I woke up to the news that Blake Snell had signed a 5-year, $182 million contract with the Dodgers. I also read something that said the Cubs were interested in the two-time CY winner before the trade deadline but were probably not in pursuit of the free agent lefty. Huh?

Not sure who floated that rumor because I never heard anything at the time and don’t believe they were ever going to put up the money for him. That being said, I’m trying to figure out what this signing means for fans outside of Los Angeles.

Maybe the Giants and Padres will kick the tires on a few of the remaining pitchers on the free agent market because they have to and honestly believe they can compete with their NL West rivals.

As a Cubs fan first and a Brewers fan second, I don’t know how this signing benefits me. I certainly don’t get a cut of his salary and really don’t care for him anyway. Overall, he had a decent season for the Giants last year, but if I were a Giants fan, this news would doubly honk me off. After signing too late to have an effective ST, he stunk on toast through his first 8 starts (0-3 6.31 ERA in 35.2 innings). That he won 5 games after the AS break wasn’t enough, nor were the paltry 104 innings pitched in 20 starts. When teams sign high priced free agents, they expect immediate success.

By now, several MLB writers will have written columns about how this signing will set the ball in motion and other moves will soon follow. Unlike other off-seasons I’m not so sure that he’s really establishing the market for other pitchers. Max Fried, Corbin Burnes and the rest of the class have different backs of baseball cards, plusses and minuses that teams will have to consider before opening up their wallets.

If you are a fan whose team is so far outside looking in, this signing by the rich getting richer might be a harbinger of things to come. Obviously, teams like the Athletics, Nationals, Marlins, and the White Sox (to name but a few) aren’t willing to spend a dime and their fans will suffer through another miserable season (or three).