How Much is the Most You'd Pay Mookie?

[Elktonnick]

i dont think draft picks are really traded in baseball? football/basketball? yes. baseball? teams trade for MiLB players (of the PTBNL), not draft picks.

You are correct. Compensatory draft picks may be traded, all others no. My bad!

[notin]

i dont think draft picks are really traded in baseball? football/basketball? yes. baseball? teams trade for MiLB players (of the PTBNL), not draft picks.

 

But MLB has added the ability to trade recent draft picks in the last couple of years, They might be headed that way soon...

[notin]

You are correct. Compensatory draft picks may be traded, all others no. My bad!

 

Competiive Balance Draft picks can be traded. Not compensatory draft picks.

 

Compensatory draft picks are for losing free agents who reject qualifying offers. Competitive Balance Draft picks are assigned to teams based on low revenue and small market criteria. There are only 20 such picks per year, and not every team gets one...

[mvp 78]

But MLB has added the ability to trade recent draft picks in the last couple of years, They might be headed that way soon...

 

We'll see. I'm not sure losing some draft picks affects the Mookie trade as there aren't enough draft picks they could obtain in a trade to cover whatever penalties they face. Also, I think they need players closer to MLB than lottery tickets that are 4-5 years away.

[notin]

We'll see. I'm not sure losing some draft picks affects the Mookie trade as there aren't enough draft picks they could obtain in a trade to cover whatever penalties they face. Also, I think they need players closer to MLB than lottery tickets that are 4-5 years away.

 

Losing draft picks should incentivize the Red Sox to make a Mookie trade. The farm is fairly weak and, even if they reset and re-sign Mookie, they won't have enough decent minimum wage players coming to fill out a competitive roster...

[mvp 78]

Losing draft picks should incentivize the Red Sox to make a Mookie trade. The farm is fairly weak and, even if they reset and re-sign Mookie, they won't have enough decent minimum wage players coming to fill out a competitive roster...

 

True enough if that is a concern of theirs.

[notin]

True enough if that is a concern of theirs.

 

It all depends on their plans.

 

Clearly the Sox are preparing themselves for a 2020 without Mookie. Or at the very least, considering it.

 

If they can include Price in the deal, they can easily reset. And if they get a SP (Gonsolin? Ferguson?) and a position player or two (Verdugo? Downs?), they can much more easily affford to bring Mookie back in 2021. Mookie is signing somewhere after this year, nd it will be somewhere that can clearly afford the a player who is either the most expensive player in the game or very close to it. If all this happens, the large market Red Sox two biggest contracts left will be Chris Sale ($110 mill over 5 years) and Xander Bogaerts ($100 mill over 5 years). They certainly jump to the top of the list of teams that can afford Mookie.

 

The primary comp might be the Dodgers, aka Mookie's Other Team (at least how it looks so far). But the Dodgers rarely give those huge contracts to players outside their organization and will be facing the first year of arbitration of Cody Bellinger. They might prioritize extending Cody over bringing back Mookie. They certainly could do both, but it's not something this team seems to do very often.

 

As I have pointed out before the current longest contract in the Dodger organization is the 6 year $30mill contract signed by 28yo Cuban RHP Yasiel Sierra. No one else has more than 4 unless AJ Pollock's fifth year option is exercised. When it comes to free agency, Friedman sometimes appears to have a small market mindset...

[mvp 78]

My guess is that the Dodgers don't have any long contracts right now because they are saving up to retain their current talent. They gave Kershaw 7 years ago, so it wouldn't be surprising for them to give out more contracts like that.

 

Do you think they would still not reset if they moved Mookie? Or that they must include Price just so that they can get way under the cap and have flexibility to add during the year if they wanted?

[moonslav59]

My guess is that the Dodgers don't have any long contracts right now because they are saving up to retain their current talent. They gave Kershaw 7 years ago, so it wouldn't be surprising for them to give out more contracts like that.

 

Do you think they would still not reset if they moved Mookie? Or that they must include Price just so that they can get way under the cap and have flexibility to add during the year if they wanted?

 

Moving Betts, alone, gets us under the tax line.

 

Moving Price and/or Eovaldi allows us to be way more active next winter and beyond.