How much do they get?

Burnes - 

Fried - 

Snell - 

Unpopular opinion - but I don't think it's wise for rich teams to blow huge money on pitchers given how volatile and fragile they are, especially in today's max velo/minimum innings pitched era we live in.

I think it's down right foolish for teams with limited payrolls to do it.

If we have to trade Gunnar and Adley in a couple years because we're on the hook for a washed up IL bound SP we paid $40M/year to starting in 2025, that'll really suck.

I'd try to money ball the pitching staff. It's worked for the most part. Use your trade chips on guys that can actually pitch, unlike Trevor Rogers, that's a good way to go about it.

Spend the money on the home grown talent and a veteran gritty bat or two.

How often do teams get a solid ROI on mega contract SP's?

Burnes has the third-most innings in baseball across the last three years, obviously no pitcher is a guarantee to never get hurt but I don't know much more of a clean bill of health you could ask for in a pitcher to get a huge deal than Burnes

Burnes has the third-most innings in baseball across the last three years, obviously no pitcher is a guarantee to never get hurt but I don't know much more of a clean bill of health you could ask for in a pitcher to get a huge deal than Burnes

To me, that just means he's due (again). 

Unpopular opinion - but I don't think it's wise for rich teams to blow huge money on pitchers given how volatile and fragile they are, especially in today's max velo/minimum innings pitched era we live in.

 

I think it's down right foolish for teams with limited payrolls to do it.

 

If we have to trade Gunnar and Adley in a couple years because we're on the hook for a washed up IL bound SP we paid $40M/year to starting in 2025, that'll really suck.

 

I'd try to money ball the pitching staff. It's worked for the most part. Use your trade chips on guys that can actually pitch, unlike Trevor Rogers, that's a good way to go about it.

 

Spend the money on the home grown talent and a veteran gritty bat or two.

 

How often do teams get a solid ROI on mega contract SP's?

I generally tend to agree with this. A lot of people wanted to break the bank for Rodon for example, doesn't look so hot right now. I feel like a lot of the mid type pitchers get like 3-4/50-80M type contracts and that might be a reasonable option with a lot less risk. Eflin is that type of guy and we saw he's pretty valuable. Eovaldi was that type of guy and he'd have been solid. Some don't work out (Alex Cobb?) but at least you didn't kill your payroll for 8 years.

But, I was going to say and Rose hopped in first, Burnes may be an exception. Very durable and always very good. Yeah, maybe he's due, but some people's bodies are just made different and can pump out 180 innings year after year. I'd think about it for him. Not sure where the line is, but there's prices that make sense. He may end up getting too much.

As for the OP question, probably Burnes > Fried > Snell as far as total contract, but I have no clue what specifics.

Also I think you could just as easily argue that saving the money for when Gunnar and Adley hit free agency could mean wasting several years of their prime by not having a reliable ace. If Grayson/Bradish do a better job at staying healthy then it's a less of a concern but I'd much rather invest in the team right now than roll the dice on hoping the window is still open by the time Adley and Gunnar are free agents because it's entirely possible it won't be.  

Also I think you could just as easily argue that saving the money for when Gunnar and Adley hit free agency could mean wasting several years of their prime by not having a reliable ace. If Grayson/Bradish do a better job at staying healthy then it's a less of a concern but I'd much rather invest in the team right now than roll the dice on hoping the window is still open by the time Adley and Gunnar are free agents because it's entirely possible it won't be.  

Fair. Good point. I'm not sure the pitching has been the main problem though, but I hear you. Burnes is tempting. He's such a stud. 

How often do teams get a solid ROI on mega contract SP's?

Nola and Yamamoto got huge deals last year.  Very early, but both teams are happy they signed them right now.

Rodon, DeGrom, and Verlander got big deals in 2023.  Rodon awful year 1, ok in year 2.  DeGrom's been hurt the whole time, but that's a known risk with him.  Verlander great year 1, hurt & bad in year 2.  Maybe 1 of these 3 have worked out so far, given Verlander's huge 2023.  Still time for Rodon and DeGrom to either completely bottom out or justify the deals.

Scherzer, Ray, and Gausman got big deals in 2022.  Scherzer and Gausman their teams are happy.  Ray had a good first year but then hurt and bad and dumped since.  

No huge deals in 2021.  

I'd be absolutely fine living in that second tier of SP, 3-5 years at $15-25M a year.  You can find good arms in that price range without the long-term risk.  But I wouldn't automatically forego splashing around in the deeper waters from time to time.  I think Burnes might be right pitcher, right price.  But we'll see how high the bidding goes, I'll tap out before it gets too insane.

Unpopular opinion - but I don't think it's wise for rich teams to blow huge money on pitchers given how volatile and fragile they are, especially in today's max velo/minimum innings pitched era we live in.

 

I think it's down right foolish for teams with limited payrolls to do it.

 

If we have to trade Gunnar and Adley in a couple years because we're on the hook for a washed up IL bound SP we paid $40M/year to starting in 2025, that'll really suck.

 

I'd try to money ball the pitching staff. It's worked for the most part. Use your trade chips on guys that can actually pitch, unlike Trevor Rogers, that's a good way to go about it.

 

Spend the money on the home grown talent and a veteran gritty bat or two.

 

How often do teams get a solid ROI on mega contract SP's?

I don't think that's an unpopular opinion. 

That's everyone's opinion.  It's incredibly risky to sink major dollars (and particularly years) in pitching, especially pitching past their prime years.   (Each guy here several years past their prime.)

I think Burnes profiles really well for the next 3-4 years.  I'd give him huge AAV in those years.  
I'm sure someone is going to give him 5-7 years, and that doesn't excite me at all. 

I think the O's need to add one starting pitcher to team with Rodriguez and Eflin at the top.

Maybe they wind-up with a 3rd starter type on a 1 year deal.
Maybe they end up making a trade. 

I'm assuming Burnes is gone, but remain curious to see what numbers he actually gets.

Fried is very good, but he shouldn't cost quite as much as Burnes, and I also don't think you'd be quite as comfortable with him holding up. 

Snell... he might go ahead and opt in to the 2nd year of his deal.
If he opts out... I'm thinking he gets 2-3 years from someone.

I don't think that's an unpopular opinion. 

That's everyone's opinion.  It's incredibly risky to sink major dollars (and particularly years) in pitching, especially pitching past their prime years.   (Each guy here several years past their prime.)

 

I think Burnes profiles really well for the next 3-4 years.  I'd give him huge AAV in those years.  
I'm sure someone is going to give him 5-7 years, and that doesn't excite me at all. 

Unfortunately with all the opt outs these days, the team often bears the risk of bad performance but doesn't get the benefits of over performance. If he's good for 3 years maybe that's all we'd get. We'd be happy but still wanting more. But if he's bad for 3 years or has TJ or something we'd be on the hook for all 7.

Snell... he might go ahead and opt in to the 2nd year of his deal.

If he opts out... I'm thinking he gets 2-3 years from someone.

Zero chance he opts in unless he gets into a car crash in the next month or something dramatic like that.  

I think he gets more like 5 years than just 2-3 years from someone, but possible since he's been kind of fickle.  Seems like he rubs some teams the wrong way, too, so he might limit his market because of that.

Opt-outs have made projecting contracts incredibly difficult.  It was hard to get right before when there were only two variables, but this third variable that can have so many permutations makes it difficult to be on the same page in these types of conversations.

How much do they get?

 

Burnes - 

 

Fried - 

 

Snell - 

Burnes 7/$245M

Fried 6/$192M

Snell 5/$185M

Zero chance he opts in unless he gets into a car crash in the next month or something dramatic like that.  

 

I think he gets more like 5 years than just 2-3 years from someone, but possible since he's been kind of fickle.  Seems like he rubs some teams the wrong way, too, so he might limit his market because of that.

 

Opt-outs have made projecting contracts incredibly difficult.  It was hard to get right before when there were only two variables, but this third variable that can have so many permutations makes it difficult to be on the same page in these types of conversations.

Why didn't get he get that contract last year coming off the 2nd Cy?

He's going to be 32 in Dec. 

Including '24, the last 4 years he's pitched 128 innings, 128 innings, 180 innings, and 104 innings.

As good as he can be when available, I think that profile would be hard to give extended years to.

Of course, it just takes one team.

 

Why didn't get he get that contract last year coming off the 2nd Cy?

 

He's going to be 32 in Dec. 

 

Including '24, the last 4 years he's pitched 128 innings, 128 innings, 180 innings, and 104 innings.

 

As good as he can be when available, I think that profile would be hard to give extended years to.

 

Of course, it just takes one team.

 

Do see the Yankees reportedly offered him 6 years $150 last Winter.

Burnes 7/$245M

Fried 6/$192M

Snell 5/$185M

Why didn't get he get that contract last year coming off the 2nd Cy?

I think largely because Boras overplayed his hand.  I wouldn't be surprised if he turned down something in the 5-year range last season.

You don't think it's in Elias DNA to pay for a Free Agent SP... why?

If the answer is he hasn't, then don't you have to factor in the change of ownership (and where the club is now) vs what you've seen prior.

The 3 starters above are each going to get significantly different deals imo.

Sorry Chris I should have been more clear. i don't think its in  his DNA to make a major trade. And no I don't count the Burnes trade because Ortiz was not only blocked but in an infield log jam.