Why was Mookie traded, exactly?

[redsoxrules]

I'd still take an average of 4 WAR per year over the next decade. That would give Mookie a career WAR of 90; the 27 right fielders in the Hall of Fame average 72.1. The only guys over 100 WAR were Ruth, Aaron, Mel Ott and Frank Robinson.

 

You think he will avg a WAR of over 4 in the next decade? I was generous and provided the ESPN one. Fangraphs has him at 3.7 this past year. I'm sorry but if you want a massive Contract at minimum you'd have to produce 5 plus WAR a year. He's not going to come close to that. His body won't let him. A lot of his production is due to his quickness/speed. His Legs generate his excellent defense and his baserunning. Any speed player that has ever played the game drop off significantly once they hit 30. We are already seeing the impact of that this year. 10 SB and caught 5 times.

[mvp 78]

You think he will avg a WAR of over 4 in the next decade? I was generous and provided the ESPN one. Fangraphs has him at 3.7 this past year. I'm sorry but if you want a massive Contract at minimum you'd have to produce 5 plus WAR a year. He's not going to come close to that. His body won't let him. A lot of his production is due to his quickness/speed. His Legs generate his excellent defense and his baserunning. Any speed player that has ever played the game drop off significantly once they hit 30. We are already seeing the impact of that this year. 10 SB and caught 5 times.

 

Need to see if this is a one year aberration due to injury or if this is what he is going forward. If he is just a 4 win guy, he's probably not a max contract. Kiké was a 4 fWAR guy this year. I'm not sure anyone would want to pay him $30M.

[jacksonianmarch]

Mookie was hurt this year, played through it and will likely need offseason surgery. An injured guy who can put up 4 WAR is pretty valuable

[mvp 78]

Mookie was hurt this year, played through it and will likely need offseason surgery. An injured guy who can put up 4 WAR is pretty valuable

 

Interesting that his best offensive numbers this year were in July and August when he was in and out of the lineup with the hip issue. Maybe just a SSS thing. Sept/Oct was his worst stretch this year by far.

 

What is the long term prognosis for him after surgery?

[jacksonianmarch]

Interesting that his best offensive numbers this year were in July and August when he was in and out of the lineup with the hip issue. Maybe just a SSS thing. Sept/Oct was his worst stretch this year by far.

 

What is the long term prognosis for him after surgery?

 

Depends on what they find. If it is just a clean up procedure, he should be 100%. If they need to repair the labrum, then it will likely sap some speed

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

You think he will avg a WAR of over 4 in the next decade? I was generous and provided the ESPN one. Fangraphs has him at 3.7 this past year. I'm sorry but if you want a massive Contract at minimum you'd have to produce 5 plus WAR a year. He's not going to come close to that. His body won't let him. A lot of his production is due to his quickness/speed. His Legs generate his excellent defense and his baserunning. Any speed player that has ever played the game drop off significantly once they hit 30. We are already seeing the impact of that this year. 10 SB and caught 5 times.

 

Betts has Hank Aaron wrists. Aaron stopped running at age 34 and just swung away. He had 31.6 more WAR from ages 35-42, averaging 4 WAR those last eight years.

 

Mookie bowls every winter and is a good bet to maintain his wrist power throughout his career.

[moonslav59]

Betts has Hank Aaron wrists. Aaron stopped running at age 34 and just swung away. He had 31.6 more WAR from ages 35-42, averaging 4 WAR those last eight years.

 

Mookie bowls every winter and is a good bet to maintain his wrist power throughout his career.

 

That's exactly how I felt.

 

The strong wrists and off-the-charts "twitch reflexes" make his skill a unique one that cannot just be simply grouped in to past "small players" that fizzled out quickly.

 

I was a big supporter of bringing back Betts at nearly any cost, but I think we made out fine.

[notin]

Mookie was hurt this year, played through it and will likely need offseason surgery. An injured guy who can put up 4 WAR is pretty valuable

 

Not if the guy behind him can put up 3 fWAR and playing through the injury hampers him next season...

[notin]

I'd still take an average of 4 WAR per year over the next decade. That would give Mookie a career WAR of 90; the 27 right fielders in the Hall of Fame average 72.1. The only guys over 100 WAR were Ruth, Aaron, Mel Ott and Frank Robinson.

 

4 fWAR for $30mill?

 

Nicky Lopez was worth 4.4 fWAR this year, Should he get $30mill, too?

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

4 fWAR for $30mill?

 

Nicky Lopez was worth 4.4 fWAR this year, Should he get $30mill, too?

 

Only if he can average that per season for a decade. Then he'd most likely be one of the most valuable players in baseball.

 

Here are the players with more than Mookie's 50.0 bWAR from 2011 to 2021 (that's technically 11 years, but 2020 was like a third of a year):

 

Mike Trout 76.1, Paul Goldschmidt 50.7.

 

Here's the only other MLB player to average at least 4.4 WAR in the past 11 seasons: Joey Votto, 49.3 bWAR.

 

Mookie, of course, earned his WAR totals in the past eight years.

[moonslav59]

Only if he can average that per season for a decade. Then he'd most likely be one of the most valuable players in baseball.

 

Here are the players with more than Mookie's 50.0 bWAR from 2011 to 2021 (that's technically 11 years, but 2020 was like a third of a year):

 

Mike Trout 76.1, Paul Goldschmidt 50.7.

 

Here's the only other MLB player to average at least 4.4 WAR in the past 11 seasons: Joey Votto, 49.3 bWAR.

 

Mookie, of course, earned his WAR totals in the past eight years.

 

The Trout, Goldschmidt and Votto comps also offer a glimpse at the back end of long mega deals.

[mvp 78]

Goldschmidt 4.9 fWAR (33)

Votto 3.6 fWAR (37)

[moonslav59]

Goldschmidt 4.9 fWAR (33)

Votto 3.6 fWAR (37)

 

They both had nice bounce back years'

 

Goldschmidt had a

17.5 fWAR (ages 25-27)

15.3 fWAR (ages 28-30)

3.0 in 2019

2.2 in the shortened 2020 season- actually much better than 2019

4.9 in 2021

(10.1 in 2.4 seasons ages 31-33)

 

Certainly very good, and better than most aging players, but still a drop off.

 

Votto is older, and he did very well in his mid 30's:

fWAR

7.2 (age 31)

5.2 (32)

6.5 (33)

3.5 (34)

0.5 (35)

0.5 (36) short season

3.6 this season (age 37)

[notin]

Only if he can average that per season for a decade. Then he'd most likely be one of the most valuable players in baseball.

 

Here are the players with more than Mookie's 50.0 bWAR from 2011 to 2021 (that's technically 11 years, but 2020 was like a third of a year):

 

Mike Trout 76.1, Paul Goldschmidt 50.7.

 

Here's the only other MLB player to average at least 4.4 WAR in the past 11 seasons: Joey Votto, 49.3 bWAR

Mookie, of course, earned his WAR totals in the past eight years.

 

Buston Posey has averaged over 5 fWAR for the past 10 years (or, 9 years, as he sat out 2020).

 

Of course, Posey has not actually had a 5 fWAR season since 2016. And of course, the Giants have still been paying him to be a 5 fWAR catcher that entire time.

 

Those long term contracts do have a built in back end of potentially extremely subpar performance. And everyone is willing to live with them until they get here...

Edited October 5, 2021 by notin

[Kimmi]

Let's just hope we're not having the same condescending conversation about Devers in five years.

 

Let's just hope that Devers does not turn down the equivalent of Mookie's $300M offer and choose instead to go after the most money.

[Kimmi]

Mike Trout missed all but 36 games of the 2021 season because of a right calf strain.

 

You could make an argument that it's 100% irrational to give any player a deal this long.

 

Even if the player's skills hold up, the injury demon is always there waiting.

 

That's the bottom line.

[jad]

You could make that argument. You could also argue that film stars are paid too much and therefore you won't go to the movies. Why not direct your wrath of overpaid workers to the CEO's, whose businesses you subsidize despite their millions in salaries and stock options.

[moonslav59]

You could make that argument. You could also argue that film stars are paid too much and therefore you won't go to the movies. Why not direct your wrath of overpaid workers to the CEO's, whose businesses you subsidize despite their millions in salaries and stock options.

 

Exactly, there always seems to be outrage when people who never had any money or not much makes it big. That seems to bother people more than anything.

[Bellhorn04]

You could make that argument. You could also argue that film stars are paid too much and therefore you won't go to the movies. Why not direct your wrath of overpaid workers to the CEO's, whose businesses you subsidize despite their millions in salaries and stock options.

 

Exactly, there always seems to be outrage when people who never had any money or not much makes it big. That seems to bother people more than anything.

 

Straw man arguments?

 

We're just talking about whether it's a wise baseball business decision to give any player a 10-12 year contract.

[moonslav59]

Straw man arguments?

 

We're just talking about whether it's a wise baseball business decision to give any player a 10-12 year contract.

 

No poster has ever said baseball players don't deserve massive contracts?

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

You could make that argument. You could also argue that film stars are paid too much and therefore you won't go to the movies. Why not direct your wrath of overpaid workers to the CEO's, whose businesses you subsidize despite their millions in salaries and stock options.

 

I've tried to make the same comparison but it simply doesn't resonate with baseball fans. The difference is that nearly everyone has played ball in some form since childhood -- Teeball, at recess, PE class, whiffleball in the backyard, or Little League on up. Fewer people have ever tried acting, and even those who nail their lines in a kids' play usually aren't celebrated with high fives and pile-ups on stage where the cast sprays carbonated beverages on each other.

 

The main reason most don't ever question or debate wages of actors and actresses is that it's accepted that movie stars are rare and beautiful. The rest of us aren't. Mirrors don't lie.

 

The beauty of baseball, though, is that even Humpty Dumpty can get a hit if he times a pitch. Most of us know we can't act, but all of us think we can hit.

[moonslav59]

I've tried to make the same comparison but it simply doesn't resonate with baseball fans. The difference is that nearly everyone has played ball in some form since childhood -- Teeball, at recess, PE class, whiffleball in the backyard, or Little League on up. Fewer people have ever tried acting, and even those who nail their lines in a kids' play usually aren't celebrated with high fives and pile-ups on stage where the cast sprays carbonated beverages on each other.

 

The main reason most don't ever question or debate wages of actors and actresses is that it's accepted that movie stars are rare and beautiful. The rest of us aren't. Mirrors don't lie.

 

The beauty of baseball, though, is that even Humpty Dumpty can get a hit if he times a pitch. Most of us know we can't act, but all of us think we can hit.

 

Maybe we can all hit- just not well.

 

Maybe all of us can act- just not well.

 

To see what Oprah has made vs some ball players is a valid comp, IMO.

[Bellhorn04]

No poster has ever said baseball players don't deserve massive contracts?

 

Sure, but that's got nothing to do with what I'm saying. It's got nothing to do with deserve. It's all about the risk.

[Bellhorn04]

I've tried to make the same comparison but it simply doesn't resonate with baseball fans..

 

Let me clarify my position then.

 

I sure as hell think Mookie Betts deserves 30 million for a season of baseball more than Adam Sandler deserves it for a movie.

 

That has nothing to do with whether I think Mookie should get a 12 year guaranteed contract.

[moonslav59]

Sure, but that's got nothing to do with what I'm saying. It's got nothing to do with deserve. It's all about the risk.

 

Yes, in the context of this recent debate, it was "strawman."

 

It went off on a tangent.

[jad]

Let me clarify my position then.

 

I sure as hell think Mookie Betts deserves 30 million for a season of baseball more than Adam Sandler deserves it for a movie.

 

That has nothing to do with whether I think Mookie should get a 12 year guaranteed contract.

 

Yes, I know that. But 5GG is correct, I think. There is never an argument about large contracts in this crowd that doesn't get on a roll, gather up residual snow, and end up as the base for a teetering moral snow man. (E.g., e.g., several comments above deriding players who just 'go for the money').

[Bellhorn04]

Yes, I know that. But 5GG is correct, I think. There is never an argument about large contracts in this crowd that doesn't get on a roll, gather up residual snow, and end up as the base for a teetering moral snow man. (E.g., e.g., several comments above deriding players who just 'go for the money').

 

This is a wide-open internet forum with very diverse attitudes and opinions. I see no 'groupthink' thing whatsoever. You'll get clusters who agree with each other, of course, but that's only natural.

 

I think it's possible to have two separate arguments, one about the baseball business decision part and one about the "moral" part.

 

I was using the Mike Trout injury as evidence of the astronomical risks associated with any of these mega-contracts.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

I was using the Mike Trout injury as evidence of the astronomical risks associated with any of these mega-contracts.

 

Back to the movies -- and probably another reason why there's not the same consternation for salaries in that industry -- if an actor gets injured (or even old), he or she just takes on more sedentary roles: sitting at desks, judging cooking competitions, endorsing products. Some former heroes even become villains.

 

Pro athletes who get career-ending injuries sometimes become actors. But old actors can't hit a baseball (Kostner in his prime could make contact, but Billy Crystal was a lamb).

[Bellhorn04]

Back to the movies -- and probably another reason why there's not the same consternation for salaries in that industry -- if an actor gets injured (or even old), he or she just takes on more sedentary roles: sitting at desks, judging cooking competitions, endorsing products. Some former heroes even become villains.

 

Pro athletes who get career-ending injuries sometimes become actors. But old actors can't hit a baseball (Kostner in his prime could make contact, but Billy Crystal was a lamb).

 

Plus I think if Tom Cruise gets injured just before he's supposed to start making Mission Impossible 17, he doesn't collect his $30 million.

[mvp 78]

Plus I think if Tom Cruise gets injured just before he's supposed to start making Mission Impossible 17, he doesn't collect his $30 million.

 

He would have the smallest strike zone since Eddie Gaedel.