A Realistic View at 2020: Part I

[Elktonnick]

Meh. Kiermeier would have hit it 20’ further.....and then sprint out to CF while the ball was in the air and robbed his own homerun....

 

The point is that JBJ is NOT the best defensive CF currently playing. His defense although at times spectacular can be replaced at a reasonable cost. So there are options other than JBJ for Boston.

[notin]

The only real disadvantage for the Sox in resetting after 2020 and then re-signing Betts is the free agent market beyond Mookie right now actually looks fairly weak. This has pluses and minuses.

 

The big minus is that any team looking to drop some serious coin won;t find anything in the way of alternatives. The flip side to that is, those same teams obviously won't have a $20mill player coming off the books, so we won't know who has available budget, and a lot of them have their own internal star players to worry about, such as the Dodgers. (Sign Mookie or extend Bellinger?) That is, unless Giancarlo Stanton opts out of his Yankee contract, which would be a move his agent will be screaming at him not to do. Much like Price, I don't think Stanton is going to find a comparable offer from the non-Yankee teams out there. I doubt anyone else will top the 7 year / $218mill he will still have left on that deal (which could also turn onto an 8 year / $233mill deal if his option gets exercised). The remianing years for Stanton are the higher paid ones on thta contract.

 

Now I do expect JD Martinez to be more likely to opt out, a his last 2 years are the lower paid ones on his deal. But he might find staying to be the better move, since his last bout with free agency didn't play out the way it was supposed to in the public story (which might have been nothing but a marketing ploy by Boras).

 

So that leaves only George Springer as a consolation prize, and likely a considerably cheaper one than Betts as Springer is 3 years older and not nearly as good. Or the Sox and the other suitors will have to wait another year for Kris Bryant...

[notin]

The point is that JBJ is NOT the best defensive CF currently playing. His defense although at times spectacular can be replaced at a reasonable cost. So there are options other than JBJ for Boston.

 

And even if you only get 90% of JBJ out there, is it really so bad? We did win a title with Johnny Damon in CF at one point, and compared to JBJ, it really was like leaving CF vacant for a season. We are talking about a CF who once used the LF as a cutoff man...

[Elktonnick]

I think the Celtics had 3 different owner groups during their glory years, so I guess none qualify?

 

Brown was the sole owner until his death. Henry's accomplishments although outstanding pale in comparison to what Walter Brown did for Boston Sports which include six world titles, being the original owner of the Celtics, co founding the NBA and literally saving the Boston Bruins. Like I said he is in BOTH the hockey and basketball halls of fame as well as having made the Boston Marathon one of the world's premier sporting events. Henry may be one of the best current owners in professional sports but his accomplishments for New England by any objective analysis don't measure up to Walter Brown's, at least not yet.

[moonslav59]

The only real disadvantage for the Sox in resetting after 2020 and then re-signing Betts is the free agent market beyond Mookie right now actually looks fairly weak. This has pluses and minuses.

 

The big minus is that any team looking to drop some serious coin won;t find anything in the way of alternatives. The flip side to that is, those same teams obviously won't have a $20mill player coming off the books, so we won't know who has available budget, and a lot of them have their own internal star players to worry about, such as the Dodgers. (Sign Mookie or extend Bellinger?) That is, unless Giancarlo Stanton opts out of his Yankee contract, which would be a move his agent will be screaming at him not to do. Much like Price, I don't think Stanton is going to find a comparable offer from the non-Yankee teams out there. I doubt anyone else will top the 7 year / $218mill he will still have left on that deal (which could also turn onto an 8 year / $233mill deal if his option gets exercised). The remianing years for Stanton are the higher paid ones on thta contract.

 

Now I do expect JD Martinez to be more likely to opt out, a his last 2 years are the lower paid ones on his deal. But he might find staying to be the better move, since his last bout with free agency didn't play out the way it was supposed to in the public story (which might have been nothing but a marketing ploy by Boras).

 

So that leaves only George Springer as a consolation prize, and likely a considerably cheaper one than Betts as Springer is 3 years older and not nearly as good. Or the Sox and the other suitors will have to wait another year for Kris Bryant...

 

I've been pushing for trying to make the rebuild last just one year (reset after this year and be back 2021), but it is likely we will need at least one more year.

 

As much as I hate to say it, maybe 2022 is the earliest we can reasonably expect to be back near the top- assuming a reset is in the works.

 

I hope we can keep Betts and be back by 2021 or 2022, but it just may not work out.

[notin]

I've been pushing for trying to make the rebuild last just one year (reset after this year and be back 2021), but it is likely we will need at least one more year.

 

As much as I hate to say it, maybe 2022 is the earliest we can reasonably expect to be back near the top- assuming a reset is in the works.

 

I hope we can keep Betts and be back by 2021 or 2022, but it just may not work out.

 

 

I am thinking of more of a Reload than a Rebuild. To me, "rebuilding" is a really nice way of telling your fans "we aren't spending any money, so keep those expectations low."

 

The White Sox have been in a rebuild fo a while, and the expectations have been low, but the White Sox are actually a fairly smart organization. I go to their games plenty of times because, well, you should see how cheap the Sunday ticket prices are. An "expensive" ticket sometimes costs all of $7. That's like the price of a fast food value meal. And for the cheaper, "less interesting" games - $4 per ticket. These are not typos.

 

This means on some Sundays, I can take my entire family to a White Sox game and spend less on tickets than I would if I were to go by myself to watch the Schaumburg Boomers or the Joliet Slammers. (These are baseball teams.)

 

But if the Sox rebuild, will they be so generous to their fans? How do you get people to go?

[moonslav59]

I am thinking of more of a Reload than a Rebuild. To me, "rebuilding" is a really nice way of telling your fans "we aren't spending any money, so keep those expectations low."

 

The White Sox have been in a rebuild fo a while, and the expectations have been low, but the White Sox are actually a fairly smart organization. I go to their games plenty of times because, well, you should see how cheap the Sunday ticket prices are. An "expensive" ticket sometimes costs all of $7. That's like the price of a fast food value meal. And for the cheaper, "less interesting" games - $4 per ticket. These are not typos.

 

This means on some Sundays, I can take my entire family to a White Sox game and spend less on tickets than I would if I were to go by myself to watch the Schaumburg Boomers or the Joliet Slammers. (These are baseball teams.)

 

But if the Sox rebuild, will they be so generous to their fans? How do you get people to go?

 

Call it what you want, but even if resetting, we'll still be near or over $200M and a top 6 or 7 spender, so we should never be the worst team, like The Astros were for a while.

 

I'm not sure how having the 10th to 20th draft pick and a little more international pool money will help to improve the farm, but any significant step forward there could help our extended future.

 

If we reset after 2019 and spend up to but below the max line in 2021, we should have a nice team for the fans to watch.

 

"Highly competitive" might be another issue, especially if we guess wrong on our signings and extension.

[jacksonianmarch]

Being willing to spend typically lessens the blow, but willingness to spend and ALREADY spending big money are two different things. It isn’t like Henry is able to provide a clean slate here. He’s got over $500 million dollars in future commitments when you consider Pedroia, Eovaldi, JD, Bogaerts, Sale, and Price. And the only one that looks like plus value is Bogaerts’ deal. The Astros were down for many years because they refused to spend to speed up the process and what it allowed them was a considerably larger window with the ability to use their finances to secure their players long term or bring in guys with big contracts to stay on top. That will crash down eventually, but they refused to fully raid their farm which allowed them to keep guys like Alvarez, Tucker and Whitley who are their next wave. The Sox are in a pickle. They need to decide if they should spend and give the gang another chance or sell off some pieces and have an aging roster of high priced players on a bad team.

[kenmeister]

Price, Sale, and Eovaldi really do need to provide significant ROI over the next few years for us to compete, I agree.

[Bellhorn04]

Brown was the sole owner until his death. Henry's accomplishments although outstanding pale in comparison to what Walter Brown did for Boston Sports which include six world titles, being the original owner of the Celtics, co founding the NBA and literally saving the Boston Bruins. Like I said he is in BOTH the hockey and basketball halls of fame as well as having made the Boston Marathon one of the world's premier sporting events. Henry may be one of the best current owners in professional sports but his accomplishments for New England by any objective analysis don't measure up to Walter Brown's, at least not yet.

 

It's an apples and oranges comparison no doubt.

 

If you're a Red Sox fan it has to be Henry. He took over a team that had not won a title since 1918 - arguably the most famous drought in sports - and not only delivered that long-awaited title but now 4 of them.

[dgalehouse]

I am thinking of more of a Reload than a Rebuild. To me, "rebuilding" is a really nice way of telling your fans "we aren't spending any money, so keep those expectations low."

 

The White Sox have been in a rebuild fo a while, and the expectations have been low, but the White Sox are actually a fairly smart organization. I go to their games plenty of times because, well, you should see how cheap the Sunday ticket prices are. An "expensive" ticket sometimes costs all of $7. That's like the price of a fast food value meal. And for the cheaper, "less interesting" games - $4 per ticket. These are not typos.

 

This means on some Sundays, I can take my entire family to a White Sox game and spend less on tickets than I would if I were to go by myself to watch the Schaumburg Boomers or the Joliet Slammers. (These are baseball teams.)

 

But if the Sox rebuild, will they be so generous to their fans? How do you get people to go?

 

Stop being such a small time Charlie . Spend a buck . Take your family to a Cubs day game at Wrigley . They will have a lot more fun .

[notin]

Stop being such a small time Charlie . Spend a buck . Take your family to a Cubs day game at Wrigley . They will have a lot more fun .

 

Done that. Trips to Wrigley are a comparative nightmare.

 

First of all, while it isn't cheap, at least Guaranteed Rate has parking lots. The train ride in can be fun, but getting back is a lot easier driving if my daughter is all worn out and can't stay awake. We'd all rather she not sleep on a train.

 

And GRF is less crowded, and the concession and rest rooms are less packed (and the rest rooms have been updated since 1912).

 

And Cubs fans have been crazy the last few years. A few years ago they put in the new scoreboard, which blocked some of the rooftop bleachers across the street. There was all kinds of lawsuits from the rooftop owners, apparently angry and complaining they could no longer steal gate money from the Cubs. One game I was in RF foul territory facing the scoreboard sitting next to my daughter, who was maybe 8 or 9 at the time. As she was reading the scoreboard for pitches and velocities, I could see on the rooftop across the street underneath it. In giant letters, someone had painted "BITE ME" so large it could be read by someone sitting in the RF foul seats several hundred yards away. I spent the whole game hoping my daughter wouldn't drop her eyes down just enough to notice it...

[moonslav59]

Brown was the sole owner until his death. Henry's accomplishments although outstanding pale in comparison to what Walter Brown did for Boston Sports which include six world titles, being the original owner of the Celtics, co founding the NBA and literally saving the Boston Bruins. Like I said he is in BOTH the hockey and basketball halls of fame as well as having made the Boston Marathon one of the world's premier sporting events. Henry may be one of the best current owners in professional sports but his accomplishments for New England by any objective analysis don't measure up to Walter Brown's, at least not yet.

 

Thanks for the info.

 

I'm not a Celtics fan, so I knew little about their ownership history before the 70's.

[Elktonnick]

It's an apples and oranges comparison no doubt.

 

If you're a Red Sox fan it has to be Henry. He took over a team that had not won a title since 1918 - arguably the most famous drought in sports - and not only delivered that long-awaited title but now 4 of them.

 

The following statement was made: "John Henry is the greatest owner in New England sports history and its not even close." So it wasn't just confined to baseball. Most Native New Englanders are fans of teams other than the Red Sox as well. The original statement was pertinent to the entire scope of New England Sports history. While John Henry did end the baseball drought the New England Sports landscape is much broader and richer than just baseball. The man who did more than anyone else to ensure that broad rich landscape was Walter Brown. Simply put neither the Boston Bruins nor the Boston Celtics would exist at least not in Boston if it hadn't been for Walter A. Brown and Boston and all of New England would be a lot less interesting to local sports fans.

[Slasher9]

perhaps...but in New England...

Baseball >>>>>>>>>Football/Hockey/Basketball > Soccer/shooting animals

[moonslav59]

The Bleacher Report had these updated farm system rankings after the deadline trades:

 

Only winning teams listed:

 

2. Tampa (2 top 25 and 6 top 100)

3. AZ (5 top 100)

4 ATL (2 top 25 and 5 top 100)

5. MN (2 top 25 and 5 top 100)

8. LAD (2 top 25 and 4 top 100)

 

14. SFG (1 top 25 and 3 top 50)

15. PHI (1 top 25 and 2 top 100)

16. CLE (3 top 100)

17. Oak (1 top 25 and 3 top 100)

 

20. NYY (3 top 100)

22. NYM (2 top 100)

23. STL (2 top 50)

25. HOU (2 top 50)

26. WSH (1 top 25 and 2 top 100)

28. Cubs (1 top 100)

29. MIL (1 top 100)

30. BOS (0 top 100 and only 2 "tier 2's- Casas & Mata)

Note: the Rays have 3 tier 2's beyond their 6 in the top 100! The D-backs have 3, too.

 

9 in the top 17

7 in the bottom 11

 

You can win and have a strong farm. Theo and DD have among the worst 3 farms in MLB.

Edited August 29, 2019 by moonslav59

[notin]

The Bleacher Report had these updated farm system rankings after the deadline trades:

 

Only winning teams listed:

 

2. Tampa (2 top 25 and 6 top 100)

3. AZ (5 top 100)

4 ATL (2 top 25 and 5 top 100)

5. MN (2 top 25 and 5 top 100)

8. LAD (2 top 25 and 4 top 100)

 

14. SFG (1 top 25 and 3 top 50)

15. PHI (1 top 25 and 2 top 100)

16. CLE (3 top 100)

17. Oak (1 top 25 and 3 top 100)

 

20. NYY (3 top 100)

22. NYM (2 top 100)

23. STL (2 top 50)

25. HOU (2 top 50)

26. WSH (1 top 25 and 2 top 100)

28. Cubs (1 top 100)

29. MIL (1 top 100)

30. BOS (0 top 100 and only 2 "tier 2's- Casas & Mata)

 

At least we didn't go down.

 

Hopefully the Sox have some Jeff McNeil types who struggle in the PCL but somehow can excel at hitting Major League pitching...

[moonslav59]

At least we didn't go down.

 

Hopefully the Sox have some Jeff McNeil types who struggle in the PCL but somehow can excel at hitting Major League pitching...

 

It's good to see the Yanks heading to the bottom tier.

[Slasher9]

also...there was nothing in sports...nothing....like 2004 boston red sox winning the world series.

https://www.si.com/mlb/2014/10/30/si-60-sportsmen-year-boston-red-sox

 

thank you John Henry. the greatest owner in ALL of sports in ALL the world.

[Bellhorn04]

The Bleacher Report had these updated farm system rankings after the deadline trades:

 

Only winning teams listed:

 

2. Tampa (2 top 25 and 6 top 100)

3. AZ (5 top 100)

4 ATL (2 top 25 and 5 top 100)

5. MN (2 top 25 and 5 top 100)

8. LAD (2 top 25 and 4 top 100)

 

You can win and have a strong farm. Theo and DD have among the worst 3 farms in MLB.

 

However, I would point out that those top 5 teams have a combined total of 1 championship this century.

[S5Dewey]

And even if you only get 90% of JBJ out there, is it really so bad? We did win a title with Johnny Damon in CF at one point, and compared to JBJ, it really was like leaving CF vacant for a season. We are talking about a CF who once used the LF as a cutoff man...

 

This is what I was referring to in an earlier post, that someone would come up with a bizarre situation where a team won the WS with a second-rate CF'er. Are you suggesting had the Sox had the 2004 version of Johnny Damon in CF they'd have won the WS last year? Or to put it a different way, gun to your head, would you rather have 2004 Damon or JBJ running down balls in CF?

[S5Dewey]

The Bleacher Report had these updated farm system rankings after the deadline trades:

 

 

30. BOS (0 top 100 and only 2 "tier 2's- Casas & Mata)

 

You can win and have a strong farm. Theo and DD have among the worst 3 farms in MLB.

 

This is exactly why I don't think Mookie is going to be in Boston in 2021 and why I think JBJ will be. Mookie will leave because he won't want any part of this rebuild that's occurring with no talent in the system to draw from, and since the Sox need JBJ more than he needs them he'll get a raise in pay in 2021 and stay.

[S5Dewey]

First, thank you for your thoughtful response.

 

I have resigned myself to the idea that Mookie isn't coming through that door in 2021. If you were a championship-type player, someone you build a team around, would you want to come back to a team that's obviously in the start of a rebuild, but with a decimated farm? I sure wouldn't. Trust me. After you've been on a winning team losing becomes not an option if you can control it. I'd be wiling to settle for a few million dollars less over the life of the contract to play for a winner. (And I know that "a few million dollars' is still a lot of money but it's not as much when you have 300 of them piled up anyway). So I don't see him coming back. In fact, IMO he'd be stupid if he does come back.

 

Although I see the Sox as entering a "rebuild mode" very soon, I do not think it will be a long drawn out rebuild- like the Astros. Henry has shown he is willing to spend, and I think once we reset, we will be back to near the top in player budget spending the next year. That is a huge draw to any free agent or player looking to see where he may want to spend the next 7-10 years.

 

Also, if we end up losing Betts, I don't think Henry will pocket the $30+M and say, "Oh well, that sucked!" He will spend it elsewhere.

 

So then we have JBJ, who can be signed for a whole lot less to anchor that outfield. I don't expect to see anyone throwing $300M, $200M, or even $100M his way unless it's a lifetime contract - and the Sox would be stupid to offer anyone not named Mookie (or maybe Devers) a lifetime contract.

 

Okay, so what is preventing us from signing JBJ after trading or non tendering him? Or, what is preventing us from signing someone similar to JBJ or maybe even better on defense going forward to the next 2-5 years?

 

Like DD, I like defense! I believe that defense is as important to winning games as is offense and I believe our pitching staff would tell you the same thing. Like DD, I also believe in the old adage (if 'old adages' haven't been outdated in this time of metrics) of being Solid Up The Middle. Our up-the-middle defense is weak enough as it is with Bogaerts and a PTBNL in the infield. [sidebar disclaimer: IMO Bogaerts offensive capability outweighs his defensive shortcomings so I'm not advocating moving him but that doesn't make him any better defensively].

 

I still don't know why another, much cheaper great defensive CF'er wouldn't make the staff and us happy.

 

Getting back to SUTM now, I've always believed that a winning team should be solid defensively at C, 2b, SS, & CF and accept any offensive shortcomings at those positions to be that way. I've also believed that if a team has to have defensive weaknesses it should be at the corner positions. I don't particularly like having defensive weaknesses anywhere but if a team has an offensive player like XBo in an UTM position they can afford a weakness at a corner position.

 

I totally agree.

 

In a nutshell, if the Sox are going into a rebuild mode I believe they should take the longer view and keep the best players they can afford to keep in the long run and not be so focused on the next year that they let one (or more) of those players get away. I also believe that one in the hand is worth two in the bush. We KNOW we can sign JBJ to another season and then deal with signing him (or not) for 2021 depending on what the 2021 team looks like. I'd rather do that and accept the salary consequences than risk our outfield defense in 2021 & beyond by losing both JBJ for 2020 & Mookie in 2021 in two years. I DO NOT want to see this team turn into Baltimore or Toronto for the sake of a 'rebuild'.

 

Would you be okay, if we signed or traded for a CF'er who was equal or better to JBJ, or maybe very slightly worse but much younger?

 

And BTW, I also haven't given up on the future of the team that takes the field now. Our only weakness is starting pitching and it's entirely possible that we, for some reason, hit The Perfect Storm of bad pitching this year. The thing that concerns me most is the situation with Sale, which, in spite of what I read here, hasn't been resolved yet and won't be until they can do more diagnostic work on his elbow. But even if Sale goes down in 2020 I still keep JBJ and try to sign him for 2021 and beyond.

 

Our pen is a weakness, too. Beyond on the field, our farm and budget are our biggest issues.

 

I love what Henry has done for the Sox, but I think he is going to want to reset after 2020 or 2021. If we choose 2021, Betts is 99.9% gone. If we choose 2020, he may be 50-50, but only if JBJ is gone and replaced by a more than capable CF'er.

Phew!

 

Yes, and thanks again for the reply.

 

Let me know, if there are any current CF'er in MLB you'd be okay with instead of JBJ.

 

Sure, there are several current CF'ers in MLB whom I could see out there instead of JBJ. Pillar, Keirmeier, and some of those guys Notin mentioned earlier. I haven't seen them play but I'd defer to Notin's judgement if he has seen them. The problem is, they're not on the Boston Red Sox, and a secondary problem is that the team that 'owns' them probably isn't going to get rid of them.

 

While, yes, JBJ is my favorite current Red Sox player at the same time the Red Sox are my favorite team and that takes precedence over any one player. To me this still comes down to what Mookie does and we're probably not going to know what's going to happen with him until after next season.

 

I think (HOPE!) we can agree that Fenway is an unusual park due in part to the outfield dimensions. I also think & hope we can agree that CF & RF each need to be manned by someone better than an average outfielder. There's been chatter about Billy Hamilton, and his defense could probably replicate JBJ or Mookie. Now we come to question #2: If we non-tender JBJ and then Mookie walks we're now in the market for TWO outfielders of Hamilton's quality.

 

This is still probably the best outfield in baseball. Do we really want to screw it up completely by letting 2/3 of it get away when we could only let 1/3 of it go?

 

I'll say it again. Let JBJ go to arbitration if necessary but keep him in the fold. Then if Mookie walks we can attempt to extend him - and there's always a better chance of extending someone than of signing him. If Mookie stays, THEN look for this CF whiz-kid who's going to make us forget all about JBJ.

 

And certainly if Mookie gets traded in the off season we're going to NEED JBJ out there to maintain 2/3 of that outfield, because JBJ can cover some of that ground that Mookie's replacement most likely won't be covering.

 

Sorry, but I don't understand why people aren't crawling all over this idea. It's called "Insurance". Insurance against Mookie's leaving.

[notin]

This is exactly why I don't think Mookie is going to be in Boston in 2021 and why I think JBJ will be. Mookie will leave because he won't want any part of this rebuild that's occurring with no talent in the system to draw from, and since the Sox need JBJ more than he needs them he'll get a raise in pay in 2021 and stay.

 

I don't think the Sox can afford a prolonged rebuild. They have too many high-priced contracts as it is. And with Bogaerts, Devers, Benintendi and Vazquez all with the team for the next 3 years, they do have a solid foundation. All they need with Mookie is to decide to pay him. And despite his "off year," Betts is all but irreplaceable. If you think Bradley's Gold glove defense and .730 OPS is going to be tough to replace, what about Mookie's Gold Glove defense and .900 OPS?

 

I also don't think the Sox need Bradley more than he needs them. Not sure where that is coming from. The only differences between Bradley and Kevin Pillar are 30 points in OPS and $3mill in salary. And Pillar was acquired for a failed former top prospect and a career borderline middle reliever. Replacing Bradley with a cheaper version is one of the few types of players they can afford.

 

The Sox might keep Bradley, but it actually doesn't make much sense if they want to reset and try to sign Mookie. Betts is a generational talent and potential Hall of Famer. Bradley is a glove-first ninth spot hitter with the occasional hot streak. You don't build around the latter...

[moonslav59]

This is exactly why I don't think Mookie is going to be in Boston in 2021 and why I think JBJ will be. Mookie will leave because he won't want any part of this rebuild that's occurring with no talent in the system to draw from, and since the Sox need JBJ more than he needs them he'll get a raise in pay in 2021 and stay.

 

If we lose Betts, IMO, it won't matter who else we keep. JBJ won't make a difference as we will be in rebuild mode, unless we've already reset after this year and use Betts' money to get 2-3 decent players, and they all work out.

[moonslav59]

Sure, there are several current CF'ers in MLB whom I could see out there instead of JBJ. Pillar, Keirmeier, and some of those guys Notin mentioned earlier. I haven't seen them play but I'd defer to Notin's judgement if he has seen them. The problem is, they're not on the Boston Red Sox, and a secondary problem is that the team that 'owns' them probably isn't going to get rid of them.

 

While, yes, JBJ is my favorite current Red Sox player at the same time the Red Sox are my favorite team and that takes precedence over any one player. To me this still comes down to what Mookie does and we're probably not going to know what's going to happen with him until after next season.

 

I think (HOPE!) we can agree that Fenway is an unusual park due in part to the outfield dimensions. I also think & hope we can agree that CF & RF each need to be manned by someone better than an average outfielder. There's been chatter about Billy Hamilton, and his defense could probably replicate JBJ or Mookie. Now we come to question #2: If we non-tender JBJ and then Mookie walks we're now in the market for TWO outfielders of Hamilton's quality.

 

This is still probably the best outfield in baseball. Do we really want to screw it up completely by letting 2/3 of it get away when we could only let 1/3 of it go?

 

I'll say it again. Let JBJ go to arbitration if necessary but keep him in the fold. Then if Mookie walks we can attempt to extend him - and there's always a better chance of extending someone than of signing him. If Mookie stays, THEN look for this CF whiz-kid who's going to make us forget all about JBJ.

 

And certainly if Mookie gets traded in the off season we're going to NEED JBJ out there to maintain 2/3 of that outfield, because JBJ can cover some of that ground that Mookie's replacement most likely won't be covering.

 

Sorry, but I don't understand why people aren't crawling all over this idea. It's called "Insurance". Insurance against Mookie's leaving.

 

JBJ is my favorite player, too.

 

But no matter how much you try, I just don't see paying JBJ $3-5M more than he's worth in hopes that we can extend him, if Betts leaves.

 

I want a solid CF-RF defense no matter which way we go.

[Bellhorn04]

If we lose Betts, IMO, it won't matter who else we keep. JBJ won't make a difference as we will be in rebuild mode, unless we've already reset after this year and use Betts' money to get 2-3 decent players, and they all work out.

 

Losing Betts doesn't necessarily mean rebuild mode. After all, it would free up a lot of money to spend elsewhere.

[notin]

Sure, there are several current CF'ers in MLB whom I could see out there instead of JBJ. Pillar, Keirmeier, and some of those guys Notin mentioned earlier. I haven't seen them play but I'd defer to Notin's judgement if he has seen them. The problem is, they're not on the Boston Red Sox, and a secondary problem is that the team that 'owns' them probably isn't going to get rid of them.

 

You're probably right when it comes to Cain, Buxton, and Kiermeier. Thy're not going anywhere. Billy Hamilton? Uninspiring hitter, but easy to get. Currently he is on the Braves' bench awaiting pinch runner duty. As they are loaded in the OF, he is unlikely to play much defense, but he certainly is good out there. Pillar was acquired for peanuts by the Giants. He makes about $3mill less than Bradley and has one fianl arb year left. The contract-laden Giants might look for any chance to drop payroll, and their price for him was Derek Law and Alen Henson. That would be like to Sox giving up Hembree and Tzu-Wei Lin. Lagares and Maybin will be free agents. There will be options.

 

While, yes, JBJ is my favorite current Red Sox player at the same time the Red Sox are my favorite team and that takes precedence over any one player. To me this still comes down to what Mookie does and we're probably not going to know what's going to happen with him until after next season.

 

I think (HOPE!) we can agree that Fenway is an unusual park due in part to the outfield dimensions. I also think & hope we can agree that CF & RF each need to be manned by someone better than an average outfielder. There's been chatter about Billy Hamilton, and his defense could probably replicate JBJ or Mookie. Now we come to question #2: If we non-tender JBJ and then Mookie walks we're now in the market for TWO outfielders of Hamilton's quality.

 

Whether or not JBJ is anyone's favorite player, the bottom line is Mookie is irreplaceable. I can nominate CFs to replace JBJ, and at the very least, people will argue, with some agreeing and some disagreeing. I can't think of a RF where we can have that same type of argument with Betts. There just isn't anyone. So if the Sox need to keep either player, the choice at which one you try to keep is obvious to me. Bradley is probably th safer answr, as he should be much easier. Although it's not like he has been all over taking an extension, either. And his agent isn't known for hometown discounts.

 

This is still probably the best outfield in baseball. Do we really want to screw it up completely by letting 2/3 of it get away when we could only let 1/3 of it go?

 

Yeah it feels like dealing Lynn to California in some ways.

 

But even if the Sox tender Bradley, his agent is Scott Boras. So if you tender him and guarantee Betts leaves, all you're doing is increasing the odds that both leave after 2020 anyway.

 

I'll say it again. Let JBJ go to arbitration if necessary but keep him in the fold. Then if Mookie walks we can attempt to extend him - and there's always a better chance of extending someone than of signing him. If Mookie stays, THEN look for this CF whiz-kid who's going to make us forget all about JBJ.

 

And certainly if Mookie gets traded in the off season we're going to NEED JBJ out there to maintain 2/3 of that outfield, because JBJ can cover some of that ground that Mookie's replacement most likely won't be covering.

 

Sorry, but I don't understand why people aren't crawling all over this idea. It's called "Insurance". Insurance against Mookie's leaving.

 

 

The biggest reason is the Luxury Tax. Say Bradley gets his $10-12mill. That doesn't mean he costs the Sox $10-12 mill. Depending on final payroll, that could be as high as $14.5mill to $16.8mill. My thoughts were that Bradley just isn't a $10-12mill player. Do you think he is a $15-17mill player? That's what Henry would be paying. If the Sox bring back Betts and Bradley, the amount the Sox pay Bradley plus his luxury tax hit could be nearly 70% of what Sox actually pay Betts. (Assuming $25mill for Betts here.) That's not insurance; that's a drastically disproportionate pricing scheme.

 

Bradley does make baseball sense. He's a good player. But the financial impact does matter, too. A lot of these decisions have to transcend baseball quite often. It is a business after all...

[dgalehouse]

I have to laugh at the owners being scared off by the self imposed " luxury " tax . All these guys know is luxury. The owner of the downtrodden Kansas City Royals is looking to sell the team for One Billion . Far , far more than he paid for it . These guys are raking it in . One can only imagine the money John Henry takes in from the Red Sox , Fenway Park and NESN .

[moonslav59]

Losing Betts doesn't necessarily mean rebuild mode. After all, it would free up a lot of money to spend elsewhere.

 

Yes, I've said that before, but I just don't see JBJ as insurance to losing Betts.