Why was Mookie traded, exactly?

[notin]

There is no sense to be had with this team. But the important question is, will the Seadogs have enough of a season so that I can pay off that debt I owe you? (Probably the only thing about this baseball season I'm looking forward to.)

 

I can’t call this a save that worked...

[jad]

I can’t call this a save that worked...

 

Did you expect me to go back and apply my exegetical skills to my earlier post? (I'm just way to wrapped up in the game to do that.)

[moonslav59]

I am talking about giving up the chance to re-sign him. If you assume he wouldnt have signed anyway, then it's already a win. If you assume the sox would have re-signed him, then you need more

 

Re-signing or not has nothing to do with the trade.

 

It is a separate transaction.

 

Yes, one can say that the Dodgers were able to extend him as a result of the trade, but they also forked over a ton of cash.

 

The Sox saved the cash by not extending him.

 

Look, I'd rather we had Betts at what the Dodgers paid, but it came at a price that is not a no brainer win. The contract evens out what Betts will give over the whole length of the deal.

 

We have Verdugo and Downs and the money to spend that would have gone to pay Betts vs Betts alone. That's the deal and signing view.

 

In reality, we traded one (60 game season) year of Betts for Verdugo, Downs and Wong.

[moonslav59]

The thing is that the future will always be there . When the " future " arrives , you still can't spend because there is another " future " ahead. And so forth and so on. Sometimes you just have to go for it . Same with life in general , you can't always be looking to the future , sometimes you have to be in the moment.

 

Agreed. Yes, we over-killed it in 2018, but we got a ring.

 

We'll "go for it," again, at some point- hopefully sooner rather than later.

 

There's no way I can agree that "every fan should be concerned how Henry spends his money." The guy has single-handedly revived the Sox from decades of frustration and agony. If he chooses to just spend $200M a year for a while (still top 3 to 5), instead of going all out every year, I'm 100% fine with that.

 

When we get close enough to being 1-2 big players away from winning, then I'm thinking Henry will okay a pounce.

[oldtimer]

Agreed. Yes, we over-killed it in 2018, but we got a ring.

 

We'll "go for it," again, at some point- hopefully sooner rather than later.

 

There's no way I can agree that "every fan should be concerned how Henry spends his money." The guy has single-handedly revived the Sox from decades of frustration and agony. If he chooses to just spend $200M a year for a while (still top 3 to 5), instead of going all out every year, I'm 100% fine with that.

 

When we get close enough to being 1-2 big players away from winning, then I'm thinking Henry will okay a pounce.

 

Would Betts have made a difference in the first three losses to the O's. Probably not enough to win.

[Kimmi]

This. And I truly believe Mookie didn’t want to be in Boston. Honestly I think he chose Cali over Mass.

 

We'll probably never know for sure, but I'm guessing you are absolutely right. Hence the absurd counteroffer.

[moonslav59]

Would Betts have made a difference in the first three losses to the O's.

 

Nope.

 

He doesn't play 3B, 2B and SS.

[Kimmi]

The thing is that the future will always be there . When the " future " arrives , you still can't spend because there is another " future " ahead. And so forth and so on. Sometimes you just have to go for it . Same with life in general , you can't always be looking to the future , sometimes you have to be in the moment.

 

The Sox went for it leading up to 2018. And now, here we are. They can't 'go for it' every year, despite what some people think, but they can take a more balanced approach and remain highly competitive year after year. Sustainability is Bloom's buzz word, and I am fully on board with him.

 

I've said it a thousand times and I'll say it again, we need a strong farm system above all else. Having the farm system opens up so much more flexibility, including allowing the team the luxury of signing some larger contracts.

[Kimmi]

Would Betts have made a difference in the first three losses to the O's. Probably not enough to win.

 

JD is the only guy in our line up who has done anything worth mentioning. And one of his doubles was the sun-aided variety.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

We'll probably never know for sure, but I'm guessing you are absolutely right. Hence the absurd counteroffer.

 

And yet, meeting in the middle of $300 mil and $420 mil is 1). merely Mookie's market value (basically what he signed for); 2). about the same AAV inked by other superstar players with big market franchises focused on sustained contention; and Worst of All): bound to be similar numbers that the Red Sox inevitably give to someone else... who is not nor will ever be Mookie Betts.

[Kimmi]

And yet, meeting in the middle of $300 mil and $420 mil is 1). merely Mookie's market value (basically what he signed for); 2). about the same AAV inked by other superstar players with big market franchises focused on sustained contention; and Worst of All): bound to be similar numbers that the Red Sox inevitably give to someone else... who is not nor will ever be Mookie Betts.

 

Fair enough on points 1 and 2, though I still think that Mookie was sending a message to the Sox with his counter. And I remain utterly in shock that the Dodgers seemingly bid against themselves and gave him that contract.

 

On your 3rd point, I don't see the Sox giving a similar contract to another player.

[mvp 78]

And yet, meeting in the middle of $300 mil and $420 mil is 1). merely Mookie's market value (basically what he signed for); 2). about the same AAV inked by other superstar players with big market franchises focused on sustained contention; and Worst of All): bound to be similar numbers that the Red Sox inevitably give to someone else... who is not nor will ever be Mookie Betts.

 

^^^

[moonslav59]

Fair enough on points 1 and 2, though I still think that Mookie was sending a message to the Sox with his counter. And I remain utterly in shock that the Dodgers seemingly bid against themselves and gave him that contract.

 

On your 3rd point, I don't see the Sox giving a similar contract to another player.

 

I think a select few teams, maybe even the Sox, might have offered what the Dodgers gave him as a FA.

[Larry33]

This idiots traded Babe Ruth once and were they were the laughing stock of pro basball yet they traded Mookie Betts another baseball great now they're going to be known as the Al East laughing stockfor years to come. Edited April 4, 2021 by Larry33

[moonslav59]

For argument's sake, let's say we extended Betts at the same exact contract he got with the Dodgers, even though that is far from a given happening, and we were also made to stay under the luxury tax, this year.

 

Here is what our 2021 roster might look like, subtracting Mookie's $30.4M a year from this past winter's spending budget:

 

No Richards $10M

No Ottavino $8.9M

No EHern $7M

No Renfroe $3.1M

No Sawamura $1.5M

 

SP: ERod, Perez, Pivetta, Houck, Seabold

RP: Barnes, DHern, Taylor, Abdriese, Whitlock, Brice, Valdez, Brewer, M Hall

C: Vaz, Plawecki

1B: Dalbec

2B: Arroyo

3B: Devers

SS: Bogey

LF: Cordero/ Marwin

CF: Duran

RF: Betts

DH: JD

UR: Chavis/ Arauz

 

(No Downs in the minors, either.)

 

Now, there's a playoff team!

 

Edited April 5, 2021 by moonslav59

[mvp 78]

For argument's sake, let's say we extended Betts at the same exact contract he got with the Dodgers, even though that is far from a given happening, and we were also made to stay under the luxury tax, this year.

 

Here is what our 2021 roster might look like, subtracting Mookie's $30.4M a year from this past winter's spending budget:

 

No Richards $10M

No Ottavino $8.9M

No EHern $7M

No Renfroe $3.1M

No Sawamura $1.5M

 

SP: ERod, Perez, Pivetta, Houck, Seabold

RP: Barnes, DHern, Taylor, Abdriese, Whitlock, Brice, Valdez, Brewer, M Hall

C: Vaz, Plawecki

1B: Dalbec

2B: Arroyo

3B: Devers

SS: Bogey

LF: Marwin

CF: Duran

RF: Cordero

DH: JD

UR: Chavis, Arauz

 

Now, there's a playoff team!

 

 

Mookie is riding the bench on that team? DFA’d?

[moonslav59]

Mookie is riding the bench on that team? DFA’d?

 

LOL, went back and fixed it.

[mvp 78]

LOL, went back and fixed it.

 

That team would win more games than the 2021 version.

[moonslav59]

That team would win more games than the 2021 version.

 

I doubt it.

 

The depth beyond those 26 is basically non existent.

 

[a700hitter]

For argument's sake, let's say we extended Betts at the same exact contract he got with the Dodgers, even though that is far from a given happening, and we were also made to stay under the luxury tax, this year.

 

Here is what our 2021 roster might look like, subtracting Mookie's $30.4M a year from this past winter's spending budget:

 

No Richards $10M

No Ottavino $8.9M

No EHern $7M

No Renfroe $3.1M

No Sawamura $1.5M

 

SP: ERod, Perez, Pivetta, Houck, Seabold

RP: Barnes, DHern, Taylor, Abdriese, Whitlock, Brice, Valdez, Brewer, M Hall

C: Vaz, Plawecki

1B: Dalbec

2B: Arroyo

3B: Devers

SS: Bogey

LF: Cordero/ Marwin

CF: Duran

RF: Betts

DH: JD

UR: Chavis/ Arauz

 

(No Downs in the minors, either.)

 

Now, there's a playoff team!

 

I like it better than what we have. At least we could watch Mookie, Devers and JD wreck lots of pitching staffs.

[mvp 78]

I doubt it.

 

The depth beyond those 26 is basically non existent.

 

Why? What’s different about the 40 man?

[Nick]

I like it better than what we have. At least we could watch Mookie, Devers and JD wreck lots of pitching staffs.

 

I could agree with you except I just think he wanted out of Boston.

[Maxbialystock]

Great player, no question, but in my view, good riddance. No player is worth that salary. The more MLB players are paid, the more we pay to watch them and the less minor league players are paid, which is why minor league teams are folding right and left.

[mvp 78]

Great player, no question, but in my view, good riddance. No player is worth that salary. The more MLB players are paid, the more we pay to watch them and the less minor league players are paid, which is why minor league teams are folding right and left.

 

There's nothing about this statement that is true.

[Maxbialystock]

There's nothing about this statement that is true.

 

Show me. Explain why bigger and bigger MLB salaries are good for all of us.

[mvp 78]

Show me. Explain why bigger and bigger MLB salaries are good for all of us.

 

Bigger salaries have NO impact on MiLB salaries. They also aren't the reason that MiLB leagues are folding. They are folding because they are trying to get rid of the anachronistic ownership structure in MiLB and so that all teams fall under the MLB ownership umbrella at some point.

[notin]

I like it better than what we have. At least we could watch Mookie, Devers and JD wreck lots of pitching staffs.

 

Even with a lot of bad Boston teams in the past, yes, it was definitely nice to see if Boggs could still take a batting title or if rice could challenge in any of the triple crown categories. But that always felt like a consolation when the team was just flat out losing anyway...

[jad]

Great player, no question, but in my view, good riddance. No player is worth that salary. The more MLB players are paid, the more we pay to watch them and the less minor league players are paid, which is why minor league teams are folding right and left.

 

Come on. You know enough about the economics of baseball to know that ticket prices are determined by formulae that have nothing whatsoever to do with player salaries. It's silly to imagine that if they paid players 1/10 as much as they do, then suddenly $6 box seats would be available the day of the game and hot dogs would cost a quarter.

[notin]

Why? What’s different about the 40 man?

 

In his hypothetical scenario, I think he is referring to there being no Jeter Downs or Connor Wong. While Downs is not on the 40 man roster, how much depth do they have there right now?

[Bellhorn04]

There's nothing about this statement that is true.

 

I believe it's true that there's a relationship between MLB salaries and MLB ticket prices, although they don't move in lockstep.