Mookie downgrade thread

[Slasher9]

The reported offer from the Padres reads like one of those homerish proposals where the Red Sox send Rusney Castillo, a good-not-great prospect, and some other spare parts we don't really need for another team's star...I can reluctantly accept trading Mookie for an impressive return, but not if we're doing the John Lackey trade again on a grander scale, which is what this sounds like.

 

Something still isn't adding up here.

 

you can thank JH for this one. he destroyed our leverage with verbalizing the LT mandate to the media.

[Slasher9]

If the Dodgers are desperate, you'd never know it from this offseason. They've done virtually nothing.

 

i believe they got a "pass" from the fans this offseason due to the cheating scandals. there has been less pressure on them to do something big as the fanbase thinks they should have had 2 parades...

[Slasher9]

I'm not sure why you think a fire sale is a real possibility.

 

if we are under .500 staring at a double digit GB deficit to multiple teams in our division i can envision Bloom trying to trade anyone with less then 3 years of control (including Beni) for as many high level prospects as possible.

Any offer for Devers & X-bo would need to be way over the top that the trade simulator would implode. everyone else on the roster would be available for fair trade.

[moonslav59]

If the Dodgers are desperate, you'd never know it from this offseason. They've done virtually nothing.

 

I do think the Dodgers are desperate. It's the main reason I have been talking so much about trades with them, but they are very tight with their prospects, and rightly so.

 

Trading 3 top prospects is giving up 15 years for 1 of Betts. I get that those 15 years are speculative or even highly speculative, but guys like Vergugo, Gonsolin and Strippling have already shown something at the ML level.

 

The Dodgers are clearly looking to add one major piece, but we are not the only team they are talking to. The Sox are desperate, but have less teams to talk to.

 

[moonslav59]

I'm not sure why you think a fire sale is a real possibility.

 

I'm surprised many seem to feel the idea isn't a possibility. We've seen the team sell 4 of it's 5 starters plus Andrew Miller in one year. We've seen the team trade AGon, Beckett & Crawford in one trade.

 

I've never said it was probably or likely, in fact, I have said the opposite. I seriously doubt it happens.

 

Also, we are losing these guys anyways, so I'm not seeing what the big deal is.

 

Not trading anybody and clinging to long odds on 2020 is going to hamper our chances in 2021 and beyond. It seems clear to me there's a good reason to at least consider a fire sale at some point in 2020. I'm fine with anyone being against the idea, but to say it has little merit or can never happen is denying history and logic. Of course, it CAN happen, even if unlikely to do so.

Edited January 28, 2020 by moonslav59

[Bellhorn04]

I'm surprised many seem to feel the idea isn't a possibility.

 

I've never said it was probably or likely, in fact, I have said the opposite. I seriously doubt it happens.

 

I don't get why it's even a possibility.

[Bellhorn04]

you can thank JH for this one. he destroyed our leverage with verbalizing the LT mandate to the media.

 

It was kind of obvious though, or at least it would be once you start putting it out there that Betts & Price are available.

[moonslav59]

if we are under .500 staring at a double digit GB deficit to multiple teams in our division i can envision Bloom trying to trade anyone with less then 3 years of control (including Beni) for as many high level prospects as possible.

Any offer for Devers & X-bo would need to be way over the top that the trade simulator would implode. everyone else on the roster would be available for fair trade.

 

No way we trade Devers or Bogey. They are the foundation we will rebuild around.

[mvp 78]

Now a rebuild comes in two flavors.

 

1. Do you do what the O's are doing and detonate everything and wait until some of the kids graduate before supplementing a new core? This is the longest way to rebuild. You actively rebuild a young core which can take 3-4 years.

 

2. The way the big market teams do it is either spend around the young core coming up, or spend to create a core and use the kids to fill in, or use that new farm and financial flexibility to deal for now assets.

 

#2 has worked for the Sox pretty well. No reason for a complete teardown.

[mvp 78]

No way we trade Devers or Bogey. They are the foundation we will rebuild around.

 

It'd be dumb to. Perfect way to wreck a fanbase for a decade.

[mvp 78]

If the report from yesterday is to be believed... Imagine being the Padres and missing out on getting Mookie Betts for that weak-ass package due to a disagreement over 25% of Myers' salary.

 

Also imagine being the Dodgers and missing out on getting Mookie Betts because you wouldn't top that weak-ass package.

 

The reported offer from the Padres reads like one of those homerish proposals where the Red Sox send Rusney Castillo, a good-not-great prospect, and some other spare parts we don't really need for another team's star...I can reluctantly accept trading Mookie for an impressive return, but not if we're doing the John Lackey trade again on a grander scale, which is what this sounds like.

 

Something still isn't adding up here.

 

Nah, I think the trade approximates fair value of ONE YEAR OF MOOKIE.

[mvp 78]

you can thank JH for this one. he destroyed our leverage with verbalizing the LT mandate to the media.

 

I think people are overestimating what a return for Mookie right now should be.

[mvp 78]

I do think the Dodgers are desperate. It's the main reason I have been talking so much about trades with them, but they are very tight with their prospects, and rightly so.

 

Trading 3 top prospects is giving up 15 years for 1 of Betts. I get that those 15 years are speculative or even highly speculative, but guys like Vergugo, Gonsolin and Strippling have already shown something at the ML level.

 

The Dodgers are clearly looking to add one major piece, but we are not the only team they are talking to. The Sox are desperate, but have less teams to talk to.

 

 

Sox only need two teams to work with to get a decent deal for Mookie. Helps that Marte went to the DBags.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

I think people are overestimating what a return for Mookie right now should be.

 

... not for those of us looking forward to this season.

[mvp 78]

... not for those of us looking forward to this season.

 

I'd rather have Mookie too, but I think the FO's goal is to shed salary and they don't seem to have any takers for Price.

[Jack Flap]

I think people are overestimating what a return for Mookie right now should be.

 

Nah, people see the reports that San Diego wants to unload Myers and most of his salary on us and still not give up any top prospects and are calling ******** on that.

 

The "It's only one year" argument is invalidated to an extent in any scenario that has us taking on the majority of Myers' contract, because by doing so, you've now made the Padres significantly better (and the Red Sox worse) in 2021 and 2022 in addition to 2020. Guys like Lucchesi and Naylor would be perfectly acceptable pieces in a Mookie trade sans Myers, but if the Padres want to push Myers' contract on us, they need to pony up more.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

I'm surprised many seem to feel the idea isn't a possibility. We've seen the team sell 4 of it's 5 starters plus Andrew Miller in one year. We've seen the team trade AGon, Beckett & Crawford in one trade.

 

I've never said it was probably or likely, in fact, I have said the opposite. I seriously doubt it happens.

 

Also, we are losing these guys anyways, so I'm not seeing what the big deal is.

 

Not trading anybody and clinging to long odds on 2020 is going to hamper our chances in 2021 and beyond. It seems clear to me there's a good reason to at least consider a fire sale at some point in 2020. I'm fine with anyone being against the idea, but to say it has little merit or can never happen is denying history and logic. Of course, it CAN happen, even if unlikely to do so.

 

Those Sox firesales in 2012 and 2014 came during last-place years. Yes, dumping players helped lead to doormat finishes -- but no one wants that... and not many expect Boston to have a losing record in '20. Even with all the injuries in '19, the Red Sox still had a winning team; it was just a major disappointment to most because of expectations after '18.

[mvp 78]

Nah, people see the reports that San Diego wants to unload Myers and most of his salary on us and still not give up any top prospects and are calling ******** on that.

 

The "It's only one year" argument is invalidated to an extent in any scenario that has us taking on the majority of Myers' contract, because by doing so, you've now made the Padres significantly better (and the Red Sox worse) in 2021 and 2022 in addition to 2020. Guys like Lucchesi and Naylor would be perfectly acceptable pieces in a Mookie trade sans Myers, but if the Padres want to push Myers' contract on us, they need to pony up more.

 

There aren't many trades that I can remember for a one year rental where you got the types of players you are looking for.

[mvp 78]

Those Sox firesales in 2012 and 2014 came during last-place years. Yes, dumping players helped lead to doormat finishes -- but no one wants that... and not many expect Boston to have a losing record in '20. Even with all the injuries in '19, the Red Sox still had a winning team; it was just a major disappointment to most because of expectations after '18.

 

They shouldn't trade Beckett, CC and AGon for Rubby and Alan Webster! That's not a good enough deal for the Sox! We're tanking this season! It makes the Dodgers better in 2013 and 2014! We'll have no shot in 2013!

[notin]

I think people are overestimating what a return for Mookie right now should be.

 

 

Exactly. Henry’s words mean nothing compared to one year and $27 million...

[Jack Flap]

There aren't many trades that I can remember for a one year rental where you got the types of players you are looking for.

 

No offense, but did you read the post you just replied to?

 

Maybe you can explain what conceivable purpose there would be for the Red Sox to even consider taking Myers and his underwater contract in this deal if not to wring a greater return out of the Padres?

[Jack Flap]

IMO, if Myers is coming to the Red Sox along with the majority of his money, asking for Gore as a headliner is far from crazy...I can see why that's probably not happening, but I'd hold out for Patino at least. (Play around with the trade simulator if you still think this is unreasonable...people have already posted scenarios where it works.) At a bare minimum, if Myers is in this deal, then Campusano needs to be. There...I'm done.

[mvp 78]

No offense, but did you read the post you just replied to?

 

Maybe you can explain what conceivable purpose there would be for the Red Sox to even consider taking Myers and his underwater contract in this deal if not to wring a greater return out of the Padres?

 

The Padres are a "small market team" that wants to limit payroll and horde prospects. They'd love to have Mookie, but don't want to cover $27M since that's like a quarter of their team's salary. They are willing to take on additional salary, but only to a certain extent.

[mvp 78]

IMO, if Myers is coming to the Red Sox along with the majority of his money, asking for Gore as a headliner is far from crazy...I can see why that's probably not happening, but I'd hold out for Patino at least. (Play around with the trade simulator if you still think this is unreasonable...people have already posted scenarios where it works.) At a bare minimum, if Myers is in this deal, then Campusano needs to be. There...I'm done.

 

Exactly. That's why a Mookie one year rental isn't going to bring back an amazing return.

[notin]

The Padres are a "small market team" that wants to limit payroll and horde prospects. They'd love to have Mookie, but don't want to cover $27M since that's like a quarter of their team's salary. They are willing to take on additional salary, but only to a certain extent.

 

At $27mill, Mookie would not even be the highest paid player on the team.

 

The Padres do need prospects, but they’ve been spending in recent years, giving big contracts to Myers, Hosmer and Machado. I’m struggling to believe they can’t afford one year of Betts, even while paying half of Myers contract. (Paying Betts and half of Myers is cheaper than getting stuck with Myers full contract. I assume Preller is aware of this if he is suddenly worried about money.)

[Jack Flap]

The Padres are a "small market team" that wants to limit payroll and horde prospects. They'd love to have Mookie, but don't want to cover $27M since that's like a quarter of their team's salary. They are willing to take on additional salary, but only to a certain extent.

 

Oh, I perfectly understand why the Padres want us to take Myers...I'm just saying you don't give them that salary relief for free. Whatever you feel would be a fair return for one year of Mookie, once you add in Myers with any significant portion of his salary, the cost goes up.

 

By all accounts, the Padres are highly motivated to get out from under that contract...to not use that to our advantage in any negotiation with them would be malpractice.

[Slasher9]

Oh, I perfectly understand why the Padres want us to take Myers...I'm just saying you don't give them that salary relief for free. Whatever you feel would be a fair return for one year of Mookie, once you add in Myers with any significant portion of his salary, the cost goes up.

 

By all accounts, the Padres are highly motivated to get out from under that contract...to not use that to our advantage in any negotiation with them would be malpractice.

 

yup. this is why no deal has been done yet. neither team has blinked yet

[a700hitter]

Exactly. That's why a Mookie one year rental isn't going to bring back an amazing return.

It will be a flat out salary dump. There will be no significant talent coming back to us -- possibly a spare part and a few seedlings.

[mvp 78]

It will be a flat out salary dump. There will be no significant talent coming back to us -- possibly a spare part and a few seedlings.

 

So then they have to sell the salary dump to a fanbase that pays through the nose for tickets. Yikes.

 

I think that's why it's still 50/50 they just ride with Mookie for one more year.

[mvp 78]

Oh, I perfectly understand why the Padres want us to take Myers...I'm just saying you don't give them that salary relief for free. Whatever you feel would be a fair return for one year of Mookie, once you add in Myers with any significant portion of his salary, the cost goes up.

 

By all accounts, the Padres are highly motivated to get out from under that contract...to not use that to our advantage in any negotiation with them would be malpractice.

 

They should then trade Myers in for Price, an asset they could use. A veteran presence on that pitching staff would be helpful.