What would a Betts extension be?

[Kimmi]

Hard to "crash" when you are a perennial also ran in the division. The Sox have won 2 WS since the last time the NYY even won the division.

 

Back to back to back to back. Enough said.

[Kimmi]

In the new millenium: Sox 4WS, Yanks 1 WS.

 

It must be hard being the little brother.

 

Reigning World Champions. Enough said.

[S5Dewey]

I don't think that Betts is in any hurry to leave Boston. At the same time, I get the impression that he's going to follow the money, so there is no sense of 'loyalty', or whatever you want to call it, holding him here. If the Red Sox give him the deal that he wants, he'll stay.

 

And as much as I hate to say it, that's the way it should be in this is the age of "Money Talks".

 

I'm very conflicted on this topic. On the one hand I think Scott Bora$$ is one of the worst things that ever happened to baseball fans (of which I'm one). I believe he bears more responsibility than anyone else for the escalation of salaries and the portability of players. OTOH, he's one of the best things to happen to the players as he's making sure they get their share of the pie - and it appears that it's a really big pie! Since I believe in labor unions I support the players getting the share they deserve. Conflicted.

On the third hand, I also believe that the owners are swimming in cash (our cash) so it's hard to work up any sympathy for them.

 

 

I used to be a fan who wanted players to take less money to stay in their home city. Now after seeing how the FO uses a lower salary as a tool to trade a player and fans make disparaging comments about a player who gets injured after taking a HTD i've changed my mind. I still dislike the long term affects of Bora$$'$ success but I stand behind the players.

[Bellhorn04]

I don't think that Betts is in any hurry to leave Boston. At the same time, I get the impression that he's going to follow the money, so there is no sense of 'loyalty', or whatever you want to call it, holding him here. If the Red Sox give him the deal that he wants, he'll stay.

 

He has said that he's very interested in what Machado and Harper get. Maybe after they sign he'll be ready to seriously negotiate an extension that works for everyone. Kind of a Pollyanna take, I know, but it's possible.

[dgalehouse]

He has said that he's very interested in what Machado and Harper get. Maybe after they sign he'll be ready to seriously negotiate an extension that works for everyone. Kind of a Pollyanna take, I know, but it's possible.

 

I think we can say without doubt that Mookie is a more desirable asset than Harper or Machado. He will get more than they will . Maybe quite a bit more .Trout is the only comparable future free agent. Assuming the Yanks get Machado and the Dodgers get Harper , the Sox would certainly be the front runners for Mookie. I don't see any other team having a realistic shot.

[moonslav59]

Reigning World Champions. Enough said.

 

It's a wonderful feeling, isn't it.

 

What makes it more precious is the fact that we've won 4 rings 15 years, after I went 34 years of agony and frustration.

 

Thank, Theo, Ben & DD (and even Dan D for laying a nice foundation for Theo).

[Northern Star]

It's a wonderful feeling, isn't it.

 

What makes it more precious is the fact that we've won 4 rings 15 years, after I went 34 years of agony and frustration.

 

Thank, Theo, Ben & DD (and even Dan D for laying a nice foundation for Theo).

 

Although the Sox drought was long, it has nothing on the Cubs' one. It's generations of their fans that I feel sorry for.

[Northern Star]

So, what you're saying is.... thanks, Ben?

[moonslav59]

Although the Sox drought was long, it has nothing on the Cubs' one. It's generations of their fans that I feel sorry for.

 

They got their ring.

 

No more sympathy~

[notin]

Although the Sox drought was long, it has nothing on the Cubs' one. It's generations of their fans that I feel sorry for.

 

What about the White Sox fans? Their drought (1917-2005) was longer than the Red Sox but no one ever talked about it or acknowledged it at all...

[cp176]

What about the White Sox fans? Their drought (1917-2005) was longer than the Red Sox but no one ever talked about it or acknowledged it at all...

 

Louie A. and Nellie F. - two of my all time favorite players growing up.

[sk7326]

And as much as I hate to say it, that's the way it should be in this is the age of "Money Talks".

 

I'm very conflicted on this topic. On the one hand I think Scott Bora$$ is one of the worst things that ever happened to baseball fans (of which I'm one). I believe he bears more responsibility than anyone else for the escalation of salaries and the portability of players. OTOH, he's one of the best things to happen to the players as he's making sure they get their share of the pie - and it appears that it's a really big pie! Since I believe in labor unions I support the players getting the share they deserve. Conflicted.

On the third hand, I also believe that the owners are swimming in cash (our cash) so it's hard to work up any sympathy for them.

 

 

I used to be a fan who wanted players to take less money to stay in their home city. Now after seeing how the FO uses a lower salary as a tool to trade a player and fans make disparaging comments about a player who gets injured after taking a HTD i've changed my mind. I still dislike the long term affects of Bora$$'$ success but I stand behind the players.

 

The biggest reason for the escalation of salaries is the escalation of revenue. The players became portable once the sport and the union recognized that they have the same right to switch companies that every other person has. The owners are swimming in cash, as you said. The Yankees are spending barely a third of their revenue on player salaries. To the Red Sox credit, they are spending more. They can absorb it - but they are spending a lot.

[notin]

And as much as I hate to say it, that's the way it should be in this is the age of "Money Talks".

 

I'm very conflicted on this topic. On the one hand I think Scott Bora$$ is one of the worst things that ever happened to baseball fans (of which I'm one). I believe he bears more responsibility than anyone else for the escalation of salaries and the portability of players. OTOH, he's one of the best things to happen to the players as he's making sure they get their share of the pie - and it appears that it's a really big pie! Since I believe in labor unions I support the players getting the share they deserve. Conflicted.

On the third hand, I also believe that the owners are swimming in cash (our cash) so it's hard to work up any sympathy for them.

 

 

I used to be a fan who wanted players to take less money to stay in their home city. Now after seeing how the FO uses a lower salary as a tool to trade a player and fans make disparaging comments about a player who gets injured after taking a HTD i've changed my mind. I still dislike the long term affects of Bora$$'$ success but I stand behind the players.

 

 

Boras doesn’t do anything the players don’t want. His tactics for getting players as much money as possible are so well-known that even we as fans are aware of them. Consequently any player choosing him as their representative is boldly stating to the world he desires that type of service and eventual outcome.

 

Boras works for his clients, not the other way around. He isn’t the problem with baseball. He’s 66 years old, has a net worth of roughly $400milll and may retire any day now. And when he does, some other agent will fill the void he creates. After all, that’s what the players want....

[mvp 78]

Boras doesn’t do anything the players don’t want. His tactics for getting players as much money as possible are so well-known that even we as fans are aware of them. Consequently any player choosing him as their representative is boldly stating to the world he desires that type of service and eventual outcome.

 

Boras works for his clients, not the other way around. He isn’t the problem with baseball. He’s 66 years old, has a net worth of roughly $400milll and may retire any day now. And when he does, some other agent will fill the void he creates. After all, that’s what the players want....

 

For real tho. He's not the bogeyman people make him out to be.

[sk7326]

Big part of appeal about Betts is his athleticism to go along with his baseball skills.

 

I seriously doubt in 7 years, he'll be making the same type of running catches nor running the bases with abandonment as he's doing now. His power will certainly decline. He is NOT going to repeat last year's performance year after year.

 

I would agree Betts is worth $35M per year if he repeats last year's numbers for next ten years. I just don't think he can do it.

 

In 7 years he is probably Andrew McCutchen now - a guy who has to "play a corner" (instead of now where Betts happens to play a corner because the CF is excellent) but still gets on base more than enough to be a good player, if not an MVP level one.

[sk7326]

For real tho. He's not the bogeyman people make him out to be.

 

If it were me and my career, I'd want him. Remember, part of Boras' job is to welcome the hatred - so his clients don't have to take it.

[sk7326]

Regarding the Betts extension. If you take his projected 2019 arb value of $18.7M and let's just say $25M for 2020 (his arb value was $10.8M for 2018 so this seems fair) and add $40M/$42M for two free agent years (used fangraphs estimation tool for a 5 WAR player) , that comes to a total of $125M for 4 years. If you apply some sort of discount rate (like 5%), that comes out to $115 PV. So perhaps a "opt-out period" of 4/120 works, (27.8, 29.2, 30.7, 32.2) which gets more "value" in his hands earlier while saving the Red Sox money (and tax) later.

 

In this baseball economy you have to look at, say the 4 years after that at something like $40+ per year. So let's say 4/180 or something. So a total extension of 8 years 300 million makes sense. There is some room to go higher, but that is what you are looking at imo, more or less.

[S5Dewey]

The biggest reason for the escalation of salaries is the escalation of revenue. The players became portable once the sport and the union recognized that they have the same right to switch companies that every other person has. The owners are swimming in cash, as you said. The Yankees are spending barely a third of their revenue on player salaries. To the Red Sox credit, they are spending more. They can absorb it - but they are spending a lot.

 

I'd find it very interesting to see a breakdown of where a team's revenue goes. There's so much more than player's salaries involved in running a team. Scouting, property taxes, trainers, deals with minor league teams, advertising, paying for charter flights & hotel rooms for players. (Just that would run into money at Motel 6! ) and who knows how many hundred more things... just buying baseballs! Everything costs money.

 

But there's huge revenue there too. When you go to a game you see thousands of people in the "Team Store" spending $100+ and paying $3.50 for a bottle of water after they've paid $76 for their ticket. Then $8.50 for a beer that I can get locally for $2.50 on a weekday afternoon.

 

Again, it would be interesting to see an itemized balance sheet written so I could understand it.

[sk7326]

I'd find it very interesting to see a breakdown of where a team's revenue goes. There's so much more than player's salaries involved in running a team. Scouting, property taxes, trainers, deals with minor league teams, advertising, paying for charter flights & hotel rooms for players. (Just that would run into money at Motel 6! ) and who knows how many hundred more things... just buying baseballs! Everything costs money.

 

But there's huge revenue there too. When you go to a game you see thousands of people in the "Team Store" spending $100+ and paying $3.50 for a bottle of water after they've paid $76 for their ticket. Then $8.50 for a beer that I can get locally for $2.50 on a weekday afternoon.

 

Again, it would be interesting to see an itemized balance sheet written so I could understand it.

 

the largest items on the expense ledger are player expenses and stadium debt (which the Yankees have). But the industry in general is much much richer than fans think.

[Kimmi]

And as much as I hate to say it, that's the way it should be in this is the age of "Money Talks".

 

I'm very conflicted on this topic. On the one hand I think Scott Bora$$ is one of the worst things that ever happened to baseball fans (of which I'm one). I believe he bears more responsibility than anyone else for the escalation of salaries and the portability of players. OTOH, he's one of the best things to happen to the players as he's making sure they get their share of the pie - and it appears that it's a really big pie! Since I believe in labor unions I support the players getting the share they deserve. Conflicted.

On the third hand, I also believe that the owners are swimming in cash (our cash) so it's hard to work up any sympathy for them.

 

 

I used to be a fan who wanted players to take less money to stay in their home city. Now after seeing how the FO uses a lower salary as a tool to trade a player and fans make disparaging comments about a player who gets injured after taking a HTD i've changed my mind. I still dislike the long term affects of Bora$$'$ success but I stand behind the players.

 

I get the idea that people don't want the owners pocketing the money, and they'd rather see it going to the players. With Henry, I feel like he spends more than an ample amount on payroll, so that hasn't been an issue for me. Ideally, he throw some of that money back to the fans in the way of cheaper tickets, but I know that's not happening.

 

I just keep hoping for those players who aren't all about the money. I understand that Mookie (or any player) has the right for to go for the most money. I just find it disheartening.

[Kimmi]

He has said that he's very interested in what Machado and Harper get. Maybe after they sign he'll be ready to seriously negotiate an extension that works for everyone. Kind of a Pollyanna take, I know, but it's possible.

 

I don't know if he'll sign an extension before reaching free agency or not, but I do think he'll remain with the Red Sox one way or the other.

 

Dombrowski will have to get creative with the front loading and opt outs.

[Kimmi]

It's a wonderful feeling, isn't it.

 

What makes it more precious is the fact that we've won 4 rings 15 years, after I went 34 years of agony and frustration.

 

Thank, Theo, Ben & DD (and even Dan D for laying a nice foundation for Theo).

 

Amen to all of that Moon.

 

Let's win another WS in 2019 and put the icing on the cake!

[Sandman1956]

Big part of appeal about Betts is his athleticism to go along with his baseball skills.

 

I seriously doubt in 7 years, he'll be making the same type of running catches nor running the bases with abandonment as he's doing now. His power will certainly decline. He is NOT going to repeat last year's performance year after year.

 

I would agree Betts is worth $35M per year if he repeats last year's numbers for next ten years. I just don't think he can do it.

 

While it is unlikely that Mookie can repeat his numbers from last year, there are players who have repeated seemingly unrepeatable numbers year after year. Babe Ruth, Greg Maddux, and a player I like to compare to Mookie, Willie Mays. Mookie has quick hand, speed, and most of all a love of the game that the fans can see and feel. I don't think it would be smart to lock him up for 10 years at 35 mill a year, but locking him up for seven years at a high number would not be amiss.

[Sandman1956]

I just keep hoping for those players who aren't all about the money. I understand that Mookie (or any player) has the right for to go for the most money. I just find it disheartening.

 

I agree. This is what I loved about Jason Varitek, Big Papi and a few others who took less money than they could have made in free agency to stay with the Sox. I respect it when players from other teams eschew money from Boston or (especially) New York to stay with their teams. Unfortunately, there are three things getting in the way of this happening. First, big money lasts a long time. If you invest it wisely it can take a family through multiple generations of comfortable living, nice vacations, private schools, etc. and the bigger the money, the longer the impact. Second, there is the unspoken desire of these players to win the competition to be the best paid. Third, there are Scott Boras and the others of his ilk who care more about making money for themselves and making a name for themselves than they care about the state of baseball or of the fans' pocketbooks. To me, the first two reasons are excusable. The final one angers me to no end.

[Northern Star]

I get the idea that people don't want the owners pocketing the money, and they'd rather see it going to the players. With Henry, I feel like he spends more than an ample amount on payroll, so that hasn't been an issue for me. Ideally, he throw some of that money back to the fans in the way of cheaper tickets, but I know that's not happening.

 

I just keep hoping for those players who aren't all about the money. I understand that Mookie (or any player) has the right for to go for the most money. I just find it disheartening.

 

I understand the hatred of the reserve clause, but I wonder if players today recognize how fortunate they are to make this kind of money. I think for some, it warps their perception (Gary Sheffield asking what the Dodgers ever did for him). I can't blame them for wanting the most they can get, even though at some point the numbers are academic, as they have more than enough for them and any children to be set for life. But the name of the game in our society is make as much money as possible, the one with the biggest pile of cash when they pop off wins.

 

I wonder how many of today's players even know their history, and what the reserve clause was.

[S5Dewey]

I agree. This is what I loved about Jason Varitek, Big Papi and a few others who took less money than they could have made in free agency to stay with the Sox. I respect it when players from other teams eschew money from Boston or (especially) New York to stay with their teams. Unfortunately, there are three things getting in the way of this happening. First, big money lasts a long time. If you invest it wisely it can take a family through multiple generations of comfortable living, nice vacations, private schools, etc. and the bigger the money, the longer the impact. Second, there is the unspoken desire of these players to win the competition to be the best paid. Third, there are Scott Boras and the others of his ilk who care more about making money for themselves and making a name for themselves than they care about the state of baseball or of the fans' pocketbooks. To me, the first two reasons are excusable. The final one angers me to no end.

 

Well put, Sand. I wish I'd said that. ^^

[Bellhorn04]

I agree. This is what I loved about Jason Varitek, Big Papi and a few others who took less money than they could have made in free agency to stay with the Sox.

 

I'm not sure that applies to Varitek. It's my recollection that Boras was his agent and was looking for a laughably big deal because of Jason's reputation as the great game-caller, but no one was interested and he ended up returning to the Sox on a humblingly small deal.

[Kimmi]

I agree. This is what I loved about Jason Varitek, Big Papi and a few others who took less money than they could have made in free agency to stay with the Sox. I respect it when players from other teams eschew money from Boston or (especially) New York to stay with their teams. Unfortunately, there are three things getting in the way of this happening. First, big money lasts a long time. If you invest it wisely it can take a family through multiple generations of comfortable living, nice vacations, private schools, etc. and the bigger the money, the longer the impact. Second, there is the unspoken desire of these players to win the competition to be the best paid. Third, there are Scott Boras and the others of his ilk who care more about making money for themselves and making a name for themselves than they care about the state of baseball or of the fans' pocketbooks. To me, the first two reasons are excusable. The final one angers me to no end.

 

I love it when a player leaves money on the table to play for a team that they really love.

 

I understand the reasons you've stated for why this doesn't happen more often. I'm guessing the players union also really frowns upon players taking discounts. I always wonder, however, what can you do with $250 mil that you can't do with $220 mil? IMO, the player's ego plays a big part in going after the most money.

[S5Dewey]

I'm not sure that applies to Varitek. It's my recollection that Boras was his agent and was looking for a laughably big deal because of Jason's reputation as the great game-caller, but no one was interested and he ended up returning to the Sox on a humblingly small deal.

 

IIRC the Sox had already offered 'Tek a fairly reasonable contract and he turned it down (I assume) on the advice of his agent Bora$$. And you're right, after 'Tek found out that there wasn't as much interest in him as Bora$$ had implied 'Tek went crawling back to the Sox for a much lower salary.

 

This was the final straw for me regarding Bora$$. That's when I realized his motive. An agent's share of, say, $10MM is 5x more than his share of $2MM, and if it doesn't work out for a player like Varitek, so what? He's got plenty of other players. slime.

[Kimmi]

I understand the hatred of the reserve clause, but I wonder if players today recognize how fortunate they are to make this kind of money. I think for some, it warps their perception (Gary Sheffield asking what the Dodgers ever did for him). I can't blame them for wanting the most they can get, even though at some point the numbers are academic, as they have more than enough for them and any children to be set for life. But the name of the game in our society is make as much money as possible, the one with the biggest pile of cash when they pop off wins.

 

I wonder how many of today's players even know their history, and what the reserve clause was.

 

Agree. As I just posted, what's an extra $30 mil when you already have hundreds of millions? I think it's an ego thing.