Mookie and Andrew Mcutchen .....

[illinoisredsox]

I love comparisons like this. So what idiot left Boggs in the minors for so long?

 

My guess is they were looking for a little more power out of a corner infielder; Boggs only hit 9 homers in 6 minor league seasons and until his last year in AAA, there weren't a lot of doubles either (71 total through his first 5 minor league seasons). His last year at AAA, he hit 41.

 

Boggs was a late bloomer. He was a 7th round pick, so it's not like he had star written all over him out of high school. Some guys take longer to figure it out; maybe he just had to mature physically.

 

He was an anomaly in that he hit better in the majors than he did in the minors (although he did hit pretty well for average there as well), When he first came up (1982), he played as much 1B as he did 3B; the Sox had Carney Lansford at 3rd and all he had done was win the batting title his first year with Boston in 1981 (and he still hit .301 in 1982).

Edited November 12, 2019 by illinoisredsox

[Slasher9]

It was the only aspect of his career you mentioned. So why do you suspect PEDs so strongly?

 

body type, era he played in, teammates, company he kept.

we love to look at bonds rookie picture and then his picture later in his career after he "bulked up". why not take a look at rickey?

also, rickey says "rickey does what rickey wants".

[moonslav59]

I love comparisons like this. So what idiot left Boggs in the minors for so long?

 

The company line, "He was blocked" by Carney Lansford- same way Bagwell was blocked. (Novel idea: move Bags to 1B.)

 

In the team's defense, Boggs was one of those rare birds who did much better in MLB than he did in the minors:

He spent 6 years in the minors (counting 57 games in 1976 NYPL). Can you imagine Boggs on the 1978 team?

 

He was under .800 in A-/A ball (174 games).

He was .784 in AA (222 gms)

He was .834 in AAA (266 games)

.798 in all the minors combined (662 gms & 2680 PAs)

 

He ended his ML career with a .858 OPS.

 

He had a .906 OPS from 1982 to 1991 (10 years).

 

He was still a respectable .778 from 1992-1997 (ages 34-41)!

[kenmeister]

Carney Lansford, right. I remember now.

 

Interesting stats there about he did better in the majors than the minors.

[illinoisredsox]

The company line, "He was blocked" by Carney Lansford- same way Bagwell was blocked. (Novel idea: move Bags to 1B.)

 

In the team's defense, Boggs was one of those rare birds who did much better in MLB than he did in the minors:

He spent 6 years in the minors (counting 57 games in 1976 NYPL). Can you imagine Boggs on the 1978 team?

 

He was under .800 in A-/A ball (174 games).

He was .784 in AA (222 gms)

He was .834 in AAA (266 games)

.798 in all the minors combined (662 gms & 2680 PAs)

 

He ended his ML career with a .858 OPS.

 

He had a .906 OPS from 1982 to 1991 (10 years).

 

He was still a respectable .778 from 1992-1997 (ages 34-41)!

 

Boggs would not have done much to help the 1978 team. He was 20, spent the year at AA and although he hit .311. his slugging was only .370. He apparently wasn't that good in the field at that point either; he had 61 appearances in the field spread out among 3B, SS, 2B and the OF and must have DH'd/PH the other 48 games he played in.

 

He really didn't start showing flashes of the hitter he became in the majors until 1981.

[notin]

body type, era he played in, teammates, company he kept.

we love to look at bonds rookie picture and then his picture later in his career after he "bulked up". why not take a look at rickey?

also, rickey says "rickey does what rickey wants".

 

None of that really says anything.

 

Even when those pictures of McGwire from his rookie year of 1989 and then his 1999 picture were juxtaposed with each other really wasnt proof. A lot can happen in a full 10 years.

 

There are reasons to be suspicious, maybe. But that's the best there is, and the random circumstantial accusations of steroid abuse get legs quickly and have had very negative effects on the legacies of some innocent players...

[moonslav59]

Boggs would not have done much to help the 1978 team. He was 20, spent the year at AA and although he hit .311. his slugging was only .370. He apparently wasn't that good in the field at that point either; he had 61 appearances in the field spread out among 3B, SS, 2B and the OF and must have DH'd/PH the other 48 games he played in.

 

He really didn't start showing flashes of the hitter he became in the majors until 1981.

 

Yes, I was kind of thinking of the mid 80's Boggs playing in '78- kind of unrealistic, I know.

 

It's like saying, "Imagine if we had the 1967 Yaz in 1975 or 2019.

[Kimmi]

My point was more directed at fans who would give $240M/6 but let him walk over $320M/10. If none are out there, I apologize for creating a strawman.

 

I have said that I'd prefer a contract with a higher AAV for fewer years, but I'm not willing to pay him $40 mil a year.

 

That said, if I were willing to give him $240M/6, I think it's still a fairly large jump from that to $300M/10 as far as the overall money goes and especially the number of years. In other words, I can understand someone who would give the $240M/6 but not the $320M/10.

[Kimmi]

An MLB.com writer proposed some rather underwhelming trade proposals of Betts to the Mets: Nimmo and Matz? Diaz and Smith? What, you want someone with star potential... how about McNeil -- but we'd need Betts and Eovaldi.

 

Pass, pass, pass. He finally came up with a one-for-one: Betts for Thor.

 

That's getting warmer, but still not worth it to me for one of the game's top five players (plus, isn't there some kind of new GM rule advising against ever trading an All-Star position player for a pitcher straight up?). Syndergaard is good, but is coming off a season where he led the NL in earned runs allowed. As I've said from the beginning of the offseason, I wouldn't consider moving Mookie unless I was overpaid... McNeil and Thor?

 

Bloom and the Sox are smart enough to listen to all offers, but also to wait them all out unless an overwhelming, publically-perceived win looks guaranteed.

 

The early word out of the GM meetings is that teams are not willing to give up much in terms of prospects for Mookie when they also have to pay his huge salary.

 

I'm thinking more and more that the Sox are going to keep Mookie this year, and if necessary, wait until next year to reset.

[moonslav59]

I have said that I'd prefer a contract with a higher AAV for fewer years, but I'm not willing to pay him $40 mil a year.

 

That said, if I were willing to give him $240M/6, I think it's still a fairly large jump from that to $300M/10 as far as the overall money goes and especially the number of years. In other words, I can understand someone who would give the $240M/6 but not the $320M/10.

 

The $300M/10 counts as just $30M against the tax. The $240M counts as $42M. That 412M could be used to sign a nice FA. Of course, the last 4 years would be $30M vs $0.

 

IMO, contract costs will keep rising, the next player contract with MLB will help the players make more, so I think the $60M/4 difference could be okay, even if Betts hits .780 the last 4 years combined.

[redsoxrules]

Well, Rickey did steal 535 bases after age 30. That total alone would be ranked 31st on the All Time list.

 

But more important, after age 30, Henderson still had a career OBP of .403 and an OPS of .811...

 

Yeah and how much did he have prior to age 30? He declined. Betts is hardly a 30 base steal guy so imagine how poorly that will look after 30

[redsoxrules]

And also, a 811 OPS sucks if you're paying the guy a record contract

[moonslav59]

And also, a 811 OPS sucks if you're paying the guy a record contract

 

The .403 OBP part of that .811 makes it better, but it's not all that great, yes.

[notin]

Yeah and how much did he have prior to age 30? He declined. Betts is hardly a 30 base steal guy so imagine how poorly that will look after 30

 

Yes Rickey did decline as he got older But it was expected since he was one of the greatest offensive players in MLB history.

 

Everyone declines as they age. Betts will too. But that doesn’t mean he is going to be a non-contributing player. Just like Rickey wasn’t...

[moonslav59]

Yes Rickey did decline as he got older But it was expected since he was one of the greatest offensive players in MLB history.

 

Everyone declines as they age. Betts will too. But that doesn’t mean he is going to be a non-contributing player. Just like Rickey wasn’t...

 

The other part of the equation is about him producing more than he's earning for the first 5-6 years of the suggested 10 year deal. In theory, if he over-produces by $40M and then under-produces by $30M the last 4-5 years, he'd still have been an overall plus.

 

BTW, Rickey had an .870 OPS from age 26-35 and an .861 from age 27 to 36.

 

Betts has better power, and power ages better, but even if he declines like Rickey did, he'd be worth a 10 year deal.

Edited November 13, 2019 by moonslav59

[notin]

The other part of the equation is about him producing more than he's earning for the first 5-6 years of the suggested 10 year deal. In theory, if he over-produces by $40M and then under-produces by $30M the last 4-5 years, he'd still have been an overall plus.

 

BTW, Rickey had an .870 OPS from age 26-35 and an .861 from age 27 to 36.

 

Betts has better power, and power ages better, but even if he declines like Rickey did, he'd be worth a 10 year deal.

 

I think the logic behind any long deal is a team is paying for the production of the early years. I don’t think the Reds and Tigers expect Votto and Cabrera to be contributors earning their salary at age 40. I think that’s the logic behind the backloading of long term deals we used to see all the time. Pay the player less when he’s good so the team can afford a better supporting cast.

 

Deals like ARod (first deal with Texas) and Manny Ramirez - where the player was good for the entire span of the long term deal - are incredibly rare...

[moonslav59]

I think the logic behind any long deal is a team is paying for the production of the early years. I don’t think the Reds and Tigers expect Votto and Cabrera to be contributors earning their salary at age 40. I think that’s the logic behind the backloading of long term deals we used to see all the time. Pay the player less when he’s good so the team can afford a better supporting cast.

 

Deals like ARod (first deal with Texas) and Manny Ramirez - where the player was good for the entire span of the long term deal - are incredibly rare...

 

Yes, and those two deals started at relatively young ages- like Betts's would.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

I just did a study using baseball-ref of players and OPS since Jackie Robinson broke the color barrier, from 1947-2019. Through age 26, Mookie Betts has a career OPS of .893. In over 70 years since JR, only 20 players with a minimum 3,000 plate appearances have had a higher OPS through age 26. Eight of those 20 made the Hall of Fame -- Mantle, Mays, Vlad, F.Robinson, Griffey, Aaron, Mathews and Rice -- with three more sure to follow: Pujols, Cabrera and Trout. So Mookie has had a great start to his career, where over 50% of the peers above him forged paths to Cooperstown.

 

But that's not predictive of greatness going forward, in an industry constantly debating the value of the next ten years. Betts will play his age 27 season in 2020, then become a free agent, so I looked again at OPS from '47-'19, this time for players ages 27-37: a total of 47 players exceeded an average OPS of .893, including 22 Hall of Famers. This is encouraging, as the number of ballplayers in their primes and beyond more than doubled the total of those surpassing .893 through age 26.

 

Incidentally, only two of the original 20 actually increased their average OPS after age 26 -- Miggy and Bad Henry; most likely because an elite OPS in the .900s is so hard to consistently improve upon. But six others still had an average OPS over .900: Mays, Mantle, Robinson, Griffey, Guerrero, and ARod. Two more at least maintained an average OPS over .860: Pujols and Dick Allen.

 

Perhaps .860 -- if not representative of immortals -- is a better OPS benchmark for mere All-Star status. For example, 30 players had at least an .860 OPS in 1950; 46 had .860 or better in 2019. Still, using .860 as a cutoff, only 34 total players since 1947 have averaged .860 through age 26. But a total of exactly 100 players averaged .860 or better from ages 27-37. That includes a lot of guys from the PED era, but also 35 Hall of Famers.

 

So a player who maintains an .860 OPS in his prime-plus years has a better than one in three chance to make the Hall... Can Mookie?

[notin]

Yes, and those two deals started at relatively young ages- like Betts's would.

 

True, but so did the deals for Machado and Harper last year, but I doubt wither one holds up as well..

[moonslav59]

True, but so did the deals for Machado and Harper last year, but I doubt wither one holds up as well..

 

I know the odds are against most 8+ year deals, but those that started at 27 or 28 have a better record.

 

I'm also not saying Betts will be great at 35 or 36, but I would bet he'll have better numbers than Machado and Harper at ages 33-36.

[kenmeister]

I know the odds are against most 8+ year deals, but those that started at 27 or 28 have a better record.

 

I'm also not saying Betts will be great at 35 or 36, but I would bet he'll have better numbers than Machado and Harper at ages 33-36.

 

Machado and Harper are two of the most overvalued players I have ever seen. They are NOT $30 million per year talents. If they are worth $30 million a year, then Betts is worth at least $45 million.

[notin]

Machado and Harper are two of the most overvalued players I have ever seen. They are NOT $30 million per year talents. If they are worth $30 million a year, then Betts is worth at least $45 million.

 

Well, having 6 years of MLB experience at an age where the majority of the league has less than 3 is worth something. Edgar Martinez is a deserving Hall of Famer in the eyes of many, but he didn't get even 200 plate appearances in a single season until he was older than Machado and Harper were when they became free agents. If Machado and/or Harper have careers from age 27 forward like Martinez did, we might feel differently about how overvalued they were...

[moonslav59]

I just did a study using baseball-ref of players and OPS since Jackie Robinson broke the color barrier, from 1947-2019. Through age 26, Mookie Betts has a career OPS of .893. In over 70 years since JR, only 20 players with a minimum 3,000 plate appearances have had a higher OPS through age 26. Eight of those 20 made the Hall of Fame -- Mantle, Mays, Vlad, F.Robinson, Griffey, Aaron, Mathews and Rice -- with three more sure to follow: Pujols, Cabrera and Trout. So Mookie has had a great start to his career, where over 50% of the peers above him forged paths to Cooperstown.

 

But that's not predictive of greatness going forward, in an industry constantly debating the value of the next ten years. Betts will play his age 27 season in 2020, then become a free agent, so I looked again at OPS from '47-'19, this time for players ages 27-37: a total of 47 players exceeded an average OPS of .893, including 22 Hall of Famers. This is encouraging, as the number of ballplayers in their primes and beyond more than doubled the total of those surpassing .893 through age 26.

 

Incidentally, only two of the original 20 actually increased their average OPS after age 26 -- Miggy and Bad Henry; most likely because an elite OPS in the .900s is so hard to consistently improve upon. But six others still had an average OPS over .900: Mays, Mantle, Robinson, Griffey, Guerrero, and ARod. Two more at least maintained an average OPS over .860: Pujols and Dick Allen.

 

Perhaps .860 -- if not representative of immortals -- is a better OPS benchmark for mere All-Star status. For example, 30 players had at least an .860 OPS in 1950; 46 had .860 or better in 2019. Still, using .860 as a cutoff, only 34 total players since 1947 have averaged .860 through age 26. But a total of exactly 100 players averaged .860 or better from ages 27-37. That includes a lot of guys from the PED era, but also 35 Hall of Famers.

 

So a player who maintains an .860 OPS in his prime-plus years has a better than one in three chance to make the Hall... Can Mookie?

 

Great numbers- remember ages 27-36 is 10 years not 27-37.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

Great numbers- remember ages 27-36 is 10 years not 27-37.

 

Thanks. I included age 27 because 2020 will be Mookie's age 27 season, which may have even more value because it's his salary-drive year. A 10-year deal after that will encompass his ages 28-37 seasons. So, when comparing contemporaries -- and for continuity -- I used 27-37 for the post-26 years.

[mvp 78]

Machado and Harper are two of the most overvalued players I have ever seen. They are NOT $30 million per year talents. If they are worth $30 million a year, then Betts is worth at least $45 million.

 

^^^

[moonslav59]

Thanks. I included age 27 because 2020 will be Mookie's age 27 season, which may have even more value because it's his salary-drive year. A 10-year deal after that will encompass his ages 28-37 seasons. So, when comparing contemporaries -- and for continuity -- I used 27-37 for the post-26 years.

 

Okay.

 

I think most people view prime as being over at ages 31-32, but many of the best players have great years after 32.

 

Look at Dwight Evans:

OPS

.777 ages 20-26

.865 ages 27-31

.885 ages 32-37, including his career high OPS of .986 at age 35 and league leading .920 at age 32.

(He put up these numbers from ages 35-39: .857.)

 

His defense barely declined.

 

Remember, power ages better.

 

Dwight's avg HRs per 162 gams

21 ages 20-29

27 ages 30-39

 

So, Betts may lose some speed, but he may gain some power.

 

 

Edited November 13, 2019 by moonslav59

[notin]

Okay.

 

I think most people view prime as being over at ages 31-32, but many of the best players have great years after 32.

 

Look at Dwight Evans:

OPS

.777 ages 20-26

.865 ages 27-31

.885 ages 32-37, including his career high OPS of .986 at age 35 and league leading .920 at age 32.

(He put up these numbers from ages 35-39: .857.)

 

His defense barely declined.

 

Remember, power ages better.

 

Dwight's avg HRs per 162 gams

21 ages 20-29

27 ages 30-39

 

So, Betts may lose some speed, but he may gain some power.

 

 

 

Completely unrelated, but I always though this was fascinating

 

JD Drew ages 31-34 with Boston: .270/.377/.476 (.853 OPS)

Dwight Evans ages 31-34 with Boston: .266/.372/.477 (.850 OPS)

 

Is it possible to find two more similar hitters at the same ages who played the same position for the same team for a four year stretch?

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

Okay.

 

I think most people view prime as being over at ages 31-32, but many of the best players have great years after 32.

 

Look at Dwight Evans:

OPS

.777 ages 20-26

.865 ages 27-31

.885 ages 32-37, including his career high OPS of .986 at age 35 and league leading .920 at age 32.

(He put up these numbers from ages 35-39: .857.)

 

His defense barely declined.

 

Remember, power ages better.

 

Dwight's avg HRs per 162 gams

21 ages 20-29

27 ages 30-39

 

So, Betts may lose some speed, but he may gain some power.

 

 

 

I agree the typical prime of most ballplayers is from about 27-32. But the primeline can certainly extend for the best athletes with healthy lifestyles.

 

Again, the reason I chose to look at OPS through age 37 was to see how star players performed through what would be the final season of a hypothetical 10-year deal for Mookie.

 

I also agree that diminished running speed doesn't correspond with less bat speed. Aaron stopped stealing bases after age 34, but still averaged over 30 HRs for the next eight years. Betts may not be another Aaron, but all we have are statistics through age 26:

 

Aaron through age 26 (1039 games): 46.6 bWAR

Mookie through age 26 (794 games): 42 bWAR

[moonslav59]

Completely unrelated, but I always though this was fascinating

 

JD Drew ages 31-34 with Boston: .270/.377/.476 (.853 OPS)

Dwight Evans ages 31-34 with Boston: .266/.372/.477 (.850 OPS)

 

Is it possible to find two more similar hitters at the same ages who played the same position for the same team for a four year stretch?

 

I would have guessed Dewey was better.

 

How about 35-37?

 

Dewey .294/.397/.507 (.903) in 1932 PAs

 

Drewy .222/315/.302 (.615) in 286 PAs (He retired after his age 35 season)

[Swiharts Ghost]

Mike Trout and Mookie are 1 and 1a..Mikes contract is a barometer of what we are looking at with Mookie .I happen to think Mike is the best player I’ve ever witnessed besides Bonds .Mookie salary won’t equal that of Mikes but it will be within 50 million . I could see a team like the Whitesox offering 12 years 380 to 400 million .Hard Pass on that kind of money to a single player .I want Kopech to start any trade with them . Edited November 13, 2019 by Swiharts Ghost