A Realistic View at 2020: Part I

[jacksonianmarch]

As Boston Globe columnist Alex Speier wrote on Friday:

 

https://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/redsox/2019/11/15/takeaway-from-meetings-red-sox-are-open-anything/l6guLESkDmy5ZA0vIENt3K/story.html?outputType=amp&__twitter_impression=true

 

Exactly. Teams are willing to spend the farm if they can negotiate with a player about an extension. Betts has already said he isn’t interested

[jacksonianmarch]

I also wonder if the Sox are better off waiting into the season. The Dodgers gave up so much for Machado because Seager went down. That caused them to “have” to win the Machado bidding. Maybe the Sox hold onto him and if they’re contending, bonus. If not, wait for a team like MILWAUKEE should Yelich go down again or LA should Bellinger go down or another contending squad should a Star OFer go down. Imagine the horror. The Sox aren’t in the PO picture and Judge goes down. Could you imagine seeing Betts in a Yankee uniform?

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

I know a lot of guys here like Fangraphs -- there's a lengthy article by Ben Clemens titled "The Red Sox Shouldn't Trade Mookie Betts", with a lot of reply posts. The writer uses WAR to quantify why it is such a bad idea; here's his conclusion: "Trading Betts, even if the cold hard surplus value math balances, doesn’t make sense. The Red Sox should stick to their guns and try to spike a World Series in 2020, then figure out what to do in 2021 later."

 

As for ex-Red Sox in pinstripes, I'm used to it. Most were If-you-can't-beat-em, join-em decisions, but besides Sparky Lyle, all I can recall were past-their-primers: Boggs, Clemens (I know he won a puffed-up Cy, but got torched by Boston in '99 & '03 LCS), Damon, Ellsbury (we knew neither could throw), and Tiant -- though that one hurt the most.

 

But if Betts becomes a Yankee -- in his prime -- that would be a back-breaker for Boston, a likely point-of-no-return for many fans, from which the brand may never recover. Because that would mean that he stays in the Northeast and it really was all about just the money... and that the Sox let him get away (it certainly won't be in a trade for NY's worst infield glove and worst outfield glove, as suggested in the Globe, in a proposal that would be laughable if it wasn't so vomit-inducing).

Edited November 16, 2019 by 5GoldGloves:OF,75

[harmony]

I know a lot of guys here like Fangraphs -- there's a lengthy article by Ben Clemens titled "The Red Sox Shouldn't Trade Mookie Betts", with a lot of reply posts. The writer uses WAR to quantify why it is such a bad idea; here's his conclusion: "Trading Betts, even if the cold hard surplus value math balances, doesn’t make sense. The Red Sox should stick to their guns and try to spike a World Series in 2020, then figure out what to do in 2021 later."

 

As for ex-Red Sox in pinstripes, I'm used to it. Most were If-you-can't-beat-em, join-em decisions, but besides Sparky Lyle, all I can recall were past-their-primers: Boggs, Clemens (I know he won a puffed-up Cy, but got torched by Boston in '99 & '03 LCS), Damon, Ellsbury (we knew neither could throw), and Tiant -- though that one hurt the most.

 

But if Betts becomes a Yankee -- in his prime -- that would be a back-breaker for Boston, a likely point-of-no-return for many fans, from which the brand may never recover. Because that would mean that he stays in the Northeast and it really was all about just the money... and that the Sox let him get away (it certainly won't be in a trade for NY's worst infield glove and worst outfield glove, as suggested in the Globe, in a proposal that would be laughable if it wasn't so vomit-inducing).

https://blogs.fangraphs.com/the-red-sox-shouldnt-trade-mookie-betts/

[moonslav59]

I could see these type of deals maybe happening:

 

Betts + Price or Eovaldi for scraps, then Bloom working his magic with lower cost signings and trades.

 

Betts for a $10-13M cost decent player (to lessen the financial hit on the accepting team) plus better prospects due to less money cost of the deal.

 

Betts for very good but far away prospects, then Bloom flips them for under-the-radar ML players.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

I could see these type of deals maybe happening:

 

Betts + Price or Eovaldi for scraps, then Bloom working his magic with lower cost signings and trades.

 

Betts for a $10-13M cost decent player (to lessen the financial hit on the accepting team) plus better prospects due to less money cost of the deal.

 

Betts for very good but far away prospects, then Bloom flips them for under-the-radar ML players.

 

I don't think you'll take this personally, because you said you "could see" such scenarios maybe happening -- but weren't advocating any of them. They are all possible, but I'd say improbable -- and not because any wouldn't necessarily work going forward. I just don't think a trade of Mookie Betts that is anything but an immediate lateral move -- bringing back equal or better value that looks obvious to the average fan -- will be acceptable and not met with total uproar by Red Sox Nation.

 

I know these types of considerations may not have been issues in Bloom's past or even in his character as an MLB executive, but they absolutely have to be now, in his new market.

Edited November 16, 2019 by 5GoldGloves:OF,75

[moonslav59]

I don't think you'll take this personally, because you said you "could see" such scenarios maybe happening -- but weren't advocating any of them. They are all possible, but I'd say improbable -- and not because any wouldn't necessarily work going forward. I just don't think a trade of Mookie Betts that is anything but an immediate lateral move -- bringing back equal or better value that looks obvious to the average fan -- will be acceptable and not met with total uproar by Red Sox Nation.

 

I know these types of considerations may not have been issues in Bloom's past or even in his character as an MLB executive, but they absolutely have to be now, in his new market.

 

I think most of Red Sox nation was disgusted by 2019 and knows our pitchers are high injury risks and not likely to lead us to a ring in 2020. I may be wrong, and I don't live in New England anymore, but Sox fans aren't dumb, in general. Most might be fine with 2020 being viewed as a rebuild year, as long as they feel we'll be back in contention by 2021 or 2022.

 

BTW, any trade of Betts that I would go along with would have to be for a decent return. To me, it doesn't have to be ML ready studs in return, as long as Bloom shows an over plan that gets us back to the top within 1-2 years. Also, I have said many times, if I trade Betts, I'm still going all out to re-sign him in 2021. To me, that would be the best of both worlds. Get something very good for him and then bring him back. (If we lose out on the bidding, let Bloom take the $30+M and spend on multiple lower cost bargain signings.)

[notin]

I know a lot of guys here like Fangraphs -- there's a lengthy article by Ben Clemens titled "The Red Sox Shouldn't Trade Mookie Betts", with a lot of reply posts. The writer uses WAR to quantify why it is such a bad idea; here's his conclusion: "Trading Betts, even if the cold hard surplus value math balances, doesn’t make sense. The Red Sox should stick to their guns and try to spike a World Series in 2020, then figure out what to do in 2021 later."

 

As for ex-Red Sox in pinstripes, I'm used to it. Most were If-you-can't-beat-em, join-em decisions, but besides Sparky Lyle, all I can recall were past-their-primers: Boggs, Clemens (I know he won a puffed-up Cy, but got torched by Boston in '99 & '03 LCS), Damon, Ellsbury (we knew neither could throw), and Tiant -- though that one hurt the most.

 

But if Betts becomes a Yankee -- in his prime -- that would be a back-breaker for Boston, a likely point-of-no-return for many fans, from which the brand may never recover. Because that would mean that he stays in the Northeast and it really was all about just the money... and that the Sox let him get away (it certainly won't be in a trade for NY's worst infield glove and worst outfield glove, as suggested in the Globe, in a proposal that would be laughable if it wasn't so vomit-inducing).

 

 

That’s just a stupid statement by whoever wrote it. The Sox have survived worse.

 

Not to mention, if the Yankees sign Betts when he comes a free agent, it’s not like the Sox could stop it...

[moonslav59]

That’s just a stupid statement by whoever wrote it. The Sox have survived worse.

 

Not to mention, if the Yankees sign Betts when he comes a free agent, it’s not like the Sox could stop it...

 

...and it's not like we get Betts back or nothing at all. The $33M a year for Betts can get us some other very nice FAs.

[oldtimer]

I think most of Red Sox nation was disgusted by 2019 and knows our pitchers are high injury risks and not likely to lead us to a ring in 2020. I may be wrong, and I don't live in New England anymore, but Sox fans aren't dumb, in general. Most might be fine with 2020 being viewed as a rebuild year, as long as they feel we'll be back in contention by 2021 or 2022.

 

BTW, any trade of Betts that I would go along with would have to be for a decent return. To me, it doesn't have to be ML ready studs in return, as long as Bloom shows an over plan that gets us back to the top within 1-2 years. Also, I have said many times, if I trade Betts, I'm still going all out to re-sign him in 2021. To me, that would be the best of both worlds. Get something very good for him and then bring him back. (If we lose out on the bidding, let Bloom take the $30+M and spend on multiple lower cost bargain signings.)

 

Like many of the posters and fans here, I think I know the playbook for 2020 and feel certain that Bloom knows it, only better than we. Clearly he can trade away or otherwise get rid of some of our lower price contracts, but in reality he does have to shoot for a higher cost player. That list is fairly small and hopefully he finds a way to rid us of at least one of our higher risk and high cost starting pitchers. Possibly he has to add someone we would rather keep to make that happen.

 

My approach is to let Bloom do his job and comment when his moves are announced.

[moonslav59]

Like many of the posters and fans here, I think I know the playbook for 2020 and feel certain that Bloom knows it, only better than we. Clearly he can trade away or otherwise get rid of some of our lower price contracts, but in reality he does have to shoot for a higher cost player. That list is fairly small and hopefully he finds a way to rid us of at least one of our higher risk and high cost starting pitchers. Possibly he has to add someone we would rather keep to make that happen.

 

My approach is to let Bloom do his job and comment when his moves are announced.

 

I think Bloom will not decide on trading Betts until July.

 

He will trade JBJ and non tender Leon & Hembree. He may try to trade Price or Eovaldi to get a little wiggle room to fill some gaps and see wharer we stand in July. At that point, he'll choose to shoot for one more ring or start a sell-off.

 

Just my opinion as we wait and see what Bloom will end up doing.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

That’s just a stupid statement by whoever wrote it. The Sox have survived worse.

 

Not to mention, if the Yankees sign Betts when he comes a free agent, it’s not like the Sox could stop it...

 

I wrote the stupid statement, and it's based on my perceptions after reading around 400 posts by mostly Sox fans in their reactions to two columns in the Globe last week -- Saughnessey's "Mookie is overrated" and Abraham's proposed Betts-Yankee trade -- plus, the posts on the Fangraphs article. But I don't dismiss opinions here, either.

 

Another Red Sox player going over to the dark side might not be the end of the world -- it's not like blowing the pennant in extra-innings of Game Seven in the ALCS in NY -- but it will certainly make the world less fun... unless you're a frustrated Yankee fan or FOX, salivating to replay more endless clips of Ruth/Dent/Boone and Buckner, with another Mookie haunting New England.

Edited November 17, 2019 by 5GoldGloves:OF,75
typo

[S5Dewey]

That’s just a stupid statement by whoever wrote it. The Sox have survived worse.

 

Not to mention, if the Yankees sign Betts when he comes a free agent, it’s not like the Sox could stop it...

 

...Which would be more acceptable than trading him to the Yankees - for anyone. UGH!

[illinoisredsox]

I wrote the stupid statement, and it's based on my perceptions after reading around 400 posts by mostly Sox fans in their reactions to two columns in the Globe last week -- Saughnessey's "Mookie is overrated" and Abraham's proposed Betts-Yankee trade -- plus, the posts on the Fangraphs article. But I don't dismiss opinions here, either.

 

Another Red Sox player going over to the dark side might not be the end of the world -- it's not like blowing the pennant in extra-innings of Game Seven in the ALCS in NY -- but it will certainly make the world less fun... unless you're a frustrated Yankee fan or FOX, salivating to replay more endless clips of Ruth/Dent/Boone and Buckner, with another Mookie haunting New England.

 

Your mistake was reading anything by Shaughnessy. He defines Spiro Agnew’s nattering nabob of negativism. I really think he is incapable of writing a positive word about anything.

[S5Dewey]

...and it's not like we get Betts back or nothing at all. The $33M a year for Betts can get us some other very nice FAs.

 

This is what I keep thinking about now. I KNOW Mookie is an outstanding baseball player, maybe the best player in the game not named Trout, but he's still only one player who comes to bat only once through the rotation and probably makes 4-5 plays a game, nearly all of them routine ones.

 

How much is that really worth? When one thinks about what a team could sign for $30M either in a pitcher or in quality defensive players or a combination of those? That's still a lot of money even in today's market.

[Elktonnick]

Your mistake was reading anything by Shaughnessy. He defines Spiro Agnew’s nattering nabob of negativism. I really think he is incapable of writing a positive word about anything.

 

Shaughnessy basically called the DD firing well before anyone else published anything. He wrote Francona's book. It is obvious he has excellent sources inside the clubhouse. Like him or hate him no one should dismiss what he writes out of hand.

[notin]

Shaughnessy basically called the DD firing well before anyone else published anything. He wrote Francona's book. It is obvious he has excellent sources inside the clubhouse. Like him or hate him no one should dismiss what he writes out of hand.

 

 

No doubt Shaughnessy has unimpeachable sources. But it’s definitely true he puts a pessimistic spin on everything as he has for decades...

[Larry Cook]

No doubt Shaughnessy has unimpeachable sources. But it’s definitely true he puts a pessimistic spin on everything as he has for decades...

 

Could any part of his negative spin be attributable to growing up in an era when the Sox just continually found ways to lose?

[Bellhorn04]

How much is that really worth? When one thinks about what a team could sign for $30M either in a pitcher or in quality defensive players or a combination of those? That's still a lot of money even in today's market.

 

Sure, $30 million is a lot of money if you spend it wisely - and luckily.

 

It could get you a Max Scherzer.

 

Or it could get you a Pablo/Ellsbury-type albatross or two.

[notin]

Could any part of his negative spin be attributable to growing up in an era when the Sox just continually found ways to lose?

 

 

No. If that’s the reason, then he never grew up...

[notin]

This is what I keep thinking about now. I KNOW Mookie is an outstanding baseball player, maybe the best player in the game not named Trout, but he's still only one player who comes to bat only once through the rotation and probably makes 4-5 plays a game, nearly all of them routine ones.

 

How much is that really worth? When one thinks about what a team could sign for $30M either in a pitcher or in quality defensive players or a combination of those? That's still a lot of money even in today's market.

 

The last pitcher the Sox signed for $30mill didn’t work out so well.

 

If Betts doesn’t sign with Boston, cross his name off the check and pen in “Rafael Devers”...

[Bellhorn04]

The last pitcher the Sox signed for $30mill didn’t work out so well.

 

The Price signing has been iffy, and yet there have been far worse signings, crazy as that is.

[moonslav59]

The Price signing has been iffy, and yet there have been far worse signings, crazy as that is.

 

I remember some posters saying we'd be screwed if he opted out.

[Bellhorn04]

I remember some posters saying we'd be screwed if he opted out.

 

I think that might be a bit of an overstatement. I think 700hitter probably did a few eye rolls when people said they were hoping he'd opt out.

[notin]

I think that might be a bit of an overstatement. I think 700hitter probably did a few eye rolls when people said they were hoping he'd opt out.

 

Like me?

[Bellhorn04]

Like me?

 

Yes like you. I think you may have used more colorful terms than 'hoping', too.

[jacksonianmarch]

Even Price’s deal landed significant value. He was being paid for last performance, but he still performed well enough to belong in the top 3 of a rotation.

 

The last very long term deal for an elite talent that really backfired was Pujols. Even Teixeira provided positive WAR. Pujols fell off the planet almost immediately, although his fall was likely more due to shifting than anything else

[notin]

Yes like you. I think you may have used more colorful terms than 'hoping', too.

 

No. Once he spent 2017 basically out of action, I suggested the only possible reason he would opt out was he simply wanted out of Boston, a scenario I considered very unlikely. I was told repeatedly he was not opting out, which was the same thing I said, but still told so rather aggressively...

[moonslav59]

I think that might be a bit of an overstatement. I think 700hitter probably did a few eye rolls when people said they were hoping he'd opt out.

 

Yes, it was an overstatement.

 

700's point was this: if he opts out, it will be because he is pitching great, and we'd lose by losing a great pitcher, which makes sense, but I still hoped he'd opt out even if he had stayed healthy and pitched great due to his age and liklihood of decline and our ability to use his $30M wisely.

[notin]

Yes, it was an overstatement.

 

700's point was this: if he opts out, it will be because he is pitching great, and we'd lose by losing a great pitcher, which makes sense, but I still hoped he'd opt out even if he had stayed healthy and pitched great due to his age and liklihood of decline and our ability to use his $30M wisely.

 

We all knew if he was great for 3 years he would opt out. But once he got injured that second year, the chances of his opting out plummeted drastically...