 How much does a man mean or a player mean to a fan base? He is their modern day Sandy Kofaks. But the thing that would concern me, and maybe he wouldn't have opted out, is he doesn't throw nearly as hard as he used to. He thinks he can throw harder if he works out his back problems. But he's been on the DL two years in a row because of back issues. That's scary to me. When you get older, other than Verlander, you don't throw harder. And I thought this was unusual. I thought they were going to say, either you take the 32 and a half, adding up to 65 for the last two years, or you can go somewhere else. And I don't think there's any place else that would pay him $31 million a year, although I look at it this way. Maybe to the Dodgers, he's worth that. Even at a distressed level. That's got to be it because he's not the same pitcher he used to be, and he's never been a good pitcher in the postseason. But isn't that dangerous to do something because it would be a gift to the fans? I mean, right now, a gift to your fans would be to go out there and try to win another championship. Now, I think they can be competitive to do that because the National League is wide open. They can go right back to the World Series again for a third consecutive year. But does this make a lot of sense over the next three years to spend that kind of money? Now, there's no cap. I guess they don't really care from that standpoint. But does this make a lot of sense? Does this preclude them from going out and improving a pitching staff that maybe needs to be improved? I'm not sure. But if you did this solely because he's an iconic Dodger and he deserves to finish his career there, that's tough to do at the expense of winning a championship. Now, they've gone 30 years between championships. And that's a long time for this organization. For any organization. You're going back a long time. They've had a lot of winning in LA since they got there in 1958. And this is the longest they've gone by far without winning a championship. And you know that the Mets are two years longer? No, you don't think I know that? I know you know that. I know it. Now, when I say how it affects the free age of market, if Clayton Kershaw in a diminished state gets $31 million a year, what's Patrick Corbin going to get? Did he just lock him into a $30 million a year contract? Just because of what they gave Kershaw? Now, you could say Kershaw got Dodger money because he's an iconic Dodger. But Patrick Corbin's younger, had a great year. So what's he going to command? Is that going to be the price now for a big-time free age and pitcher over $30 million a year? The Diamondbacks do not have the Dodger's money when it comes to the television revenue that they raked in. Then they sign like a billion-dollar television contract with Fox. I don't know if Arizona's got that kind of money to throw around. As much as they probably want to keep Corbin, I don't know if they have that. They've said they want to rebuild. They would love to trade. Is that cranky? If cranky makes over $30 million a year, but cranky has no trade clause. So it's going to be interesting. Deals like this, they reverberate throughout the free agent market because now Corbin could probably make more money than we thought he was going to make.