Mixed reports on Matt Chapman extension saga likely points to internal rift with SF Giants

A few reports came out last week conveying varying levels of involvement that Farhan Zaidi had in the Matt Chapman extension talks. With the dust now settled, it seems possible, and even likely, that there is some type of internal rift within SF Giants organization.

Mixed reports on Matt Chapman extension saga likely points to internal rift with SF Giants

If you need a refresher, Andrew Baggarly of The Athletic wrote a surprising article about how Buster Posey got heavily involved in the Chapman extension. In his report, the longtime Giants catcher and now minority owner pushed to get the deal completed.

Baggarly's article even suggests that ownership was frustrasted with how long the Chapman talks had taken up until that point. Posey stepped in to help get the deal done by negotiating a no-trade clause in Chapman's contract.

It is not uncommon for ownership to get involved with negotiations of this nature. If they are going to make that type of investment, they want to be sure that all angles are covered.

This report did not paint Zaidi's involvement in a positive light as it seemed like ownership undermined their own president of baseball operations to get the deal done. With the Giants limping to the finish line in another disappointing season, this was thought to be the last straw in Zaidi's tenure.

However, Susan Slusser and John Shea of the San Francisco Chronicle reported a much different story than what was described by The Athletic. Slusser and Shea connected with Scott Boras, who not only denied the report by The Athletic but said that he was never even interviewed for the original report.

Boras claims that he and Zaidi negotiated much of the financial package. The Giants ownership, including Posey, got involved near the end to discuss the more minute details such as no-trade clauses and charitable donations. That last detail is one of the few that aligns with The Athletic.

Boras does come off as a credible source here because he really had nothing to gain by lying. Additionally, he could have just refuted The Athletic's report but went a step further to say that he was never even contacted

In a brief blurb, Bob Nightengale of USA Today corroborated much of the same information that The San Francisco Chronicle reported. He confirms that Posey was involved, but more so to answer Chapman's questions about the direction of the organization.

That is a fair inquiry for an organization that will now miss the playoffs for the seventh time in the last eight seasons. The good news is that a deal got done.

The bad news is that there seems to be some type of internal rift in the Giants organization. When reports like this come to the surface, there is usually a reason.

Both The Athletic and The San Francisco Chronicle are reputable news outlets. Andrew Baggarly, John Shea, and Susan Slusser have all been covering baseball for decades, so when they report on something, there is plenty of credibility behind what they say.

There is a good chance that Baggarly's source is unhappy with the current state of the Giants and wants to inspire change. The discontent is understandable. The players, front office, ownership, and fans are all unhappy with the mediocre results.

The source's intent may not be known, but it certainly painted a negative picture of Zaidi. Time will tell if this is Zaidi's final week with the club. The start of the offseason or even right before it is usually a time when organizational changes are made.

For now, Zaidi remains in his role and likely played a pretty significant role in the Chapman talks. The reporting that has come out since that deal was done does suggest that he may have at least one adversary in the organization even if he remains.