Snell vs Burnes

[dystopia]

Burnes is more reliable to throw strikes, make starts, and have consistent seasons. 

[TommyPickles]

Interesting that they have the exact same career ERA: 3.19.

I'd be thrilled with either deal. I chose Snell, because four years seems lower risk.

[Since1984]

In order to win, sign both! The next 4-6 years are a window worth the payroll stretch. You could always trade

[Jim'sKid26]

Snell. Reasoning:

1) Shorter contract

2) Elite LH starter in OPACY appeals to the Waltimore issue.

3) Snell's stuff is special and he has had success in AL East in the past.

4) Nice complement to the other RH starters, Eflin, Rodriguez and Bradish.

[LookitsPuck]

Either would be great. I do generally like shorter term contracts because of reducing the risk.

But I think I like Burnes more. Snell is 2 years older, which is why I presume you went with 4 years for him, but he does have durability concerns. If we break down each pitcher in terms of times pitching more than, say, 100 IP, 130 IP, 150 IP, and 180 IP:

Burnes also hasn't been a full time starter in the majors since 2021. So, presumably, there's less wear/tear. 

Think my main takeaway here is that Burnes has been a full time starter in the majors for the last 4 years and he's went 160+ in all 4 and went 190+ in 3 of them. Snell has been entirely used as a starter and has only eclipsed the 160 IP mark 3 out of 9 of his seasons and only once in the last 4 years did he go more than 130 IP.  

I'd gladly take either, though.

[Allan Bryant]

12 hours ago, OsFanSinceThe80s said:

 

My choice would be Burnes

My thought is why not him And Snell AND Roki ?   We can afford it 

[Bemorewins]

53 minutes ago, Since1984 said:

In order to win, sign both! The next 4-6 years are a window worth the payroll stretch. You could always trade

This.