Skip to content

Agent: Anibal Sanchez left money on the table

Dec 18, 2012, 9:11 AM EDT

Money on the Table

Remember a couple of years ago how everyone said Cliff Lee “left money on the table” to sign with the Phillies? I actually doubt he left money on the table — no one knows for sure what the Yankees were offering him — but I was pleased that the “money on the table” metaphor got goosed with all of that.  I now like to picture all free agent negotiations taking place in a room with a big table and large stacks of cash.

Anyway, Lee must have let Anibal Sanchez borrow his table this past week:

Sanchez’s agent, Gene Mato, said that Sanchez left money on the table at the winter meetings, when an unnamed team offered him a contract, but that Sanchez didn’t want to make his decision on money, but rather comfortability.

Don’t say a thing about “comfortability.” I make up words all the time myself, and as long as everyone knows what they mean I think it’s good.

As for Sanchez leaving money on the table: I am doing the little Mr. Spock thing in which one eyebrow is raised. Partly out of skepticism, partly out of curiosity.

It would have to be a team which keeps its lips locked and about whom we tend not to hear rumors before something actually happens. The first two that spring to mind are the Blue Jays and the Yankees, and the Yankees aren’t in the market for an $80 million+ starting pitcher.  Could be the Jays, I suppose.

Or it could be an agent trying to make it sound like his client didn’t just use another team — the Cubs — as a bogey in order to extract a few extra million from the team with whom his client wanted to sign all along. What say you, Mr. Mato?

The next morning, he called me early in the morning and said, ‘Listen, I want to be a Tiger.’  It was pretty clear from the beginning, to me, that Anibal really wanted to be a Tiger, so I did everything in my ability to make that happen.”

Fascinating.

  1. craigisaloser - Dec 18, 2012 at 9:29 AM

    You’re such a jackass Craig.

  2. darthicarus - Dec 18, 2012 at 9:30 AM

    I find it hard to believe a team offered greater than $16m per year for Anibal’s services…but if it helps Mato sleep better at night to say someone did then so be it.

    • paperlions - Dec 18, 2012 at 9:38 AM

      Well, the difference in production and ability between Greinke and Sanchez is certainly less than $9M/year…Dempster got $12.5/year and Sanchez has much better stuff than Dempster. A deal in the $17M/year range isn’t impossible within that context.

      • dan1111 - Dec 18, 2012 at 12:01 PM

        Well, Greinke took all the money on his table and several other tables, then he took the table, too. I am astounded at the contract he got. He had that one great season, but other than that his career results have been more like Dempster and Sanchez than a top tier pitcher.

        Kudos to other pitchers if they can make his contract the new standard, but I doubt it.

      • bjbroderick - Dec 18, 2012 at 4:47 PM

        @dan1111

        That should be a late nominee for comment of the year.

    • mattyflex - Dec 18, 2012 at 11:43 AM

      I think there’s a good possibility it was the Royals, pre Myers/Odorizzi-Shields/Davis. I really thought they were going to sign him until trade talks intensified.

  3. larryboodry - Dec 18, 2012 at 9:38 AM

    He used the Cubs to jack up the price from the Tigers…Period.

  4. historiophiliac - Dec 18, 2012 at 9:53 AM

    This concludes today’s edition of “Why you NEED an agent 101.” If you liked “Leaving money on the table,” be sure to check out other editions like “Let me do the talking, kid” and “I can get you millions more if you dress like an elf for charity.”

  5. rockthered1286 - Dec 18, 2012 at 9:59 AM

    “…and the Yankees aren’t in the market for an $80 million+ starting pitcher. ”

    Since when does $$$ eliminate the Yanks from contention? I’ve never once heard someone in their organization say “he’s too rich for our taste.”

    • snowbirdgothic - Dec 18, 2012 at 10:59 AM

      Say it with me: “Luxury Tax”.

      Alternately, you can look at all the other stories posted on this site about how the Yankees are skimping this year.

  6. proudlycanadian - Dec 18, 2012 at 10:18 AM

    Probably the Cubs. The Jays did not have the budget for Sanchez. The Jays had to have the Mets take all of Buck’s contract in order to make the Dickey trade work.

  7. hisgirlgotburrelled - Dec 18, 2012 at 10:32 AM

    You know who left money on the table? Jered Weaver. $80 million over 5 years for Anibal Sanchez is, in my opinion, a little too high of a price as it is.

  8. pisano - Dec 18, 2012 at 10:36 AM

    I’ve never heard one thing about the Yankees being interested in him, you don’t think his agent got that going do ya?

  9. deathmonkey41 - Dec 18, 2012 at 3:21 PM

    Maybe he met with Tigers officials at a restaurant and was the one that left the tip?

  10. spartyon420 - Dec 18, 2012 at 4:30 PM

    WHO IS THIS GUY CALLING CRAIG A LOSER? IDK YOU OR CRAIG BUT YOUR CLEARLY THE LOSER WHEN YOU WAIT FOR AN ARTICLE TO POST THAT AS THE FIRST COMMENT. WHAT IS WITH YOUR USERNAME? DID CRAIG DO SOMETHING TO YOU PERSONALLY? GET A LIFE MAN, HONESTLY ITS PEOPLE LIKE YOU THAT ARE THE PROBLEM IN THIS COUNTRY… I HOPE YOU HAVE A WONDERFUL HOLIDAY!

  11. spartyon420 - Dec 18, 2012 at 4:35 PM

    JACKASS WHATEVER YOU SAID…. YOU ARE A TWAT WHISTLE BRO

  12. onbucky96 - Dec 18, 2012 at 4:38 PM

    Scott Boras would never let player sign for less$. How rude, leaving money on the table to sign where you want to play. THE ARROGANCE!

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Featured video

Patience finally paying off for Royals fans
Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. R. Castillo (2837)
  2. D. Ortiz (1993)
  3. M. Trout (1969)
  4. A. Pagan (1963)
  5. A. Pujols (1912)
  1. J. Hamilton (1866)
  2. N. Arenado (1802)
  3. G. Stanton (1779)
  4. H. Ramirez (1766)
  5. C. Kershaw (1709)