A Realistic View at 2021: Part II

[Bellhorn04]

If it's $25.6, I think the Sox would have done that.

 

That's still a big chunk of change that would radically alter future financial decisions for many years ahead, and we'd no longer have Verdugo, Downs and Wong, but if you include the extension as part of the trade, it gets more interesting.

 

 

I haven't seen one of these for a while, but we used to see trades where the acquiring team was given a 48 hour window or something like that to sign an extension with the player.

 

In this case the Dodgers got a much longer window, you might say. It seems pretty obvious that a big part of why they made the trade was that they figured they could keep him.

[moonslav59]

I haven't seen one of these for a while, but we used to see trades where the acquiring team was given a 48 hour window or something like that to sign an extension with the player.

 

In this case the Dodgers got a much longer window, you might say. It seems pretty obvious that a big part of why they made the trade was that they figured they could keep him.

 

I agree, but it's debatable whether to include the extension as part of the trade.

 

Since it wasn't part of the actual trade, I think not, but I can understand why some think it should be.

 

It was similar to the AGon trade, where the extension was delayed but always expected.

 

[Bellhorn04]

I agree, but it's debatable whether to include the extension as part of the trade.

 

Since it wasn't part of the actual trade, I think not, but I can understand why some think it should be.

 

It's a feature. It's not something you can just dismiss. The Dodgers were in perfect position to lock Mookie up, and I do believe that had a lot to do with why they made the trade and gave up a guy like Verdugo.

 

Now if you assume that the Red Sox were saying goodbye with the trade, and had no thoughts whatsoever of bidding on Mookie in free agency, all of that meant nothing to them.

[moonslav59]

It's a feature. It's not something you can just dismiss. The Dodgers were in perfect position to lock Mookie up, and I do believe that had a lot to do with why they made the trade and gave up a guy like Verdugo.

 

Now if you assume that the Red Sox were saying goodbye with the trade, and had no thoughts whatsoever of bidding on Mookie in free agency, all of that meant nothing to them.

 

Even if the Sox felt they might make a strong play for Betts after 2020, I still don't think linking any extension or re-signing should be viewed as part of the trade.

 

I get your point, and from the Dodger perspective, counting the extension seems obvious- just like we did with AGon.

[Bellhorn04]

Even if the Sox felt they might make a strong play for Betts after 2020, I still don't think linking any extension or re-signing should be viewed as part of the trade.

 

If they had thoughts of making a strong play, trading him to the Dodgers risked losing the chance, which is exactly what happened.

 

We did have some people on the forum advocating trading him, re-setting the tax, and then signing him as a free agent. But they totally ignored this possibility.

[moonslav59]

If they had thoughts of making a strong play, trading him to the Dodgers risked losing the chance, which is exactly what happened.

 

We did have some people on the forum advocating trading him, re-setting the tax, and then signing him as a free agent. But they totally ignored this possibility.

 

I'm not saying they did have thoughts of making a strong play for Betts. My point was that even if they did, I don't count any extension as part of the trade.

[Bellhorn04]

I'm not saying they did have thoughts of making a strong play for Betts. My point was that even if they did, I don't count any extension as part of the trade.

 

What I would argue is that they traded the rights to negotiate an extension with Mookie.

 

But you can look at it however you want, really.

[Nick]

Does anyone really think Sox would have traded 13 years of Betts for Verdugo, Wong and Downs? There goes that theory.

[Bellhorn04]

Does anyone really think Sox would have traded 13 years of Betts for Verdugo, Wong and Downs? There goes that theory.

 

It's not that simple. There was no certainty the Dodgers would extend Mookie, but there was certainly an opportunity given to them.

[moonslav59]

What I would argue is that they traded the rights to negotiate an extension with Mookie.

 

But you can look at it however you want, really.

 

I get that, and I don't entirely disagree.

 

I just look at the trade without what happened after.

 

Many view the Beckett trade as including his re-signing much later.

[moonslav59]

Change of subject: Bobby Dalbec:

 

.959 first 92 PAs

 

.595 middle 173 PAs

 

.873 last 73 PAs

 

(Basically, he's been about a 900 hitter early and late and 600 in the middle.)

 

 

 

Career: .751 in 338 PAs

 

Projected over 676 PAs:

 

.229 36 102 (66 XBHs)

[moonslav59]

88 games played.

 

We are 54-34

 

27-17 Home & Away

 

.500 or better vs every team we played, except Texas (1-3) and HOU (2-5).

 

Divide the season into 8- 11 game sample sizes:

 

8-3

5-6

7-4

6-5

6-5

7-4

7-4

8-2

 

How about 4- 22 game sample sizes?

13-9

13-9

13-9

15-6

 

 

[notin]

Change of subject: Bobby Dalbec:

 

.959 first 92 PAs

 

.595 middle 173 PAs

 

.873 last 73 PAs

 

(Basically, he's been about a 900 hitter early and late and 600 in the middle.)

 

 

 

Career: .751 in 338 PAs

 

Projected over 676 PAs:

 

.229 36 102 (66 XBHs)

 

The problem is the “middle” sample is about the same as the first and last samples combined…

[moonslav59]

The problem is the “middle” sample is about the same as the first and last samples combined…

 

Yes, I noticed that.

 

If he was hitting a consistent .750 over his first 340 PAs in MLB, most would think that was a very nice start- very promising, and nothing to think about, in terms of demotions or benching/platooning, but the unbalanced nature of the start of his career- spread out over 2 seasons, makes it harder to know just who Dalbec is.

 

It was my hope, he could muster a decent OBP, despite striking out a lot, but the .290 career mark needs to improve for me to be sold on him as our corner IF'er of the future.

 

I am far from giving up on him, but there are times I think a benching or demotion are not far-fetched.

[moonslav59]

The problem is the “middle” sample is about the same as the first and last samples combined…

 

One could arrange it this way:

 

.959 first 92 PAs

 

.558 middle 108 PAs

 

.771 in last 138 PAs

 

Now, it's almost 2:1 PAs with better numbers vs the 0ne bad stretch.

 

[Fan_since_Boggs]

Moon, I would like to see the Red Sox keep M.Wilson on the 40 man next season. He could be a quality 4th outfielder who puts up impressive numbers against lefties.

 

Chavis will definitely be left off if they can't trade him. Interesting stat: Chavis has a 63 OPS+ since the start of the 2020 season in just over 200 plate appearances.

[Fan_since_Boggs]

The team that acquires Kimbrel will need to give up a quality prospect in return. We can be certain of that. Kimbrel isn't going to be traded for a couple of mediocre prospects. While I would trade Jeter Downs for Kimbrel in a second, I might prefer some kind of trade with the Royals where the Red Sox acquire Santana and a relief pitcher.

[dgalehouse]

The team that acquires Kimbrel will need to give up a quality prospect in return. We can be certain of that. Kimbrel isn't going to be traded for a couple of mediocre prospects. While I would trade Jeter Downs for Kimbrel in a second, I might prefer some kind of trade with the Royals where the Red Sox acquire Santana and a relief pitcher.

There are a number of teams that need a closer more than the Sox. Assuming the Cubs trade Kimbrel , they surely will look for the best offer. I don't think that will come from Boston.

[Fan_since_Boggs]

There are a number of teams that need a closer more than the Sox. Assuming the Cubs trade Kimbrel , they surely will look for the best offer. I don't think that will come from Boston.

 

Very true. I would offer Jeter Downs, but at the end of the day the Cubs may get a better offer.

[Nick]

Very true. I would offer Jeter Downs, but at the end of the day the Cubs may get a better offer.

 

So let me get this straight

 

1. Trade Downs for Kimbrel and not pick up his 2022 option. So you give up Downs for a rental. or

2. Trade Downs for Kimbreal and pick up his 2022 option along with $16M?

 

If he makes that trade we might as well have kept DD. It's not in Bloom's DNA.

[Fan_since_Boggs]

So let me get this straight

 

1. Trade Downs for Kimbrel and not pick up his 2022 option. So you give up Downs for a rental. or

2. Trade Downs for Kimbreal and pick up his 2022 option along with $16M?

 

If he makes that trade we might as well have kept DD. It's not in Bloom's DNA.

 

DD= a great GM, who left the Red Sox farm system in better shape than most people knew (while winning a championship).

 

Bloom= 0 championships. I like Bloom, but he has not yet achieved what DD achieved.

 

It would be insane to not pick up Kimbrel's option. The Red Sox would be acquiring a relief pitcher who is having an historic season and can contribute to two possible championship runs.

 

We don't want Bloom to be like Brian Cashman, who had a few opportunities to win championships (recently) and didn't do enough at the trade deadline. There is a pejorative phrase for that: "prospect hugging."

[SPLENDIDSPLINTER]

The AL East team that I believe would go the hardest to acquire Kimbrel would probably be Toronto.

[moonslav59]

Moon, I would like to see the Red Sox keep M.Wilson on the 40 man next season. He could be a quality 4th outfielder who puts up impressive numbers against lefties.

 

Chavis will definitely be left off if they can't trade him. Interesting stat: Chavis has a 63 OPS+ since the start of the 2020 season in just over 200 plate appearances.

 

Wilson is not as good as some players we need to Rule 5 protect.

[moonslav59]

Very true. I would offer Jeter Downs, but at the end of the day the Cubs may get a better offer.

 

I'm not all that high on Downs, but I would not do this deal. Not even close.

[SPLENDIDSPLINTER]

It's kinda of funny that the SOX current closer is going to the All-star game and we're talking about going after a closer.

[moonslav59]

It's kinda of funny that the SOX current closer is going to the All-star game and we're talking about going after a closer.

 

Maybe the best closer season since Koji.

 

Kimbrel fans may argue with this.

[Larry Cook]

It's kinda of funny that the SOX current closer is going to the All-star game and we're talking about going after a closer.

 

Barnes would have some serious value in the trade market as a short term rental.

[moonslav59]

Barnes would have some serious value in the trade market as a short term rental.

 

I'm not even close to supporting us being sellers, but we could really set ourselves up nicely for 2022 and beyond with a few rental trade-aways.

 

Barnes

 

Ottavino

 

ERod

[Fan_since_Boggs]

It's kinda of funny that the SOX current closer is going to the All-star game and we're talking about going after a closer.

 

The idea is to upgrade the bullpen, which has been really good, but will it continue to perform at a high level? Who cares if that upgrade is or isn't a closer. The only goal is to add a really good bullpen arm to replace one of guys who will not be trusted to pitch in the postseason: Workman, Rios, Andreise.

 

If the Red Sox acquire Kimbrel, I would keep Barnes as the closer and use Kimbrel as a kind of weapon to be used in crucial situations to stop a rally (a game is sometimes decided in the 6th or 7th inning, for example). Kimbrel would undoubtedly understand the dynamics of that (he is an excellent teammate) and of course Kimbrel would reclaim the closer role next season when Ottavino and Barnes are not here.

[SPLENDIDSPLINTER]

Barnes would have some serious value in the trade market as a short term rental.

 

 

So would Kimbrel to a team that is contending and actually needs a closer.