2020 Trade Deadline

[Bellhorn04]

But why didn't we want to pay Mookie $400 million? You can't look at his contract in a bubble. Whether the Sox are willing to pay out a big contract has a lot to do with how much they're paying other players and how many cost-controlled players are on the team or will be in the near future.

 

I'm not looking at it in a bubble, honestly. We had a lot of payroll coming off the books by the end of 2022. That's why Mookie's contract would have been doable if they were willing to give him the $400 million.

[Kimmi]

I'm not looking at it in a bubble, honestly. We had a lot of payroll coming off the books by the end of 2022. That's why Mookie's contract would have been doable if they were willing to give him the $400 million.

 

Would the Sox have been able to reset the luxury tax penalty this year or next? If I'm not mistaken, a $300 million contract to Mookie would have ended up costing close to $500 million after the tax penalties.

[Bellhorn04]

Would the Sox have been able to reset the luxury tax penalty this year or next? If I'm not mistaken, a $300 million contract to Mookie would have ended up costing close to $500 million after the tax penalties.

 

They might not have been able to reset this year. They might have had to wait one more year. It might have cost a few extra million in tax.

 

Or they could have traded JDM, traded Price, not signed JBJ etc. That would have offset Mookie's 27 million.

 

If the tax issue was the prime reason they traded Mookie, it's a horrible one.

 

You have made a persuasive case against giving Mookie $350-400 million. I can accept that as the one valid reason to let him go.

[Bellhorn04]

Would the Sox have been able to reset the luxury tax penalty this year or next? If I'm not mistaken, a $300 million contract to Mookie would have ended up costing close to $500 million after the tax penalties.

 

That math is not right about the $500 million. No way the extra cost is that much.

[Kimmi]

They might not have been able to reset this year. They might have had to wait one more year. It might have cost a few extra million in tax.

 

Or they could have traded JDM, traded Price, not signed JBJ etc. That would have offset Mookie's 27 million.

 

If the tax issue was the prime reason they traded Mookie, it's a horrible one.

 

You have made a persuasive case against giving Mookie $350-400 million. I can accept that as the one valid reason to let him go.

 

So in order to keep Mookie they would have to give up other players. Maybe it's semantics, but I don't agree that the only valid reason to let him go is because they don't want to pay him that much.

 

What you're saying that if the team considered nothing else and decided they didn't want to pay Mookie $400 million, then that's a valid reason. But the team can't consider nothing else.

[Bellhorn04]

It's possible that the Sox thought they'd have a shot at Mookie in free agency, of course. But if they thought that was a real possibility, trading him to the team with the best shot at signing Mookie to an extension would also qualify as a huge blunder.

[Kimmi]

That math is not right about the $500 million. No way the extra cost is that much.

 

I can't remember where I read that and what the details were surrounding it in terms of the Sox resetting, but I'm certain I read that somewhere.

 

I've been wrong before though.

[moonslav59]

I can't remember where I read that and what the details were surrounding it in terms of the Sox resetting, but I'm certain I read that somewhere.

 

I've been wrong before though.

 

I think the assumption was they'd be over the cap after 2021.

[notin]

It's possible that the Sox thought they'd have a shot at Mookie in free agency, of course. But if they thought that was a real possibility, trading him to the team with the best shot at signing Mookie to an extension would also qualify as a huge blunder.

 

Well, you can only trade him to a team that makes an offer. Did anyone else make one?

 

If Mookie was as deadset on testing the market as we all thought, the destination did not matter...

[Bellhorn04]

Well, you can only trade him to a team that makes an offer. Did anyone else make one?

 

If Mookie was as deadset on testing the market as we all thought, the destination did not matter...

 

But the destination mattered hugely, as things turned out.

 

Look for a new thread on this topic this evening!

[notin]

But the destination mattered hugely, as things turned out.

 

Look for a new thread on this topic this evening!

 

Ah, hindsight. The best criteria for a decision.

 

Of course, the sox could have trade him to, say, Cleveland and saw Mookie test the market. At which point, the Dodgers would certainly have interest (unless you think they committed $365 million on a whim), so the Sox still would have had serious competition re-signing him. Maybe we could have forced the Dodgers to pay more? Maybe Mookie simply wanted a change of scenery or to be out of Boston?

 

It looks like that no matter the outcome, getting Verdugo might actually be the absolute best case scenario for the Sox...

[Bellhorn04]

Ah, hindsight. The best criteria for a decision.

 

If you're the Red Sox, you have to take in all the possible scenarios. It's kind of your job to do that...

[notin]

If you're the Red Sox, you have to take in all the possible scenarios. It's kind of your job to do that...

 

You know, there was more to that post...

[mvp 78]

I look forward to continuing to debate this move for the next 10 years at which point there will be only 6 people left on here.

[Bellhorn04]

You know, there was more to that post...

 

Wait for tonight's new thread!

[notin]

Wait for tonight's new thread!

 

Are you a cable TV network now?

[oldtimer]

So in order to keep Mookie they would have to give up other players. Maybe it's semantics, but I don't agree that the only valid reason to let him go is because they don't want to pay him that much.

 

What you're saying that if the team considered nothing else and decided they didn't want to pay Mookie $400 million, then that's a valid reason. But the team can't consider nothing else.

 

Signing Mookie to such a large long term deal and having Bogaerts, Sale, Eovaldi and JDM with big contracts and the Price contract hangover would have made it difficult to sign a couple more quality pitchers and fill some of the obvious gaps in the lineup. A 12 year deal is a high risk deal. It just wasn't right for the Sox at that time. We got a nice young player in Verdugo. It won't be that long until Devers will expect to be paid. Mookie is a great young player and it would have been nice to keep him in a Sox uniform. Too bad circumstances didn't permit it to happen.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

Ah, hindsight. The best criteria for a decision.

 

Of course, the sox could have trade him to, say, Cleveland and saw Mookie test the market. At which point, the Dodgers would certainly have interest (unless you think they committed $365 million on a whim), so the Sox still would have had serious competition re-signing him. Maybe we could have forced the Dodgers to pay more? Maybe Mookie simply wanted a change of scenery or to be out of Boston?

 

It looks like that no matter the outcome, getting Verdugo might actually be the absolute best case scenario for the Sox...

 

Especially... and I would say, because... LA agreed to take Price in the same deal. For all we know, the price of getting rid of David was the inclusion of Betts in the deal. The reset and budget going forward was less about Mookie's 2020 20 mil and more about Price's contract -- which Boston would be stuck with for the duration once his no-trade kicked in (because no one would've wanted him at his price). Price was already an unhappy camper for his entire Red Sox tenure (including his bitter WS presser) and had to go; imagine how rancorous it would've become -- at least in the press -- as he continued to decline while playing for a bad team.

 

p.s. if it was just a straight Mookie trade, to LA or SD, even for one year, I find it hard to believe that wouldn't be worth someone's decent minor league pitching prospect.

[mvp 78]

For all we know, the price of getting rid of David was the inclusion of Betts in the deal.

 

Can't say I agree with that premise, especially when the Sox are paying a lot of his salary going forward. The addition of Price just allowed the Sox to get some better prospects in return for only one year of Betts.

[notin]

Especially... and I would say, because... LA agreed to take Price in the same deal. For all we know, the price of getting rid of David was the inclusion of Betts in the deal. The reset and budget going forward was less about Mookie's 2020 20 mil and more about Price's contract -- which Boston would be stuck with for the duration once his no-trade kicked in (because no one would've wanted him at his price). Price was already an unhappy camper for his entire Red Sox tenure (including his bitter WS presser) and had to go; imagine how rancorous it would've become -- at least in the press -- as he continued to decline while playing for a bad team.

 

p.s. if it was just a straight Mookie trade, to LA or SD, even for one year, I find it hard to believe that wouldn't be worth someone's decent minor league pitching prospect.

 

 

Something I have always believed, too.

 

But....

 

History has shown those contracts do get traded. Stanton, A-Rod, Cano, Price, Fielder, Verlander, Greinke, Kemp, Manny Ramirez. These were all among the largest contracts in the game when signed, and all of them were traded mid-contract. And I bet I forgot about one or two names.

 

Of course, most of thir deals have been eclisped in the past 3 years by Trout, Machado, Harper, Rendon, Cole, etc. But I would imagine some of those deals will get dealt as well. (Machado will get traded. Book it.)

 

So.. will Mookie play all 12 years in Dodger Blue? I wouldn't bank on it just yet....

[notin]

Especially... and I would say, because... LA agreed to take Price in the same deal. For all we know, the price of getting rid of David was the inclusion of Betts in the deal. The reset and budget going forward was less about Mookie's 2020 20 mil and more about Price's contract -- which Boston would be stuck with for the duration once his no-trade kicked in (because no one would've wanted him at his price). Price was already an unhappy camper for his entire Red Sox tenure (including his bitter WS presser) and had to go; imagine how rancorous it would've become -- at least in the press -- as he continued to decline while playing for a bad team.

 

p.s. if it was just a straight Mookie trade, to LA or SD, even for one year, I find it hard to believe that wouldn't be worth someone's decent minor league pitching prospect.

 

I do believe Price was unhappy, but apparently he could be bought. He did have the option to opt out after 2018...

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

Can't say I agree with that premise, especially when the Sox are paying a lot of his salary going forward. The addition of Price just allowed the Sox to get some better prospects in return for only one year of Betts.

 

Man, I see it as totally opposite. Even conceding that Price is still a talented pitcher, his multitude of recent age-related physical/mental issues (slash included for connection) make him an unreliable investment, even at half-price (no pun intended, but maybe it should be...).

[notin]

Can't say I agree with that premise, especially when the Sox are paying a lot of his salary going forward. The addition of Price just allowed the Sox to get some better prospects in return for only one year of Betts.

 

I would argue it limited the return. Otherwise, why not deal Price separately?

[mvp 78]

I would argue it limited the return. Otherwise, why not deal Price separately?

 

I'm arguing the exact opposite, so why not include Price?

[mvp 78]

I can't imagine one year of Betts for Wong/Verdugo/Downs would have been accepted on baseball trade values.

[notin]

I can't imagine one year of Betts for Wong/Verdugo/Downs would have been accepted on baseball trade values.

 

It was not. Verdugo alone had more value than Betts at the time.

 

Price had negative trade value comparable to that of Wil Myers at the time. And Myers was a guy the Sox were taking in trade rumors in order to up the prospect return..

Edited September 3, 2020 by notin

[notin]

I'm arguing the exact opposite, so why not include Price?

 

Because per your argument, Price had positive trade value despite his declining WAR and massive salary. If he had positive trade value, why not deal him separately...

[mvp 78]

It was not. Verdugo alone had more value than Betts at the time.

 

But it was much closer than the May/Lux (Maalox?) packages people were expecting...

 

Well, people are idiots and the baseballtradevalues site is not infallible.

[mvp 78]

Because per your argument, Price had positive trade value despite his declining WAR and massive salary. If he had positive trade value, why not deal him separately...

 

His massive salary was cut in half. Price at half his contract has a ton of value.

[notin]

His massive salary was cut in half. Price at half his contract has a ton of value.

 

BTV still had him at negative trade value at half his price...