Pay Mookie!

[moonslav59]

OK. thats if you believe he didnt have sexual relations with the girl from her age 15-18.

for me this is one of those times i dont need to see a jizz stained blue dress to know what he was up to. i do feel for his wife though. didnt he also throw her under the bus for the HGH accusations?

 

Exactly. You don't bring a 15-18 year old girl alone with you on multiple vacations without some sort of hanky-panky. Down here, in Sugar Land, word was they stayed in one room, and he paid off people to be quiet about what they witnessed, but I can't find that in writing.

 

At best, he was "grooming" her for sex when she became legit.

 

He's a scumbag and always has been.

 

I'm not getting why he's being defended so strongly.

[notin]

100% Slasher approved

 

I never wanted Price either, although for different reasons. I did not like what would be obvious ramifications on spending and keeping the young core. The only thing I ever liked about his contract was the opt out, which becamse a moot point when he got injured during the second year...

[Hitch]

 

And it enrages me to think that the Red Sox just traded one of their best players in history to get rid of one of their worst contracts in history.

 

Do you really believe this to be true? That the only reason they traded Mookie was to get rid of half of Price?

[mvp 78]

OK. thats if you believe he didnt have sexual relations with the girl from her age 15-18.

for me this is one of those times i dont need to see a jizz stained blue dress to know what he was up to. i do feel for his wife though. didnt he also throw her under the bus for the HGH accusations?

 

What I posted is what the woman herself stated. Everything else is just conjecture. I guess you just don't believe women?

[mvp 78]

Exactly. You don't bring a 15-18 year old girl alone with you on multiple vacations without some sort of hanky-panky. Down here, in Sugar Land, word was they stayed in one room, and he paid off people to be quiet about what they witnessed, but I can't find that in writing.

 

At best, he was "grooming" her for sex when she became legit.

 

He's a scumbag and always has been.

 

I'm not getting why he's being defended so strongly.

 

Nobody is defending him. He just has never been accused of being a child predator. I asked where you got your info from and everything you provided showed that the person he slept with was over 18.

[notin]

Right. Mookie has never made any bones about his desire to hit Free Agency. It's possible that the only thing Price brought to the table in this trade was a better return... which we're paying a portion of his salary for. But I believe the return for Betts would have been less had it not been for Price. We're essentially paying ~$15M for that return but it's the best deal we could get.

 

I honestly do not get all these people who think "if we trade Mookie he's never coming back" but somehow thought if we did not trade him, he was here forever.

 

Mookie wanted the market. It was a choice between trade him now for what you can get or watch him walk after 2020 and receive only a single draft pick that likely never cracks AAA...

[Elktonnick]

He's never been accused of that either. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

The allegations are that he cheated on his wife with a consenting adult.

 

These slanderous allegations against a former player serve no useful purpose other then expose both the poster of the allegations and the owner of this forum needless legal jeopardy

[Slasher9]

What I posted is what the woman herself stated. Everything else is just conjecture. I guess you just don't believe women?

 

correct. i am just conjecturing. thats pretty much all i do on this website.

as for the woman in question...perhaps she has an nda. perhaps she doesnt care that she was rapey. perhaps it is blocked from her memory. perhaps it never happened.

[Slasher9]

These slanderous allegations against a former player serve no useful purpose other then expose both the poster of the allegations and the owner of this forum needless legal jeopardy

 

uh oh. i hope lawyers/players/owners never ever read the game threads.

[mvp 78]

I honestly do not get all these people who think "if we trade Mookie he's never coming back" but somehow thought if we did not trade him, he was here forever.

 

Mookie wanted the market. It was a choice between trade him now for what you can get or watch him walk after 2020 and receive only a single draft pick that likely never cracks AAA...

 

The thinking (or at least mine is) that if they didn't extend him now, they were never going to keep him around.

[mvp 78]

uh oh. i hope lawyers/players/owners never ever read the game threads.

 

I can't wait for my posts to be used in a deposition!

 

Judge: "These posts titles truly are horrendous."

[moonslav59]

Nobody is defending him. He just has never been accused of being a child predator. I asked where you got your info from and everything you provided showed that the person he slept with was over 18.

 

He took her on vacations, alone from ages 16-18. The girl was a consenting target, but it's still statutory rape, if sex happened.

 

She even said she "can't deny" anything in the story that came out, except she said she was 16 not 15 when "it" started..

[moonslav59]

I honestly do not get all these people who think "if we trade Mookie he's never coming back" but somehow thought if we did not trade him, he was here forever...

 

That's how I see it. Without a reset, we'd have had a way smaller chance at signing him than we do now, no matter how small our chances are after trading him.

 

Plus, it seems like a minority want to pay him more than $375M/10, so we'd be losing him anyways- for nothing.

[moonslav59]

What I posted is what the woman herself stated. Everything else is just conjecture. I guess you just don't believe women?

 

I almost always believe women, but not when the sex was consensual and Clemens was her sugar daddy. Those are facts, BTW.

 

The question is about when the sex started, and if you choose to believe Clemens spent 2 years grooming her and waiting until she turned 18, that's fine.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

Do you really believe this to be true? That the only reason they traded Mookie was to get rid of half of Price?

 

It wasn't the only reason they traded Mookie, but it was the only way they could get rid of Price. Otherwise, they would've packaged anyone else with Price -- JD, JBJ, Chavis/Dalbec, etc. -- and kept their best player.

 

Instead, the had to give up their best player so someone would take Price off our hands.

 

Sure, Bloom did the best he could getting prospects (instead of a draft pick next winter), but by all accounts the return was worse because Price was included.

 

The better question is, does anyone really believe our new Chief Baseball Officer when he just said the luxury tax wasn't much of a factor in making this trade?

[notin]

It wasn't the only reason they traded Mookie, but it was the only way they could get rid of Price. Otherwise, they would've packaged anyone else with Price -- JD, JBJ, Chavis/Dalbec, etc. -- and kept their best player.

 

Instead, the had to give up their best player so someone would take Price off our hands.

 

Sure, Bloom did the best he could getting prospects (instead of a draft pick next winter), but by all accounts the return was worse because Price was included.

 

The better question is, does anyone really believe our new Chief Baseball Officer when he just said the luxury tax wasn't much of a factor in making this trade?

 

 

No.

 

but do you believe if it was, then it was going to continue to be a factor when Betts reached free agency?

 

If you are among those who say "once Betts is dealt he is never coming back" - a viewpoint which does stand a good chance of becoming true - then why do you believe not dealing him meant anything more than keeping him for 2020 and losing him for a single draft pick? Especially since you clearly believe the luxury tax payments are a huge factor?

 

If you do think the luxury tax was a factor, then you also have to realize dealing Betts was the only real chance of bringing him back in 2021. It actually is not likely to work out, but it does have a chance to, and that means it has a better chance than any other realistic option...

[moonslav59]

It wasn't the only reason they traded Mookie, but it was the only way they could get rid of Price. Otherwise, they would've packaged anyone else with Price -- JD, JBJ, Chavis/Dalbec, etc. -- and kept their best player.

 

Instead, the had to give up their best player so someone would take Price off our hands.

 

Sure, Bloom did the best he could getting prospects (instead of a draft pick next winter), but by all accounts the return was worse because Price was included.

 

The better question is, does anyone really believe our new Chief Baseball Officer when he just said the luxury tax wasn't much of a factor in making this trade?

 

Some seem to think Price at $16M x 3 is a bargain to LA. (I don't.)

 

Trading Betts got us to reset. Trading Price set us up for a better 2021 and 2022.

 

When we signed Price, most of us who thought the deal was needed or who liked the deal knew the last 2-3 years would be a net loss in value vs cost.

 

I think we did well getting LA to pay $16M x 3. I expected they might pay $12-14M.

[moonslav59]

No.

 

but do you believe if it was, then it was going to continue to be a factor when Betts reached free agency?

 

If you are among those who say "once Betts is dealt he is never coming back" - a viewpoint which does stand a good chance of becoming true - then why do you believe not dealing him meant anything more than keeping him for 2020 and losing him for a single draft pick? Especially since you clearly believe the luxury tax payments are a huge factor?

 

If you do think the luxury tax was a factor, then you also have to realize dealing Betts was the only real chance of bringing him back in 2021. It actually is not likely to work out, but it does have a chance to, and that means it has a better chance than any other realistic option...

 

I just can't imagine signing Betts without a reset and paying a 50% tax on $35-40M.

 

If people think $38M is too much, how would $56M sound, even if just for 1-2 years?

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

I have no proof of this, but I'm of the opinion that moving Price was a mandate, and not just because he had the worst contract on the club.

 

The Red Sox are an image-conscious franchise in an entertainment business, and Price's personality was bad for business. If I'm running a company that was ready to make changes, he'd be the first one to go... especially since his athletic contributions were so tenuous going forward.

 

Remember, Boston even tolerated Bill Lee as long as he was still good (in their eyes).

[notin]

I have no proof of this, but I'm of the opinion that moving Price was a mandate, and not just because he had the worst contract on the club.

 

The Red Sox are an image-conscious franchise in an entertainment business, and Price's personality was bad for business. If I'm running a company that was ready to make changes, he'd be the first one to go... especially since his athletic contributions were so tenuous going forward.

 

Remember, Boston even tolerated Bill Lee as long as he was still good (in their eyes).

 

The big problem with moving Price as a mandate is right now, he was a safer bet to go out there and pitch over Sale or Eovaldi. That can certainly change, but Price can pitch. And pitching well can cure a lot of image problems. I didn't hear anyone ranting about Price and his run-ins with Eckersley during the 2018 post-season run...

[mvp 78]

I have no proof of this, but I'm of the opinion that moving Price was a mandate, and not just because he had the worst contract on the club.

 

The Red Sox are an image-conscious franchise in an entertainment business, and Price's personality was bad for business. If I'm running a company that was ready to make changes, he'd be the first one to go... especially since his athletic contributions were so tenuous going forward.

 

Remember, Boston even tolerated Bill Lee as long as he was still good (in their eyes).

 

Price's image was fine. People just don't like his contract. You don't see people complaining about JBJ's image.

[notin]

Price's image was fine. People just don't like his contract. You don't see people complaining about JBJ's image.

 

But there is that one guy complaining about Verdugo's image, although mostly because he does not like the trade...

[mvp 78]

But there is that one guy complaining about Verdugo's image, although mostly because he does not like the trade...

 

I think it's cause he had braids in his hair at one point.

[notin]

I think it's cause he had braids in his hair at one point.

 

I can get behind that...

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

Verdugo was the best possible acquisition that Bloom could've gotten for one year of Betts: a promising player whose best-case may even out-double Betts once he learns how to hit the Monster (when Mookie no longer has the wall as a target)...

 

I just hope the media gives him a fair shot at thriving here, because no one can truly replace Betts. Verdugo's best approach should just be to hustle -- after every fly ball, gapper or base-hit, and especially to first on every grounder, pop-up or longball...

[mvp 78]

Verdugo was the best possible acquisition that Bloom could've gotten for one year of Betts: a promising player whose best-case may even out-double Betts once he learns how to hit the Monster (when Mookie no longer has the wall as a target)...

 

I just hope the media gives him a fair shot at thriving here, because no one can truly replace Betts. Verdugo's best approach should just be to hustle -- after every fly ball, gapper or base-hit, and especially to first on every grounder, pop-up or longball...

 

As long as the fans don't boo him on opening day, it'll be fine.

[Jasonbay44]

The hate for David Price is absurd. How dare that ******* accept an absurdly big contract offer! He should have taken less!

[mvp 78]

The hate for David Price is absurd. How dare that ******* accept an absurdly big contract offer! He should have taken less!

 

Honestly, he would have been more over with the fans if NESN focused on his dog Astro more.

[Jasonbay44]

Honestly, he would have been more over with the fans if NESN focused on his dog Astro more.

 

Rest In Peace, Astro. I actually always liked Price, was happy when we signed him (not necessarily for the money lol) and he was big contributor to a World Series. Don’t see a reason to hate him

[Elktonnick]

Rest In Peace, Astro. I actually always liked Price, was happy when we signed him (not necessarily for the money lol) and he was big contributor to a World Series. Don’t see a reason to hate him

 

The Eckersley dust up didn't help his image