This is certainly a situation where the rich get richer. The Dodgers are smart enough to go for it again now given that some of their prime stars (Otahni, Betts and Freeman) are all at or on the other side of 30. I too would not have given perhaps the best 5 inning pitcher in the game such a long contract, but assume the Dodgers deferred a big chunk of change as they have done on other contracts. And, they are truly a team that just needed to add a piece or two to make them the top contender. The Mets have much more that needs to be done.
While I like and trust David Stearns' judgement, I don't want to fill the pitching staff with cheaper reclamation projects with the hopes that they recover their old form. They got lucky with Severino, Manaea and Quintana last season, but they all ran out of gas at the end when they needed their best possible performance. Not as bad a Tom Glavine who needed just to beat the lowly Marlins to get into the playoffs, but we need some front line arms.
Burnes and Flaherty come to mind as do a flock of relievers. Lets' make a splash now and not wait to see what the Thanksgiving leftovers look like.
Here in fandom, we live in a sheltered world of privilege to not have to worry about the total reality of running a team and facing direct competition with other teams that want to win at all costs. And you know what? None of those teams are going broke no matter what they spend.
Does the Snell contract look like an overpay? Yes. A big over pay? I think so. Reality? Well this is what committed teams do to win. I hope Cohen/Stearns appreciate that.
We regularly well under imagine what contracts for particularly perceived-as-top-end-players will get. Kikuchi, now Snell.In our world, we see contracts based on the performance vale, but not the holistic situation of what it takes to win. For example I really think Pete should be valued at 4/28 for 112M. But let me tell you, he's gonna get more than that. A lot more.More in years and more in cash. No one here will want to stomach what that contract will be, and if he's a Met, what the annual 28M$ for 3 decline years will be. But so it is.
This is great perspective for Soto. Im still at 15/47 for 705M. Just pay the man and get it done. Then pay Burnes, then trade whoever the hell the ChiSox want for Crochet and let 25 begin. Welcome to the cost of winning.
deferrals in contract reduce present value to $160M-$165M or about $32.5M annually for competitive balance tax purposes
limited no-trade protection
$5M assignment bonus with trade
I could not confirm it but my guess is that the signing bonus is paid up front, rather than over the life of the deal. If this is the case, it makes up - at least some - for future deferrals.
Every year teams need to evaluate the present situation. In 24, there was no real intent to go to the WS as it was a stated transitional year to unload contracts. And through the magic of sterns the team went further than really it could be imagined. To get two pitchers to have come backs like they did was a remarkable stretch of luck...and hard work. But the deal is this, Im not the least bit comfortable running a starting pitching staff like a bull pen. That pig won't fly. So yes, at some point the team is going to have to commit to a front line starter and pay real money and accept the risk of injury. If that is too queasy of an ask, then sell the team, this game aint for you. At the same time I sure hope Stearns can back up a major FA pitcher with plays like Manaea and Severino and raise the youth through the system. It has to be a mix to fill out a staff that can pitch into late October.
So Id be shocked of Stearns goes 7 on Burned, but Id be more shocked if Cohen didnt say "win me a World Series". It costs money to make money.
As for Manaea and Severino, I really look at them as two different cases. There was a lot of reason to expect a rebound from Manaea. There was virtually no reason to believe Severino could do anything remotely like that.
While I still think that what Severino did had more to do with luck than skill - the fact is that he did ... something. He was a league-average pitcher over a bunch of innings. To me, this is a best-case scenario for Severino. And my feeling is that the Mets should aim higher than that. At least with someone potentially pulling down a $20 million AAV.
At the end of the day, there are always a ton of ways to assemble the roster and there's not one "right way" to assemble a playoff squad. And after what he did in MIL and then did last year with the Mets, it seems Stearns has earned a lot of rope with how he chooses to put the team together.
The best part of playing with other people’s money is the dollars don’t mean a thing. That’s why I’d like them to jump out and make some deals now and not wait for the leftovers.
Snell’s contract will still have an AAV of $32MM per year, despite the hefty upfront money. The Dodgers are still schooling other teams on how to manipulate the rules, but anyone that calls them stupid should double check their opinion. From MLBTR:
“Snell was the best pitcher in baseball down the stretch. Over his final 14 starts, he turned in a 1.23 earned run average while holding opponents to a .123/.211/.171 batting line that looked like a throwback to the days when pitchers hit. Snell struck out more than 38% of batters faced over that run.”
Being an open thread, I’d like to suggest that Soto’s best option is in Boston, and I’m good with that. Injuries are part in the game and if you want to tie up $50MM on a player that isn’t on the field much, that’s a big risk. Boston has some of MLB’s best prospects bubbling to the surface, some very good offensive players in Duran and Devers, and a great hitting park. Juan, go there, please.
This is certainly a situation where the rich get richer. The Dodgers are smart enough to go for it again now given that some of their prime stars (Otahni, Betts and Freeman) are all at or on the other side of 30. I too would not have given perhaps the best 5 inning pitcher in the game such a long contract, but assume the Dodgers deferred a big chunk of change as they have done on other contracts. And, they are truly a team that just needed to add a piece or two to make them the top contender. The Mets have much more that needs to be done.
While I like and trust David Stearns' judgement, I don't want to fill the pitching staff with cheaper reclamation projects with the hopes that they recover their old form. They got lucky with Severino, Manaea and Quintana last season, but they all ran out of gas at the end when they needed their best possible performance. Not as bad a Tom Glavine who needed just to beat the lowly Marlins to get into the playoffs, but we need some front line arms.
Burnes and Flaherty come to mind as do a flock of relievers. Lets' make a splash now and not wait to see what the Thanksgiving leftovers look like.
Here in fandom, we live in a sheltered world of privilege to not have to worry about the total reality of running a team and facing direct competition with other teams that want to win at all costs. And you know what? None of those teams are going broke no matter what they spend.
Does the Snell contract look like an overpay? Yes. A big over pay? I think so. Reality? Well this is what committed teams do to win. I hope Cohen/Stearns appreciate that.
We regularly well under imagine what contracts for particularly perceived-as-top-end-players will get. Kikuchi, now Snell.In our world, we see contracts based on the performance vale, but not the holistic situation of what it takes to win. For example I really think Pete should be valued at 4/28 for 112M. But let me tell you, he's gonna get more than that. A lot more.More in years and more in cash. No one here will want to stomach what that contract will be, and if he's a Met, what the annual 28M$ for 3 decline years will be. But so it is.
This is great perspective for Soto. Im still at 15/47 for 705M. Just pay the man and get it done. Then pay Burnes, then trade whoever the hell the ChiSox want for Crochet and let 25 begin. Welcome to the cost of winning.
If Snell gets 5 years - what does Burnes get? I'd be shocked if Stearns went more than 5 years on a FA pitcher this offseason.
Here's how Cot's breaks down the contract:
Blake Snell lhp
5 years/$182M (2025-29)
5 years/$182M (2025-29)
signed by LA Dodgers as a free agent 11/27/24
$52M signing bonus
deferrals in contract reduce present value to $160M-$165M or about $32.5M annually for competitive balance tax purposes
limited no-trade protection
$5M assignment bonus with trade
I could not confirm it but my guess is that the signing bonus is paid up front, rather than over the life of the deal. If this is the case, it makes up - at least some - for future deferrals.
Every year teams need to evaluate the present situation. In 24, there was no real intent to go to the WS as it was a stated transitional year to unload contracts. And through the magic of sterns the team went further than really it could be imagined. To get two pitchers to have come backs like they did was a remarkable stretch of luck...and hard work. But the deal is this, Im not the least bit comfortable running a starting pitching staff like a bull pen. That pig won't fly. So yes, at some point the team is going to have to commit to a front line starter and pay real money and accept the risk of injury. If that is too queasy of an ask, then sell the team, this game aint for you. At the same time I sure hope Stearns can back up a major FA pitcher with plays like Manaea and Severino and raise the youth through the system. It has to be a mix to fill out a staff that can pitch into late October.
So Id be shocked of Stearns goes 7 on Burned, but Id be more shocked if Cohen didnt say "win me a World Series". It costs money to make money.
Chris, I think your first line is spot on.
As for Manaea and Severino, I really look at them as two different cases. There was a lot of reason to expect a rebound from Manaea. There was virtually no reason to believe Severino could do anything remotely like that.
While I still think that what Severino did had more to do with luck than skill - the fact is that he did ... something. He was a league-average pitcher over a bunch of innings. To me, this is a best-case scenario for Severino. And my feeling is that the Mets should aim higher than that. At least with someone potentially pulling down a $20 million AAV.
At the end of the day, there are always a ton of ways to assemble the roster and there's not one "right way" to assemble a playoff squad. And after what he did in MIL and then did last year with the Mets, it seems Stearns has earned a lot of rope with how he chooses to put the team together.
The best part of playing with other people’s money is the dollars don’t mean a thing. That’s why I’d like them to jump out and make some deals now and not wait for the leftovers.
Snell’s contract will still have an AAV of $32MM per year, despite the hefty upfront money. The Dodgers are still schooling other teams on how to manipulate the rules, but anyone that calls them stupid should double check their opinion. From MLBTR:
“Snell was the best pitcher in baseball down the stretch. Over his final 14 starts, he turned in a 1.23 earned run average while holding opponents to a .123/.211/.171 batting line that looked like a throwback to the days when pitchers hit. Snell struck out more than 38% of batters faced over that run.”
Being an open thread, I’d like to suggest that Soto’s best option is in Boston, and I’m good with that. Injuries are part in the game and if you want to tie up $50MM on a player that isn’t on the field much, that’s a big risk. Boston has some of MLB’s best prospects bubbling to the surface, some very good offensive players in Duran and Devers, and a great hitting park. Juan, go there, please.