It's been a crazy day as the Giants are hiring John Harbaugh as their next head coach.

The other piece of news that will come out, maybe at some point today, I kind of guess it'll

be today, if not tomorrow, is the decision that Kyle Tucker is going to have to make.

Because Kyle Tucker has a monster offer from the New York Mets.

It's either four or five years at $50 million per.

And then the Toronto Blue Jays have a long-term offer out there. We don't know the financials, but there are reports that it is as long as 10 years. Right, but only at an AV of $30,000 to $35 million. That's our guess. Right. Like we don't actually know, but we know it's not 50. And so Kyle Tucker, and I think the Dodgers are a factor as well. I assume they're off or similar to the Mets would be a high A.A.V. Low years kind of deal. Which would benefit Kyle Tucker. No doubt. So the question I have for you. If it's the Dodgers. Because you're going to go win. Yes. I think that would be a huge edge the Dodgers have. And the Blue Jays have that edge too. But right now, I think most guys go based on money. And if the Mets have the greatest short-term offer. Yeah. And Toronto has the greatest long-term offer. What would you do? I don't know. Is Kyle Tucker Wonsoto? No.

Does he command Wonsoto A-A-V money?

No. Is he that good offensively and defensively to be in the same talking points as Wonsoto?

No, but I think the reason he is is because you're paying a tax for the fact that you don't want to give him a tenure deal. So that's circumstantially making him one of the highest paid players in baseball. Correct, yeah. That seems like an error. What? That just seems wrong. Why? Because you're going to end up not getting the most out of it, especially if you're the Mets. If you're the Dodgers, I get it because money doesn't matter. The Mets money does matter. And so if you're going to overpay for a guy, pay him on the level of Juan Soto, and he turns out to just be slightly above average, was it worth it? And you don't win. Was it worth it?

I don't think it's ever worth it if you don't win.

And I would agree, like, we're probably not going to.

So deciding Kyle Tucker make you a definitive division and then, let's call it, just

get into the NLCS.

Is that where Kyle Tucker takes you as you're currently constructed? It makes them significantly better than what they are now. Are they the favorites in the division? No. Are they better than the Dodgers? No. But they would be a significantly better team if they added Kyle Tucker than if they don't. I just think it's a mistake. It just feels like an overpay for a guy who's not as good as Juan Soto and you're going to pay him

that much and you don't know if your team is even built well enough. So what does that mean? Would you rather give him a 10-year deal? Because I asked you yesterday, what would you rather do? And I thought you were on my side that I'd rather pay the tax of the more money. Yeah, but the more I think about it and I I don't even think, I don't know if I realize it,

because when I think about Juan Soto,

you hear 14-year deal, 700 million. He got everything, one. He got the years and the 80s. It could be 800, too. So it is what it is. It could be. Yeah, yeah. You don't think about the A.A.V. But then you're like, all right, let me do the math real quick.

And I'm like, oh, that's $50 million a year.

And it's like, wait a second.

You're going to pay Kyle Tucker $50 million a year?

Yeah. the AV. But then you're like, all right, let me do the math real quick. I'm like, that's $50 million a year. And it's like, wait a second, you're going to pay

Kyle Tucker $50 million a year? Yeah, but I don't. And I'm not, I'm not knocking Kyle Tucker because he's a really good player. But is he a great elite player? No. So why pay him like a great elite player for a short term.

...