What would a Betts extension be?

[notin]

Human nature being what it is , it is easy to have our favorites and get attached to some of them . Being totally objective is often hard to do . But a G.M. really has to strive for total objectivity. Along with talent evaluation, it is important to success. With Mookie, I think we should try hard to keep him . It may not be as hard as you might think, because there are not many teams that can afford to go that big and are also places where he might want to go . However, as stated before, you can't go crazy . There is no sense having a mega star if he is surrounded by a group of low pay mediocrities.

 

A lot of teams handle that by backloading the money on the extension, making it easier to put an actual team around the player during his potential best seasons

 

The downside to that strategy is the player gets more expensive while declining and becomes virtually untradable in the latter years...

[moonslav59]

Human nature being what it is , it is easy to have our favorites and get attached to some of them . Being totally objective is often hard to do . But a G.M. really has to strive for total objectivity. Along with talent evaluation, it is important to success. With Mookie, I think we should try hard to keep him . It may not be as hard as you might think, because there are not many teams that can afford to go that big and are also places where he might want to go . However, as stated before, you can't go crazy . There is no sense having a mega star if he is surrounded by a group of low pay mediocrities.

 

We paid Pablo & HRam $41M this year and still won a ring.

 

$35M does not mean all you can afford are scubs.

 

Plus, if we extend now, maybe we can keep his luxury cost to $31 or 32M.

 

[moonslav59]

We paid Pablo & HRam $41M this year and still won a ring.

 

$35M does not mean all you can afford are scubs.

 

Plus, if we extend now, maybe we can keep his luxury cost to $31 or 32M.

 

 

Without Pablo & HRam we'd have been under the luxury line while paying Price $31M, JD $22M and Porcello $21M.

 

If we didn't have Pablo & HRam, we could have paid Betts $31M and not had Porcello and been under the tax line.

[oldtimer]

Without Pablo & HRam we'd have been under the luxury line while paying Price $31M, JD $22M and Porcello $21M.

 

If we didn't have Pablo & HRam, we could have paid Betts $31M and not had Porcello and been under the tax line.

 

If we didn't have Hanley, Pablo and Pedey we would have had $54 million of wiggle room and none of those contributed to our success.

[dgalehouse]

It is very hard to stay consistently on top without spending big bucks. Of course, mistakes will be made . You just have to deal with it , keep them to a minimum and don't get gun shy about spending. The owners will decide what their budgetary limits are . If , as some misguided folks want , you acquire a bunch of second rate players, you will soon become a second rate team. Red Sox Nation does not want a second rate team.

[a700hitter]

If we didn't have Hanley, Pablo and Pedey we would have had $54 million of wiggle room and none of those contributed to our success.

Hanley and Pablo were some shiny pieces of junk when they were signed. Pedey was a dollar store mistake compared to the $200 million spent on Panda and HanRam.

[moonslav59]

If we didn't have Hanley, Pablo and Pedey we would have had $54 million of wiggle room and none of those contributed to our success.

 

True, but my point was that people say we can't win by paying someone $35M. We just paid Pablo, HRam, Pedey and Price $86M last year and only saw one of them play for us. And, we won it all.

 

I realize it won't be easy, but if we reset after 2019 by losing Porcello, Bogey and maybe Sale, we can spend heavily in 2020 and build a pretty good team, and maybe by 2021 or 2022, we can be back on top.

 

We will need to drat well, when we get those higher picks. We need to strike gold with some international signings, like we did a while back. We can't make many more mistakes like Pablo, HRam or Castillo, but when you have to fill in so many roster spots with free agents, you are bound to make at least one or two.

 

2020 with an extended Betts and no Bogey, Porcello and Sale (keeping JD):

 

Price

Eovaldi

ERod

Wright

Johnson/Velazquez/DHernandez/Shawaryn

 

Feltman

Brasier

Barnes

Lakins

Poyner

(SP'er)

 

1. Betts

2. Beni

3. Devers

4. JDM

5. Bradley

6. Chavis/Dalbec

7. Pedey/Lin

8. Lin/Chatham/Hernandez

9. Vaz/Swihart

 

If we can go $39M over in 2021 after resetting after 2019, we can upgrade several of the weak positions.

 

 

 

 

 

[Kimmi]

I agree that Betts has been a great player, but my spidey sense is tingling due to the relatively small sample size. My preference is let him do it again for another two years, make a 8 year deal if it makes sense, if not, trade as a rental and goodbye.

 

Maybe I just don't get attached to players as much as some of you.

 

I get very attached to our players. I hate to see any of them go.

 

At the same time, I can't see handing out the kind of contract he will likely get.

 

With everything said, my bet is that he'll be a Red Sox for a long time.

[Kimmi]

We paid Pablo & HRam $41M this year and still won a ring.

 

$35M does not mean all you can afford are scubs.

 

Plus, if we extend now, maybe we can keep his luxury cost to $31 or 32M.

 

 

We had a lot of cost controlled players this year who were big contributors.

 

Will that be the case in a few years?

[Northern Star]

In the midst of this discourse about how much to give Betts, has anyone considered Betts might not want to stay here (very) long term?

[Station 13]

In the midst of this discourse about how much to give Betts, has anyone considered Betts might not want to stay here (very) long term?

 

Nope. never got that vibe at all. Betts loves the atmosphere here.

[Nick]

2019 soft cap after taking out player benefit is $193M. Let's make the numbers easier by saying each team can spend $200M on 25 players or $4M per man.

 

The goal is to win. That's what makes fans happy. I'm sorry but I don't care how good Trout is. I'm not going to watch him play if he's on a losing team year after year.

 

I will always watch winning Red Sox team. I will not watch losing Sox team with Betts on it.

 

If Betts eats up too much of that $200M payroll, Sox will not win.

 

Baseball is still a team sports.

Edited January 3, 2019 by Nick

[Emp9]

Our m.o. is clearly to pay huge dollars for starting pitching since we can not develop any ourselves and rely on homegrown hitters for the most part.

 

Sorta true. We certainly can't develop SP but we do trade for it. We traded for Porcello (initially), Eovaldi (initially), ERod, Sale, Wright. We bought Price. We bought DiceK. We bought Lackey. Traded for Pedro. Traded for Schilling. Right? It's been a mixed bag I think.

[Emp9]

We paid Pablo & HRam $41M this year and still won a ring.

 

$35M does not mean all you can afford are scubs.

 

Plus, if we extend now, maybe we can keep his luxury cost to $31 or 32M.

 

 

This is true.

[dgalehouse]

Sorta true. We certainly can't develop SP but we do trade for it. We traded for Porcello (initially), Eovaldi (initially), ERod, Sale, Wright. We bought Price. We bought DiceK. We bought Lackey. Traded for Pedro. Traded for Schilling. Right? It's been a mixed bag I think.

 

All in all , we've done pretty well . The results are more important than the process.

[moonslav59]

We had a lot of cost controlled players this year who were big contributors.

 

Will that be the case in a few years?

 

Not as many, and that's why I believe a cliff happens, but that does not mean we can't build a team around Betts and his $32M luxury tax hit once we reset and are able to go $39M over the limit again.

 

We will get a nice draft pick and international bonus money the year we crash while resetting. We'll still have JD and/or JBJ, Betts, Beni, Devers, Price, ERod, Vaz, Brasier, Barnes and can maybe count on 2-3 prospects to do okay in some key roles. There will be a lot of money to spend, if we say good bye to Bogey, Porcello, Sale and maybe JBJ or JD.

 

I'm hoping we can keep the cliff to one year with maybe the second year being just a wild card hopeful.

 

Through it all, I want Betts on my team and probably all the way to retirement.

 

This might not be my best position of all time, and I can certainly understand the opposing arguments, but my gut says keep this guy. (BTW, if you know me, you know my gut rules all else.)

 

Edited January 3, 2019 by moonslav59

[moonslav59]

In the midst of this discourse about how much to give Betts, has anyone considered Betts might not want to stay here (very) long term?

 

I haven't mentioned it, but I've thought about it.

 

If he says no to something like my suggested offer, then we did what we could, and we move on.

 

Maybe we keep Sale & JBJ.

[moonslav59]

2019 soft cap after taking out player benefit is $193M. Let's make the numbers easier by saying each team can spend $200M on 25 players or $4M per man.

 

The goal is to win. That's what makes fans happy. I'm sorry but I don't care how good Trout is. I'm not going to watch him play if he's on a losing team year after year.

 

I will always watch winning Red Sox team. I will not watch losing Sox team with Betts on it.

 

If Betts eats up too much of that $200M payroll, Sox will not win.

 

Baseball is still a team sports.

 

The reset will be for one year, then we can revert back to $39M over the limit, if needed.

[Bellhorn04]

Not as many, and that's why I believe a cliff happens, but that does not mean we can't build a team around Betts and his $32M luxury tax hit once we reset and are able to go $39M over the limit again.

 

We will get a nice draft pick and international bonus money the year we crash while resetting. We'll still have JD and/or JBJ, Betts, Beni, Devers, Price, ERod, Vaz, Brasier, Barnes and can maybe count on 2-3 prospects to do okay in some key roles. There will be a lot of money to spend, if we say good bye to Bogey, Porcello, Sale and maybe JBJ or JD.

 

I'm hoping we can keep the cliff to one year with maybe the second year being just a wild card hopeful.

 

Through it all, I want Betts on my team and probably all the way to retirement.

 

This might not be my best position of all time, and I can certainly understand the opposing arguments, but my gut says keep this guy. (BTW, if you know me, you know my gut rules all else.)

 

 

I'm with ya all the way on this one.

[jacksonianmarch]

Not as many, and that's why I believe a cliff happens, but that does not mean we can't build a team around Betts and his $32M luxury tax hit once we reset and are able to go $39M over the limit again.

 

We will get a nice draft pick and international bonus money the year we crash while resetting. We'll still have JD and/or JBJ, Betts, Beni, Devers, Price, ERod, Vaz, Brasier, Barnes and can maybe count on 2-3 prospects to do okay in some key roles. There will be a lot of money to spend, if we say good bye to Bogey, Porcello, Sale and maybe JBJ or JD.

 

I'm hoping we can keep the cliff to one year with maybe the second year being just a wild card hopeful.

 

Through it all, I want Betts on my team and probably all the way to retirement.

 

This might not be my best position of all time, and I can certainly understand the opposing arguments, but my gut says keep this guy. (BTW, if you know me, you know my gut rules all else.)

 

 

It all depends on what you do before the crash. The Yanks dealt off their assets at the same time that their prospects were hitting the upper levels, hence we didn't see a crash. The sox aren't gonna be in that boat since the sox prospects are way, way down and aren't really well recognized. If you run the course trying to stay competitive, then let your assets walk, your team wont have a "cliff" any more, you'll reach a nadir that will take 2-3 years to climb out of. My guess is Henry will try to prop up the team with his finances to allow his prospects to develop, thereby avoiding what was a financially disastrous basement dwelling few years. Cashman did it right. I bet Henry will have his next GM do that too

[mvp 78]

It all depends on what you do before the crash. The Yanks dealt off their assets at the same time that their prospects were hitting the upper levels, hence we didn't see a crash. The sox aren't gonna be in that boat since the sox prospects are way, way down and aren't really well recognized. If you run the course trying to stay competitive, then let your assets walk, your team wont have a "cliff" any more, you'll reach a nadir that will take 2-3 years to climb out of. My guess is Henry will try to prop up the team with his finances to allow his prospects to develop, thereby avoiding what was a financially disastrous basement dwelling few years. Cashman did it right. I bet Henry will have his next GM do that too

 

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.

[jacksonianmarch]

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.

 

We did make the playoffs in 2015 and were competitive in 13 and 14. Even after we blew it up in 2016, we were in the race until the final week. That was our nadir. We didn't go to basement dwelling like the sox did 3 of 4 years, but we weren't title contenders either. My bet is the sox end up the same

[moonslav59]

We did make the playoffs in 2015 and were competitive in 13 and 14. Even after we blew it up in 2016, we were in the race until the final week. That was our nadir. We didn't go to basement dwelling like the sox did 3 of 4 years, but we weren't title contenders either. My bet is the sox end up the same

 

I'll take a ring and 3 last place finishes in a 4 year stretch over your 4 year low point with one playoff appearance every day of the week.

[mvp 78]

We did make the playoffs in 2015 and were competitive in 13 and 14. Even after we blew it up in 2016, we were in the race until the final week. That was our nadir. We didn't go to basement dwelling like the sox did 3 of 4 years, but we weren't title contenders either. My bet is the sox end up the same

 

Flags fly forever. In NY, there are just starting to be fewer of them.

[BillyWilliams]

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.

 

They have also finished in last place several times over the last decade..........

[BillyWilliams]

Flags fly forever. In NY, there are just starting to be fewer of them.

 

That's a dumb statement, if they fly forever, how could there be fewer?

[mvp 78]

That's a dumb statement, if they fly forever, how could there be fewer?

 

As in they are becoming less frequent you dumbass. If you don't know what I meant, go back to whatever s***** defunct messageboard you came from.

[mvp 78]

They have also finished in last place several times over the last decade..........

 

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

 

It must be hard being the little brother.

[Kimmi]

Not as many, and that's why I believe a cliff happens, but that does not mean we can't build a team around Betts and his $32M luxury tax hit once we reset and are able to go $39M over the limit again.

 

We will get a nice draft pick and international bonus money the year we crash while resetting. We'll still have JD and/or JBJ, Betts, Beni, Devers, Price, ERod, Vaz, Brasier, Barnes and can maybe count on 2-3 prospects to do okay in some key roles. There will be a lot of money to spend, if we say good bye to Bogey, Porcello, Sale and maybe JBJ or JD.

 

I'm hoping we can keep the cliff to one year with maybe the second year being just a wild card hopeful.

 

Through it all, I want Betts on my team and probably all the way to retirement.

 

This might not be my best position of all time, and I can certainly understand the opposing arguments, but my gut says keep this guy. (BTW, if you know me, you know my gut rules all else.)

 

 

If we say goodbye to the players you mentioned, that is several more holes that are going to need to be filled. Again, tough to do when you're tying up $32 mil to a single player and you don't have the cost-controlled players to balance it out.

 

As several posters have said, it will be interesting to see how Dombrowski handles the next couple of off seasons.

 

I completely get why people want to keep Betts at any cost. I really, really, really want to keep him too. I just can't see paying him that kind of money to do so.

[Kimmi]

In the midst of this discourse about how much to give Betts, has anyone considered Betts might not want to stay here (very) long term?

 

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.