Los Angeles Angels: Mike Trout deserves half a billion

In two years it will be Mike Trout, not Manny Machado or Bryce Harper, in the center stage when his contract expires with the Los Angeles Angels.

The Los Angeles Angels have had the luxury of fielding the best player in baseball, Mike Trout, since 2012. Trout made his debut in 2011 but his traditional rookie year was 2012, the same year as both Manny Machado and Bryce Harper.

The three young superstars have had parallels their entire careers. The biggest difference, besides the play on the field, is that Harper and Machado never signed an extension.

Because of that, both Harper and Machado entered free agency this offseason. Machado just signed a 10-year, $300 million contract with the San Deigo Padres, who probably wasn’t his first choice in free agency.

That shows that the Padres were probably the only team willing to give him that lucrative $300 million contract and also shows that Bryce Harper, although he will get more, won’t get much more.

What a fall from grace. Last offseason, we were talking about how Harper might be worth $400 million.

Trout, on the other hand, signed an extension with the Los Angeles Angels to play two more seasons with the Halos. This not only gave Trout more money than his arbitration number would have been but gave the Angels some flexibility in building a contender around him.

The team has been unable to do that and after the Machado and Harper hype fades everyone will be turning to the 2020-2021 offseason when Trout is going to have his own frenzy.

Sure, Nolan Arenado is a free agent after this year but if Manny Machado only got $300 million I doubt Arenado will. People seem to be extremely high on Arenado without realizing that his splits away from Coors Field are not that good.

Anyways, whatever Harper is going to get Trout is undoubtedly going to get more. Machado and Harper have been great in their MLB careers, have been all-stars and in Harper’s case has even been an MVP.

Many say that neither are even in their prime yet, so part of the massive contracts dished out to them is potential. Both guys will be great either way, but there is that hope that they will be better than they are now.

The best either of them can get is where Mike Trout is right now and Trout has done it his entire career. He is already among the ranks of the all-time greats and has shown no signs of slowing down.

Trout might not even be in his prime, which is a very scary thought. If the Los Angeles Angels made the playoffs every year of his career, Trout would have at least five MVP awards. Barry Bonds is the all-time leader with seven and Trout can easily catch that number if he plays for a contending team in the latter half of his career.

When the time comes for Trout to gauge the market he should aim to take in half a billion dollars, which is just absurd to say out loud. He will still only be 29 when he hits the market and will, at the very very least, still have seven more great years out of him.

If I am the Los Angeles Angels, or any team for that matter, I would have no problem offering Trout a 14-year contract for $500 million. I understand MLB owners are scared of the risk associated with these contracts but Trout has done enough to assure every owner in the MLB.

That would give Trout just over $35 million per year and might be so massive that no sports contract ever surpasses it.