Blake Snell to the Giants
- Thread starter RedOctober3829
- Start date
How many posters are going to lose their minds the Sox didn't match this, ignoring it's not enough to move the needle and cost the team a pick?
I feel like the Giants have lit tens of millions of dollars on fire this off-season. I don't like any of the Jordan Hicks, Jorge Soler, Jung-Hoo Lee or Matt Chapman signings… and signing Snell to 2 years is no guarantee they'll get a really good season out of him. That said, most years the Giants are a much better team than I can comprehend, so what do I know?
Honestly the Yanks should have done this deal, they need to make the most out of Soto's year with them.
Zaidi must really be feeling the hot seat heat this month.
EDIT: Miscellaneous details:
View: https://twitter.com/susanslusser/status/1769903415491268962
Zaidi must really be feeling the hot seat heat this month.
EDIT: Miscellaneous details:
View: https://twitter.com/susanslusser/status/1769903415491268962
Last edited:
I find Nightengale's report that the Yankees only missed out because they "wouldn't go over $30m" exceedingly hard to believe.
Now that Chaim is gone, Farhan is probably holds the title of "most disliked FO leader among his team's fan base." This off-season feels like the work of a guy throwing a bunch of stuff at the wall and hoping something sticks.
Now that Chaim is gone, Farhan is probably holds the title of "most disliked FO leader among his team's fan base." This off-season feels like the work of a guy throwing a bunch of stuff at the wall and hoping something sticks.
I'd estimate this is basically a 1 year, 40-45M contract as far as the value the Giants are giving up. 31M for this season, then that 31M insurance policy Snell gets in case of injury or suckitude has to be worth 10M+. Seems like a dumb way to do business unless the Giants are convinced Snell makes them a World Series contender in 2024.
As far as Snell goes, I am shocked he didn't try to get as much guaranteed $ as possible. He is unlikely to outperform last year, will be another year older, and pitching volatility must be higher than for hitters. I think he should have taken anything over 120M or so guaranteed, have to image that was out there.
The rare lose-lose signing.
As far as Snell goes, I am shocked he didn't try to get as much guaranteed $ as possible. He is unlikely to outperform last year, will be another year older, and pitching volatility must be higher than for hitters. I think he should have taken anything over 120M or so guaranteed, have to image that was out there.
The rare lose-lose signing.
They lost a second and a third round pick. Teams give up that level of prospect all the time in deals for rentals and nobody bats an eyelash. I’d be happy if the Sox gave up Antonio Anderson (plus a little international bonus $$) to do this.
If I ever am fortunate enough to come back in another life as a 31 year old pitcher with control issues coming off a Cy Young award, I can assure you I would not risk up to 88M in career earnings for a chance to hit FA in a year and try again on a long term contract.
Sure he could get 5/118 (or more) after a year on the Giants, but doesn't seem worth the downside risk to me for Snell. Not Boras' finest hour.
So Giants have the top two Cy Young finalists from last year to head their rotation. Webb/Snell/Harrison/Cobb then Robbie Ray when he gets back from TJ surgery. Rest of their roster looks kind of bad though, not terribly familiar with this team, but a 1/2 of Webb and Snell is formidable.
I can see the Astros or the Yankees or the Mariners or the Phillies or the Mets or the Cubs doing this. But the Giants? Aren’t they still gonna finish 4th in the NL West?
Was Stephen Drew the last guy who got this screwed over by Boras's negotiating approach?
Correa's first Twins contact was a blunder, though the lockout was involved.
I think he messed up with Conforto at some point too?
It's not just the pick / player, it's the pool money that goes with it, making the remaining draft class that much weaker on average (less flexibility to give your picks at-slot or over-slot deals).
Players don’t seem to grasp the disconnect between Boras’ motives and (what should be) their own.
Boras has a large stable of these top players and when pooled, he will come out ahead by going to FA and holding out for top dollar most of the time. A few may flame out and get much less money, but for Boras that is not a problem because he’s going to get a few of those mega deals to make up for it and then some.
But for a player, assuring that first 50-100M (or whatever number you want to pick) is so much more valuable and life changing than the next X million. It’s not remotely close to linear, and many of these players would be better off taking a more conservative approach…. Assuring themselves massive life changing $ with much less risk.
Not sure I follow. A top-of-the-market player like Snell who is just reaching FA for the first time has already earned about $50 million. (In fact, Snell has, to date, earned just over $51 million.) He already has life-changing money - now's his chance to go after generational wealth.
I may be incorrect, but I wouldn’t be surprised if there are quite a few players we don’t remember/know about that Boras advised as amateurs and ended up turned down life changing money in the draft, only to slip precipitously by their next draft eligible year.
First of all, there is no specific point in time $ goes from "life changing" to "generational". It's all on a spectrum.
Forget the exact numbers. Snell has earned a ton of money yes, but if I were him I'd still value that next 100M very highly. Much more than simply being half as valuable as the next 200M. I'd be playing things more conservatively rather than looking as each extra dollar as a linear benefit.
But from Boras' perspective, he has created his own insurance with strength in numbers. He is pooling all the clients and knows if he goes for top dollar on them all, even if he makes mistakes along the way or some players get hurt/suck before signing their big deal, he is still going to come out ahead in total. Basically, because he has a lot of great players, he can afford to have a few to get screwed individually for the benefit of his overall portfolio.
If I was a player, I'd have no interest in joining that group of players. Individually, it's not worth the X% chance Boras' high risk/high reward tactics end up screwing you.
Last edited:
Certainly, everyone has their own level of risk aversion, so I can't say what's "right." But to clarify, the downside risk for Snell (assuming that's what we're seeing here) is that he gets an additional $62 million from the Giants and the chance to go up for free agency again in two years, which puts his career earnings around $110 million plus whatever he gets in two years. That seems a long way from screwed, and in fact (to me) puts him in exactly the sort of situation where the gamble seems worth it.
It definitely seems like Snell started with a strong preference to stay on the West Coast, I think where Boras probably miscalculated was in thinking that SEA would go after him in addition to SF. But they just had the Robbie Ray deal go bad and have lots of young guys, so Snell ended up at what seems to be every FA's safety school, SF.
Mutual in some ways I suppose, but Boras is supposed to be the expert here, so I do have some sympathy for Snell if he went along with Boras' "expert" advice.
It's not that easy for a player to have their famous agent tell them what they recommend, and then go the other way.
Haha, "screwed" is all relative for any of these guys.
If the 150M contract is legit, he gave up 88M guaranteed as a 31 year old pitcher. He's not getting any younger and he's one unfortunate pitch from blowing out his elbow. He wouldn't be screwed if it happened, but that would be a major bummer.
Snell has made a ton of money and he/his family are going to be just fine, not trying to make it too dramatic. I just think a lot of these guys individually would be better off taking a more conservative approach.
Even in Snell's already wealthy shoes, I'd rather have a 100% chance at another 150M instead of a 100% at least 62M with some unknown X% chance I would make at least another 88M at age 33 or 118M at age 32 (unless X is like 90+ or something I guess). Even if that riskier path keeps alive the chances I end up with 200M+ in the end.
I don’t want to defend Boras here, but while we laud players like Mookie or Judge for “betting on themselves”, this is the flip side, especially when the player may not accurately be judging their own skills relative to the marketplace. Instead of Blaming this on Boras, I think the decision is Snell’s.
That’s gotta be less than the value of Valdez and Abreu when we acquired them for two months of Christian Vazquez, relative to the value of a full year of Chapman and Snell, even factoring in the downside risk of their contracts.
For perspective, the last time the Sox had a 3rd round pick (which is what SF gives up here) that turned into something remotely interesting was Brian Rose and his career WAR of 0.3. That was 30 years ago. This is an NBA team giving up a second round pick. A low second round pick. And the 569K slot money that goes with the Giants' pick doesn't move that needle much.
Last edited:
Your arguments from a strictly financial perspective are persuasive. But as others have pointed out, there’s another way to look at it. He’s 31, already incredibly wealthy, has just guaranteed himself another $62 million in salary over the next two years, and has left himself the opportunity to make tens of millions more either next year or the year after. Maybe he‘s arrived at a point in his life where maximizing his finances (or winning) is no longer his primary goal. It seems somewhere between possible and likely that he told Boras to get him the best overall package he could from a West Coast team and this was the result. At the start of free agency it was widely reported that he wanted to be out west. Not here to defend Boras in any way, but it is the case that his job involves more than just getting his client the most money possible.
This is all assuming the Yanks offer is real. If so, he also could never have wanted to leave the west.
Pretty much, yes.
FWIW, they were actually in playoff position last year heading into September. They collapsed in that last month, in part because they were dead last in innings per start in all of MLB. I don’t like any of their moves and would power-rank them fourth in their division, but I at least get why they’re Going For It.
I think we're grasping a bit at straws here. Now, anything is possible, and we're not in Snell's head. But I'd be stunned if maximizing his finances was not his primary goal during this free agency. That would make Boras's strategy even more surprising. Snell could/should have done better, even with the requirement of being on the West Coast.
No. Boras misread his market and got less money than he was initially seeking. It happens. Now 2/$62m is actually a pretty good save, considering. But to suggest it was the plan all along doesn't pass the smell test, I don't think.
It's funny (not haha funny) that the Giants and Sox had virtually the same records on 9/1/23. The Sox had a better July both had similar Augusts. But on 9/1. the Sox were falling out of contention and SFG was tied for a WC if I'm reading it all right). And both were awful in September.
There are a lot of reasons why players who are already millionaires just may not want to be in northeast cities. Think of all the reasons that *you* (we) may not want to relocate to a certain place.
Huh, sounds kind of familiar....
In all seriousness, it will be pretty fascinating to watch the season unfold and see the results from the two distinctly different approaches the Giants and Sox are taking.
It's also pretty interesting that the Giants are second only to the Sox in championship success since the turn of the century, and now they are also struggling yearly to contend in a tough, tough division.
Now I don't feel so lonely.
Apparently there are agents having a few laughs at Boras' expense. And I get it -- he did overplay his hand this year. But if I'm a competing agent, even one that had lost clients to him, I'm eternally grateful for the fact that his tactics have raised the market, massively, and made millions upon millions of dollars for all players (and agents).
https://theathletic.com/5352861/2024/03/19/scott-boras-blake-snell-strategy/
https://theathletic.com/5352861/2024/03/19/scott-boras-blake-snell-strategy/
And nobody will remember any of this when Soto lands a $500M+ deal later this year.
Unless that's deferred to infinity it's not happening. He's a great bat and he's young, yeah. But he's hit like a top 10 guy more than a top 3 guy, he's already slow as hell and he's a liability in the field. If Boras holds tight to a $500m dream he's gonna end up with another pillow contract.
He hasn't made millions and millions for ALL players. The money flows massively to the elite few while the majority get to be "cost-controlled" and then cast aside. Boras' influence has pushed the union to prioritize the needs of the elites over the average ballplayers.
The thing that seems obvious to an outsider and I could easily be wrong, is that teams are not going into February or March relying on free agency to improve their roster anymore. Not as plan A anyway. Sure, problems pop up in spring with injuries but some players also come back looking great and squash the need for that extra signing. My gut tells me that it was always an insane strategy on Boras's part to keep his top players from signing until the very last second and I would love if the pattern from the last couple of years ended.
Sure he has. Without A-Rod and Bryce Harper and Xander Bogaerts making a gazillion dollars, guys like Jorge Soler sign for a lot less than 3 years and 42 mil. Adam Ottanvio isn't looking at 55 mil in career earnings at the end of this season. The 'cost controlled' system may be unfair, but just because he hasn't been able to crack that doesn't mean his impact hasn't been felt across the board.
Do we know that Snell wanted the most money? It's not out of the question that he didn't want to be in NY or anywhere else in the East.
First, this is a very fair argument you are making. But I wasn't suggesting that the specific terms of 2/$62 million with an opt out was in the ballpark of the plan all along. I could have been clearer about that, however. I certainly do agree that Boras assumed he'd be able to get more from a West Coast team and simply misread the market.
But I am not convinced that even with the benefit of hindsight Snell looks at locking himself into six years in New York (as in the East Coast, not suggesting anything unacceptable about the Yankees) for a guaranteed $150 million and decides that's a better fit for himself than two years on the West Coast (where he wants to be) at a guaranteed $62 million, plus the ability to make much more than that because of the opt out/short contract length and no ability in the future to QO him.
I suspect that Snell was willing all along to take less to pitch for Seattle or the Giants or some such but that Boras overestimated what he would be willing to command on a guaranteed five or six year deal to do so. The specific terms of this contract were absolutely not the plan all along, but this outcome does appear to reflect non-financial priorities that were quite important to Snell.
I kind of agree here, about Soto. This winter could really serve as a warning to him and Boras that these enormous contract offers aren't going to materialize.
With Soto, it's going to boil down to whether he wants to stay in New York. I wonder if that report that Cashman's final offer to Yamamoto did not exceed Cole's deal will apply to Soto. Maybe the Yankees will refuse to go over 9/$360M out of deference to Judge?
Anyway, conversation for next year.
A host on the the radio station that carries the Giants out here was saying two nights ago that Snell's decision was down to SF and LAA because he wanted to stay on the West Coast, so your theory seems plausible.
However, Boras had TWO guys in this situation, and it's not clear to me that Jordan Montgomery has the same geographical preferences as Snell, so that's not going to be an excuse if he also signs a short-term contract.