[DC 86]

Baggarly has a reputation for being a straight shooter.  Heck, he was ostracized by a number of Giants players for a period of time during his tenure with CSN Bay Area for what the players felt was unwarranted criticism.  I’ll take his comments (that SF was willing to pay what was necessary) at face value.  The problem was location, location, location.

The article was basically a P.R. piece justifying why Suzuki signed with Chicago instead of San Francisco. But there was no mention of an offer from SF, which of course would be highly relevant, in fact it would be the key piece of information. If Baggerly reported that the Giants offered $85 million but Suzuki chose the Cubs, or even better that the Giants offered more than $85 million but that Suzuki still chose the Cubs, then that would be meaningful, because it would be a message that the Giants did all they could but that non-economic factors prevailed. As it is, absent reference to a Giants offer the narrative of the article falls into the same category as Mike Hampton choosing the Rockies because of the Denver school system or Gerrit Cole proclaiming that he signed with the Yankees because they were his favorite childhood team.

If the Giants had made a competitive offer you can be sure that it would have been leaked to Baggerly, to strengthen his thesis. The fact that no explicit Giants offer has been reported indicates that either there was no offer or that it was inferior to the Cubs offer (and therefore best left unmentioned), so any fluff about the Suzukis loving Chicago more than California being the overriding consideration needs to be taken with several grains of salt in light of the Cubs obviously offering more money than the Giants.

P.S. I'm not questioning Baggerly's integrity, but being ostracized by players doesn't support his credibility with regard to this piece, since this was a defense of management/ownership, not a player criticism.

[DC 86]

Baggarly has a reputation for being a straight shooter.  Heck, he was ostracized by a number of Giants players for a period of time during his tenure with CSN Bay Area for what the players felt was unwarranted criticism.  I’ll take his comments (that SF was willing to pay what was necessary) at face value.  The problem was location, location, location.

The article was basically a P.R. piece justifying why Suzuki signed with Chicago instead of San Francisco. But there was no mention of an offer from SF, which of course would be highly relevant, in fact it would be the key piece of information. If Baggerly reported that the Giants offered $85 million but Suzuki chose the Cubs, or even better that the Giants offered more than $85 million but that Suzuki still chose the Cubs, then that would be meaningful, because it would be a message that the Giants did all they could but that non-economic factors prevailed. As it is, absent reference to a Giants offer the narrative of the article falls into the same category as Mike Hampton choosing the Rockies because of the Denver school system or Gerrit Cole proclaiming that he signed with the Yankees because they were his favorite childhood team.

If the Giants had made a competitive offer you can be sure that it would have been leaked to Baggerly, to strengthen his thesis. The fact that no explicit Giants offer has been reported indicates that either there was no offer or that it was inferior to the Cubs offer (and therefore best left unmentioned), so any fluff about the Suzukis loving Chicago more than California being the overriding consideration needs to be taken with several grains of salt in light of the Cubs obviously offering more money than the Giants.

P.S. I'm not questioning Baggerly's integrity, but being ostracized by players doesn't support his credibility with regard to this piece, since this was a defense of management/ownership, not a player criticism.