Mookie and Andrew Mcutchen .....

[notin]

Where's the line between "unlikely" and "unforeseeable"?

 

They mean different things. “Unlikely” means “not likely to happen,” and relates to probability of an occurrence being low. But “unforeseeable” means “cannot have been predicted.” The latter does not take probability into account at all like the former does...

[S5Dewey]

They mean different things. “Unlikely” means “not likely to happen,” and relates to probability of an occurrence being low. But “unforeseeable” means “cannot have been predicted.” The latter does not take probability into account at all like the former does...

 

Then what you were saying when you said, "And while we might have seen an unlikely worst case scenario, I still wouldn't say the whole situation was unforseeable" what you were saying is that it probably wouldn't have happened, but it could.

 

That's pretty much what you can say about any situation.

[notin]

Then what you were saying when you said, "And while we might have seen an unlikely worst case scenario, I still wouldn't say the whole situation was unforseeable" what you were saying is that it probably wouldn't have happened, but it could.

 

That's pretty much what you can say about any situation.

 

Except that the point was it was not unforeseeable, meaning it was foreseeable, and not even by pessimists alone. The Sox had 3 pitchers with either recent or significant injury history. Really we knew someone was going to get hurt. But what happened was the worst case scenario where they all did...

[Kimmi]

I think most Red Sox fans realize that it was the pitching that doomed this year's team, and it will be pitching that largely determines the fate of the 2020 team.

 

I think that's completely separate from the Betts issue. He is a guy that a lot of Sox fans would like to see still in the uniform 7-8 years from now. Those fans are not just thinking about 2019 or 2020.

 

A decision to keep Betts because that's who fans want to see is a decision based on the business side of things (money), not based on the baseball side of things (wins). This is akin to Lucchino wanting to make a 'splash' or a 'sexy' move, and what supposedly created such a rift between him and Theo. While keeping Mookie is probably also the best decision in terms of wins, the FO should not operate based on who the fans want to see.

[notin]

But if the Sox had kept Lynn only to watch him leave one year later, they still would have been a bad team from them until Clemens. The problem wasn’t that they traded Lynn, it was that they traded him for an aging Frank Tanana, an even older Joe Rudi, and a non-prospect borderline major league talent named Jim Dorsey...

[Bellhorn04]

But if the Sox had kept Lynn only to watch him leave one year later, they still would have been a bad team from them until Clemens. The problem wasn’t that they traded Lynn, it was that they traded him for an aging Frank Tanana, an even older Joe Rudi, and a non-prospect borderline major league talent named Jim Dorsey...

 

The other problem was letting Fisk just walk away for nothing, by sheer incompetence.

 

There weren't many good moves in that time period.

[Bellhorn04]

A decision to keep Betts because that's who fans want to see is a decision based on the business side of things (money), not based on the baseball side of things (wins). This is akin to Lucchino wanting to make a 'splash' or a 'sexy' move, and what supposedly created such a rift between him and Theo. While keeping Mookie is probably also the best decision in terms of wins, the FO should not operate based on who the fans want to see.

 

I mostly agree, Kimmi. But I do think pleasing the fans is a kind of necessary evil of doing business sometimes. After all, they are the ones who pump all the money into the team's coffers that allows the team to pay the salaries of the players.

[cp176]

Yes it could very easily be painful.

 

But this is the price for Dombrowski's actions. DD did win a title, but he left behind a very expensive team that has a few missing pieces and no minimum wage replacements. We all enjoyed winning in 2018, but losing Betts this offseason could easily be part of that price of that title...

 

notin - seriously now this has nothing to do with a discussion about whatever DD did or did not do. We all know how you feel about DD. it is your right to feel that way but it isn't part of this discussion. There must be a thread somewhere that continues to beat up on a past GM don't you think. Personally I'm operating in the here and now. If Mookie is traded and you want to blame it on Dave Dombrowski well that's nice but once again the average fan likely will already have forgotten the past GM's name. He probably does not care about this.

[cp176]

I mostly agree, Kimmi. But I do think pleasing the fans is a kind of necessary evil of doing business sometimes. After all, they are the ones who pump all the money into the team's coffers that allows the team to pay the salaries of the players.

 

I hardly doubt that a decision to keep Betts will be dictated by what the fans want or expect. The decision to keep Mookie I think is likely to be made on the fact that shy of Trout he may be the best player in the game for years to come. Signing Mookie long term would be a long way from even resembling a "splashy" move which has been suggested. Giving away a generational talent for next to nothing would be hard to take and I doubt that any amount of spin suggesting that it helps out our farm is going to go over very well.

[cp176]

Something has been bothering me about this whole Betts dilemma in the past year: I can’t imagine this ownership is unwilling to pay or even overpay with the ultimate top bid to keep a fan favorite – one that already led Boston to a world title -- who is now about to enter his prime.

 

I just don’t believe that billionaire owners of a billion-dollar franchise who have always been willing to spend to sustain and improve a competitive product have suddenly drawn the line with their best player… not after throwing money at shiny baubles, trinkets and fugazis for years and years (Renteria, Drew, Lugo, Crawford, Panda, Hanley, Price, etc. – not to mention damaged goods like Sale and Eovaldi).

 

There is no way I will believe the Sox can’t afford whatever Betts wants, or can't absorb any accompanying tax penalties. There is also no way I will believe that a few bad (so far) contracts to pitchers – guys who play maybe once a week during the season – has anything to do with Boston affording their best everyday regular. I also don’t believe that the owners – after 20 years -- have suddenly changed their minds about how they approach casting a successful show in what is nothing more than an entertainment business. Adults don’t change who they are, and in most cases, old adults can’t change who they are.

 

The quotes, columns and stories that have been circulating for months have to be management’s spin to the public that they’re trying to make the best of a situation they know has gotten beyond their control. If Mookie had said just once, “I want to be a Red Sox for life” – and the Sox replied, “We will make sure you are” – that would have ended daily speculation long ago, and all would be quiet until the presser to announce his extension.

 

You speak my language!!!

[notin]

notin - seriously now this has nothing to do with a discussion about whatever DD did or did not do. We all know how you feel about DD. it is your right to feel that way but it isn't part of this discussion. There must be a thread somewhere that continues to beat up on a past GM don't you think. Personally I'm operating in the here and now. If Mookie is traded and you want to blame it on Dave Dombrowski well that's nice but once again the average fan likely will already have forgotten the past GM's name. He probably does not care about this.

 

Are you kidding?

 

Reasons like this are exactly why I didn’t like Dombrowski. Why do you think people complained about his depletion of the farm?? No one was complaining about that because they care more about the Sea Dogs than the Red Sox.

 

Think about what the Sox are going to have to spend money on this off-season.

 

Starting pitchers? Like Logan Allen or Kopech or Beeks.

 

CF? Like Margot, maybe?

 

2b? Moncada would fit nicely. Or Dubon, so we can still get Sale.

 

But as it stands now, if they reset it’s near impossible to fill those positions from within and not spend. Now some of DD’s trades were certainly worthwhile, but the whole stack together left the cupboard pretty bare at a time when the Sox need it not to be. At least if they want to keep Betts...

[moonslav59]

We'll know within a year or two some of the effects of nearly emptying the farm.

 

The debate will likely never end, and will be revived every time one of the young guys we trade has a great season (or more).

 

Again,I was fine with what DD did since we won a ring, but I knew the price we'd have to pay would be painful at some point.

[cp176]

Are you kidding?

 

Reasons like this are exactly why I didn’t like Dombrowski. Why do you think people complained about his depletion of the farm?? No one was complaining about that because they care more about the Sea Dogs than the Red Sox.

 

Think about what the Sox are going to have to spend money on this off-season.

 

Starting pitchers? Like Logan Allen or Kopech or Beeks.

 

CF? Like Margot, maybe?

 

2b? Moncada would fit nicely. Or Dubon, so we can still get Sale.

 

But as it stands now, if they reset it’s near impossible to fill those positions from within and not spend. Now some of DD’s trades were certainly worthwhile, but the whole stack together left the cupboard pretty bare at a time when the Sox need it not to be. At least if they want to keep Betts...

 

You tickle me. Now - trading away a possible generational talent for next to nothing could hurt this franchise much more than any trades made yesteryear by whoever the GM was.

[cp176]

We'll know within a year or two some of the effects of nearly emptying the farm.

 

The debate will likely never end, and will be revived every time one of the young guys we trade has a great season (or more).

 

Again,I was fine with what DD did since we won a ring, but I knew the price we'd have to pay would be painful at some point.

 

 

I was concerned about losing Moncada and sort of a little concerned with losing Kopech but getting Chris Sale was worth it and would have been silly not to make the trade. As for everyone of those other players lost - ho hum. I will admit though that I was fond of Margot and Dubon. I absolutely believe that it is time to look ahead and those who continually keep expressing negative feelings about DD have something else going on. What it is, I don't know. Maybe it is a constant need to feel right when there likely is no right or wrong. It strikes me as strange. The majority of successful people that I know tend to look ahead and not backward. I'm all in on our new GM but he won't get any free pass from most fans regardless of what he was left with. It is about him now and not our former GM. From all reports it looks like the right guy could have been hired. Let's see how he does.

[Bellhorn04]

Are you kidding?

 

Reasons like this are exactly why I didn’t like Dombrowski. Why do you think people complained about his depletion of the farm?? No one was complaining about that because they care more about the Sea Dogs than the Red Sox.

 

Think about what the Sox are going to have to spend money on this off-season.

 

Starting pitchers? Like Logan Allen or Kopech or Beeks.

 

CF? Like Margot, maybe?

 

2b? Moncada would fit nicely. Or Dubon, so we can still get Sale.

 

But as it stands now, if they reset it’s near impossible to fill those positions from within and not spend. Now some of DD’s trades were certainly worthwhile, but the whole stack together left the cupboard pretty bare at a time when the Sox need it not to be. At least if they want to keep Betts...

 

It's ludicrous to blame DD if we don't keep Betts.

 

It's not DD's fault that Mookie turned up his nose at a $200 million extension offer because he has his heart set on something more astronomical like $350 million.

 

It's not DD'd fault that Mookie is the second best player in the game and is all about the money.

 

Also, after the 2020 season the team's albatross count will not be that bad.

 

Price and Eovaldi will each have 2 years left. Pedroia will have 1. Castillo will be off the books.

 

They will definitely be able to break the bank for Mookie - if that's what they want to do.

[notin]

It's ludicrous to blame DD if we don't keep Betts.

 

It's not DD's fault that Mookie turned up his nose at a $200 million extension offer because he has his heart set on something more astronomical like $350 million.

 

It's not DD'd fault that Mookie is the second best player in the game and is all about the money.

 

Also, after the 2020 season the team's albatross count will not be that bad.

 

Price and Eovaldi will each have 2 years left. Pedroia will have 1. Castillo will be off the books.

 

They will definitely be able to break the bank for Mookie - if that's what they want to do.

 

It’s not DD’s fault Betts turned down an offer, or is all about money, but the contract situation they have is certainly his doing, as is the depleted farm. These were my main gripes about Dombrowski when the Sox hired him - he signs players to absurd contracts, and he empties farm systems.

 

Also, the albatross situation after 2020 is the same - the Sox will still have 4 (Price, Eovaldi, Sale, Pedroia). Castillo doesn’t matter

[Bellhorn04]

It’s not DD’s fault Betts turned down an offer, or is all about money, but the contract situation they have is certainly his doing, as is the depleted farm. These were my main gripes about Dombrowski when the Sox hired him - he signs players to absurd contracts, and he empties farm systems.

 

Also, the albatross situation after 2020 is the same - the Sox will still have 4 (Price, Eovaldi, Sale, Pedroia). Castillo doesn’t matter

 

Castillo might not matter to Luxury Tax Budgies, but I'm sure he matters to John Henry and the team accountants.

 

The bottom line is, the vast majority of Mookie's contract will fall in the years after Price, Eovaldi and Pedroia are gone.

[Slasher9]

I hardly doubt that a decision to keep Betts will be dictated by what the fans want or expect. The decision to keep Mookie I think is likely to be made on the fact that shy of Trout he may be the best player in the game for years to come. Signing Mookie long term would be a long way from even resembling a "splashy" move which has been suggested. Giving away a generational talent for next to nothing would be hard to take and I doubt that any amount of spin suggesting that it helps out our farm is going to go over very well.

 

how many parades has mike trout been a part of?

[Slasher9]

You tickle me. Now - trading away a possible generational talent for next to nothing could hurt this franchise much more than any trades made yesteryear by whoever the GM was.

 

how did trading away nomar work out?

[notin]

You tickle me. Now - trading away a possible generational talent for next to nothing could hurt this franchise much more than any trades made yesteryear by whoever the GM was.

 

You do realize Betts has only one more year, right? Let’s not compare this to what trading away Roger Clemens in 1988 would have been like.

 

But by your logic, keeping Betts for 2020 and letting him walk for a fourth round pick after a season that rests entirely on the health of 3 pitchers coming off injury, and also by not resetting, have positioned the team to struggle to re-sign Betts after 2020 is the smart way to go here.

 

And who said “next to nothing.” Whatever the package is, it will be better than a single fourth round pick (which is your choice)...

[Bellhorn04]

But by your logic, keeping Betts for 2020 and letting him walk for a fourth round pick after a season that rests entirely on the health of 3 pitchers coming off injury, and also by not resetting, have positioned the team to struggle to re-sign Betts after 2020 is the smart way to go here.

 

The Red Sox can easily re-sign Betts after 2020-if they're willing to be the top bidder.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

I'd rather have Betts in his prime in his salary-drive season than this century's versions of Tanana and Rudi. To me as a Red Sox fan, one more year of Mookie is better than barely warm bodies already halfway to rigor mortis.

 

As for Dombroski, a lot of folks forget that after his Marlins won in '97, the owner ordered him to gut the team. DD went full fire-sale for one calendar year and completely turned over the Fish... He didn't get much back in return, as far as prospects who'd become future stars (but it's not like he was trading future Hall of Famers, either). Point is, DD has done a reset in his past -- which makes comments about how he wasn't the right man going forward for Boston curious.

 

Maybe Dave told Henry and Co. he couldn't stomach another tear-down in his old age. Or more likely, they felt Bloom, with all his peer connections and modern research, is better-poised for acquiring cheaper talent with upside -- instead of the kind of established talent that the senior Dombro targets and relies upon.

[moonslav59]

I'd rather have Betts in his prime in his salary-drive season than this century's versions of Tanana and Rudi. To me as a Red Sox fan, one more year of Mookie is better than barely warm bodies already halfway to rigor mortis.

 

As for Dombroski, a lot of folks forget that after his Marlins won in '97, the owner ordered him to gut the team. DD went full fire-sale for one calendar year and completely turned over the Fish... He didn't get much back in return, as far as prospects who'd become future stars (but it's not like he was trading future Hall of Famers, either). Point is, DD has done a reset in his past -- which makes comments about how he wasn't the right man going forward for Boston curious.

 

Maybe Dave told Henry and Co. he couldn't stomach another tear-down in his old age. Or more likely, they felt Bloom, with all his peer connections and modern research, is better-poised for acquiring cheaper talent with upside -- instead of the kind of established talent that the senior Dombro targets and relies upon.

 

One year of the same as 2019 is not worth getting nothing for Betts. Now, maybe I'm wrong about our chances in 2020, but I'm leaning towards looking more at 2021 and beyond than just 2020 and being left with less afterwards.

[notin]

Castillo might not matter to Luxury Tax Budgies, but I'm sure he matters to John Henry and the team accountants.

 

The bottom line is, the vast majority of Mookie's contract will fall in the years after Price, Eovaldi and Pedroia are gone.

 

Oh I agree.. The only thing the Sox save by keeping Castillo down is the tax on his salary, which is only a few million. (I love how casually I say that, like I have it for pocket change.)

 

If the Sox pare enough salary odd the team, he might even play in the majors this year, although I think the probability is not very high. I just think it might not be 0 anymore...

[notin]

I'd rather have Betts in his prime in his salary-drive season than this century's versions of Tanana and Rudi. To me as a Red Sox fan, one more year of Mookie is better than barely warm bodies already halfway to rigor mortis.

As for Dombroski, a lot of folks forget that after his Marlins won in '97, the owner ordered him to gut the team. DD went full fire-sale for one calendar year and completely turned over the Fish... He didn't get much back in return, as far as prospects who'd become future stars (but it's not like he was trading future Hall of Famers, either). Point is, DD has done a reset in his past -- which makes comments about how he wasn't the right man going forward for Boston curious.

 

Maybe Dave told Henry and Co. he couldn't stomach another tear-down in his old age. Or more likely, they felt Bloom, with all his peer connections and modern research, is better-poised for acquiring cheaper talent with upside -- instead of the kind of established talent that the senior Dombro targets and relies upon.

 

If the best deal the Sox can get is the 2020 version of the Lynn trade, than by all means keep Betts. That deal was one of the worst Sox trades since WW II.

 

but if they can get even half of what the Diamondbacks got for one year of Goldschmidt, is it a bad idea? How about the next Luke Weaver or Carson Kelly?

[notin]

As for Dombroski, a lot of folks forget that after his Marlins won in '97, the owner ordered him to gut the team. DD went full fire-sale for one calendar year and completely turned over the Fish... He didn't get much back in return, as far as prospects who'd become future stars (but it's not like he was trading future Hall of Famers, either). Point is, DD has done a reset in his past -- which makes comments about how he wasn't the right man going forward for Boston curious.

 

Maybe Dave told Henry and Co. he couldn't stomach another tear-down in his old age. Or more likely, they felt Bloom, with all his peer connections and modern research, is better-poised for acquiring cheaper talent with upside -- instead of the kind of established talent that the senior Dombro targets and relies upon.

 

Maybe because that gutting of the Marlins ended in a series of trades that produced 5 straight sub-.500 seasons was a big part in not wanting Dombrowski for this one? Henry did own that team, too...

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

Maybe because that gutting of the Marlins ended in a series of trades that produced 5 straight sub-.500 seasons was a big part in not wanting Dombrowski for this one? Henry did own that team, too...

 

I know -- I keep fluctuating, wondering whether they hired Bloom as the best man to arrange a way to keep Betts or because Bloom is the best man to make the most out of trading Betts.

[notin]

The Red Sox can easily re-sign Betts after 2020-if they're willing to be the top bidder.

 

And they would be better positioned to do so if they achieve the goal of resetting, right?

[notin]

I know -- I keep fluctuating, wondering whether they hired Bloom as the best man to arrange a way to keep Betts or because Bloom is the best man to make the most out of trading Betts.

 

I'd go with the latter. Look how he dealt Archer (favorable contract, but a shadow of himself as a pitcher) and quickly improved his team by getting Meadows and Glasnow...

[Jack Flap]

I'll reserve judgment until we see an actual trade package put forward for Mookie, but conventional wisdom seems to hold that the Red Sox are going to have trouble getting elite young talent in return given his 2020 salary, only one year of control, and the fact that every sentient being in the solar system knows that he's 99.9% going to free agency without an extension at this point. Short of some team getting desperate and stupid (which certainly could happen), whatever we get back is going to feel very underwhelming.

 

If it comes to it, I'd certainly take the 6-7 WAR (on the low end) Mookie will provide in 2020, and take my chances signing him in the offseason, over a couple of middling prospects that may never pan out, or another Allen Craig/Joe Kelly type trade (such control, wow, so value).

 

We're not talking about just any trade of any player, but one of the finest talents that this franchise has produced in its long and storied history...and whatever their respect for Bloom's skills in wheeling and dealing, you can bet Henry & Co. are also heavily weighing the PR consequences of trading him for a return that does not reflect that.