How Mike Trout's Blockbuster Contract Compares to A-Rod's Contracts, Factoring for Inflation

How Mike Trout's Blockbuster Contract Compares to A-Rod's Contracts, Factoring for Inflation

MLB

How Mike Trout's Blockbuster Contract Compares to A-Rod's Contracts, Factoring for Inflation

By

Mike Trout inked a blockbuster extension with the Angels today. ESPN’s Jeff Passan reports it is a 12-year deal worth $430 million, and that it breaks the records of individual MLB player per-year deal (passing Zach Greinke’s $34 million per year with the Diamondbacks), total MLB contract for the duration of the deal (passing Bryce Harper’s $330 million with the Phillies), and biggest contract in all sports (passing Canelo Alvarez’s $365 million with DAZN).

As a fun exercise, let’s see how this compares and contrasts to A-Rod’s contracts that he signed with the Rangers and the Yankees, factoring in inflation. A-Rod signed a 10-year, $252 million contract with the Rangers in 2000; in 2007 he opted out and signed a new 10-year deal with the Yankees worth $275 million.

According to the CPI calculator, $25.2 million in December of 2000 is the equivalent of $36.6 million today. $27.5 million in December of 2007 is the equivalent of $33.1 million today. The average annual value of Mike Trout’s contract is $35.8 million.

So, the first A-Rod deal is actually worth more on a per-year basis than Trout’s if you factor in inflation from the signing of the deal, and the second is worth less. Trout got more years on his deal than A-Rod did on either of them, but his first deal had an opt out that he took full advantage of.

There’s probably not a real moral of the story here other than both players signed phenomenally rich deals, one in which served as a benchmark for future stars and the other of which almost certainly will going forward. It’s hard to conclude that one deal is necessarily better than the other.

Latest Leads

More MLB
Home