As for Trout, good for him. The kid is great to watch. This was probably the smart move by both parties. The Angels aren’t stuck in a decade deal and Trout will be free at just the right time. Really, he’s betting on himself to get that payday at 29, I don’t doubt it will happen and I like that he’s looking at it like that. I hope he doesn’t end up like Grady Sizemore but who cares, Grady is doing just fine.

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Featured video

Patience finally paying off for Royals fans
Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. R. Castillo (3055)
  2. D. Ortiz (2283)
  3. J. Hamilton (2240)
  4. N. Arenado (2199)
  5. C. Kershaw (2163)
  1. G. Stanton (2126)
  2. A. Pagan (2081)
  3. M. Trout (2063)
  4. A. Pujols (2050)
  5. A. Rizzo (2004)