Snell to Giants

[markedman5]

 

[duewizard]

Boras cost him money. What was the Yankees offer? Something like 200 million? Unless he pitches like he did last year (which I doubt considering his peripherals), he will not get anywhere close to that amount of money.

[brewerfan82]

2 minutes ago, duewizard said:

Boras cost him money. What was the Yankees offer? Something like 200 million? Unless he pitches like he did last year (which I doubt considering his peripherals), he will not get anywhere close to that amount of money.

A quick google search makes it sound like 6 yrs, $150M:

[duewizard]

24 minutes ago, brewerfan82 said:

A quick google search makes it sound like 6 yrs, $150M:

Thanks. Thats my point. I doubt he gets another 100 million from anyone. 33 by the end of this deal, not great peripherals. I can see 50? at most?

[TURBO]

Good, teach these guys some lessons, including Boras.

[JosephC]

If I was Snell, I would have overruled Boras and taken the 150 million.

There were 58 pitchers who threw at least 150 innings last year.  Snell was 16th in xFIP (3.62) and 28th in SIERA (4.06).  His ERA-FIP was -1.19, the biggest negative number by a fairly significant number (Josiah Grey was #2 at -1.03, next closest was -0.68),  His ERA was a huge outlier when looking through the rest of the numbers.

Interestingly enough, Corbin Burnes had a 3.80 xFIP and 4.02 SIERA.  Burnes lead the league in BABIA at .244, Snell was 3rd with .256.  Interesting the things one stumbles across when checking out some of the numbers.  Of course, Burnes ERA (3.39) was more in line with what it "should have been," as compared to Snell's ridiculous looking 2.25.

[sveumrules]

Obviously pitcher wins are like a novelty stat at this point, but Snell has 35 Ws in his two CY campaigns and 36 Ws combined in his other six seasons.

Does a pretty good job summing up how inconsistent he has been year over year.

2018 (180 IP)
46 ERA- | 72 FIP- | 143 K%+ | 110 BB%+ | 65 HR9+ | 82 BABIP+

2019-22 (413 IP)
95 ERA- | 82 FIP- | 139 K%+ | 119 BB%+ | 87 HR9+ | 106 BABIP+

2023 (180 IP)
54 ERA- | 80 FIP- | 142 K%+ | 154 BB%+ | 61 HR9+ | 86 BABIP+

Pretty incredible how consistent his league adjusted K rate has remained over his two CY seasons and the four in between. Walk rate really went crazy this last year though.

He’s a safe bet to be about 20% better than average by FIP, but yeah, the two CY seasons essentially came down to getting crazy BABIP/HR luck compared to the four intervening years where his lack of command resulted in higher than average BABIPs and an ERA that didn’t live up to his K and HR rates.

Good new is SF is one of the best pitchers parks out there, though the Giants haven’t been able to leverage it into actual run prevention recently with a 3.94 ERA vs a 3,67 FIP the last two seasons, the 5th largest wrong way difference over that stretch with their -79 DRS (28th) likely playing a part.

[Axman59]

Snell lacks the consistency and durability to be worth the money on a long term contract. He should have taken the 150 from the Yankees. While it's possible he will outperform 6/150, I wouldn't bet on it. And he just did.

[Jopal78]

13 hours ago, duewizard said:

Boras cost him money. What was the Yankees offer? Something like 200 million? Unless he pitches like he did last year (which I doubt considering his peripherals), he will not get anywhere close to that amount of money.

Snell has 2 Cy Young Awards, and throws with his left hand.  His agent got him AAV of $30 million dollars for ‘24 (and the chance to try again next year without a QO attached) which places him Top 10 amongst starting pitcher salaries.  Same situation with Bellinger and the Cubs. 
 

It’s trendy to torch Boras this off season, for not getting the 10 year mega deals. But why would a quality agent attempt to sell his clients short on AAV? Taking a larger guarantee in favor of a smaller AAV in reality is asking a player to bet against themselves. Taking the AAV in the short run is exactly how the Brewers wound up with Yasmani Grandal, and it worked out fine for him and the Brewers.
 

[Lloyd330]

51 minutes ago, Jopal78 said:

Snell has 2 Cy Young Awards, and throws with his left hand.  His agent got him AAV of $30 million dollars for ‘24 (and the chance to try again next year without a QO attached) which places him Top 10 amongst starting pitcher salaries.  Same situation with Bellinger and the Cubs. 
 

It’s trendy to torch Boras this off season, for not getting the 10 year mega deals. But why would a quality agent attempt to sell his clients short on AAV? Taking a larger guarantee in favor of a smaller AAV in reality is asking a player to bet against themselves. Taking the AAV in the short run is exactly how the Brewers wound up with Yasmani Grandal, and it worked out fine for him and the Brewers.
 

Thats a huge risk for someone of Snells age, inconsistency and injury history - Boras living like this is 2005

[Jopal78]

1 hour ago, Lloyd330 said:

Thats a huge risk for someone of Snells age, inconsistency and injury history - Boras living like this is 2005

Tough world, Boras apparently mucked it up, AND got his guy $30 million dollars for ‘24 at the same time. Not to mention agents get paid by taking a percentage so it’s actually against his own financial interest for his clients to take one year high AAV deals. 

You’re right, Snell could be fizzled out in a year or two, OR he could win his 3rd Cy Young which would punch his ticket to Cooperstown. 

What’s Boras to do when teams that can afford 30 million AAV are risk averse or well into the luxury tax? All of his clients have extreme competitive drives or they wouldn’t be in the majors, so arguing to bet against themselves is something that’s likely given much thought. So they wait until the last minute hoping someone panics then choose the top AAV and try again next winter. 

[BrewerFan]

17 minutes ago, Jopal78 said:

What’s Boras to do when teams that can afford 30 million AAV are risk averse or well into the luxury tax? All of his clients have extreme competitive drives or they wouldn’t be in the majors, so arguing to bet against themselves is something that’s likely given much thought. So they wait until the last minute hoping someone panics then choose the top AAV and try again next winter. 

Take the best offer?

Yes, athletes have a very high level of confidence...but it seems like it's largely Boras' clients who are unemployed(or signing short deals well into camp.

[MrTPlush]

I love how people always run out to blame Boras. Snell, the pitcher, signs the contract at the end of the day. Snell must be pretty confident in himself and want to take that risk. This isn't a Boras issue...greedy high ego players seek out for him to represent them. The way Boras is, is a mirror image of the guys he represents. They are gamblers that would rather take a huge AAV with opt-outs versus taking a measly $150mil after a second Cy Young award.

People always get mad when a player has Boras as their agent and they know the guy won't take an early extension or avoid FA in general, news flash, the players don't want to....that is why they have Boras as their agent.

 

[Axman59]

2 hours ago, Jopal78 said:

Tough world, Boras apparently mucked it up, AND got his guy $30 million dollars for ‘24 at the same time.

 

A healthy 31 year old two-time Cy Young winning pitcher, coming off a Cy Young season settling for a 2 year deal is not a win for Boras under any analysis. Period.

[jerichoholicninja]

Scott is making millions (maybe billions?) of dollars off of the other deals he's gotten signed. That every offseason a couple guys get hung out to dry and get "less" than what they expected means nothing to him in the long run.

[Jopal78]

16 hours ago, Axman59 said:

A healthy 31 year old two-time Cy Young winning pitcher, coming off a Cy Young season settling for a 2 year deal is not a win for Boras under any analysis. Period.

Look at the other active pitchers with 2 or more Cy Young awards and their AAV:

Verlander—- $43 million AAV

Scherzer—- $43 million AAV

deGrom—- $37 million AAV

Even Kershaw got a 10 million dollar guarantee and he might miss all of ‘24 and retire.

If those are the comps, you might think Snell/Boras have egg on their faces, but why would Snell even consider signing a deal which would lock in his compensation for years at a rate so much less than his peers?

 

 

 

 

[SeaBass]

16 hours ago, Axman59 said:

A healthy 31 year old two-time Cy Young winning pitcher, coming off a Cy Young season settling for a 2 year deal is not a win for Boras under any analysis. Period.

???

I mean, end of the day Blake Snell just got $62 million to throw a baseball 60 feet 6 inches 80 to 100 times every 5 to 6 days over a 6 month period for each of the next 2 years. And the chance to re-enter the market if he can put up another successful season. I think he's going to be ok.

There's a reason some of these guys choose to gamble for a bigger payday even after getting offered $150 million, because the consolation prize if the gamble goes "bad" is still pretty damn amazing.

And Scott Boras is in zero danger of losing clients over this. These players know how the game is played.

[MrTPlush]

I mean, it is more than plausible that Boras preferred him to take the $150mil. Boras found him the best long-term deal possible and the best short term 'bet'. Snell then ended up going with the short term bet. Boras clients aren't really ones to take deals perceived as under market rate. They want the maximum amount of money and to set the market. $150mil for a two-time Cy Young winner is pretty embarrassing at face value. I get why it was the peak offer...but still, it doesn't look right on paper. I am guessing Snell isn't going to fire Boras, therefor a good sign he didn't have any problem with how Boras went about this offseason. 

Unless I am missing it, I don't see where some team offered $200mil and they declined it. Why would they have egg on their face if they only got offered a measly $150mil? If that is what the market was willing to pay...it is what it is. If he is elite and healthy....he will probably get offered $200mil+.

He has already made $50mil+ and is assured another $60mil regardless of performance. Rich athletes are often willing to gamble versus playing on a potential bargain contract that will damage their fragile egos. Is that dumb? Well...there is a reason most of them go broke after retirement.

[SeaBass]

24 minutes ago, MrTPlush said:

Well...there is a reason most of them go broke after retirement.

Not that it's really all that important to your overall point but you kinda lost me here, do most retired athletes really go broke? "Most" feels like a strong term, as in more than half of all players at minimum.

Figure of speech or sarcasm maybe?

I feel like we'd be hearing about the epidemic of once rich athletes that squander their money after their careers end.

I also feel like I'm overthinking this but can we even really apply this to the average or replacement level "scrub" player that floats around the league for basically the minimum salary? It's gotta be the top level guys that have earned even a modest free agent contract after their arby years. Maybe $10 million minimum career earnings? I'm definitely overthinking it but I just can't see how that many guys go absolutely broke.

[NOMAAM]

What does this mean for Montgomery and his market.  You’d almost have to assume he waits out the comp pick.  And even then going to be hard to get to 25 million AVV.

[MrTPlush]

1 hour ago, SeaBass said:

Not that it's really all that important to your overall point but you kinda lost me here, do most retired athletes really go broke? "Most" feels like a strong term, as in more than half of all players at minimum.

Figure of speech or sarcasm maybe?

I feel like we'd be hearing about the epidemic of once rich athletes that squander their money after their careers end.

I also feel like I'm overthinking this but can we even really apply this to the average or replacement level "scrub" player that floats around the league for basically the minimum salary? It's gotta be the top level guys that have earned even a modest free agent contract after their arby years. Maybe $10 million minimum career earnings? I'm definitely overthinking it but I just can't see how that many guys go absolutely broke.

I am sure it is well over 50% of all pro athletes because, yah, most of them don't last long and don't make insane amounts of money. Retiring before 40 requires some smart moves even if you have quite a few millions. 

My point wasn't that Blake Snell is going to go broke, it is the reality that pro athletes aren't exactly on the smartest side of the spectrum when it comes to financial literacy and making good decisions. In no way shape or form is it a good idea to pass up on $90mil to gamble on physical health and the randomness of athletic performance over one season. He is basically taking $90mil to the casino. But he is rich, so he can do it and potentially it means nothing to him in the end. It doesn't make sense and it doesn't really need to. You could tell him his odds this is a bad idea are 70% and he would probably still do it. He is a gambler.

[jerichoholicninja]

3 hours ago, Jopal78 said:

Look at the other active pitchers with 2 or more Cy Young awards and their AAV:

Verlander—- $43 million AAV

Scherzer—- $43 million AAV

deGrom—- $37 million AAV

Even Kershaw got a 10 million dollar guarantee and he might miss all of ‘24 and retire.

If those are the comps, you might think Snell/Boras have egg on their faces, but why would Snell even consider signing a deal which would lock in his compensation for years at a rate so much less than his peers?

 

 

 

 

Snell may have 2 Cy Youngs but he's been no where near as good, as consistent, and done it as long as those others have. Just looking at Snell's career it's really interesting that he's pitched like a Hall of Famer in 2018 and 2023 and been kind of above average or worse the rest. To say those guys are comps isn't accurate.

[SeaBass]

10 minutes ago, MrTPlush said:

I am sure it is well over 50% of all pro athletes because, yah, most of them don't last long and don't make insane amounts of money. Retiring before 40 requires some smart moves even if you have quite a few millions. 

My point wasn't that Blake Snell is going to go broke, it is the reality that pro athletes aren't exactly on the smartest side of the spectrum when it comes to financial literacy and making good decisions. In no way shape or form is it a good idea to pass up on $90mil to gamble on physical health and the randomness of athletic performance over one season. He is basically taking $90mil to the casino. But he is rich, so he can do it and potentially it means nothing to him in the end. It doesn't make sense and it doesn't really need to. You could tell him his odds this is a bad idea are 70% and he would probably still do it. He is a gambler.

Right, I wasn't thinking you meant Snell. Should he have taken the $150 million? In hindsight, absolutely. He gambled, he lost. He is still insanely rich. There are richer people than him by far but he was going to live comfortably for the rest of his life even before he settled for "only" $60 million. As I said, I think that's why some of these guys are more willing to do the gamble. Not all of them do. It's like playing Who Wants To Be A Millionaire. At some point in the game there's enough of a safety net where going for it isn't as harmful even if you lose. I'm not saying I'd do the same thing in his shoes but I see why there's always a handful of guys that choose to play this game of chicken with the rich teams every off season.

I do think, anecdotally anyway, that pro players are more cognizant about how to save and invest their money now days than they used to be maybe even as little as 10 to 15 years ago. There are a LOT of really rich guys playing baseball, basketball, football etc. Chances are pretty decent that guys will talk to their teammates about how to be smart with their money. I specifically remember Pat Connaughton and Giannis saying they talked about investing strategies with each other. I'd also assume that the unions have more resources for the players too. I remember hearing news reports about young pros not having the first clue about what to do with their money going back 10 years ago or so and I feel like that has become more of a focus in the major sports now to take care of these guys. Doesn't mean people won't make bad decisions.

As for the lower dollar earners in professional sports I'd hope those people would be smarter with their money knowing that for some, similar to career minor league baseball players, their sport isn't as likely to make them enough money to retire on and they'll need "real" jobs someday. Some of them might have gotten decent signing bonuses when they were drafted but I'd really hesitate to even call them "rich" in the first place. I guess I'd still say it's hard for me to simply assume that over half actually go broke, they simply transition into regular jobs once their careers end.

[TURBO]

52 minutes ago, MrTPlush said:

I am sure it is well over 50% of all pro athletes because, yah, most of them don't last long and don't make insane amounts of money. Retiring before 40 requires some smart moves even if you have quite a few millions. 

 

Wait, you are saying that 50% of pro athletes end up going broke?

Yeah, I think that is probably really inaccurate. 

[nate82]

9 hours ago, TURBO said:

Wait, you are saying that 50% of pro athletes end up going broke?

Yeah, I think that is probably really inaccurate. 

Is it? The majority of the players are going to be on the low end of the salary ranges.  While still a lot of money you still need to have at least an average financial understanding.  Majority are well below average in financial knowledge.

There is also the culture where everyone is super competitive and if player a has x car then player b is going to try and get a better y car.  These are not your basic Ford, Toyota or Chevy’s.  These vehicles are in the $100k’s.  Then take into account all the other things they will buy and the vacations they will go on.  Don’t forget the personal trainers and the clubs and the parties and the clothes.  Yeah I can see how that can be higher than 50%.  This is also not taking into consideration someone giving money to a family member to start a business or to buy a house.