Why was Mookie traded, exactly?

[moonslav59]

Rule 1: Don't believe Felger

Rule 2: See rule 1

 

+1 ....

[notin]

If we want to go all anecdotal on Mookie, the one that stings a bit, and came from Mookie himself, is that when the Red Sox first offered him an extension, it was for $200 million - for 8 years I believe - he says he was very close to taking it, but his mother gave him a little talk about not acting hastily and not acting on emotion, or words to that effect.

 

And after that point, Mookie did seem hellbent on testing the market.

 

It is entirely possible he saw the extension from LA as being about as good as thigns were going to get once the pandemic hit and the economic future seemed a lot less certain.

 

His comments about being dedicated to winning in the atmosphere of the Dodgers seemed a bit premature, as he had not played a single regular season game for them at the time the deal was announced...

[notin]

I'm not sure I think JH is too cheap to sign MB. To me, it's an example of owner/GM/management all wanting to put their 'stamp' on a team (human nature--same with the 'new guy' your company just hired). And they think more about that than the results. So Bloom wants primarily to make a big splash, and what better way to do that than to do what he did? As to question 2-- I'm sure this damages fan relations (but fans have short memories, and if you live in NE, as most of us do, you're going to remain a fan regardless); players? I wouldn't know. But they'll probably go where the money is best (even though, for young athletes, I can's see how Boston can compete with LA or Miami).

 

Just yesterday you asked Henry if he was too busy "bean counting" to watch Mookie in the World Series.

 

Although I can honestly see that being chalked up to frustration...

[jad]

Just yesterday you asked Henry if he was too busy "bean counting" to watch Mookie in the World Series.

 

Although I can honestly see that being chalked up to frustration...

 

Ha! Obviously, you spend WAY too much time reading and collating my posts! But I believe you are essentially correct.

 

(In my defense, and in defense of good people everywhere, perhaps allowing for a bit, just a bit of hyperbole [i know I know, we never see that on sports boards], I'm not sure those two posts are contradictory!)

[notin]

Ha! Obviously, you spend WAY too much time reading and collating my posts! But I believe you are essentially correct.

 

(In my defense, and in defense of good people everywhere, perhaps allowing for a bit, just a bit of hyperbole [i know I know, we never see that on sports boards], I'm not sure those two posts are contradictory!)

 

And really, I have seen enough in my (way too many) years of posting on Red Sox boards to realize some people use these types of forums to vent their frustrations...

[Bellhorn04]

And really, I have seen enough in my (way too many) years of posting on Red Sox boards to realize some people use these types of forums to vent their frustrations...

 

Yes, like the way you insist on blaming Mookie's departure on DD.

[notin]

Yes, like the way you insist on blaming Mookie's departure on DD.

 

I still do. Because his spending habits made it an obvious outcome.

 

I was even saying in the waning days of that other website that the Price contract would make signing Betts more difficult if not impossible...

[moonslav59]

I still do. Because his spending habits made it an obvious outcome.

 

I was even saying in the waning days of that other website that the Price contract would make signing Betts more difficult if not impossible...

 

...and it wasn't just Price. DD essentially chose to sign Sale, JD and Bogey knowing it may make it harder to keep Betts, later. He may have tried harder to keep Betts anyways, if Henry allowed him to do so.

[oldtimer]

...and it wasn't just Price. DD essentially chose to sign Sale, JD and Bogey knowing it may make it harder to keep Betts, later. He may have tried harder to keep Betts anyways, if Henry allowed him to do so.

 

Now the Dodgers may have problems signing Seager based on the Mookie contract. What goes around comes around.

[jad]

Now the Dodgers may have problems signing Seager based on the Mookie contract. What goes around comes around.

 

? I don't see why. The only problems they will have in signing him is if they do not offer what he could get on the open market, right? (That was also the case with Mookie.). I can't imagine any player (or worker in any organization) accepting the argument: "We really can't pay you what you want or deserve because we paid your colleague too much."

[notin]

Now the Dodgers may have problems signing Seager based on the Mookie contract. What goes around comes around.

 

The Dodgers also have the advantage of havig players come up and contribute for minimum MLB wage, which makes keeping some of their stars around with insane lucrative deals, even if said prospects play different positions. They might let Seager walk but they have the option to take, say, Keibert Ruiz, a highly regarded and superfluous (thanks to Will Smith) catching prospect, and package him off for a shortstop, like say Carter Kieboom,who then plays for the MLB minimum.

 

The bigger deal will be when they try to extend Bellinger, who should be a lot more difficult to replace than Seager...

[mvp 78]

The Dodgers also have the advantage of havig players come up and contribute for minimum MLB wage, which makes keeping some of their stars around with insane lucrative deals, even if said prospects play different positions. They might let Seager walk but they have the option to take, say, Keibert Ruiz, a highly regarded and superfluous (thanks to Will Smith) catching prospect, and package him off for a shortstop, like say Carter Kieboom,who then plays for the MLB minimum.

 

The bigger deal will be when they try to extend Bellinger, who should be a lot more difficult to replace than Seager...

 

You break the bank to keep Betts and Bellinger together. LA can afford it.

[notin]

? I don't see why. The only problems they will have in signing him is if they do not offer what he could get on the open market, right? (That was also the case with Mookie.). I can't imagine any player (or worker in any organization) accepting the argument: "We really can't pay you what you want or deserve because we paid your colleague too much."

 

Exactly.

 

oldtimer's point is Mookie very likely cut too deep into the budget to accommodate the expected demands of Seager. And they potentially see Seager walk after next season...

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

I'll always wonder if the climate may have been a factor. Baseball is a warm weather sport, and Boston -- in the Spring moreso than the Fall -- negates the concept, especially at night when most of the games are held. If the money is comparable, why wouldn't an athlete want to play in optimal conditions conducive to a long, productive career; Betts grew up in the South, after all.

 

As far as whether the franchise and/or city is undesirable, I did hear Mookie comment in an interview a year ago on the pressures of the full-court press and fan attention in Beantown as opposed to other places. LA is just so more relaxed in so many ways.

 

But all Red Sox fans should call BS on Betts' latest take on preferring the Dodgers because they're winners. Was he not on a team that finished first three straight years, including a World Series title and best record in club history?

[notin]

I'll always wonder if the climate may have been a factor. Baseball is a warm weather sport, and Boston -- in the Spring moreso than the Fall -- negates the concept, especially at night when most of the games are held. If the money is comparable, why wouldn't an athlete want to play in optimal conditions conducive to a long, productive career; Betts grew up in the South, after all.

 

As far as whether the franchise and/or city is undesirable, I did hear Mookie comment in an interview a year ago on the pressures of the full-court press and fan attention in Beantown as opposed to other places. LA is just so more relaxed in so many ways.

 

But all Red Sox fans should call BS on Betts' latest take on preferring the Dodgers because they're winners. Was he not on a team that finished first three straight years, including a World Series title and best record in club history?

 

But how did he know what to compare it to? I wonder what city had the second toughest media he played in front of - Pawtucket or Portland? Or was it Greenville?

 

Now I will give him this - Boston does have some of the stupidest sportswriters and media personalities like Gerry Callahan and Tony Massarotti. But those guys rip into ownership just as much as players...

[Bellhorn04]

I still do. Because his spending habits made it an obvious outcome.

 

I was even saying in the waning days of that other website that the Price contract would make signing Betts more difficult if not impossible...

 

It was far from impossible.

[notin]

It was far from impossible.

 

Speculation.

 

Even JD Martinez said the Sox would not be able to keep two $30mill players. But we know they could afford one...

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

But how did he know what to compare it to? I wonder what city had the second toughest media he played in front of - Pawtucket or Portland? Or was it Greenville?

 

Now I will give him this - Boston does have some of the stupidest sportswriters and media personalities like Gerry Callahan and Tony Massarotti. But those guys rip into ownership just as much as players...

 

Well, he is from Nashville, a few hours from Memphis, where stands a famous museum with the amiable name of Graceland...

 

It's probably easier playing in front of the rabid fans of LA... like, when do they have time to hammer the players on talk radio -- from their cars while trying to get to Dodger Stadium by the 3rd inning or when they leave the games by the 7th inning every night?

[Bellhorn04]

Speculation.

 

Even JD Martinez said the Sox would not be able to keep two $30mill players. But we know they could afford one...

 

Your position is at least as speculative as mine.

 

Tom Werner's comments after Mookie signed the extension said nothing about short-term constraints. He talked about the length of the deal and how sketchy the results of such long deals have been etc.

[notin]

Your position is at least as speculative as mine.

 

Tom Werner's comments after Mookie signed the extension said nothing about short-term constraints. He talked about the length of the deal and how sketchy the results of such long deals have been etc.

 

Oh they all go south eventually. Signing a mega deal wheer you get as many productive seasons as Manny Ramirez provided is the outlier. But then Manny was a similar age to Betts when he signed...

[moonslav59]

Speculation.

 

Even JD Martinez said the Sox would not be able to keep two $30mill players. But we know they could afford one...

 

Interestingly, he traded the one $30M man with Betts to LAD. Now, we have none.

[notin]

Well, he is from Nashville, a few hours from Memphis, where stands a famous museum with the amiable name of Graceland...

 

It's probably easier playing in front of the rabid fans of LA... like, when do they have time to hammer the players on talk radio -- from their cars while trying to get to Dodger Stadium by the 3rd inning or when they leave the games by the 7th inning every night?

 

So Mookie craves apathy?

 

Not really sure how you think Graceland fits in the story...

[Bellhorn04]

Oh they all go south eventually. Signing a mega deal wheer you get as many productive seasons as Manny Ramirez provided is the outlier. But then Manny was a similar age to Betts when he signed...

 

Yep. But even Manny's deal was "only" 8 guaranteed years. Mookie's is a full 50% longer than that.

[notin]

Well, he is from Nashville, a few hours from Memphis, where stands a famous museum with the amiable name of Graceland...

 

It's probably easier playing in front of the rabid fans of LA... like, when do they have time to hammer the players on talk radio -- from their cars while trying to get to Dodger Stadium by the 3rd inning or when they leave the games by the 7th inning every night?

 

Now Mookie did have an uncle (actually first cousin once removed) who played in a variety of MLB cities, including Boston briefly, and possibly hinted at this. But I don't think Terry Shumpert drew either a lot of praise or a lot of ire from the Boston media for any of his 51 plate appearances for the Sox...

[notin]

Yep. But even Manny's deal was "only" 8 guaranteed years. Mookie's is a full 50% longer than that.

 

True. But Manny's deal was signed 20 years ago. Back when we were still at "82 years and counting." I'd think the Sox financial picture might have changed a bit since then. Could they afford 4 more years of potential decline nowadays?

 

Other teams have locked up their stars into their early 40's. I would bet Mookie's deal, despite being significantly larger, would hamper the Sox a lot less than, say, Joey Votto's will do to the Reds...

[mvp 78]

True. But Manny's deal was signed 20 years ago. Back when we were still at "82 years and counting." I'd think the Sox financial picture might have changed a bit since then. Could they afford 4 more years of potential decline nowadays?

 

Other teams have locked up their stars into their early 40's. I would bet Mookie's deal, despite being significantly larger, would hamper the Sox a lot less than, say, Joey Votto's will do to the Reds...

 

If 28 year old Manny Ramirez was on the market this offseason, the Sox would be dumb not to do a mega deal with him.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

So Mookie craves apathy?

 

Not really sure how you think Graceland fits in the story...

 

New Englanders are a lot of things, but no one's ever called me graceful.

[Bellhorn04]

True. But Manny's deal was signed 20 years ago. Back when we were still at "82 years and counting." I'd think the Sox financial picture might have changed a bit since then. Could they afford 4 more years of potential decline nowadays?

 

Other teams have locked up their stars into their early 40's. I would bet Mookie's deal, despite being significantly larger, would hamper the Sox a lot less than, say, Joey Votto's will do to the Reds...

 

We've got A-Rod's deal with the Yankees and Pujols's deal with the Angels as more evidence that signing guys into their 40's is not a great idea.

[notin]

New Englanders are a lot of things, but no one's ever called me graceful.

 

I saw nothing on the board today that changes that...

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

We've got A-Rod's deal with the Yankees and Pujols's deal with the Angels as more evidence that signing guys into their 40's is not a great idea.

 

Big-bodied power brokers break down. Stanton and Judge are always hurt. Wiry guys juggling bowling balls every winter last longer.