Mike Trout, Angels Discussing Six-Year Extension

MONDAY: MLB.com's Alden Gonzalez reports that the Angels don't have to wait until Opening Day to sign Trout to an extension in order to avoid luxury tax ramifications. Because Trout has already had his 2014 salary set, the Angels can structure an extension beginning with the 2015 season without undergoing penalty. In other words: they can extend Trout as soon as they want. This, Gonzalez writes, is the same rationale the Yankees used when signing Brett Gardner to a four-year extension that doesn't kick in until 2015.

SUNDAY, 2:00 pm: "No comment, but I like how a lot of people are writing it. It's pretty funny," Trout told reporters, including Mike DiGiovanna of the Los Angeles Times.

12:46 pm: Mike Trout and the Angels are discussing a six-year deal worth about $150MM, Jeff Passan of Yahoo! Sports reports. The deal would buy out two free agent seasons, and allow Trout to become a free agent at age 28. FOX Sports' Ken Rosenthal tweets the Angels' desire is for a seven-year pact in the $150-160MM range. Trout is represented by LSW Baseball.

There are still details to iron out, as Passan notes that there remains a difference between the two sides in the "low eight figures." The deal will cover one pre-arbitration season, as well as three arbitration years. Fangraphs' Dave Cameron recently wrote about the possibility of a Trout extension and estimated Trout might make a total of $60MM during his arbitration seasons, so a $150MM extension over six years might essentially buy out two free agency years at a little less than $45MM apiece.

Passan suggests that, in practice, Trout might actually get $35MM and $38MM in those seasons. Those still sound like enormous figures, but they're hardly surprising given the escalation of salaries throughout baseball and given that those two free-agency years would be the age-26 and age-27 seasons for the best player in the game. The $25MM average annual value would tie teammate Josh Hamilton as the richest for an outfielder (per Cot's Baseball Contracts), but the six-year, $150MM proposal would still fall far short of the record-setting seven-year, $215MM extension Clayton Kershaw signed with the Dodgers last month.

The timing of the extension is crucial to the Angels, according to Jeff Fletcher of the Orange County Register. The Angels are not believed to be interested in signing Trout to a deal that includes 2014, because it would likely push them over the $189MM luxury tax threshold. Fletcher reports the Angels are approximately $15MM under the threshold now and, by reaching a deal on a 2015 contract sometime after Opening Day, could avoid going over because it would not count against this year's cap, even if Trout receives a sizeable signing bonus to be paid in 2014.

Recently, Jeff Todd asked MLBTR readers about the parameters of a Trout extension. The consensus (as measured by the median of responses) was the Angels should be willing to give Trout a 10-year, $300MM deal, but a nine-year, $250MM contract is more likely to be reached. 

Edward Creech contributed to this post.


Leave a Reply

175 Comments on "Mike Trout, Angels Discussing Six-Year Extension"


baseballfan92
1 year 5 months ago

Trout becomes super rich for the rest of his life and is still set up to get the biggest contract ever when he’s 28. Angels get the best player in the world for an extra 2 seasons. Sounds like a win win.

LocustFarm
1 year 5 months ago

Well put. As an Angels fan, I’d certainly like to see a few more years added in on the deal and bump the amount up along with the years, but this deal would play it safe for him and work out for both sides, while setting him up for a huge contract afterwards if he keeps his pace up.

liberalconservative
1 year 5 months ago

Only in a perfect world. Don’t forget the same thoughts when Arod signed. Hamilton and Pujols contracts weigh down the team and Weaver contract will be up in a few years. This is better than signing another old vet but what about the pitching?

RyanWKrol
1 year 5 months ago

The Pujols and Hamilton contracts are not weighing the team down. Those two will eat up exactly $40 MM in payroll in 2014. And the team is currently at a projected $149 MM. That’s $109 MM remaining. That alone is about the same payroll they had when won 5 division titles in 6 years. And the remainder will increase when Trout is extended. Paying Wells $18 MM to play golf and Blanton $9 MM to sit in the bullpen are what’s weighing the team down. That’s $27 MM. That’s two Matt Garzas. Or Two Ubaldos. Or both! Or about 12 Capuanos. The Angels will finally be going over the luxury tax when they extend Trout, so the contracts of Pujols and Hamilton are not that big of an issue.

Ryan
1 year 5 months ago

The Angels wouldn’t sign Mike Trout to an extension until after Opening Day that way it wouldn’t affect their 2014 Payroll even if Trout received a large signing bonus paid in 2014

RyanWKrol
1 year 5 months ago

I know that. Whether it’s now or after opening day, they’re going over the luxury tax.

brianc6234
1 year 5 months ago

Contracts that have hurt the Angels are the ones like Vernon Wells. All those millions for pretty much nothing. Arte Moreno should have signed Adrian Beltre and he wouldn’t have had that big problem.

RyanWKrol
1 year 5 months ago

Word around the Angels beat writer camp fire is that Beltre approached Arte about signing and Arte slammed the door in his face. Good one! Now he’s ripping it up in Texas.

LAAUSC
1 year 5 months ago

They will wait until after opening day to announce any extension….he will make a million or 2 for 2014 but the extension will be for 2015 and beyond because of the luxury tax cap for 2014…. so 10 million signing bonus ( paid in 2014 ) and 5 million for 2015….18 million for 2016….22 million for 2017 ( 55 million total for 3 arbitration years ) 30 million for 2018….30 million for 2019….35 million for 2020….total extension = 6 years 150 million…..free agent at 29…..

RyanWKrol
1 year 5 months ago

Sounds right to me. New reports have the Angels and Trout signing the deal after opening day for that very reason, with Wells being paid $18 million to be a fan as the primary culprit.

Tony Matias
1 year 5 months ago

OOOHhhhhh,… this should be interesting.

Dbacksfan44
1 year 5 months ago

That is a great deal if it is only for 150 million

Christopher A. Otto
1 year 5 months ago

I can’t believe we’ve gotten to the point where that sentence actually is reasonable.

Matt Mccarron
1 year 5 months ago

No one, not Miggy, not Cutch, not Goldy will have a shot at 300M in there life, Trout has a chance to over take Arod as the richest MLB player.

Christopher A. Otto
1 year 5 months ago

Hell, he might double A-Rod.

Matt Mccarron
1 year 5 months ago

ARod made like 400M, not gonna happen.

Metsfan93
1 year 5 months ago

maybe (a huge maybe) if this deal doesn’t happen and he actually hits FA he could double A-Rod’s 275 MM deal. I doubt that happens, but that might be what he meant.

cubsfan97
1 year 5 months ago

Doublw 275MM is 550MM. Spread that over 10 years, no one, not even the Dodgers would pay 55 million a year, not anywhere in the near future. Say they gave him 12 years, its still 45 million a year. He will not make 40 million a year, and IMO 35 would probably be the ceiling, and thats if the Yankees, Dodgers and Red Sox all start bidding for him.

Metsfan93
1 year 5 months ago

I said a huge maybe, lol. It would need to coincide with, say, the Yankees needing new players once McCann/Ells decline, and wanting to go all out. It’s a long shot, but a 12-year, 550 MM deal would be a monstrosity. An albatross. That’s why I said huge maybe. I agree with you, I was just trying to justify that other guy’s comment since he couldn’t have been projecting Trout to earn over 800 MM in his career..

Jeffy25
1 year 5 months ago

Projected breakdown shows 73 million for his two free agent years.

4 years before he even gets there.

Kid can easily challenge 40 million a year if he keeps this up

bhambravesfan
1 year 5 months ago

He only stands to make 50-60MM in arbitration so they are basically paying him 45-50MM per FA year

brianc6234
1 year 5 months ago

Trout will never hit free agency if he keeps it up like he has. The Angels won’t let that happen. Nobody should ever let the best player in baseball become a free agent unless they’re a small market team that can’t afford him. Those teams would trade him.

Metsfan93
1 year 5 months ago

You know it takes two parties to sign a contract, right? And a 26-year-old superstar with two 10+ WAR seasons through his age-21 campaign might be enticed to take his talents elsewhere and incite a bidding war at some point, right?

Jeffy25
1 year 5 months ago

150 here.

At 28, get 10/350 easily…

Yeah, he can easily over take a-rod just by being as good as he’s been for the next 6 years.

uberalec
1 year 5 months ago

Arod had two contracts of $252 & $275 which adds up to $527 million (one of those years may have blended). Either way $150 is stupid for Trout especially when Kershaw just got $30 per yer. A $375 million with $150 million still wouldn’t surpass Alex, which would beterrible negotiation on Trouts part considering the insane rate deals are given now.

Metsfan93
1 year 5 months ago

Three of those years are blended. He opted out of the final three years of the 252 MM deal..

uberalec
1 year 5 months ago

Ah you are completely correct, forgot about that. I guess either way I just see Trout easily being able to at least get a $180 million extension. If the Kershaw extension never happened, I understand, you’re paying for the arb years. Now though since there is precedent, $150 million is a steal for the Angels it seems.

As stupid as it sounds from pure shock value, $300-$350 million dollar deal isn’t as resounding as the $252 million Alex originally signed. Contracts are so inflated now. I really think if he stays consistent, $400 wouldn’t be out of the picture once teams start bidding for his services.

bjsguess
1 year 5 months ago

“Yeah, he can easily over take a-rod just by being as good as he’s been for the next 6 years.”

— Otherwise known as a run that no player in baseball history has ever gone on. That would give Trout 8 consecutive 10 WAR seasons. Ruth had 9 throughout his entire career (longest run was 3 consecutive seasons). Ted Williams managed to land 4 10 WAR seasons. Bonds was at 5. To just assume that Trout will be the best player in baseball history is a pretty tall order.

Meh Sheep
1 year 5 months ago

Not much of a deal when you figure 4 of the six years were arbitration years anyway so he wasn’t likely to get even $20 million per for any of those 4 years. More of a market deal than a bargain.

Scott Thorn
1 year 5 months ago

Trout was set to break every single arbitration record ever.

Meh Sheep
1 year 5 months ago

That isn’t the way arbitration works you don’t get huge salaries in you first couple of years of arbitration.

Current Records for arbitration:

First time: Ryan Howard – $10MM (2008).
Second time: Miguel Cabrera – $11.3MM (2007).
Third time: Prince Fielder – $15.5MM (2011)

Scott Thorn
1 year 5 months ago

I know how arbitration works, thanks.

You said he wouldn’t get $20M per for ANY of the 4 years. I could easily see him getting 20+ by the 4th year.

Meh Sheep
1 year 5 months ago

Even if he were to get 25 in the 4th, 20 in the 3rd, 15 in the 2nd and 10 in the first. That is still 40 million per year for years 5 and 6 so that isn’t a deal. Like I said market value.

Nick Costanza
1 year 5 months ago

Mike Trout isn’t a Super Two, he only goes through the arbitration process three times (maybe you don’t know exactly how the process works).

Metsfan93
1 year 5 months ago

The first post Scott responded to referenced “four arbitration years”…

Metsfan93
1 year 5 months ago

Two of those salaries are very outdated. Howard would’ve certainly beaten Cabrera and Fielder’s figures but was extended. Cabrera would’ve beaten Fielder’s figure too but was also extended. Regardless, none of the three have Trout’s pre-arb pedigree. I would think a 15-20-25 arb isn’t out of the question, considering he’s superior to all three and the 10 MM was six years ago..

pastlives
1 year 5 months ago

yeah but…1M for this season, + 15+20+25 means he’s getting paid like 45M per free agent season…that’s not a deal.

Metsfan93
1 year 5 months ago

I don’t think I ever said this contract was a steal for LA. Going year to year would be cheaper, but there’s no way Trout would sell himself for a two-year deal after 2017 if he stays healthy. Overpaying for 2018-2019 now might be the only way for LA to secure those years without worry of him leaving.

bjsguess
1 year 5 months ago

“Regardless, none of the three have Trout’s pre-arb pedigree.”

I suggest you look at Howard’s platform season again. He absolutely crushes Trout on things that arbiters look at. They don’t care about WAR or positional adjustments. They pay for BA, SLG, HR’s and RBIs. It’s not right but it is reality.

Howard is actually a great comp. With inflation maybe you make the argument like pastlives that he gets 15/20/25. Personally, I think that’s more than he would get but it’s in the right ballpark. That also assumes he is otherworldly for the next 3 seasons.

If Trout is injured or posts more pedestrian numbers he’s not going to sniff at $15M for his first time through arbitration.

Jeffy25
1 year 5 months ago

Yeah, trout was set to beat each one of them.

People don’t seem to be aware how good his traditional stats really are.

Matt Mccarron
1 year 5 months ago

Best possibility for both sides. He gets another chance at a major contract his age 28 season, and the Angels lock him up until then. Interesting.

Runtime
1 year 5 months ago

And he still gets to sign a 10 year deal with the Yankees afterwards.

(Don’t take me seriously, guys. It’s a joke)

Trock
1 year 5 months ago

A joke that very well could happen…lol

Jeremy Schiff
1 year 5 months ago

By that time the Mets will also be at full power and you can bet the dodgers will be in the bidding aswell. Get ready for a big market bidding war

JoeyBats13
1 year 5 months ago

6 years and 150 million would be a steal for the Angels. 10+ WAR players do not come around very often

phillies1102
1 year 5 months ago

Just keep in mind that these are the arbitration years that are mostly bought out. We’ll see how much of a steal it is when we see the salary on last 2 free agent years.

Kevin Yochim
1 year 5 months ago

Scary thing is he could easily be 12+ if he has a better year defensively than 2013.

Jeremy
1 year 5 months ago

Yup, his 2012 defence combined with 2013 offence would be a 12 WAR player.

bjsguess
1 year 5 months ago

How is this a “steal”?

I don’t care how good any player is he won’t be worth $45M in salary in today’s market. Let alone that price being a “steal”.

The 6 year deal covers 4 years of pre-arb and arbitration. He would have to shatter the records (not beat – but completely demolish) for arbitration THEN he would be paid 25% more than any other player in baseball history. That is not a steal.

Trock
1 year 5 months ago

Angels need to do whatever it takes to lock this guy up for as long as possible. Not a fan of the angels but love it when home grown guys stay with a team long term

1 year 5 months ago

Smart move. Trout gets financial security and the Angels get two FA years out of the guy who will likely get a contract of historic value when he hits FA.

Kevin Yochim
1 year 5 months ago

Keep in mind this is not the Angels saying he’s worth $25M AAV. Interested to see the breakdown and what they value the 2 FA years at (my guess is around $36M).

Metsfan93
1 year 5 months ago

36 MM would mean he’s earing 78 MM for one pre-arb year and three arb years….

Matt Mccarron
1 year 5 months ago

He was tendered a contract for this year already. Hes making 500K this year.

Metsfan93
1 year 5 months ago

If they extend him I’d have to imagine that salary is being wiped off the books and he’ll earn more now and less in the future. If it’s six years after 2014, it’s taking three FA years, not two.

Scott
1 year 5 months ago

As an Angels fan, it sounds A LITTLE BIT like a disappointing development, if a bit inevitable.

If this is buying out two years of free agency, then that means the six-year deal is also paying him for this year, when he could be making less than a million. If you assume his arbitration years will go something like 15-20-25, then he’s making $60-65 million over these next four years without a new contract. Which means the remaining two years of free agency in a 6/150 deal are going for about $40-45 million a piece (even if they won’t actually be measured out that way in terms of team payroll).

That’s a heck of a premium to pay for those years (even if his WAR/$ ratio thus far suggests he’s worth it) to only be getting two non-controlled years out of him. I want this guy to be an Angel for as long as possible, but only getting two extra years of him guaranteed sounds like a poor return at that price for the Angels.

That said, it IS exactly what works best for Trout. He gets paid handsomely for the next few years, and steps into free agency, ostensibly right in the middle of his prime, poised for the biggest contract ever.

RyanWKrol
1 year 5 months ago

This ensures that he doesn’t leave right after arbitration. This means he’s an Angel for the first 9 years of his career (2011 debut included). That’s just 1 year less than the Pujols contract; or just 2 full seasons less. Be careful what you ask for. We already have the privilege of watching the best player in the game play on our team. And it will soon be for a long time.

Scott
1 year 5 months ago

“Long” needs to be measured relative to what we’re already guaranteed…which is six full years of Trout. Getting an extension that gives us eight full years instead, with those final two years coming at the absolutely maximum market price that he would get in FA isn’t really much of a deal for the team.

RyanWKrol
1 year 5 months ago

Yes it is. Better deal than 10 years, $300 MM. And it looks like they’ll probably extend him after opening day. So make that 9 full seasons of Mike Trout overall, covering 3 free agent years. The Angels caught lightning in a bottle, and are going to harness it. Enjoy it while you can.

Scott
1 year 5 months ago

10/300 would, unequivocally, be better for the team than 6/150.

BitLocker
1 year 5 months ago

25M a year, and Trout can get a bigger deal at 28. This is a win-win.

trsitdh
1 year 5 months ago

Not questioning his greatness, but that seems like a lot for only 2 free agent years. How much can he anticipate getting through arbitration? Maybe $50M total? So does that mean this is roughly $100M/2 for the free agent years?

Scott
1 year 5 months ago

Probably closer to $60 million total in arbitration, but yeah, I agree. This contract makes for two VERY expensive FA years.

Metsfan93
1 year 5 months ago

I feel like they’ve gotta have this wrong and it’s 2015-2020, buying out three FA years, not two. Because I thinl 55-60 MM is his arb ceiling, and even at an optimistic 40 MM a year for FA years and 60 MM for arb, that’s only 140 MM..

RyanWKrol
1 year 5 months ago

Additional reports are stating the deal will be finalized after opening day since Arte likely won’t want to go over the luxury tax this season with Vernon Wells’ salary on the books. I don’t blame him.

Mike1L
1 year 5 months ago

Interesting. I’m in the minority, I think, but I like the deal for both sides. Trout gets enough money to set him for life (lives, I think) and the Angels are securing him through 28, meaning they can judge his skills, injuries, etc far better at that time. If he’s a FA at 26, that forces their hand that much earlier.

bravesnjays
1 year 5 months ago

Hard to project the arbitration process…But they are basically paying 40-45 mil a year for those 2 FA years (and that is a somewhat conservative estimate). That is insane. Even for Trout as amazing as he has been. On the open market today I think he would get a lot of guaranteed money but not at a 40-45AAV… (all this is predicated on the numbers proposed being realistic)

Metsfan93
1 year 5 months ago

I don’t think a 40 MM AAV is entirely unreasonable for a player of his ilk. Kershaw sold away his FA years for 32.5 MM per, and Trout projects to provide mountains of surplus value on Kershaw in the next few years. Trout’s *projected* as a 9-win player. That’s nuts.

Matt Mccarron
1 year 5 months ago

40M is a ton considering there is only 3 who overtook 26M.

Metsfan93
1 year 5 months ago

Trout’s young as heck and the best player in baseball, and teams are flush with cash. If anyone deserves 40 a year, it’s him..

bravesnjays
1 year 5 months ago

I don’t think anyone is questioning whether he “deserves” it or whether his stats would justify such a salary. We are simply questioning what the FA market would pay. (Technically also what he’d earn in arbitration is being discussed). Not many teams can afford signing Trout to long term deals worth 40-50mil AAV. Honestly, nobody but the Dodgers and Yankees can right now. Anybody else is essentially committing a third of their payroll for a decade to a single player.

Metsfan93
1 year 5 months ago

I’m talking more in the 35-40 range, with 40 AAV as the ceiling, not 50. When the player is that good, if you’ve got room, do it, I guess. I would imagine the Cubs, Red Sox, Angels, Dodgers, Yankees would all be in on Trout if he hit FA in a few years, at minimum.

bravesnjays
1 year 5 months ago

Also, that 40 mil AAV would mean he’d earn 70mil in arbitration. That is equally insane (not insane as in crazy, insane as it hasn’t happened before/its never been close)

Metsfan93
1 year 5 months ago

Yeah, 2014-2019 at 150 MM seems absurd.

RyanWKrol
1 year 5 months ago

Could be 3 FA years now. The deal will likely be done after opening day to count for 2015 – 2020.

bravesnjays
1 year 5 months ago

true, then it becomes a more like 30-33mil a FA year, I think we would all agree Trout gets that in a heartbeat as a FA on the open market.

bravesnjays
1 year 5 months ago

Yep, updated article shows that you are correct. 3 arbitration years and 3 FA years. This deal makes a lot more sense financially now. Good call.

Nick Costanza
1 year 5 months ago

I wouldn’t do this if I was the Angels…if you’re going to do an extension now, it should be at least 8 years.

Matt Mccarron
1 year 5 months ago

He won’t sign thru his prime, atleast not without an opt out.

Nick Costanza
1 year 5 months ago

Then I personally think it would be better to go year to year…it’s not worth shelling out a ton more cash just to get two more years.

Jeffy25
1 year 5 months ago

Trout is one of the players who should go year to year.

If I was his agent, I would be focused on him hitting free agency as young as possible.

But if they want to give near market value several years in advance and it’s two free agent years? Then sure.

northsfbay
1 year 5 months ago

If Trout gets injured he doesn’t get much money.

bjsguess
1 year 5 months ago

Nick is right on. I love Trout. Followed online the Angels draft when they took Randall and Mike back to back. Have been tracking his stats since A ball. He is an amazing player with really no weaknesses. He makes the team so much better.

All that said, I would trade him in a heartbeat if he is going to command $35-45M/year on a long term deal this many years before FA. I’d keep him for the next 2 years and then sell him with 2 years to go. If a team wants the chance to lock him up at that rate they surely would be willing to part with every interesting piece of their farm system.

There are not a lot of great examples where teams went out, spent top dollar on the best player in the game (at the time) and ended up enjoying the contract. Maybe Trout’s the exception. Or maybe he’ll be like the other 99% of the deals that look really ugly really quick.

Scott
1 year 5 months ago

This deal makes a lot more sense for the Angels (and really not much LESS sense for Trout, who would still go to free agency at 29) if it’s NOT buying out this year, and is instead buying out his 3 arb years and his first 3 FA years.

The Angels were trying to avoid having the AAV of Trout’s contract extension hit the books THIS season while Wells and Blanton are still on the books, when they’d be pushed over the luxury tax.

Also, as I said below and you noted above, the structure of a 6/150 contract starting THIS year would be such that his 2 free agency years are being priced out at about $45 million/year. Which seems almost insane.

If the deal is instead 3ARB + 3FA years, it would mean those 3FA years are going for closer to $30-35 million, which seems much more reasonable and likely)

Bromacho
1 year 5 months ago

Yeah I think it’s the latter. A deal like the one proposed right now would push the Angels into the luxury tax they have been trying to avoid all offseason

ChrisSEA84
1 year 5 months ago

We’ll if anyone deserves it, it’s him.

Rusty_Arcadia
1 year 5 months ago

This makes sense for both sides. Financial security for Trout and a few extra years of Trout for the Angels, even though a new deal isn’t necessary yet. Doing it now shows Trout that if he stays healthy and productive, the Angels have a desire to make him their franchise player and when the new deal is close to being up, I’m sure they’ll attempt to extend him again well before he hits free agency. Teams don’t let players they want to keep get into free agency unless they can’t afford the player or aren’t sure they want him back.

1 year 5 months ago

While a deal of six years makes sense for everyone, I still find it hard to fathom that a player can secure roughly $40-45M for free agent seasons when he’s four years away. You would think that would have some drastic impact on future young stars getting locked up early

Mike1L
1 year 5 months ago

You could look at a different way, which is that LA is buying itself more time to decide whether it wants to make a gigantic multiyear commitment. Trout may get injured, or his performance may drop back some, and perhaps they won’t.

1 year 5 months ago

I definitely get trying to extend him for a couple years. They get more guaranteed years of Trout, Trout is set for life and hits free agency in his twenties. But at or around the 6/$150M is very steep. It’s just not a bargain whatsoever to give a guy market-value money for his free agent years on an extension signed four years before free agency. Even the $35M & $38M figures tossed around are hardly discounts (if at all)

truroyal15
truroyal15
1 year 5 months ago

Only buying out two years of free agency. If that happens they will lose him when he becomes a free agent again.