Scott Boras, when asked about the idea of signing guys for short contracts that cover their arbitration years:
“I’m more into 12-year deals for young players,” Boras replied. “The M.O. is, you want to keep them in the franchise, and you want to be there for the fans and be a marquee for them. So why not?”
Of course Boras is going to be for massive deals because he’s Scott Boras. And of course you’re going to mock him because you love to mock Scott Boras. But go read Adam Kilgore’s article and listen to what else Boras has to say on the matter. And you realize that he makes sense.
No, most players aren’t worth that deal. Heck, no player may be worth the risk of a deal that long. But the underlying idea — that smart teams find ways to move away from what the pack is doing and that it’s probably better for teams to find ways to lock up a core of several players rather than just one or two superstars — and you can almost see the sense in giving, say, Bryce Harper or Mike Trout a deal that takes them into their 30s.
Boras says a lot of audacious things. But audacious doesn’t mean crazy. And, in a lot of ways, Boras got where he is by being willing to be audacious.