Mookie Betts and David Price have been traded to Dodgers

[cp176]

The premise in that comment is that the budget comes down in tablets from Mount Sinai instead of a decision the Fenway Sports Group makes. And it is perfectly okay to question that premise. I mean I certainly do.

 

I mean, the Red Sox made what is probably a fair-ish baseball deal considering the variables. But they also punted on 4-6 prime years of someone on a HoF trajectory, and the current return is highly unlikely to produce a single All Star appearance, all while being one of the prime earners in an industry drowning in cash. That's just the reality. (note: the new version of the trade increases the probability of very positive outcomes of course, but it's still the usual math associated with young'ins)

 

The Sox are not unique here of course. The Dodgers are trying to reset too, and we know that the Yankees in recent years have spent a relative pittance of their revenue on the major league roster (and it's still a high payroll team). It will be a fun wrestling issue for the next CBA - the players right now get all of the downsides of a salary cap without the upsides the players in say the NBA get.

 

It will be very interesting to watch the drama unfold. The deal is done whether it is liked or not. Time to move on. It just seems odd to me with respect to the package of players coming to Boston. I have yapped away long enough about the billionaire budget but in all reality it did seem inevitable that a deal was in the works. Nothing against the three youngsters coming to boston but I truly felt that a young potentially excellent arm would be part of the deal. It wasn't and that tends to sour me with respect to the information we have been fed from the front office.

[jacksonianmarch]

The Mets will be a dark horse for Betts

[cp176]

I think he should get a bit of a pass, not just because of the titles, but because since he bought the team we have had one of the highest payrolls year in and year out, and contending teams most years.

 

I think that's about all you can ask of an owner.

 

oh i still believe that the current ownership team is far and away the best I have seen surely in Boston. I'm very appreciative. I'm just willing to accept the reality that it really is about the dollars being made here. I have no problem with billionaires showing the love but in this case I don't get a warm and fuzzy feeling. But - hey with me baseball has never been a business.

[S5Dewey]

Paplebum, Youk, Ortiz, Nixon

 

...Evans, Pesky, Lowell, Smoltz (because he was a lock for the Hall), Yaz, Williams.

 

I've edited this thing twice now to keep adding names! How many of those things do I have, anyway?? LOL

Edited February 11, 2020 by S5Dewey

[S5Dewey]

You mean like my 8-year-old, who owns five different Betts shirts and trick-or-treated the last three Halloweens dressed as Mookie?

 

...And MLB wonders why kids are feeling disenfranchised by the sport. Ugh. Things like this make them lose interest.

[jung]

Now that he is out of Fenway Park, Betts could have a down year offensively in spacious Dodgers stadium. And since defense is often the first area of decline, the big offers might not be there for Betts. If that is the case, the Red Sox could swoop in with the best offer and Betts might appreciate a return to the comfortable confines of Fenway Park.

 

On other other hand, if Betts has a huge year for the Dodgers, an MVP season, some team will offer Betts a massive contract and it probably won't be the Red Sox.

 

Betts is clearly a money guy -- he goes to the highest bidder no matter what. If the Long Island Ducks made the highest offer, he would go there.

 

In the worst scenario for the Dodgers, they lose Betts in free agency but gain a compensation pick. The compensation pick would make up for one of the three players traded to the Red Sox.

 

There is no worst scenario for the Dodgers regarding this deal. There is only wining it all or not winning it all in 2020. They have been pretty devoted to winning it all year by year for the last ten years. This is just the latest iteration of the Dodgers finally win one of these things agendas.

[cp176]

I know that some of you guys have pre-teen kids who like baseball. When I walk my dog, at times kids wearing Red Sox hats or shirts come over to greet the dog. I always ask them who is their favorite player. Almost every single time, the answer is Mookie Betts. Many of them are easy to identify, because they are wearing Betts shirts. It remind me of when my son was that age in the late 90's and all the kids loved Nomar. When the Sox traded Nomar, he was 30 yrs old and physically shot. Those kids who are Mookie fans are crushed.

 

This is the piece of the puzzle that I think that many of the posters here look right over the top of when discussing this particular trade. In my opinion, this is the most important piece. The kids - the heart of the game now and in the future - really could care less about the luxury tax.

[S5Dewey]

There is no worst scenario for the Dodgers regarding this deal. There is only wining it all or not winning it all in 2020. They have been pretty devoted to winning it all year by year for the last ten years. This is just the latest iteration of the Dodgers finally win one of these things agendas.

 

And the Dodgers keep proving that the playoffs are somewhat of a crap shoot.

[moonslav59]

...And MLB wonders why kids are feeling disenfranchised by the sport. Ugh. Things like this make them lose interest.

 

But, a lot of Betts shirts being bought in LA.

 

We'll see Devers shirts on the rise.

[Bellhorn04]

Now that he is out of Fenway Park, Betts could have a down year offensively in spacious Dodgers stadium.

 

Mookie's career splits:

 

Home .930

Away .858

 

I don't think there's any question Fenway has boosted his numbers, especially in the doubles department - 135 vs. 94.

[S5Dewey]

But, a lot of Betts shirts being bought in LA.

 

We'll see Devers shirts on the rise.

 

And then he may depart LA too, leaving behind a whole bunch of unhappy kids with shirts they won't wear.

 

This is why many of us are saying that money is ruining the future of MLB.

[Bellhorn04]

And then he may depart LA too, leaving behind a whole bunch of unhappy kids with shirts they won't wear.

 

This is why many of us are saying that money is ruining the future of MLB.

 

Free agency has been around for 40+ years though.

[notin]

The Mets will be a dark horse for Betts

 

Nah. They’re in the pack...

[moonslav59]

And then he may depart LA too, leaving behind a whole bunch of unhappy kids with shirts they won't wear.

 

This is why many of us are saying that money is ruining the future of MLB.

 

It's been like this for decades.

[jung]

It's been like this for decades.

 

And it has done nothing to smooth out the distribution of salaries across ballplayers.

 

I do think the time has come to eliminate the guaranteed contract and come up with something else. If the players think the guaranteed contract has worked out for them across their union membership, they can pass me some of what they are drinking.

[Bellhorn04]

And it has done nothing to smooth out the distribution of salaries across ballplayers.

 

I do think the time has come to eliminate the guaranteed contract and come up with something else. If the players think the guaranteed contract has worked out for them across their union membership, they can pass me some of what they are drinking.

 

Hahahahahaha...good one.

[notin]

And it has done nothing to smooth out the distribution of salaries across ballplayers.

 

I do think the time has come to eliminate the guaranteed contract and come up with something else. If the players think the guaranteed contract has worked out for them across their union membership, they can pass me some of what they are drinking.

 

Yeah I see the MLBPA embracing that. Also, maybe eliminate free agency and have all players sterilized...

[notin]

It's been like this for decades.

 

Thank you, Curt Flood...

[Slasher9]

You think JH gets a free pass because we have won some titles?

 

No, not at all. i think he gets a free pass because billionaires by nature dont pay a penny more in taxes (or anything for that matter) then is absolutely necessary. the fact that JH paid LT for 2 straight years is amazing. to expect him to do it every year is irrational. the reset was going to happen - i had guaranteed you this.

[Hitch]

 

Betts is clearly a money guy -- he goes to the highest bidder no matter what. If the Long Island Ducks made the highest offer, he would go there.

 

 

This is what it comes down to. I get the kids have their heroes and losing Mookie hurts (although I find it queasy to be polite, to see how some adults are acting over it all), but does anyone think Mookie really cares that much about some brokenhearted kid in New England?

 

After the 2017 season when he only hit .264 and had the worst year of his young career, the Sox offered him 8 years at $200. He was only 25. He said no. He's only ever wanted to test free agency, and he's testing it to get the most money possible.

 

All this 'baseball isn't a business to me' stuff is all well and good, but the man you are crying to be signed up no matter the cost, sees it as that - a business. And he's going to the team that shells out, no matter how many men/children are devastated by his decision. His loyalty is to his next contract.

 

So let's not make it out like we traded away a guy desperate to stay and sign with the team he loves. He's going to follow the money.

[Bellhorn04]

This is what it comes down to. I get the kids have their heroes and losing Mookie hurts (although I find it queasy to be polite, to see how some adults are acting over it all), but does anyone think Mookie really cares that much about some brokenhearted kid in New England?

 

After the 2017 season when he only hit .264 and had the worst year of his young career, the Sox offered him 8 years at $200. He was only 25. He said no. He's only ever wanted to test free agency, and he's testing it to get the most money possible.

 

All this 'baseball isn't a business to me' stuff is all well and good, but the man you are crying to be signed up no matter the cost, sees it as that - a business. And he's going to the team that shells out, no matter how many men/children are devastated by his decision. His loyalty is to his next contract.

 

So let's not make it out like we traded away a guy desperate to stay and sign with the team he loves. He's going to follow the money.

 

I agree. Mookie is not exactly an innocent saint in all this.

[harmony]

And it has done nothing to smooth out the distribution of salaries across ballplayers.

 

I do think the time has come to eliminate the guaranteed contract and come up with something else. If the players think the guaranteed contract has worked out for them across their union membership, they can pass me some of what they are drinking.

Guarantees work both ways.

 

Should the entire system -- the draft, the team control, the salary structure before free agency -- be abolished to grant baseball players the freedoms most individuals enjoy in the employment marketplace?

[cp176]

No, not at all. i think he gets a free pass because billionaires by nature dont pay a penny more in taxes (or anything for that matter) then is absolutely necessary. the fact that JH paid LT for 2 straight years is amazing. to expect him to do it every year is irrational. the reset was going to happen - i had guaranteed you this.

 

You little soothsayer you. As long as I'm not being stuck with needles and you are still communicating with me, I'm ok with it. Oh well - I don't pay a penny more in taxes than I have to either.

[jacksonianmarch]

It is a business to all of them. They don’t play baseball then go to their 9-5’s. They’re baseball players and that’s what pays the bills.

[cp176]

This is what it comes down to. I get the kids have their heroes and losing Mookie hurts (although I find it queasy to be polite, to see how some adults are acting over it all), but does anyone think Mookie really cares that much about some brokenhearted kid in New England?

 

After the 2017 season when he only hit .264 and had the worst year of his young career, the Sox offered him 8 years at $200. He was only 25. He said no. He's only ever wanted to test free agency, and he's testing it to get the most money possible.

 

All this 'baseball isn't a business to me' stuff is all well and good, but the man you are crying to be signed up no matter the cost, sees it as that - a business. And he's going to the team that shells out, no matter how many men/children are devastated by his decision. His loyalty is to his next contract.

 

So let's not make it out like we traded away a guy desperate to stay and sign with the team he loves. He's going to follow the money.

 

There is a lot of truth to what you say like it or not. It is just a business I guess. It sucks too but oh well. JH is gambling on the fact that most fans of our cherished Red Sox will accept this premise as well. Maybe this trade will enhance ticket sales - likely not. or maybe the fan base will buy into the fact that overall this trade will be good for the franchise. We shall see. My only question - Where the hell is the pitcher that we so desperately need?

By the way if I appear queasy over this it is only because of the jersey that my 8 year old grandson wears on his back that has 0 meaning for him now. I actually find it obnoxious that there so many adults here who pretend to know anything about a billionaire's budget. Lots of rich folk I guess.

[Hitch]

Guarantees work both ways.

 

Should the entire system -- the draft, the team control, the salary structure before free agency -- be abolished to grant baseball players the freedoms most individuals enjoy in the employment marketplace?

 

I know quite a few sportsmen in the UK who play football (soccer) at the highest level. The football players in particular find it astonishing players in US sports can just be moved city and team without the players consent. As I am sure most know, in the European set up within most sports, players have to agree to being moved to another club or they can stay exactly where they are until their contract runs down.

 

I also once interviewed Brent Severyn who played for the Islanders/Ducks/Stars. We covered this, he couldn't believe there could be system where players had that much power.

 

The differences between the set ups is vast and very interesting to someone like me who loves sports on both sides of the pond.

Edited February 11, 2020 by Hitch

[mvp 78]

No, not at all. i think he gets a free pass because billionaires by nature dont pay a penny more in taxes (or anything for that matter) then is absolutely necessary. the fact that JH paid LT for 2 straight years is amazing. to expect him to do it every year is irrational. the reset was going to happen - i had guaranteed you this.

 

The luxury tax isn't really a tax though.

[Nick]

The luxury tax isn't really a tax though.

 

What is it?

[Nick]

It is a business to all of them. They don’t play baseball then go to their 9-5’s. They’re baseball players and that’s what pays the bills.

 

Sox fans just needs to get over it and move on.

 

Sox supposedly made a legit offer, Mooke wants to test FA. He's gambling a bit.

 

What if get's hurt? What if he has a down year?

 

At least give him credit for believing in himself.

 

I don't want Sox to give out anyone $400M contract.

 

We got back 15 years of team control players (3). You want rebuild of our farm system? Well, we just got started.

[S5Dewey]

Yeah I see the MLBPA embracing that. Also, maybe eliminate free agency and have all players sterilized...

 

Which is why I wouldn't be at all surprised to see a work stoppage at/during the next CBA.