2024 Trade Deadline

[calsnowskier]

He does kind of owe us a little, letting him waste half the year rehabbing and spring training during the season, he might appreciate that, who knows. Just being hopeful I guess, it's not 100% sure he opts out, or doesn't extend with us.

Players careers are way too short to show loyalty like that. He may extend with us, and he may even do it at a relatively acceptable cost. But there is no chance he opts in “out of the goodness of his heart”.

And he shouldn’t.

 

[filosofy29]

Players careers are way too short to show loyalty like that. He may extend with us, and he may even do it at a relatively acceptable cost. But there is no chance he opts in “out of the goodness of his heart”.

And he shouldn’t.

You’re right no matter what. But especially with this current President of Baseball Ops.

 

[msgkings322]

Players careers are way too short to show loyalty like that. He may extend with us, and he may even do it at a relatively acceptable cost. But there is no chance he opts in “out of the goodness of his heart”.

And he shouldn’t.

I never said otherwise, lots of factors in choosing where to sign, maybe that's one.

Trying to figure out why he wasn't dealt, optimistically maybe they feel they can keep him.

 

[calsnowskier]

I never said otherwise, lots of factors in choosing where to sign, maybe that's one.

Trying to figure out why he wasn't dealt, optimistically maybe they feel they can keep him.

We have no idea what offers were presented for him. The option was, understandably, a pretty toxic poison pill. The Giants use that contract tool more than any other team (it seems, at least). It would appear that most other teams aren’t comfortable with that level of variable liability.

Barring an injury, I don’t expect Snell to activate the option. It is a 15M salary with a deferred 15M to be paid (iirc) in ‘27. He may not be able to get a multi year 30M aav contract, but he can certainly get a very nice long term deal (4ish years, likely). I wouldn’t be blown away if he were to get a contract better than 4/100.

 

[msgkings322]

We have no idea what offers were presented for him. The option was, understandably, a pretty toxic poison pill. The Giants use that contract tool more than any other team (it seems, at least). It would appear that most other teams aren’t comfortable with that level of variable liability.

Barring an injury, I don’t expect Snell to activate the option. It is a 15M salary with a deferred 15M to be paid (iirc) in ‘27. He may not be able to get a multi year 30M aav contract, but he can certainly get a very nice long term deal (4ish years, likely). I wouldn’t be blown away if he were to get a contract better than 4/100.

Would you be happy if it's the Giants signing him for 4/100?

 

[calsnowskier]

Would you be happy if it's the Giants signing him for 4/100?

I figure he has at least 1 more season of Ace-level pitching. If we could get an additional 2 seasons as a solid starter, I would be ecstatic with that.

 

[msgkings322]

I figure he has at least 1 more season of Ace-level pitching. If we could get an additional 2 seasons as a solid starter, I would be ecstatic with that.

Me too, and it’s only money and they have plenty. I hope they didn’t t trade him because they think they have a good shot to keep him

 

[sf1giantfan]

Maybe being a west coast kid (Seattle) he might want to stay close by. 4/100 million isn’t bad, but I think he will want more years if not more money, if he is decent or better.

 

[Stokes1931]

Maybe being a west coast kid (Seattle) he might want to stay close by. 4/100 million isn’t bad, but I think he will want more years if not more money, if he is decent or better.

Although with California taxes, 4/100 may be closer to 4/85. If he pitched in Florida or Nevada, that 4/100 is legit 4/100. Until the Feds are involved. And yes, I realize players are taxed on where they play, but since most games (81 home + 2 Oak + 6 LAD + 6 SD + 3 LAA) that's almost 60% of the games being played in California.

 

[sf1giantfan]

Although with California taxes, 4/100 may be closer to 4/85. If he pitched in Florida or Nevada, that 4/100 is legit 4/100. Until the Feds are involved. And yes, I realize players are taxed on where they play, but since most games (81 home + 2 Oak + 6 LAD + 6 SD + 3 LAA) that's almost 60% of the games being played in California.

Sadly that is true.

 

[calsnowskier]

Although with California taxes, 4/100 may be closer to 4/85. If he pitched in Florida or Nevada, that 4/100 is legit 4/100. Until the Feds are involved. And yes, I realize players are taxed on where they play, but since most games (81 home + 2 Oak + 6 LAD + 6 SD + 3 LAA) that's almost 60% of the games being played in California.

Look at all the FA the dogs miss out on because of those same restrictions…

 

[tzill]

Interesting factoid from Baggs today:

Snell, for all his two Cy Young Awards and his 15-strikeout dominance in his outing Saturday, has never thrown a pitch in the ninth inning. (He’s faced only 12 hitters in his career after the seventh inning.)

 

[calsnowskier]

Interesting factoid from Baggs today:

Snell, for all his two Cy Young Awards and his 15-strikeout dominance in his outing Saturday, has never thrown a pitch in the ninth inning. (He’s faced only 12 hitters in his career after the seventh inning.)

He is legit so filthy that he does not induce bad contact. His pitch count is always too high for him to go deep.

 

[sf1giantfan]

Interesting factoid from Baggs today:

Snell, for all his two Cy Young Awards and his 15-strikeout dominance in his outing Saturday, has never thrown a pitch in the ninth inning. (He’s faced only 12 hitters in his career after the seventh inning.)

He is no Webb

 

[calsnowskier]

He is no Webb

“Do you SNELL-LA-LA-LA…

What the Webb… Is… Cookin!”

 

[tzill]

He is legit so filthy that he does not induce bad contact. His pitch count is always too high for him to go deep.

Agreed, but you'd think at some point in his career he would've at least come out ONCE for the ninth inning...

 

[LHG]

From MLBTR's subscriber Q & A:
Adrian R. asks:

Why does Farhan Zaidi continually nibble at the margins, like at this trade deadline, and not cash in valuable trade assets for a pending free agent/opt out like Blake Snell? Is Farhan Zaidi really the smartest guy in the room as he likes to think of himself?

I do think the Giants have a tendency to get a little cute with their transactions, particularly given the financial might they possess. I still look back and wonder why they didn’t spend more to keep Kevin Gausman after his Bay Area breakout, for instance, and I thought they could’ve more concretely shored up the rotation this past offseason than going deliberately patchwork in the first half and hoping to stay afloat until Robbie Ray and the since-traded (before he threw a big league pitch) Alex Cobb returned from injury.

That said, I don’t really agree that Snell was an asset who could be easily “cashed in.” MLBTR’s Anthony Franco wrote about the difficulty of trading players with player options/opt-out clauses on month ago, and everything he wrote there applies here — and then some. Snell was one of the trickiest trade candidates to navigate this summer.

On top of having a hefty $30MM player option for the 2025 season — which he’d only exercise with a poor showing down the stretch and/or an injury — the two-time Cy Young winner has had two different IL stints already in 2024. His early-season performance was catastrophically bad. He’s only looked like the best version of himself for a few weeks now. I’d wager there were still plenty of teams that buy this as the beginning of a legitimate return to form — I do myself — but that player option is pure downside. It’s a poison pill for any new club, in the sense that Snell will either look like his peak self for two months, turn it down and opt out (with no possibility of a qualifying offer), or he’ll get hurt/struggle and lock himself into a $30MM salary for next season on the heels of a potentially career-worst year. That’s a scary enough proposition for any team even if they were looking to only take on the money. Of course, the Giants weren’t just going to give Snell away to shed the contract. They were understandably asking for prospects of note in return. It’s easy to say they should’ve paid down the contract to get the prospects they want and move the player, but that’s an ownership call — and it also greatly reduces the postseason chances of a team that’s still only 4.5 games out of the final Wild Card spot.

I don’t love all of the moves the Giants have made under Zaidi. I nearly did a spit-take when I saw his post-deadline comments about having the best rotation in baseball (even though the group is undeniably talented). But even though I’ve at times been left scratching my head at some of their moves and non-moves, I don’t think it’s fair to ding the Giants for not moving Snell, as I simply don’t believe he was a hot commodity who could’ve easily been moved for a package of top-end prospects in a straightforward swap.

 

[calsnowskier]

From MLBTR's subscriber Q & A:
Adrian R. asks:

Why does Farhan Zaidi continually nibble at the margins, like at this trade deadline, and not cash in valuable trade assets for a pending free agent/opt out like Blake Snell? Is Farhan Zaidi really the smartest guy in the room as he likes to think of himself?

I do think the Giants have a tendency to get a little cute with their transactions, particularly given the financial might they possess. I still look back and wonder why they didn’t spend more to keep Kevin Gausman after his Bay Area breakout, for instance, and I thought they could’ve more concretely shored up the rotation this past offseason than going deliberately patchwork in the first half and hoping to stay afloat until Robbie Ray and the since-traded (before he threw a big league pitch) Alex Cobb returned from injury.

That said, I don’t really agree that Snell was an asset who could be easily “cashed in.” MLBTR’s Anthony Franco wrote about the difficulty of trading players with player options/opt-out clauses on month ago, and everything he wrote there applies here — and then some. Snell was one of the trickiest trade candidates to navigate this summer.

On top of having a hefty $30MM player option for the 2025 season — which he’d only exercise with a poor showing down the stretch and/or an injury — the two-time Cy Young winner has had two different IL stints already in 2024. His early-season performance was catastrophically bad. He’s only looked like the best version of himself for a few weeks now. I’d wager there were still plenty of teams that buy this as the beginning of a legitimate return to form — I do myself — but that player option is pure downside. It’s a poison pill for any new club, in the sense that Snell will either look like his peak self for two months, turn it down and opt out (with no possibility of a qualifying offer), or he’ll get hurt/struggle and lock himself into a $30MM salary for next season on the heels of a potentially career-worst year. That’s a scary enough proposition for any team even if they were looking to only take on the money. Of course, the Giants weren’t just going to give Snell away to shed the contract. They were understandably asking for prospects of note in return. It’s easy to say they should’ve paid down the contract to get the prospects they want and move the player, but that’s an ownership call — and it also greatly reduces the postseason chances of a team that’s still only 4.5 games out of the final Wild Card spot.

I don’t love all of the moves the Giants have made under Zaidi. I nearly did a spit-take when I saw his post-deadline comments about having the best rotation in baseball (even though the group is undeniably talented). But even though I’ve at times been left scratching my head at some of their moves and non-moves, I don’t think it’s fair to ding the Giants for not moving Snell, as I simply don’t believe he was a hot commodity who could’ve easily been moved for a package of top-end prospects in a straightforward swap.

I agree that Snell’s contract has too many variables to really be moveable. I don’t really blame FZ, in a bubble, for not trading Snell.

I blame whomever signed Snell to that contract. That person was the culprit.

And I blame whomever was the GM who decided not to trade Rodon. And the GM who didn’t trade Bum when he was still a decent pitcher with a year of control still on his contract.

Now THOSE GMs screwed the pooch.

 

[msgkings322]

I agree that Snell’s contract has too many variables to really be moveable. I don’t really blame FZ, in a bubble, for not trading Snell.

I blame whomever signed Snell to that contract. That person was the culprit.

And I blame whomever was the GM who decided not to trade Rodon. And the GM who didn’t trade Bum when he was still a decent pitcher with a year of control still on his contract.

Now THOSE GMs screwed the pooch.

I absolutely would have opposed trading Bumgarner. You can't run a franchise like that.

FZ has made mistakes but I do not agree that is one of them

 

[calsnowskier]

I absolutely would have opposed trading Bumgarner. You can't run a franchise like that.

FZ has made mistakes but I do not agree that is one of them

You mean trading a beloved player as practically your first move in the org is not a good move?