I said Price's was decent, because he directly played a significant role in a ring.
I'm not sure using fangraph's value numbers is the best measure. I'm okay with saying Cano has been decent, like price. The Not good so far label was partially based on Cano not leading the M's to the playoffs even once, let alone a ring.
I'm sorry, but I think Cano fell short of expectations in Seattle. He had an OPS+ of 138 in his last 5 years with NYY. It was 129 with Seattle. Plus, he got caught cheating, so that doesn't help his or your case much.
We can call it "decent, so far," and we can call Price "Decent or not so good, so far," if you like depending on what criteria you want to use. They are both pretty close, but Cano got a 10 year deal and has 5 more to go at ages 36-40. Price signed a 7 year deal and has 4 years left at ages 33-36. I'm pretty sure who ends up with a better final score... PRICE!