Mookie Betts and David Price have been traded to Dodgers

[moonslav59]

Even "the budget" is an oversimplification, IMHO. A budget is for one year. A contract extension for Betts would have affected the payroll for the next decade plus.

 

Henry just didn't want to go as high as it would have taken to get Mookie to sign on the bottom line. That's what it came down to.

 

Agreed. I was just trying to emphasize the nuts and bolts of budgets we knew to show how keeping Betts would have meant having very poor supporting casts in 2020 and 2021 and even 2022 and 2023 to a lesser extent.

 

Is Devers exte3nded with betts locked up?

 

Who knows, maybe we'd have traded Bogey before he bolted, dumped Sale or JD, or both.

[moonslav59]

It is isn't about dates and times and budgets I guess to me. I'm painfully aware of everything that you have said. If I had to choose would I choose to have Betts here right now without Story and without Devers? Absolutely without one bit of doubt.

 

Agreed, but would you have still been okay with sucking in 2020 and 2021?

[mvp 78]

True, they weren't good moves, even for a low budget plan, but the fact is, the Betts trade was not "the first" thing Bloom did. (He did sign him, first.) The Springs trade was great, but he didn't keep him around.

 

That is true. I was just commenting on the stuff that came before it.

 

The second Springs trade was not great!

[mvp 78]

Personally it makes no difference to me who was ultimately or even partially responsible for the fact that Betts does not wear a Red Sox uniform at this point in time. DD, Bloom, JH, blah blah blah or should I say ... Him going to the Dodgers means and meant that we lost a potential once in a generation talent. If Mookie ever had intentions of staying in Boston, which we will never truly know for sure, and he was allowed to walk because of the $ it would have taken to keep him here, I don't see it as being justifiable. We went on to sign Story and then this year Devers as well. Something just doesn't seem right with this line of reasoning. In general, I'm not really fond of much that Bloom has or has not done since he has been here but he is the GM and I choose to support him. I do kind of wish though that all of this sustainable talent that he has been responsible for developing would be put on display soon so that I can actually have a real good reason for choosing to follow them.

 

I think if you are ok with "soon" being next year, you'll be happy.

 

Mayer

Drohan

Rafaela

Yorke

Wikelman

Hickey

Guerrero

 

These guys are all AA or higher this season and could be on the MLB roster next year at some point.

 

2025 could include at least partial years from guys like:

 

Roman Anthony

Kyle Teel

Luis Perales

Brainer Bonaci

Chase Meidroth

Blaze Jordan

 

That's a lot of names. Some won't make it. Some should be traded. The pipeline is much closer than some people realize.

[mvp 78]

It is isn't about dates and times and budgets I guess to me. I'm painfully aware of everything that you have said. If I had to choose would I choose to have Betts here right now without Story and without Devers? Absolutely without one bit of doubt.

 

It's the one move I'd undo too.

[mvp 78]

Agreed, but would you have still been okay with sucking in 2020 and 2021?

 

If you get Mookie for another decade? Sure! They would have had to get under the cap in other ways (trade Xander, Devers, etc.).

 

Our superstar now is a great player, but he's not Mookie.

[moonslav59]

If you get Mookie for another decade? Sure! They would have had to get under the cap in other ways (trade Xander, Devers, etc.).

 

Our superstar now is a great player, but he's not Mookie.

 

Yes, that's why I agreed on keeping Mookie as the better move.

[Hugh2]

I think if you are ok with "soon" being next year, you'll be happy.

 

Mayer

Drohan

Rafaela

Yorke

Wikelman

Hickey

Guerrero

 

These guys are all AA or higher this season and could be on the MLB roster next year at some point.

 

2025 could include at least partial years from guys like:

 

Roman Anthony

Kyle Teel

Luis Perales

Brainer Bonaci

Chase Meidroth

Blaze Jordan

 

That's a lot of names. Some won't make it. Some should be traded. The pipeline is much closer than some people realize.

 

You also never know who is going to dazzle and who will fizzle. Someone like Jordan or Bonaci might not make it or turn out to be fine players and need a few more years until they're productive 26' 27' and others could just skyrocket. Anthony doesn't have an ETA of 2025 right now, but he could be starting in Boston that year too.

 

Same thing with Perales.

[moonslav59]

You also never know who is going to dazzle and who will fizzle. Someone like Jordan or Bonaci might not make it or turn out to be fine players and need a few more years until they're productive 26' 27' and others could just skyrocket. Anthony doesn't have an ETA of 2025 right now, but he could be starting in Boston that year too.

 

Same thing with Perales.

 

Exactly. When we look at next summer's rankings, we will see some have fallen, and some have gained.

[mvp 78]

You also never know who is going to dazzle and who will fizzle. Someone like Jordan or Bonaci might not make it or turn out to be fine players and need a few more years until they're productive 26' 27' and others could just skyrocket. Anthony doesn't have an ETA of 2025 right now, but he could be starting in Boston that year too.

 

Same thing with Perales.

 

I believe Anthony will start in AA next season. At that point, it's not a far jump to MLB.

[Deja Doh]

As of yesterday, and forgetting about the bust Jeter Downs, summing up Verdugo and Connor Wong's numbers, they combine for 108 more hits than Betts (32 more doubles). Yes they have 40 less total bases (60 less homers), 42 less walks, 21 less stolen bases, but they only have 40 less run scored and 29 less RBI. We dumped salary which is important. A star will be available. Now go sign Ohtani.

[mvp 78]

As of yesterday, and forgetting about the bust Jeter Downs, summing up Verdugo and Connor Wong's numbers, they combine for 108 more hits than Betts (32 more doubles). Yes they have 40 less total bases (60 less homers), 42 less walks, 21 less stolen bases, but they only have 40 less run scored and 29 less RBI. We dumped salary which is important. A star will be available. Now go sign Ohtani.

 

Ohtani will be twice the price and twice the injury risk. Pass.

 

Betts LAD - 18.4 fWAR

Verdugo/Wong BOS - 8.2 fWAR

 

Betts has been worth an additional 80M+ since going to LAD.

[Bellhorn04]

Mookie Betts last 39 games:

 

378/478/729 - 1207 OPS RIDICULOUS

 

57 hits

29 walks

23 K's

 

Must be one of the hottest stretches in MLB history.

 

Thanks, JH.

[mvp 78]

My heart hurts over this one.

 

I'll never get over this trade.

[redsoxrules]

Ohtani will be twice the price and twice the injury risk. Pass.

 

Betts LAD - 18.4 fWAR

Verdugo/Wong BOS - 8.2 fWAR

 

Betts has been worth an additional 80M+ since going to LAD.

 

Ohtani is already starting to skip starts and being pulled earlier in games. He's gassing out. He won't last long term doing both.

[mvp 78]

Ohtani is already starting to skip starts and being pulled earlier in games. He's gassing out. He won't last long term doing both.

 

Pitchers just carry a really huge risk. He could be worth it for a few years, but that would be the albatross to end all albatrosses.

[Hugh2]

Ohtani will be twice the price and twice the injury risk. Pass.

 

Betts LAD - 18.4 fWAR

Verdugo/Wong BOS - 8.2 fWAR

 

Betts has been worth an additional 80M+ since going to LAD.

 

How much Fwar could one have bought with 30 million a year for the past 3 years?

This is an argument that will probably never die, but I'm in the camp that you have to compare value over years of team control.

If someone could convince me otherwise, then it's inherently logical to add what you can buy with the money spent on the other side of the equation.

 

To me this makes an impossible mess.

 

I could say the Sox spend 28 million in 2021 and got 15 WAR from Kike/Renfroe/Arroyo/Eovaldi/Verdugo/wong while Dodgers spent 30.4 million to get 3.9 WAR out of Betts.

I could say in 2022 the Sox got 7.3 Fwar for only 30 million vs. Betts at 6.5 for Eovaldi/Hill/WAcha/Verdugo/Wong

I could say in 2023 they got 8.1 WAR between Wong/Duvall/Paxton/Yoshida/Martin for only an additional 32.42 million, slightly more than 30.4 million for 6.1 FWar of Betts.

 

I understand there's an argument against this, and I obviously just picked the best War performers who were picked up and matched the Salaries up, in some years negative wAR may drag these numbers down (I used Kike for some years not others). It's a mess. Still, I could say the Sox have got 30.3 FWar vs. Betts 16.5 FWar for about even money. Again, admittedly subjective, but if people want to include Betts past his team control years you have to figure in what his contract gets in in FA, as that is the opportunity cost of signing Betts here. So I'd argue it's fair, No way Henry is spending 30 extra million every years since 2020 just because Betts is on the roster. Maybe one year they do if they think they had a shot E.G. maybe they spend more in 2021.....who knows.

 

At the end of the day, people much smarter than me like to weigh team control years, which seems reasonable. I understand why people want to include Betts contract years in that evaluation but if you do that you HAVE to add in what 30.4 Million gets you which is an impossible task to not be subjective but as I clearly proved from a certain vantage point you could say the Sox almost doubled their value in trading away Betts. 30 FWAR vs. 16 Fwar.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

How much Fwar could one have bought with 30 million a year for the past 3 years?

This is an argument that will probably never die, but I'm in the camp that you have to compare value over years of team control.

If someone could convince me otherwise, then it's inherently logical to add what you can buy with the money spent on the other side of the equation.

 

To me this makes an impossible mess.

 

I could say the Sox spend 28 million in 2021 and got 15 WAR from Kike/Renfroe/Arroyo/Eovaldi/Verdugo/wong while Dodgers spent 30.4 million to get 3.9 WAR out of Betts.

I could say in 2022 the Sox got 7.3 Fwar for only 30 million vs. Betts at 6.5 for Eovaldi/Hill/WAcha/Verdugo/Wong

I could say in 2023 they got 8.1 WAR between Wong/Duvall/Paxton/Yoshida/Martin for only an additional 32.42 million, slightly more than 30.4 million for 6.1 FWar of Betts.

 

I understand there's an argument against this, and I obviously just picked the best War performers who were picked up and matched the Salaries up, in some years negative wAR may drag these numbers down (I used Kike for some years not others). It's a mess. Still, I could say the Sox have got 30.3 FWar vs. Betts 16.5 FWar for about even money. Again, admittedly subjective, but if people want to include Betts past his team control years you have to figure in what his contract gets in in FA, as that is the opportunity cost of signing Betts here. So I'd argue it's fair, No way Henry is spending 30 extra million every years since 2020 just because Betts is on the roster. Maybe one year they do if they think they had a shot E.G. maybe they spend more in 2021.....who knows.

 

At the end of the day, people much smarter than me like to weigh team control years, which seems reasonable. I understand why people want to include Betts contract years in that evaluation but if you do that you HAVE to add in what 30.4 Million gets you which is an impossible task to not be subjective but as I clearly proved from a certain vantage point you could say the Sox almost doubled their value in trading away Betts. 30 FWAR vs. 16 Fwar.

 

Where is the qualitative data that should also factor into investing in a face of the franchise: always smiling, never in trouble, always in shape, comes from good stock, feeds the homeless-- in disguise, because he doesn't want publicity, but just wants to help others...

[mvp 78]

How much Fwar could one have bought with 30 million a year for the past 3 years?

This is an argument that will probably never die, but I'm in the camp that you have to compare value over years of team control.

If someone could convince me otherwise, then it's inherently logical to add what you can buy with the money spent on the other side of the equation.

 

To me this makes an impossible mess.

 

I could say the Sox spend 28 million in 2021 and got 15 WAR from Kike/Renfroe/Arroyo/Eovaldi/Verdugo/wong while Dodgers spent 30.4 million to get 3.9 WAR out of Betts.

I could say in 2022 the Sox got 7.3 Fwar for only 30 million vs. Betts at 6.5 for Eovaldi/Hill/WAcha/Verdugo/Wong

I could say in 2023 they got 8.1 WAR between Wong/Duvall/Paxton/Yoshida/Martin for only an additional 32.42 million, slightly more than 30.4 million for 6.1 FWar of Betts.

 

I understand there's an argument against this, and I obviously just picked the best War performers who were picked up and matched the Salaries up, in some years negative wAR may drag these numbers down (I used Kike for some years not others). It's a mess. Still, I could say the Sox have got 30.3 FWar vs. Betts 16.5 FWar for about even money. Again, admittedly subjective, but if people want to include Betts past his team control years you have to figure in what his contract gets in in FA, as that is the opportunity cost of signing Betts here. So I'd argue it's fair, No way Henry is spending 30 extra million every years since 2020 just because Betts is on the roster. Maybe one year they do if they think they had a shot E.G. maybe they spend more in 2021.....who knows.

 

At the end of the day, people much smarter than me like to weigh team control years, which seems reasonable. I understand why people want to include Betts contract years in that evaluation but if you do that you HAVE to add in what 30.4 Million gets you which is an impossible task to not be subjective but as I clearly proved from a certain vantage point you could say the Sox almost doubled their value in trading away Betts. 30 FWAR vs. 16 Fwar.

 

If they retained Mookie, who does it stop you from signing? Not Arroyo. They wouldn't have Wong, Verdugo and maybe Eovaldi. However, picking Mookie's worst professional season is definitely one way to go about the argument, especially when he was still worth almost 4 fWAR. In 2019, he was already making 20M, so what does that additional 10M stop the Sox from getting? Just Kiké? So you're really comparing Mookie's RF replacements and Kiké to Mookie. Over the following decade, I think the Sox would have been better off having Betts as a fixture in RF than the uncertainty that came with turning over the roster.

 

Or is the real consideration that Henry can only willingly "afford" one max contract. Is the choice between Xander, Raffy and Mookie and which one do you pick? They went with the youngest of the three. We'll see if that choice was the correct one. So far, it's not looking good.

[moonslav59]

Where is the qualitative data that should also factor into investing in a face of the franchise: always smiling, never in trouble, always in shape, comes from good stock, feeds the homeless-- in disguise, because he doesn't want publicity, but just wants to help others...

 

I was all for keeping Betts, at any price. I was willing to go $400M/14.

 

However, if JH kept the budgets the same, we would not be any better off with Betts and 5 replacement level players, instead of 6 decent players.

 

It's not an easy comp to make.

[Hugh2]

Where is the qualitative data that should also factor into investing in a face of the franchise: always smiling, never in trouble, always in shape, comes from good stock, feeds the homeless-- in disguise, because he doesn't want publicity, but just wants to help others...

 

I was against the trade, Mookie was and continues to be my favorite MLB player, so please don't mistake my playing devils advocate as an endorsement of the deal.

 

But to answer your quesiton, I will ping back to a point I made in my tirade. This is highly subjective and likely never to die.

 

The whole "face of the franchise" element to me means nothing if you're losing. Do you think the Angels would rather have Mike Trout or championships? People could say Bogaerts was the face of the franchise after he left, probably would have felt much more like it too if they went all the way in 2021. At the end of the day stars can help you win.....but winning makes good players stars. From the vantage point I provided, one could argue the Dodgers got fleeced in the deal, not that I would say that.

 

The Sox lack of playoff success since has not been because of the Mookie Betts trade, it's been a vast combination of bad moves, trades, and underperformances from within. After all it's a team sport and LAA has shown having two of the best players in the universe means nothing if the rest of your moves stink. And after all, they would have to had made up an additional 15 FWar the last 3 seasons with Betts on this team and even money and where would that come from? Bobby Dalbec? Brandon Walter? IDK

[Hugh2]

If they retained Mookie, who does it stop you from signing? Not Arroyo. They wouldn't have Wong, Verdugo and maybe Eovaldi. However, picking Mookie's worst professional season is definitely one way to go about the argument, especially when he was still worth almost 4 fWAR. In 2019, he was already making 20M, so what does that additional 10M stop the Sox from getting? Just Kiké? So you're really comparing Mookie's RF replacements and Kiké to Mookie. Over the following decade, I think the Sox would have been better off having Betts as a fixture in RF than the uncertainty that came with turning over the roster.

 

Or is the real consideration that Henry can only willingly "afford" one max contract? Is the choice between Xander, Raffy and Mookie and which one do you pick? They went with the youngest of the three. We'll see if that choice was the correct one. So far, it's not looking good.

 

You're only proving my point, conversely no way anyone would assume the Sox are automatically spending 30 extra million a year in 2020/2021/2022/2023. You have to add/subtract from somewhere, my point was to illustrate how futile it is to use a players contract years after being traded away with team control years. That's a fans play, and in that spirit, my comment is very reasonable.

 

And picking his worse season? lol dude, I picked the last 3 seasons, was I supposed to skip it? again, just another point in this being futile and subjective. And even if they still sign Arroyo, how much FWar does he really add, and to the point of my comment I can take out and add guys in there as I see fit, it's subjective. 30.4 million is 30.4 million and it's equally reasonable if not the most to assume that money goes somewhere.

 

I wish the Mookie trade didn't happen, but the valuation we use against it doesn't make sense to me either, it's wrong. That doesn't make it a good trade by any means, those two comments aren't mutually exclusive.

[moonslav59]

I was against the trade, Mookie was and continues to be my favorite MLB player, so please don't mistake my playing devils advocate as an endorsement of the deal.

 

But to answer your quesiton, I will ping back to a point I made in my tirade. This is highly subjective and likely never to die.

 

The whole "face of the franchise" element to me means nothing if you're losing. Do you think the Angels would rather have Mike Trout or championships? People could say Bogaerts was the face of the franchise after he left, probably would have felt much more like it too if they went all the way in 2021. At the end of the day stars can help you win.....but winning makes good players stars. From the vantage point I provided, one could argue the Dodgers got fleeced in the deal, not that I would say that.

 

The Sox lack of playoff success since has not been because of the Mookie Betts trade, it's been a vast combination of bad moves, trades, and underperformances from within. After all it's a team sport and LAA has shown having two of the best players in the universe means nothing if the rest of your moves stink. And after all, they would have to had made up an additional 15 FWar the last 3 seasons with Betts on this team and even money and where would that come from? Bobby Dalbec? Brandon Walter? IDK

 

Well said.

 

I made a similar point, when fans were complaining about us losing the face of the franchise in Bogey, and to lesser extents JD and Nate. We were losing with those guys. Their "faces" had little value. (Their production was declining, too.)

[Hugh2]

If they retained Mookie, who does it stop you from signing? Not Arroyo. They wouldn't have Wong, Verdugo and maybe Eovaldi. However, picking Mookie's worst professional season is definitely one way to go about the argument, especially when he was still worth almost 4 fWAR. In 2019, he was already making 20M, so what does that additional 10M stop the Sox from getting? Just Kiké? So you're really comparing Mookie's RF replacements and Kiké to Mookie. Over the following decade, I think the Sox would have been better off having Betts as a fixture in RF than the uncertainty that came with turning over the roster.

 

Or is the real consideration that Henry can only willingly "afford" one max contract. Is the choice between Xander, Raffy and Mookie and which one do you pick? They went with the youngest of the three. We'll see if that choice was the correct one. So far, it's not looking good.

 

and over the next decade, what is the 30 million getting you? If the Sox sign a 30 million-dollar player next year and he outperforms Mookie in his 30's then I win again....

 

Again, subjective and I'm playing devils advocate, but this all just proves my point.

[Bellhorn04]

You're only proving my point, conversely no way anyone would assume the Sox are automatically spending 30 extra million a year in 2020/2021/2022/2023. You have to add/subtract from somewhere, my point was to illustrate how futile it is to use a players contract years after being traded away with team control years. That's a fans play, and in that spirit, my comment is very reasonable.

 

And picking his worse season? lol dude, I picked the last 3 seasons, was I supposed to skip it? again, just another point in this being futile and subjective. And even if they still sign Arroyo, how much FWar does he really add, and to the point of my comment I can take out and add guys in there as I see fit, it's subjective. 30.4 million is 30.4 million and it's equally reasonable if not the most to assume that money goes somewhere.

 

I wish the Mookie trade didn't happen, but the valuation we use against it doesn't make sense to me either, it's wrong. That doesn't make it a good trade by any means, those two comments aren't mutually exclusive.

 

But Hugh, we can also cherry-pick Sox players who have had lousy returns on the money the last few years.

 

For example, what if we compare 2023 Betts 29 AAV to 2023 Story and Kluber 33.33 AAV?

[Bellhorn04]

Betts AAV vs. FanGraphs Dollar Values:

 

2021 29 30.8

2022 29 52.3

2023 (pro-rated for 120 team games) 21.5 48.9

 

Totals 79.5 132

Surplus value to date 52.5

[mvp 78]

I was all for keeping Betts, at any price. I was willing to go $400M/14.

 

However, if JH kept the budgets the same, we would not be any better off with Betts and 5 replacement level players, instead of 6 decent players.

 

It's not an easy comp to make.

 

Betts, plus cheap decent players on pre-ARB/ARB deals would be fine too?

[mvp 78]

I was against the trade, Mookie was and continues to be my favorite MLB player, so please don't mistake my playing devils advocate as an endorsement of the deal.

 

But to answer your quesiton, I will ping back to a point I made in my tirade. This is highly subjective and likely never to die.

 

The whole "face of the franchise" element to me means nothing if you're losing. Do you think the Angels would rather have Mike Trout or championships? People could say Bogaerts was the face of the franchise after he left, probably would have felt much more like it too if they went all the way in 2021. At the end of the day stars can help you win.....but winning makes good players stars. From the vantage point I provided, one could argue the Dodgers got fleeced in the deal, not that I would say that.

 

The Sox lack of playoff success since has not been because of the Mookie Betts trade, it's been a vast combination of bad moves, trades, and underperformances from within. After all it's a team sport and LAA has shown having two of the best players in the universe means nothing if the rest of your moves stink. And after all, they would have to had made up an additional 15 FWar the last 3 seasons with Betts on this team and even money and where would that come from? Bobby Dalbec? Brandon Walter? IDK

 

I wouldn't mistake the Angels' ineptitude for the Sox being able to manage one large contract. Have the Sox turned into the Angels now that they extended Devers?

[mvp 78]

Betts AAV vs. FanGraphs Dollar Values:

 

2021 29 30.8

2022 29 52.3

2023 (pro-rated for 120 team games) 21.5 48.9

 

Totals 79.5 132

Surplus value to date 52.5

 

He's pretty good!

[Bellhorn04]

Betts, plus cheap decent players on pre-ARB/ARB deals would be fine too?

 

That would be very fine.