Betts or Martinez?

[notin]

Once ownership lets a guy out the door, it shows to me that they don't really want him long term for the perceived market rate (i.e. they'll trade Lester at the deadline to re-sign him in the offseason!).

 

Yeah that's what Aroldis Chapman was thinking, too.

 

If the Red Sox have the best offer once he hits free agency, think he won't sign out of spite?

[mvp 78]

Yeah that's what Aroldis Chapman was thinking, too.

 

If the Red Sox have the best offer once he hits free agency, think he won't sign out of spite?

 

No, I just think the Sox won't have the best offer (either through budget willingness or thinking the contract isn't worth it).

 

If ownership lets him out the door, it's because they don't have plans on re-signing him. Period.

[notin]

That's one part of it.

 

The other part is that trading him so you can re-set so you can have a lower tax rate for two years so you can (try to) pay the guy $35 million a year for 10 years is not much of a plan.

 

Mookie wants to hit free agency. That we know. What we don;t know is why. There are 3 possibilities

 

1) He wants out of Boston altogether.

2) He wants to try another team

3) He wants as much money as possible.

 

If it's anything but option 3, why keep him? To take "one last shot" at a title, and then have a few seasons of potential overpriced mediocrity? I know a lot of fans say they are ok with the bleak future if they get a title, but that is only true f th future stays where it is - out of the present. Because once the team has that downturn, so few are happy with the title way back when, despite how long flags fly for. We have all seen it on this board. Who liked 2014? Or 2015? Or 2019? Would you say: a) most some or c) a very small amount? And bear in mind, this team only won 84 games last year and has bigger questions independent of Betts. Mookie was healthy, but the team was not. Another 84 win season is actually more likely than another 108 win season. Or even a 100 win season.

 

If Betts just wants the most money, the Sox do need to make some arrangement to accommodate him. Despite Henry's immense wealth, he has a budget. If Mookie is dead set on hitting free agency just for the cash (IMO most likely reason), why not trade him for one year and re-sign him? The whole "his feelings will be hurt if he gets dealt" scenario laughable. First of all, none of us know his personality. Secondly, there are very few "insults" that cannot be cured with $300 million plus. That's one heck of an apology...

[notin]

No, I just think the Sox won't have the best offer (either through budget willingness or thinking the contract isn't worth it).

 

If ownership lets him out the door, it's because they don't have plans on re-signing him. Period.

 

If they won't make the best offer - certainly possible - why keep him? Think this 84 win team can return to 100+ wins? If we had one unhealthy and expensive question mark in the rotation, I might agree. But we have three, and no depth behind them. That's a lot to expect Mookie to overcome...

[notin]

Our best hope is that he returns to his CY form and someone makes a rash decision on him.

 

If he returns to Cy form, you would deal him?

 

Then why keep Mookie if the plan to is break up the biggest question mark when the answer is looking positive?

[Bellhorn04]

If Betts just wants the most money, the Sox do need to make some arrangement to accommodate him. Despite Henry's immense wealth, he has a budget. If Mookie is dead set on hitting free agency just for the cash (IMO most likely reason), why not trade him for one year and re-sign him? The whole "his feelings will be hurt if he gets dealt" scenario laughable. First of all, none of us know his personality. Secondly, there are very few "insults" that cannot be cured with $300 million plus. That's one heck of an apology...

 

The trading and then trying to sign sounds OK in theory. But in reality there are plenty of s***** possibilities created by it too.

[notin]

The trading and then trying to sign sounds OK in theory. But in reality there are plenty of s***** possibilities created by it too.

 

And how many of those possibilities go away if the Sox keep him?

[Bellhorn04]

And how many of those possibilities go away if the Sox keep him?

 

Several of them.

[moonslav59]

Again, not if you look at a trade from a team that is going for it now. What contender wouldn't want to add both an MVP and a Cy Young... for prospects who may never amount to anything? I would argue those swaps are lopsided for the former.

 

These trades happen all the time, star players or at least established players for minor leaguers. There's very few cases where a future Hall of Famer gets away, like Bagwell or Smoltz, and those were last century. I know people here still bemoan all the prospects that Dombro dealt, but so far only Moncada looks legit -- and that deal helped win a World Series... which is the whole point of trying to improve.

 

I get your point.

 

The 3-way deal makes sense. if we don't want prospects for Betts. In theory, no team trading for 1 year of Betts would want to give up equal ML talent, since they want to win in 2020. They want to give prospects. If we don't want prospects, we find a 3rd team that will take the prospects, since they are in rebuild mode. They give us the ML talent we want and need.

[Bellhorn04]

I get your point.

 

The 3-way deal makes sense. if we don't want prospects for Betts. In theory, no team trading for 1 year of Betts would want to give up equal ML talent, since they want to win in 2020. They want to give prospects. If we don't want prospects, we find a 3rd team that will take the prospects, since they are in rebuild mode. They give us the ML talent we want and need.

 

And now try to come up with an actual trade proposal that makes any sense.

[moonslav59]

Mookie wants to hit free agency. That we know. What we don;t know is why. There are 3 possibilities

 

1) He wants out of Boston altogether.

2) He wants to try another team

3) He wants as much money as possible.

 

If it's anything but option 3, why keep him? To take "one last shot" at a title, and then have a few seasons of potential overpriced mediocrity? I know a lot of fans say they are ok with the bleak future if they get a title, but that is only true f th future stays where it is - out of the present. Because once the team has that downturn, so few are happy with the title way back when, despite how long flags fly for. We have all seen it on this board. Who liked 2014? Or 2015? Or 2019? Would you say: a) most some or c) a very small amount? And bear in mind, this team only won 84 games last year and has bigger questions independent of Betts. Mookie was healthy, but the team was not. Another 84 win season is actually more likely than another 108 win season. Or even a 100 win season.

 

If Betts just wants the most money, the Sox do need to make some arrangement to accommodate him. Despite Henry's immense wealth, he has a budget. If Mookie is dead set on hitting free agency just for the cash (IMO most likely reason), why not trade him for one year and re-sign him? The whole "his feelings will be hurt if he gets dealt" scenario laughable. First of all, none of us know his personality. Secondly, there are very few "insults" that cannot be cured with $300 million plus. That's one heck of an apology...

 

Well said, and if we really want Betts back after trading him, we could tell him that. We could offer him a great deal now, and say, if you don't take it, we may trade you, so we can be better when we bid for you next winter. We want you back.

 

If it's all about money, then we'll have to make the best offer. If it wasn't about the money (unlikely), then we did well by trading him.

[moonslav59]

And now try to come up with an actual trade proposal that makes any sense.

 

notin came up with this one on trade simulator:

 

BOS: Fisher, Gaviglio, Giles

LAA: Dalbec

TOR: Marsh

 

Here's another he made, but I swapped Dalbec for Chavis:

 

BOS: Hader, Ramos

NYM: Houck

MIL: Dalbec, Smith, Vazquez

Edited December 4, 2019 by moonslav59

[mvp 78]

If he returns to Cy form, you would deal him?

 

Then why keep Mookie if the plan to is break up the biggest question mark when the answer is looking positive?

 

It'd be the only way to move on from Price if ownership still wants to worry about becoming Sisters of the Poor.

[moonslav59]

Trading Price for Myers is probably the best way to recoup some of the money and still have some hope on better-than-meager returns.

 

(I'd even throw in Chavis and more, if we can get Margot also.)

[mvp 78]

And now try to come up with an actual trade proposal that makes any sense.

 

Betts to the Dodgers for Michael Bush 2b, DJ Peters of and Jimmy Lewis rhp.

[mvp 78]

The whole "his feelings will be hurt if he gets dealt" scenario laughable.

 

I don't believe that's a factor at all. I think he gets dealt solely if the Sox think they can't re-sign him next year. They aren't doing it for salary relief this year just to break the bank next year.

[Bellhorn04]

I don't believe that's a factor at all. I think he gets dealt solely if the Sox think they can't re-sign him next year. They aren't doing it for salary relief this year just to break the bank next year.

 

That's what I'm saying.

[mvp 78]

That's what I'm saying.

 

Well it's what I'm saying too, buster!

[Bellhorn04]

notin came up with this one on trade simulator:

 

BOS: Fisher, Gaviglio, Giles

LAA: Dalbec

TOR: Marsh

 

Here's another he made, but I swapped Dalbec for Chavis:

 

BOS: Hader, Ramos

NYM: Houck

MIL: Dalbec, Smith, Vazquez

 

So we're trading Betts and Dalbec?

 

This is just having fun with the trade simulator.

[notin]

And now try to come up with an actual trade proposal that makes any sense.

 

Per Matt Cerrone, the Red Sox want "a starting pitcher, an outfielder, and two prospects" for Betts. Presumably they mean two top 100 prospects, but that isn't likely. And no team wanting Betts is going to strip mine their roster to accomodate him. But he is a proposal that makes sense. And by "makes sense", also works out on BTV, because that website, if nothing else, is objective.

 

but how about this:

 

Cincy gets Betts

Miami gets 3B/INF Jonathan India (BA #51 pre-2019). OF Aristedes Aquino

Boston gets: LHSP Caleb Smith, CF Lewis Brinson, RHP Hunter Greene (BA #57 pre-2019), OF Monte Harrison (BA #71 pre 2018)

 

Sox get a SP (admittedly on a sell high), defensive whiz for CF, and two top 100 prospects, although an injury kept Harrison off the 2019 list. The Reds get Betts to couple with Bauer for their 2020 title run. The Marlins get a top 100 prospect at a position of need (3B) and a sell-high outfielder.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

Come on, you guys. Haven't you been listening to what every free agent always says after signing? No one ever mentions money; it's all about respect...

[mvp 78]

Per Matt Cerrone, the Red Sox want "a starting pitcher, an outfielder, and two prospects" for Betts. Presumably they mean two top 100 prospects, but that isn't likely. And no team wanting Betts is going to strip mine their roster to accomodate him. But he is a proposal that makes sense. And by "makes sense", also works out on BTV, because that website, if nothing else, is objective.

 

but how about this:

 

Cincy gets Betts

Miami gets 3B/INF Jonathan India (BA #51 pre-2019). OF Aristedes Aquino

Boston gets: LHSP Caleb Smith, CF Lewis Brinson, RHP Hunter Greene (BA #57 pre-2019), OF Monte Harrison (BA #71 pre 2018)

 

Sox get a SP (admittedly on a sell high), defensive whiz for CF, and two top 100 prospects, although an injury kept Harrison off the 2019 list. The Reds get Betts to couple with Bauer for their 2020 title run. The Marlins get a top 100 prospect at a position of need (3B) and a sell-high outfielder.

 

They might "want" it, but there's no way they are getting that.

[harmony]

They might "want" it, but there's no way they are getting that.

Baseball Trade Values gives the proposed trade a "Moderate Overpay" assessment with the Red Sox coming out slightly ahead and the Marlins slightly behind:

 

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

[notin]

They might "want" it, but there's no way they are getting that.

 

It’s probably an “ask high” scenario, but it’s all I can work with. Not sure if the priorities are MLB, the farm, or MLB-ready farm.

 

Obviously getting fewer pieces might up the quality....

[mvp 78]

Baseball Trade Values gives the proposed trade a "Moderate Overpay" assessment with the Red Sox coming out slightly ahead and the Marlins slightly behind:

 

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

 

Wow. STOP THE PRESSES!

[notin]

Baseball Trade Values gives the proposed trade a "Moderate Overpay" assessment with the Red Sox coming out slightly ahead and the Marlins slightly behind:

 

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

 

Yes, but it was certainly not an outrageous ask for what I thought were crazy demands.

 

Now, if I change Caleb Smith to Jordan Yamamoto, it works out fine. But I think the Marlins would rather sell high on Smith than deal Yamamoto.

 

Also, two of the three players the Marlins give up are listed as "medium" (Smith) and "high" (Brinson) availability. Not sure where these sources are, but it certainly is important that a player be available...

[notin]

Wow. STOP THE PRESSES!

 

Actually the moderate overpay quantifier still means it's actually still roughly equal...

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

Fellow-posters, please help me understand. Tomase just posted the Braves have the prospects to make a Mookie trade. Atlanta, he writes, "could very well be one player away from challenging the Dodgers and Nationals for National League supremacy, and it's hard to imagine there's a better fit than Betts."

 

Then, a few paragraphs later, Tomase writes, "Top prospect Christian Pache, a potential Gold Glove center fielder and one of the 10 best prospects in baseball, is probably off the table."

 

My question -- to anyone who can answer without referencing economics: if a team wants Mookie so badly because they're one Mookie away from winning this year, then why wouldn't they give up their top outfield prospect, who is not Mookie? So what if Pache's "a potential Gold Glove and one of the 10 best prospects".... Mookie IS a Gold Glover and one of the 10 best MLB players.

Edited December 4, 2019 by 5GoldGloves:OF,75

[notin]

Fellow-posters, please help me understand. Tomase just posted the Braves have the prospects to make a Mookie trade. Atlanta, he writes, "could very well be one player away from challenging the Dodgers and Nationals for National League supremacy, and it's hard to imagine there's a better fit than Betts."

 

Then, a few paragraphs later, Tomase writes, "Top prospect Christian Pache, a potential Gold Glove center fielder and one of the 10 best prospects in baseball, is probably off the table."

 

My question -- to anyone who can answer without referencing economics: if a team wants Mookie because they're one Mookie away from winning this year, then why wouldn't they give up their top outfield prospect, who is not Mookie? So what if Pache's "a potential Gold Glove and one of the 10 best prospects".... Mookie IS a Gold Glover and one of the 10 MLB players.

 

Because Pache won't cost $30mill and because the Braves want to be able to field a team in 2021?

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

$orry, I a$$umed Toma$e wa$ $peaking about thi$ $ea$on...