Padres Sign Michael King to Three-Year Deal, Unless You Read the Fine Print

The San Diego Padres have re-signed starting pitcher Michael King to a… let’s just call it a three-year deal worth $75 million for now, though the particulars are somewhat more complicated.
Good for the Padres, getting their Christmas shopping done on time; not all of us are so organized. I also can’t remember if I’ve already used the joke about how a reunion between King and the Friars is the opposite of Becket, the 1964 film starring Richard Burton and Peter O’Toole. These are confusing times.
Especially for the Padres, who have been one of baseball’s more chaotic teams in the 2020s, shipping massive talents in and out with little warning and little regard for the long-term future. King came to San Diego in one of the more famous examples of this behavior: the trade that sent Juan Soto to the Yankees in 2023.
That all-in attitude — even when the Padres were selling in the short term, it was to set up another major push in the medium term — was assumed to have a shelf life. Especially after the death of popular owner Peter Seidler, whose largesse enabled GM A.J. Preller to satisfy his inexhaustible thirst for making deals.
As is so often the case with owners who cared about winning, Seidler’s heirs seem less interested in winning than cashing in on a profitable investment. In November, they put the team on the market. About two weeks later, they let the top right-handed pitcher on the market, Dylan Cease, walk in free agency. Relief ace Robert Suarez followed Cease out the door last week.
With the franchise in a transitional state, it would not have been surprising if King had also been left to seek alternate employment. Keeping him in the fold gives the Padres rotation a much-needed boost. King has been excellent when healthy, and while the current rotation begs to be compared to the what-might-have-been of a unit that also includes Cease, Blake Snell, and Yu Darvish (who’s going to miss the entire 2026 season with an elbow injury), a front three of Nick Pivetta, King, and Joe Musgrove is plenty good. And there’s plenty of high-end starting pitching talent left on the market if the Padres feel like going back for more.
You bring King back, when you have the chance, because of how good he can be when he’s healthy. The apotheosis of Michael King came in Game 1 of the 2024 NL Wild Card Series against Atlanta, when he struck out 12 batters in seven scoreless, walkless innings. According to game score, this was tied for the third-best playoff start in Padres franchise history, behind two Kevin Brown masterpieces during the 1998 postseason.
Look at the video and you’ll see why.
The 2024 Braves were a good lineup, and King made them look completely lost. He’s got four pitches he’ll throw frequently to hitters on either side of the plate: four-seamer, sinker, changeup, sweeper. The four-seamer is whatever; I want to talk about the other three.
The sinker-changeup combo really makes King, for me. In that playoff start, he was getting the kind of two-seamer movement you usually only see in old clips where Greg Maddux got away with scuffing the baseball for a couple innings. King, like Maddux, was dotting it front-door and back-door for called strikes here. The changeup comes in with a nearly identical movement profile, but with a velocity differential of about six miles per hour. That means a hitter can guess right on both movement and location and still be early or late.
And in case anyone gets too comfortable, King also throws a sweeper that looks like a changeup for a while, then gets Vaudeville-caned all the way to the other side of the plate. And then some, in fact. The plate is 17 inches wide; in 2025, the difference in induced horizontal break between King’s sweeper and changeup was a tick over 35 inches. This explains how you get Travis d’Arnaud, who usually knows what he’s doing at the plate, swinging at a pitch four feet out of the strike zone in this game.
Just for fun, King will also sprinkle in a slider, which has abnormally little horizontal movement for a pitch of that type but excellent vertical movement. The hitter thinks he’s getting a sweeper, but instead of breaking in on a lefty, it goes straight for the floor.
Now, that one playoff start was the best night of King’s life. He usually doesn’t throw that hard, with that much movement, or — if we’re being fair — get that many favorable strike calls. But over the course of the entire 2024 regular season, King was a good bat-misser for a starting pitcher (78th-percentile whiff rate, 81st-percentile strikeout rate) while posting some of the best quality-of-contact numbers in the league; his HardHit rate, 30.3%, was the best in the league among qualified starters. If you lower the threshold to 100 innings, only Snell beat him.
It’s hard to do both of those things at the same time. Since 2024, here are the starting pitchers who have thrown 100 innings in a season with a HardHit% of 34% or less and a Whiff% of 25% or more: Snell, Chris Sale, Corbin Burnes, Hunter Brown, Hunter Green, King, Tarik Skubal (twice), Tyler Anderson, and Zack Wheeler. If Burnes is worth $35 million a year at this stage of his career, you can make a pretty easy case that King is worth $25 million.
The structure of the deal, as I insinuated before, clouds that simple assertion. A three-year commitment is relatively short for a 30-year-old of King’s ability, and this contract is even less straightforward than the headline figures would make it look.
King turned down a one-year, $22.05 million qualifying offer to try his luck in free agency. The deal he got from the Padres has the following structure: $17 million in total compensation for 2026, with $5 million coming in salary and the rest in the form of a signing bonus. The two ensuing seasons are due to pay him $28 million and $30 million, respectively, and King has the option to sever the contract after either 2026 or 2027 and collect a $5 million buyout. Between his 2026 compensation and the buyout, King will make, at a minimum, almost exactly the $22 million he just turned down. If he thinks he can beat $29 million in AAV in free agency over the next two seasons, he can go back on the market at the next opportunity, unencumbered by the qualifying offer.
Every married couple, sooner or later, goes through hard times. When a rough patch hits, some people get divorced; others work through their problems and stay together. The latter group of couples can be further subdivided into two types: First, couples who go to therapy, learn to communicate, reignite the spark in the relationship, and recommit fully. You do whatever it takes to make the relationship work, and deal with the problems, rather than the symptoms.
Other couples paper over the cracks. Your job keeps you away from the family 80 hours a week? Well, we’ll still fight about it, but not in front of the kids. The overbearing in-laws turn in their spare key, but still come over four nights a week. One spouse drinks too much? Well, they’re not going to quit, but they’ll think about cutting back.
Cease’s contract in Toronto is a commitment; King’s contract in San Diego is a stopgap.
And it has the potential to work out quite badly for San Diego. Any deal that features an opt-out after every season puts the player in the driver’s seat; if King is better than expected, the Padres will only benefit from their savvy signing for one year. If he’s bad, or worse, if he gets hurt again, they’ll be on the hook for the whole contract. And this contract is so backloaded I wonder if the Seidler heirs signed off on it under the assumption that the $30 million in 2028 will be some other owner’s problem.
King intuitively feels safe; he’s a solid 6-foot-3 athlete with a boring name and a smooth, loose delivery. He does everything you’d want a starter to do at least reasonably well. He has two fastballs, two distinct breaking balls, and one of the best changeups you’ll see. He gets lefties and righties out, he gets soft contact, he gets whiffs, he gets batters to chase, he works fairly deep into games. He gets hit sometimes, like most pitchers, but in two seasons in San Diego, King has only really had one nightmare start.
At the same time, he’s appeared in seven major league seasons, and he’s only been a healthy, consistent starter in one of those campaigns. In 2025, he was limited to 15 starts by a nerve injury in his shoulder, and later by a knee injury suffered during his rehab. The chances that the Padres end up paying out the last two years of this contract, and regret doing so, are higher than they’d probably like.
But that’s a problem for another year. And quite possibly another owner. Eat, drink, be merry, and throw the sinker. Tomorrow is not promised.
Michael is a writer at FanGraphs. Previously, he was a staff writer at The Ringer and D1Baseball, and his work has appeared at Grantland, Baseball Prospectus, The Atlantic, ESPN.com, and various ill-remembered Phillies blogs. Follow him on Twitter, if you must, @MichaelBaumann.
Incredible deal for King, kudos to his agent. 3/75 would have been pretty fair without any opt-outs. Now, if he has a healthy platform year in either of the next two seasons, he gets to re-enter free agency without a QO.
It’s definitely on the unfriendly side for the team, but they’d otherwise be so hard-pressed to get a pitcher of King’s caliber without giving up another core player that it’s worth the downside risk.
Quick update, it looks like King’s signing bonus will be spread across three years. So, as of now his 2026 salary projects to be $9m, not $17m.
This makes more sense. The Padres get more upside with only having to pay $17m for a really good starting pitcher so long as he stays healthy and effective
Yeah this makes the deal fair imo. He’s not even getting QO money this season
I like the marriage analogy.
In essence, all of these contracts come down to what extent a player wants to bet on himself. Outside of the very top of the market, where there’s just not much room to grow from, longer deals and deals without opt outs are betting against yourself. Shorter deals and deals with opt outs will always guarantee less money, but allow a player to bet on himself.
The shorter deal with opt outs make sense for King, as another strong year could build his baseline and he could get the top-ish of the market deal he wants. It’s a nice position for the player to be in. I don’t understand how they don’t come at a higher cost to players. I think teams get blinded by optimism.
It seems like there are still certain teams that wildly underestimate the impact opt outs have on the value of a contract from the team POV. I understand that Michael King isn’t taking this 3 year deal with no optionality. Still, an opt out after each year drains the contract of all upside scenarios beyond the upcoming year, while leaving all downside scenarios intact.
If there’s any value to the deal (King being worth more than $58m over the next 2 years) he opts out. If the contract is underwater, he stays. There’s certainly value in getting King relatively cheap this year, but enough to take on that much additional risk? I don’t think so.
I wonder if there is anything in the contract preventing the Padres from trading him this summer if he’s good but the team isn’t.
That’s another piece of this. A contract like this is practically impossible to be traded! At the very least, his trade value is nuked.
If King is pitching well at the deadline, the buyer’s best case scenario is a pure rental where he performs well down the stretch and opts out. Unlike every other rental, if he doesn’t perform (or more likely, gets injured) you’re stuck with a massively underwater 2/$58m contract. Who’s giving up anything of value to acquire a rental with that much added downside risk?
If you’re on the threshold of a playoff spot and he’s healthy and pitching well at the time, maybe you assess the risk of injury as fairly low in that two month period? The downside is quite substantial, of course. And it’s certainly untradeable if he is bad or hurt in the first half.
Additionally, I assume that the acquirer wouldn’t have to give up too much prospect value.
I can think of at least one team with an insatiable appetite for injury prone pitchers who are terrific when healthy. And that team could absorb the downside scenario without even blinking.
It’s probably a lot cheaper than signing King to a one year, $40M+ deal. Or whatever it would take to keep him in town on a one year deal.
Are you saying you would prefer your team paying him a massive one year salary than an opt out like this?
Or maybe giving him a $25M AAV deal over four to seven years with no opt outs?
As I see it, these are the three options: This deal, the largest single year pillow deal in MLB history, or just giving him the long term deal he wants.
The single year deal may not have been option due to actual payroll constraints (they almost ran out of money a couple years ago). But you can see how the it has the lowest risk but if it works it will cost a lot more than the one he signed. The 4-7 year deal with no opt outs has the highest risk by far, but if he is actually good you’ll get more value in the early years before it turns bad later.
Obviously I’d need to feel pretty comfortable with his medicals, but if King were amenable to a 5 year deal (4 even better) at slightly lower AAV closer to both Clemens and fansourced estimates, I would much prefer that to the deal he signed. I don’t think anybody was giving King 6+ years at a comparable AAV.
With a Dodgers/Mets level payroll and an acute need in the rotation, I would also prefer the outrageous pillow deal, but like you said that’s not even on the table for San Diego (or ~25 other teams).
If a front office is signing Michael King, they already love the pitcher (me too) and are comfortable betting on his talent. If a front office is relatively comfortable with King’s medicals (as comfortable as you can be with any pitcher), I’d prefer to take on the sizable extra risk of years 4 and 5 in exchange for the massively expanded upside scenarios, which are completely wiped away by his opt outs.
Preller is better at structuring these. He got Pivetta for cheap cashflow while the Padres ownership situation is tightening the books and is trying to trade him for value before he opts out next year. Now he’s doing it again by leveraging the QO on King
Compare that to David Stearns’ 1+1 deals with Manaea and Montas
When Michael King is on, he has some of the filthiest movement this side of a pickup Wiffleball game. He is truly one of the most fun pitchers to watch. Baseballs aren’t supposed to do that.
Like Fernando Valenzuela & John Tudor in R.B.I. Baseball!
Even for Baumann the marriage analogy is a stretch
A stretch and I’d argue a bad or at least poorly articulated fit. I don’t see *therapy vs papering* as analogous to *commitment vs stopgap* for the deal
Whatever, I like this deal for the Padres. It’s obviously a great deal for King, but this team is all-in for winning right now, King is an incredible pitcher when he is healthy, and they clearly couldn’t afford to give him a deal anywhere close to what Cease got.
If you’re not going to hand out deals to starters who can elevate your team in the playoffs when your whole team is getting old and you won 90 games last year, what are you even doing? I wish more teams had the guts to do this.
Exactly..As a Tigers fan, I’m kind of pissed they couldn’t beat this.
Chance of it turning bad? Yep, but, at least it’s not $100M+ &/or 5-6 years bad.
Chance he opts out? Yep, but, that’s the price you pay for a shorter contract with a not insane yearly salary. & if he does, it means he had a good year & the contract was a win for the team that year. & if he pitched well, maybe he’ll be happy there & negotiate with you before he’s an FA.
If you got 2024 Michael King for 1 yr $17M or whatever this is, that’s a great deal for a team. Would you wish it was longer? Of course, but, bank those wins when you can.
I wouldn’t be too hard on the Tigers for this one. The Padres might have had an incumbency advantage since he has been around there for a while. Although there’s a new manager, so who knows.
He’s also an east coast guy, so it’s possible that what happened is that none of the east coast teams were willing to give him a big deal so he decided to stay where he was an get out from under the draft compensation.
Otherwise, I agree with you. It might be hard to find the right fit on the position player side because that stadium kills power, but they should be aggressively offering short-term deals for high-impact players if this is Skubal’s last year.
Even east coast guys like living in San Diego.
Not Trea Turner!
FYI: https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/2025/12/19/michael-king-eager-to-tackle-unfinished-business-in-return-to-padres/
The only CA city I tolerate, haha!
(It’s so, so wonderful)
Are teams able to insure themselves against player injury? I heard speculation that the Padres would be able to recoup some of Darvish’s 2026 salary from insurance. If so, and if the signing bonus is spread over the 3 years then the actual cash required from the Padres this year is so low that it is feasible to insure against injury for the final 2 years, in which the worst case scenario is decidedly less bad.
Yes, but the insurance premium is relative to the player’s injury risk.
Right, but no one knows more about King’s health than the Padres, and they certainly had time to explore what insurance would cost, so it is possible they have covered themselves for years 2 and 3 in the event of a serious injury. Or, they simply don’t care because someone else will be buying the injury risk when they buy the team.
Seems a fair contract. Teams are paying more than 12 million per win these days and he projects for 1.9 WAR.
Free Agents
Normally that would be a projection for an average starter or regular. King is an above average pitcher, but I’ve got the over/under at 133 innings because he has had some serious injury concerns.
I don’t know who you are, I don’t care what you do, be well, and Cockteau’s an a**hole!
He should have been able to get 5/$125 or something. Maybe he prefers this.
Did you just casually accuse one of the best pitchers of all time of cheating?
Big claims require big proof. Greg Maddux isnt Don Sutton. If you can prove otherwise, go for it. Otherwise I want a retraction and apology to Maddux.
My guess is you got Mad Dog confused with Roger Clemens, who is a proven cheater.