Let’s say you have a time machine.
You: I’m gonna kill Hitler!
Settle down. You’re thinking of a much better time machine than you can afford. You’re thinking of the store brand. You bought one secondhand at a garage sale, which was a canny move by a smart shopper, but it also meant that it didn’t come with pesky things like adjustable controls. It only goes to one place at one time, and it takes you back to the present immediately after.
You: Does that mean I can use it to do political things, like the one I’m about to mention here, in the comments, where we’re not supposed to do that?
No, absolutely not.
The place: a meeting between Larry Baer and Brian Sabean. The time: April 1, 2012. What can you change? Whether or not the Giants sign Matt Cain to that extension. You have the power to change history. Should you do it?
(Please assume for the sake of this exercise that Matt Cain will still sign a very large contract after 2012, because it is Objectively Good that Matt Cain makes a lot of money, because he spent a lot of years being underpaid and helping to make a fortune for Giants ownership, so he has absolutely earned every cent of his contract, kthxbye)
Yes
Well, uh, he’s been bad.
Cain signed the extension before the 2012 season, which was his last great season and also his last good season. After that, he was mediocre in 2013, bad and injured in 2014, and awful and injured in 2015 and 2016. It is a very strong possibility that Cain will not have a rotation spot coming out of Spring Training in 2017, in the last year of his contract (he has an option in 2018, but, I mean, come on).
If you’re worried about undoing Cain’s fine work in 2012, he was already under contract in 2012. If you’re worried about undoing the rest of it, why? The team was giving him a lot of money and he didn’t live up to it. They could have done a lot with that money. They could have upped their offer to Jon Lester after 2014 and still been able to sign Cueto (and Samardzija, if you’d like) this year. They’d have been able to really get in the market for Yoenis Cespedes. They could do any number of things with that money. Instead, they gave it to a player who was actively bad for an entire presidential term. If you could undo that, why wouldn’t you?
No
The Giants have won two World Series since the extension, which is a very impressive number of World Series to win in six seasons, and maybe we shouldn’t mess with that.
You: Why would it change anything about 2012? He was already on the team.
Good question, Reader! The answer isn’t that it definitely would have changed something. The answer is that we’re not sure that it wouldn’t have. Is it possible that Cain, irked that the Giants didn’t think enough of him to lock him up long term, starts overthrowing his fastball a bit and tweaks his arm? Yes. It’s maybe not especially likely, but it’s definitely on the table. Is it possible that Cain starts thinking about his next contract in Game 5 of the NLDS and falls apart just early enough that the Reds complete their comeback? Sure. We don’t know. Why jeopardize it?
You: But what about 2014? He wasn’t on the playoff roster and he wasn’t good in the regular season.
Another good question! And again, the answer is as simple as: Things might have changed. If the Giants go out before the season and get a new starter, they don’t trade for Jake Peavy. Maybe that new starter loses Game 1 of the NLDS. Maybe that new starter fades down the stretch. Maybe that new starter is John Lackey and we all have to look at his face for the entire year. These are all horrifying possibilities and should not be dismissed.
You: Actually, I never said any of this and also wouldn’t and I think I’m just a strawman for you to argue against.
Don’t contradict me. I’ve already got you quoted. That’s on the record.
There are other points to be made pro and con, of course, but in terms of just the on field, wins and losses, count the rings situation, which is it? Should you use your time machine to go make Matt Cain not sign his contract or not?