At this point I'll believe it when I see it. And unless he can play SS this doesn't fill their biggest weakness.

Another deal I don't really get from the team's perspective ... or maybe better put as I don't follow the decision-making process. Gambling $36 M on Coforto is probably questionable enough** but gambling $36 M on Conforto without even having the upside that he might deliver $45 M in value makes no sense to me whatsoever.

1. Conforto produces say $24 M, leaves, Giants come out on top by $6 but lose a good player.
2. Conforto produces around $18, probably leaves cuz he can at least get 3/$50 somewhere, Giants break even.
3. Conforto produces around $12, stays, Giants get $24 for $36, losing $12
4. Conforto flops, Giants out $20-36 M

That requires that the odds of him being a $24 M player are much, much higher than the chances of being a $12 M player or worse. If that's the case, either offer him a bigger 1-year deal or wrap him up longer-term. It's an anti-Goldilocks position where the Giants have somehow combined the worst aspects of bed #1 and the worst of bed #3. (I know, Goldilocks is a subversive Marxist tale trying to teach us the dialectic but the Giants have somehow chosen an anti-synthesis.)

** if you think he's a solid gamble for 2/$36 then why not sign him for 3-5 years?

** if you think he's a solid gamble for 2/$36 then why not sign him for 3-5 years?

Because $36M is less than $70M or whatever they'd have to pay? If he sucks or isn't healthy, $36M isn't much to eat. Seems like a wise gamble if you're a team that wants to win now and has resources.

They've also run out of options. Having missed out on Judge and Correa, if they don't get Conforto, the next best hitting free agent is...Trey Mancini? Jurickson Profar?

Because $36M is less than $70M or whatever they'd have to pay? If he sucks or isn't healthy, $36M isn't much to eat. Seems like a wise gamble if you're a team that wants to win now and has resources.

4/65-70 is a lower luxury tax hit, and $17M a year is really nothing for a team like the Giants to eat. If you can afford a $275M payroll, it's not a factor affecting any decisions.

I don't think Conforto takes a 5-year deal at this kind of rate. He wants to re-establish himself, and hopefully get a monster deal next offseason. That doesn't mean the Giants needed to sign him to this particular deal, but I think it explains the length.

$70MM for a guy who didn't play last year, in significant part due to a shoulder injury, and who was bad in 2021? No thanks.

Good time to be a player the Giants want

$70MM for a guy who didn't play last year, in significant part due to a shoulder injury, and who was bad in 2021? No thanks.

Then don't guarantee him $36.

I don't think Conforto takes a 5-year deal at this kind of rate. He wants to re-establish himself, and hopefully get a monster deal next offseason

Sure, then the Giants limit their exposure by signing him for 1/$21. Instead they risk $15 M in order to save $3?

Good time to be a player the Giants want represented by Scott Boras

FTFY :-)

NY Post (Nov 8, 2022): Sherman: Four ex-Mets, Yankees have surprisingly become hard-sells in MLB free agency

Now, Boras said Conforto is likely to sign a deal akin to the one another client, Carlos Rodon, signed last offseason — a two-year deal with an opt-out after one season. If, as Rodon did in 2022, Conforto excels in 2023, he could opt out into the market next offseason. If not, he would have the protection of a second year. Boras said club officials at the General Managers Meetings have been persistently inquiring on the outfielder. Boras said Conforto has full extension back in his swing during workouts near his Arizona home and that he is throwing up to 120 feet.

Because $36M is less than $70M or whatever they'd have to pay?

By definition, 1/$18 with a $18 player option is worse for the team than 2/$36. By definition, 1/$18 with a $18 player option is worse for the team than 1/$18 with no option.

And even $24 is less than $36. If he's good, you don't get the second year any way. Presumably the Giants did this only because (they perceived) another team was already offering 1/$18 or maybe more. How much higher do the Giants need to go on a 1-year deal to get him? We'll never know but 1/$21? 1/$24? Call that other total A.

Those are still better than 1/$18 with a $18 player option. Or at least they probably are. If he does well, he's gone either way but, yes, the Giants are better off because they've come out A-18 better off. But if he flops, they've come out 36-A worse off. You bet $15 to make $3; bet $12 to make $6?

For that to make sense then either A is pretty darn high or you are very confident he is a better player than the 2.5 WAR you've paid for. If you're that confident he's a 2.5+ WAR player then you should be considering a 3-5 year deal because he'll probably be just as good for ages 31-32 and maybe 33. If you're already on the hook for 36 for a small upside, a bigger gamble also brings with it a bigger payoff if you're right. He might not take the deal of course which just gets you back 1/$A or 2/$36 with no option.

This week is a testament to how well Boras does his job. In a week he had Correa agree to 13/$350M with the Giants. When that went awry he deftly took the media questions before anyone else, and he then got Correa 12/$315M which, because of the different state tax rates, is basically an identical per-year salary (just a smidge higher under the new deal; not to dismiss that he did lose one year for Correa).

Then he turns back around and gets what appears to be an inflated deal for Conforto from the Giants, with whom things could easily have turned acrimonious.

People will always dislike Boras for his bluster and/or for how he more that anyone on the players’ side drives salaries upward, but in that regard he’s like a manager taking the heat for his players in a post-game press conference. Fun to watch someone doing their job so well.

If I was a ML ballplayer I'd want Boras as my agent - Conforto misses a full year after a down year and still gets $36 mil guaranteed with an opt out. Insane.

i keep seeing this thread out of the corner of my eyes in the sidebar, and, i #### you not, this was the 3rd time i first read it as "michael conforto dead".

i keep seeing this thread out of the corner of my eyes in the sidebar, and, i #### you not, this was the 3rd time i first read it as "michael conforto dead".

Nah, if he was dead, Boras couldn’t have gotten any team to pay him more than about $20 million. Maybe 25, max.

This week is a testament to how well Boras does his job. In a week he had Correa agree to 13/$350M with the Giants. When that went awry he deftly took the media questions before anyone else, and he then got Correa 12/$315M which, because of the different state tax rates, is basically an identical per-year salary (just a smidge higher under the new deal; not to dismiss that he did lose one year for Correa).

Don't count your chickens yet. Mets don't like the medicals either.

$70MM for a guy who didn't play last year, in significant part due to a shoulder injury, and who was bad in 2021? No thanks.

Then don't guarantee him $36..

I’m not a great math guy, but my understanding is that $36MM is roughly half of $70MM.