Bloom move your asssssss

[Bellhorn04]

What's the advantage? A 2020 ring?

 

We'll be better off spending large in 2021 than not.

 

You're assuming that if they re-set in 2020 they'll get right back to heavy spending in 2021?

[notin]

He's better, mainly because he has just one year left. The financial offset is not enough to entice the Dodgers to

 

1) say yes

 

2) include something else useful.

 

This is not an option: Betts + Price for Joc alone.

 

If we trade Betts + Price for Pollock or Joc, we might as well trade JBJ, JD and Workman, too.

 

Shoot for 2021 by maybe bring back Betts (JD?) or spending large elsewhere.

 

To me, we are barely a contender in 2020, as is. Trading Betts tilts the balance to me thinking it's best to just trade all short term players and look to 2021 and beyond.

 

The simulator agrees Pederson is not enough, but I would bet that had it existed at the time, the simulator would have also said Jay Bruce and Anthony Swarzak were not enough to offset Robinson Cano.

 

The big issue with the simulator is keeping the analog trade values updated. 2 months ago, it would have rejected Zach Davies for Luis Urias as well, and by a lot. But what happened was the Padres soured a bit on Urias.

 

If the Sox could deal Bett and Price for Gonsolin, Ruiz, and Connor Wong and take back Pederson and Kelly to offset (and kick in a few mill, I suppose), is it a bad deal? They would clear about $40-45 mill or so towards the tax.

 

Ruiz is a bit like Urias. He was unimpressive in 2019 and actually seems to have fallen behind Diego Cartaya for catchers on some Dodger prospect rankings. But he’s also in AAA at 20 years old. And the Dodgers already have Will Smith holding the position for the next few years anyway. Wong is a catcher-turned-2b/3b with power, speed and overall hitting but no defensive skill. He’s buried behind multiple prospects in the Dodger farm at all those positions. But he might be a good but-low prospect.

 

Ruiz and Wong are both deep on the Dodger depth charts, and might actually be attainable. Bloom’s decision to not ask about Lux is keeping these talks alive and making good deals that don’t involve the top Dodger prospect more likely...

[notin]

You're assuming that if they re-set in 2020 they'll get right back to heavy spending in 2021?

 

If they aren’t, all the more reason to deal Betts. The Sox don’t have much in the way of internal low cost options...

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

Trading Devers isn't even my own idea, but I forget the writer who suggested it in the fall (someone from a paper on dirtdogs). At the time, I torched the guy.

 

But if the goal is to reset and rebuild a contender as quickly as possible -- with young, controllable depth -- then no player can provide that in one return-haul fell swoop like Devers. GMs don't want to give anything up for one year of Mookie, but they all would for five years of Rafie, especially a contender with a wide-open window. Like Atlanta...

 

If the Braves don't re-sign Donaldson, Devers would be an upgrade and add to a young core of talent: Acuna, Albies, Swanson, Riley, Soroka, Fried, Folty. LA won't part with their top prospects, but maybe Atlanta would, especially since Devers is around the same age as most of them.

 

The trade I proposed -- and that the simulator accepted -- was Devers and Barnes for Newcomb, Anderson, Pache and Langeliers... giving the Sox two starting pitchers, a centerfielder and a catcher. Will any of them be any good? Who knows, but at least there would be viable replacements for Price and JBJ, instant hope for the near future and maybe even the now.

 

But remember: I never deal Devers unless I know Betts is or will be locked up.

[Bellhorn04]

If they aren’t, all the more reason to deal Betts. The Sox don’t have much in the way of internal low cost options...

 

There's really nothing much forcing them to deal Betts or to re-set this year.

[moonslav59]

You're assuming that if they re-set in 2020 they'll get right back to heavy spending in 2021?

 

Maybe not $39.9Mover the line, but yes, why not?

[notin]

... which leads to an interesting question.

 

If the Sox could only lock up one of Devers or Betts, which would be the better option?

 

The advantage to Betts is that Devers is still under control for a while, but also it means he will be gone during his peak years.

 

The advantage to Devers is he will not cost nearly the same as Betts to lock up (maybe half per year while delaying free agency a season or two), giving the Sox more financial flexibility...

[moonslav59]

The simulator agrees Pederson is not enough, but I would bet that had it existed at the time, the simulator would have also said Jay Bruce and Anthony Swarzak were not enough to offset Robinson Cano.

 

The big issue with the simulator is keeping the analog trade values updated. 2 months ago, it would have rejected Zach Davies for Luis Urias as well, and by a lot. But what happened was the Padres soured a bit on Urias.

 

If the Sox could deal Bett and Price for Gonsolin, Ruiz, and Connor Wong and take back Pederson and Kelly to offset (and kick in a few mill, I suppose), is it a bad deal? They would clear about $40-45 mill or so towards the tax.

 

Ruiz is a bit like Urias. He was unimpressive in 2019 and actually seems to have fallen behind Diego Cartaya for catchers on some Dodger prospect rankings. But he’s also in AAA at 20 years old. And the Dodgers already have Will Smith holding the position for the next few years anyway. Wong is a catcher-turned-2b/3b with power, speed and overall hitting but no defensive skill. He’s buried behind multiple prospects in the Dodger farm at all those positions. But he might be a good but-low prospect.

 

Ruiz and Wong are both deep on the Dodger depth charts, and might actually be attainable. Bloom’s decision to not ask about Lux is keeping these talks alive and making good deals that don’t involve the top Dodger prospect more likely...

 

Including Kelly helps, but that was not part of the original comp between Joc and Pollock.

 

I doubt the Dodgers kick in those prospects unless we add a lot of money.

 

Taking back Pollock, to me, seems like the best way to get more from LA.

 

It saves them money over 3 years- the length of Price's deal.

[moonslav59]

The simulator agrees Pederson is not enough, but I would bet that had it existed at the time, the simulator would have also said Jay Bruce and Anthony Swarzak were not enough to offset Robinson Cano.

 

The big issue with the simulator is keeping the analog trade values updated. 2 months ago, it would have rejected Zach Davies for Luis Urias as well, and by a lot. But what happened was the Padres soured a bit on Urias.

 

If the Sox could deal Bett and Price for Gonsolin, Ruiz, and Connor Wong and take back Pederson and Kelly to offset (and kick in a few mill, I suppose), is it a bad deal? They would clear about $40-45 mill or so towards the tax.

 

Ruiz is a bit like Urias. He was unimpressive in 2019 and actually seems to have fallen behind Diego Cartaya for catchers on some Dodger prospect rankings. But he’s also in AAA at 20 years old. And the Dodgers already have Will Smith holding the position for the next few years anyway. Wong is a catcher-turned-2b/3b with power, speed and overall hitting but no defensive skill. He’s buried behind multiple prospects in the Dodger farm at all those positions. But he might be a good but-low prospect.

 

Ruiz and Wong are both deep on the Dodger depth charts, and might actually be attainable. Bloom’s decision to not ask about Lux is keeping these talks alive and making good deals that don’t involve the top Dodger prospect more likely...

 

Cartaya might be a better C option. We might get him with Gonsolin or Gray instead of just Ruiz.

Edited January 4, 2020 by moonslav59

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

From a talent standpoint, Betts is a better all-around player -- right now. But Betts is better than just about all but a handful of MLBers. Mookie's six great seasons have him on a HOF track. Rafie would have to repeat his 2019 for another half decade to equal Betts' production... but what if Devers cranks 90 extra base hits for the next decade?

 

On the bases, Devers is deceivingly fast, but Betts is elite. In rightfield, Mookie is "The best I've seen," according to Showalter... ever. Rafie is improving at third, and makes stellar plays at times. Then you have the small-body breakdown myth of an athlete who has always been in Olympian shape vs. a big-bodied 22-year-old who was already ordered to watch his diet.

 

It's a tough call, and really distasteful that fans of one of the richest franchises in one of the largest markets have to even consider. There's something wrong with a sport whose teams can't keep their young core of fan favorites intact... especially clubs that can actually afford to.

[notin]

From a talent standpoint, Betts is a better all-around player -- right now. But Betts is better than just about all but a handful of MLBers. Mookie's six great seasons have him on a HOF track. Rafie would have to repeat his 2019 for another half decade to equal Betts' production... but what if Devers cranks 90 extra base hits for the next decade?

 

On the bases, Devers is deceivingly fast, but Betts is elite. In rightfield, Mookie is "The best I've seen," according to Showalter... ever. Rafie is improving at third, and makes stellar plays at times. Then you have the small-body breakdown myth of an athlete who has always been in Olympian shape vs. a big-bodied 22-year-old who was already ordered to watch his diet.

 

It's a tough call, and really distasteful that fans of one of the richest franchises in one of the largest markets have to even consider. There's something wrong with a sport whose teams can't keep their young core of fan favorites intact... especially clubs that can actually afford to.

 

There’s nothing wrong with the sport. The problem was the Sox were run by a President whose solution to everything was to either throw prospects at it or to sign someone to a mega deal. The Sox payroll is about a QUARTER OF A BILLION dollars. They could easily afford to keep Betts if DD had not casually thrown $280 million at Price and Eovaldi. Or whose solution to Sale’s elbow problem was a $145 mill extension. Or who decided the team needed an ace, so he spent $217 mil to get one. Then decided “Not enough” and cleared out the minor league system for another. Or whose desperation to ditch his reputation for ignoring bullpens cleaned out even more prospects and actual major leaguers.

 

If you liked how DD built the title team, great. But these are repercussions from that mad dash of transactions that refused to acknowledge the existence of the future.

 

This team spent a quarter of a billion last year. That they might not be able to afford Betts is not a problem with the game. The only problem with the Sox is they didn’t spend it wisely...

[moonslav59]

There’s nothing wrong with the sport. The problem was the Sox were run by a President whose solution to everything was to either throw prospects at it or to sign someone to a mega deal. The Sox payroll is about a QUARTER OF A BILLION dollars. They could easily afford to keep Betts if DD had not casually thrown $280 million at Price and Eovaldi. Or whose solution to Sale’s elbow problem was a $145 mill extension. Or who decided the team needed an ace, so he spent $217 mil to get one. Then decided “Not enough” and cleared out the minor league system for another. Or whose desperation to ditch his reputation for ignoring bullpens cleaned out even more prospects and actual major leaguers.

 

If you liked how DD built the title team, great. But these are repercussions from that mad dash of transactions that refused to acknowledge the existence of the future.

 

This team spent a quarter of a billion last year. That they might not be able to afford Betts is not a problem with the game. The only problem with the Sox is they didn’t spend it wisely...

 

The cliff is here. Even if we dump Price, JBJ and Eovaldi, we will still likely be in the top 5 or 6 spending teams with very little hope ate evn making the WC play-in game in 2020.

 

Thank God we won in 2018, or the tone here on this site would be intolerable.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

But we'll never really know if Dombro signed the guys last winter that he could, partially because he couldn't sign the one that a lot of us preferred. We do know the Red Sox have tried to extend Betts, who admits he turned down 200 mil at a time when a lot of fellow stars were signing extensions for half that, like Bregman and Acuna.

[Bellhorn04]

They could easily afford to keep Betts if DD had not casually thrown $280 million at Price and Eovaldi.

 

They can afford to keep Betts in spite of Price and Eovaldi.

 

At the end of the 2020 season when Mookie's contract expires, the contracts of Price and Eovaldi will have 2 more years to run at $49 million per year. That's an obstacle, but not a big one.

[moonslav59]

They can afford to keep Betts in spite of Price and Eovaldi.

 

At the end of the 2020 season when Mookie's contract expires, the contracts of Price and Eovaldi will have 2 more years to run at $49 million per year. That's an obstacle, but not a big one.

 

If Betts gets $36M, we're talking $75M for those 3 players, and almost $155M for just 6 guys (Betts, Price, Sale, Bogey, JD & Eovaldi).

 

That's about 75% of a budget at the tax line.

[harmony]

To be realistic, many American League teams have improved so far this offseason.

 

Within reported payroll constraints, the Red Sox hope to improve on an 84-win club that finished 12 games back of the second Wild Card slot. With the league's seventh-best record, the Sox were followed in order by the Rangers, White Sox and Angels, who have all made upgrades.

 

In climbing to the top of the hill in 2018, the Red Sox have dug themselves into a hole for 2020 and perhaps beyond. Trying to contend in 2020 may only dig a deeper hole.

 

Or not.

[moonslav59]

To be realistic, many American League teams have improved so far this offseason.

 

Within reported payroll constraints, the Red Sox hope to improve on an 84-win club that finished 12 games back of the second Wild Card slot. With the league's seventh-best record, the Sox were followed in order by the Rangers, White Sox and Angels, who have all made upgrades.

 

In climbing to the top of the hill in 2018, the Red Sox have dug themselves into a hole for 2020 and perhaps beyond. Trying to contend in 2020 may only dig a deeper hole.

 

Or not.

 

The hope is 2019 was the outlier not 2018.

 

(Note: I'm not drinking the strong contender Kool-Aid, but I've not given up hope, either.)

[moonslav59]

The simulator agrees Pederson is not enough, but I would bet that had it existed at the time, the simulator would have also said Jay Bruce and Anthony Swarzak were not enough to offset Robinson Cano.

 

The big issue with the simulator is keeping the analog trade values updated. 2 months ago, it would have rejected Zach Davies for Luis Urias as well, and by a lot. But what happened was the Padres soured a bit on Urias.

 

If the Sox could deal Bett and Price for Gonsolin, Ruiz, and Connor Wong and take back Pederson and Kelly to offset (and kick in a few mill, I suppose), is it a bad deal? They would clear about $40-45 mill or so towards the tax.

 

Ruiz is a bit like Urias. He was unimpressive in 2019 and actually seems to have fallen behind Diego Cartaya for catchers on some Dodger prospect rankings. But he’s also in AAA at 20 years old. And the Dodgers already have Will Smith holding the position for the next few years anyway. Wong is a catcher-turned-2b/3b with power, speed and overall hitting but no defensive skill. He’s buried behind multiple prospects in the Dodger farm at all those positions. But he might be a good but-low prospect.

 

Ruiz and Wong are both deep on the Dodger depth charts, and might actually be attainable. Bloom’s decision to not ask about Lux is keeping these talks alive and making good deals that don’t involve the top Dodger prospect more likely...

 

Assuming the simulator is close to being correct, which do you prefer?

 

A) Price, Betts and $18M for Pederson ($6M a year x 3 yrs)

 

Price, Betts and $5.3M for Pederson & Kelly

 

C) Price, $3.7M & Betts for Pollock, Gonsolin & Cartaya

 

D) Price, $2M & Betts for Pollock, Kelly, Gonsolin, Cartaya, Busch & Beaty

 

Plan A does only cost us $6M a year after Joc is gone in 2021 & 2022, but we basically get nothing but salary relief for Betts, unless Joc lead us to a 2020 ring.

 

Plan B just gets us the hope Kelly rebounds and a player instead of just paying cash, but it's still just a salary dump.

 

Plan C gets us two nice young players, but we pay Pollock $12M x 3 years on the Lux tax. (Plan A was $6M x 3, though.)

 

Plan D gets us 4 young players but Pollock & Kelly cost us about $20M for 2020 & 2021 and $12M for 2022- still better than paying Price $31M x 3.

Edited January 4, 2020 by moonslav59

[moonslav59]

This trade was accepted, but I doubt the Dodgers say yes:

 

Betts, Price, Chavis, Duran & $9M

 

for

 

Pollock, Maeda, Gonsolin, Downs & Cartaya

or

Pollock, Kelly, Ruiz, Gonsolin & Ferguson

[Bellhorn04]

If Betts gets $36M, we're talking $75M for those 3 players, and almost $155M for just 6 guys (Betts, Price, Sale, Bogey, JD & Eovaldi).

 

That's about 75% of a budget at the tax line.

 

If JD opts out at the end of 2020 it'll be 5 guys.

[moonslav59]

If JD opts out at the end of 2020 it'll be 5 guys.

 

5 making almost $135M- about 65% of the budget.

 

Plus... (after 2020)

1 more year of Pedey at $13.8M

ERod's last arb (4th year arbs can get expensive.)

Beni's 2nd arb

Barnes 3rd arb

Devers 1st arb

and more...

 

I'm still looking for a reason why resetting in 2021 makes more sense.

 

[oldtimer]

Assuming the simulator is close to being correct, which do you prefer?

 

A) Price, Betts and $18M for Pederson ($6M a year x 3 yrs)

 

Price, Betts and $5.3M for Pederson & Kelly

 

C) Price, $3.7M & Betts for Pollock, Gonsolin & Cartaya

 

D) Price, $2M & Betts for Pollock, Kelly, Gonsolin, Cartaya, Busch & Beaty

 

Plan A does only cost us $6M a year after Joc is gone in 2021 & 2022, but we basically get nothing but salary relief for Betts, unless Joc lead us to a 2020 ring.

 

Plan B just gets us the hope Kelly rebounds and a player instead of just paying cash, but it's still just a salary dump.

 

Plan C gets us two nice young players, but we pay Pollock $12M x 3 years on the Lux tax. (Plan A was $6M x 3, though.)

 

Plan D gets us 4 young players but Pollock & Kelly cost us about $20M for 2020 & 2021 and $12M for 2022- still better than paying Price $31M x 3.

 

Price and Betts for Gonsolin and Pederson. $38 Mil savings. Serviceable outfielder and young pitcher. full reset with room to spend. Best sounding to me.

[harmony]

Price and Betts for Gonsolin and Pederson. $38 Mil savings. Serviceable outfielder and young pitcher. full reset with room to spend. Best sounding to me.

That trade gives the Red Sox $32.6 million in surplus value and the Dodgers $5.3 million in negative value, according to Baseball Trade Values:

 

https://www.baseballtradevalues.com/trade-simulator/

[Bellhorn04]

5 making almost $135M- about 65% of the budget.

 

Plus... (after 2020)

1 more year of Pedey at $13.8M

ERod's last arb (4th year arbs can get expensive.)

Beni's 2nd arb

Barnes 3rd arb

Devers 1st arb

and more...

 

I'm still looking for a reason why resetting in 2021 makes more sense.

 

 

If they can re-set this year without trading Betts I'm fine with it. I'm just opposed to trading him.

[S5Dewey]

Actually the correct answer was “If they trade both Price and Betts, why would they still trade Bradley?”

 

I said some time ago that they were going to hold on to one or the other of Bradley and Betts.

[S5Dewey]

If JD opts out at the end of 2020 it'll be 5 guys.

 

Maybe we'll all get free hamburgers!

[notin]

If they can re-set this year without trading Betts I'm fine with it. I'm just opposed to trading him.

 

I thunk the problem is, the choices are either 1) trade Betts and reset or 2) don't reset. And the goal not a mandate is to reset...

[Bellhorn04]

I thunk the problem is, the choices are either 1) trade Betts and reset or 2) don't reset. And the goal not a mandate is to reset...

 

That seems to be the size of it.

 

It's gentlemen place your bets (please overlook the pun) time. My bet is they don't trade Betts. I fully accept I could be wrong, but if I had to lay money on it that's where it would go.

[moonslav59]

Price and Betts for Gonsolin and Pederson. $38 Mil savings. Serviceable outfielder and young pitcher. full reset with room to spend. Best sounding to me.

 

There's no way we get LA to go for that.

 

I may not even get Pollock & Gonsolin for Betts and Price, even though the simulator says the Sox come up short.

[notin]

That seems to be the size of it.

 

It's gentlemen place your bets (please overlook the pun) time. My bet is they don't trade Betts. I fully accept I could be wrong, but if I had to lay money on it that's where it would go.

 

My bet is the trade Betts but don't trade Price. (Odds?)

 

My strategy would be to deal Price (plus cash?) to Texas for Rougned Odor. But Bloom never returns my calls