Look, I know a lot of you think being a baseball robot is the thing that all the cool kids do, but it's more than a little odd to be talking about how you could afford the guy you just signed because the guy you traded for the year before is on a VERY team-friendly deal. Like, everyone knows it's true and he's right, but it just seems like one of those things where you don't talk it up to the press. What's the point? Similarly, I know it's en vogue to be on the lookout for exploitation of players given the current offseason(and to an extent, political) climate, but I don't see a big issue in clarifying the logic behind the moves when there's a direct correlation. Quintana is on a team friendly deal, and part of that is a function of the arbitration system, but he's on a team friendly deal because of a conscious choice he made to lock in tens of millions of dollars that were far from certain at the time. I'd love for the Quintana's of the world to get a larger share of the pie in the future too, but I don't think it's gauche to point out that the contract he signed with another team facilitated other moves.