Jump to content
Talk Sox
  • Create Account

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 6.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted
Not going back to Betts after this counter was worse.

 

I agree. We should have made a second offer we would have paid. (Hopefully, that first offer was not close.)

Posted
I don't know. If the reports are accurate, Mookie asked for $420 million.

 

My theory is that the Red Sox line in the sand was somewhere around $350 million. Keeping in mind that this was 2 years before his free agency, that would be very reasonable.

 

Agreed, so why not counter with that or even $320M/10?

Posted
Agreed, so why not counter with that or even $320M/10?

 

Yes, we've talked about this before.

 

My guess is that when they got Mookie's demand, they saw no hope for a resolution at their number. Maybe they didn't want things to get drawn-out and public and unpleasant?

 

It's all speculation.

Posted
If you think the next 2-3 years is the prime of that contract, the remaining 9 years will be a nightmare.

 

Mookie is in his prime. Let's say he keeps this level next 4-5 years (Maybe I'm bit optimistic). From there he will fairly start his decline.

 

If the later is true, and considering how the Red Sox are rebuilding, IMHO Betts is not a good fit for us right now.

Posted
I think I heard this yesterday during the game. The Sox have always made the playoffs with a similar record starting May.
Posted
Yes, we've talked about this before.

 

My guess is that when they got Mookie's demand, they saw no hope for a resolution at their number. Maybe they didn't want things to get drawn-out and public and unpleasant?

 

It's all speculation.

 

I agree, but by not giving a second- more reasonable offer- it forced the drag out public unpleasantness.

Posted
I agree, but by not giving a second- more reasonable offer- it forced the drag out public unpleasantness.

 

The unpleasantness really didn't arise until they traded him. And was doubled, of course, when he signed with the Dodgers.

Posted
The unpleasantness really didn't arise until they traded him. And was doubled, of course, when he signed with the Dodgers.

 

Yes, but they must have known, not making him a second decent offer was going to make them look bad, of he extended with the Dodgers.

 

Maybe they took him at his word and figured they could make him an offer as a FA- like they ended up doing with Lester, but as we saw with that case, even a decent offer as a FA did not change the unpleasantness.

Posted
Mookie is in his prime. Let's say he keeps this level next 4-5 years (Maybe I'm bit optimistic). From there he will fairly start his decline.

 

If the later is true, and considering how the Red Sox are rebuilding, IMHO Betts is not a good fit for us right now.

 

Betts is a good fit for any team. If he's not, they need to change the composition of the team.

Posted

The Red Sox always lowballed Betts.

 

Boston's offers, while large compared to mere mortals (in and out of baseball), were always aimed at locking him up through years where they knew -- if he signed and continued his HOF pace -- he'd be making less than fair market value.

Posted
The Red Sox always lowballed Betts.

 

Boston's offers, while large compared to mere mortals (in and out of baseball), were always aimed at locking him up through years where they knew -- if he signed and continued his HOF pace -- he'd be making less than fair market value.

 

they only made one offer. What do you mean by "always?"

Posted
they only made one offer. What do you mean by "always?"

 

They also offered him $200 mil a few years before when Mookie's mom talked him out of accepting it because he was already worth more. And I'm pretty sure they once offered him $100 mil or something close when he first hit arb., trying to lock him up.

Posted
they only made one offer. What do you mean by "always?"

 

They made offers in previous years, including one for 8/$200 mill that he said he came close to accepting - and might have, if his mother didn't sort of talk him out of it.

Posted
Lindor signed for a 10 year $340 million extension with the Mets. To me, that was another crazy contract that may not help the club long term.
Posted
Lindor signed for a 10 year $340 million extension with the Mets. To me, that was another crazy contract that may not help the club long term.

 

As usual with these decade-long contracts, teams are more investing in the first half as their "long term"; in Lindor's case, for the next five years, the Mets are set -- having the best shortstop in the majors for his entire prime. If they win a title, it's worth it.

Posted
Betts is a good fit for any team. If he's not, they need to change the composition of the team.

 

It wasn’t the point. He’s arguably top 3 player of the game.

 

Point, will you give him that contract even if your team will not go anywhere — anyways?

Posted
I'm not sure we'll ever be done talking about the departure of Betts, but I'm thinking not much new can be said about it.
Posted
As usual with these decade-long contracts, teams are more investing in the first half as their "long term"; in Lindor's case, for the next five years, the Mets are set -- having the best shortstop in the majors for his entire prime. If they win a title, it's worth it.

 

Absolutely. One title and fans always stop complaining about the team. Sometimes they go the entire off-season...

Posted
Absolutely. One title and fans always stop complaining about the team. Sometimes they go the entire off-season...

 

I live in New England, and joined this site because nobody talks much baseball or Red Sox in any offseason anymore. As a matter of fact, sports talk shows on TV and radio spend 99% of the time discussing football, 24-7, year-round.

Posted
I'm not sure we'll ever be done talking about the departure of Betts, but I'm thinking not much new can be said about it.

 

I guess this all started because I said the trade was not a disaster - and if it were a disaster, then we recovered pretty quick because we're a first place team again hooray!!!

 

I'm trying to think of what the worst trade in Sox history that I personally was around for was. Maybe that Darren Bragg - Jamie Moyer one.

Posted
I guess this all started because I said the trade was not a disaster - and if it were a disaster, then we recovered pretty quick because we're a first place team again hooray!!!

 

I'm trying to think of what the worst trade in Sox history that I personally was around for was. Maybe that Darren Bragg - Jamie Moyer one.

 

You're lucky if you missed Bagwell for six weeks of Larry Anderson.

Posted
I'm not sure we'll ever be done talking about the departure of Betts, but I'm thinking not much new can be said about it.

 

I sure enjoy watching Whitlock pitch as much as I watch Betts batting for the Dodgers.

Posted

Sox in the top OPS in MLB:

6. JD 1.095

19. Bogey .940

21. Devers .936

33. Verdugo .884

 

RBI

3. JD 21

T6. Devers 19

 

Posted
I sure enjoy watching Whitlock pitch as much as I watch Betts batting for the Dodgers.

 

YES!!!!

 

Houck raised a lot of hopes after his nice career start, last season.

 

Whitlock is on his way to topping that.

 

Two years in a row is blowing my mind!

Posted
You're lucky if you missed Bagwell for six weeks of Larry Anderson.

 

I was a fan in 1990 but honestly I wasn't following closely enough to even notice who they traded away for Anderson.

Posted
I was a fan in 1990 but honestly I wasn't following closely enough to even notice who they traded away for Anderson.

 

I think the trade was pre- 90's.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
The Talk Sox Caretaker Fund
The Talk Sox Caretaker Fund

You all care about this site. The next step is caring for it. We’re asking you to caretake this site so it can remain the premier Red Sox community on the internet.

×
×
  • Create New...