A Realistic View at 2023: Part I

[moonslav59]

Not the same situation.

 

Betts had a $27mill salary and required taking as much of David Price as possible. It was a straight up salary dump. Getting Verdugo was a coup in that scenario…

 

One could even argue 5 years of Dugo was a greater value than 1 short season of Betts, not even counting the Price salary dump that took $16M of 3 budget years each.

[jad]

One could even argue 5 years of Dugo was a greater value than 1 short season of Betts, not even counting the Price salary dump that took $16M of 3 budget years each.

 

Well yes. One could argue for anything. Arguing convincingly for something is a different matter.

[moonslav59]

Well yes. One could argue for anything. Arguing convincingly for something is a different matter.

 

Dugo is certainly no Betts, but the argument might go something like this:

 

5.2 bWAR from Dugo with one year to go> 3.6 bWAR from Betts in 2020 w no years to go.

 

fWAR 5.3 > 2.9

 

Like I said, I would not trade a 9 WAR player for nine 1 WAR players, but it's not that simple.

 

As far as I know, no better offers were made.

[Bellhorn04]

Dugo is hitting .283.

 

Mookie is hitting .271.

 

Not even sure what the discussion is about.

 

[mvp 78]

Dugo is hitting .283.

 

Mookie is hitting .271.

 

Not even sure what the discussion is about.

 

 

Since 6/1/22:

 

Dugo

307 AVG

358 OBP

126 H

29 2b

50 RBI

6.9% BB

14.1% K

 

Betts

258 AVG

317 OBP

98 H

28 2b

49 RBI

6.7% BB

16.3% K

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

Since 6/1/22:

 

Dugo

307 AVG

358 OBP

126 H

29 2b

50 RBI

6.9% BB

14.1% K

 

Betts

258 AVG

317 OBP

98 H

28 2b

49 RBI

6.7% BB

16.3% K

 

Betts -- also a Hall of Famer on the bases, scoring runs, playing defense

Verdugo -- kinda of kookie sometimes

[moonslav59]

Since 6/1/22:

 

Dugo

307 AVG

358 OBP

126 H

29 2b

50 RBI

6.9% BB

14.1% K

 

Betts

258 AVG

317 OBP

98 H

28 2b

49 RBI

6.7% BB

16.3% K

 

So we made the trade, too early.

[mvp 78]

Betts -- also a Hall of Famer on the bases, scoring runs, playing defense

Verdugo -- kinda of kookie sometimes

 

Mookie Betts BsR 2021: -1.2

Alex Verdugo BsR 2021: -1.5

Edited October 4, 2022 by mvp 78

[notin]

Betts -- also a Hall of Famer on the bases, scoring runs, playing defense

Verdugo -- kinda of kookie sometimes

 

Also:

 

Betts: free agent after 2020 after turning down a $300 mill extension

Verdugo: under team control until 2025

[mvp 78]

Also:

 

Betts: free agent after 2020 after turning down a $300 mill extension

Verdugo: under team control until 2025

 

Verdugo won't even make the difference between the $300M and what the Dodgers actually gave him by the time he's done with the Sox.

[moonslav59]

Also:

 

Betts: free agent after 2020 after turning down a $300 mill extension

Verdugo: under team control until 2025

 

I was thinking he had one year left, but earlier I said 5 years vs 1.

 

My math is impeccable.

 

[moonslav59]

Verdugo won't even make the difference between the $300M and what the Dodgers actually gave him by the time he's done with the Sox.

 

One can argue that with the money saved, we signed Richards, Perez I, Perez II, Paxton, Marwin, Andriese, Diekman and others, or Wacha, Kike, Hill, Strahm and others, but actually, it's all of them.

[jacksonianmarch]

One can argue that with the money saved, we signed Richards, Perez I, Perez II, Paxton, Marwin, Andriese, Diekman and others, or Wacha, Kike, Hill, Strahm and others, but actually, it's all of them.

 

And you got jack s*** for it. Spending is worth it when you are talking about a generational talent. Betts and Judge are generational talents. Thing is, Betts was going into his walk year on a team that was heading for the basement. Betts issue was more timing than anything else. If Betts hit FA when the sox were winning the AL East and were title contenders, I do not doubt that Henry would have made every push to sign him. You're running into the same thing now. Xander is a great talent. I wouldn't say generational like Betts, but he is a great Red Sox. If the sox werent doormats this year and staring at another year or two of doormat-dom, then it would be a no brainer. But it makes little sense to sign a 30+ yr old SS with limited range to a huge deal if the first couple years are not going to be successful for the team. If Bogey stays and goes .300/30/100 and the sox win 75 games, it was a waste

[cp176]

And you got jack s*** for it. Spending is worth it when you are talking about a generational talent. Betts and Judge are generational talents. Thing is, Betts was going into his walk year on a team that was heading for the basement. Betts issue was more timing than anything else. If Betts hit FA when the sox were winning the AL East and were title contenders, I do not doubt that Henry would have made every push to sign him. You're running into the same thing now. Xander is a great talent. I wouldn't say generational like Betts, but he is a great Red Sox. If the sox werent doormats this year and staring at another year or two of doormat-dom, then it would be a no brainer. But it makes little sense to sign a 30+ yr old SS with limited range to a huge deal if the first couple years are not going to be successful for the team. If Bogey stays and goes .300/30/100 and the sox win 75 games, it was a waste

 

I kind of agree with this and have alluded to it before. I think that Bogaerts deserves to play on a winning team. I think that it is going to be very difficult for this team to become competitive overnight. Maybe but I doubt it.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

And you got jack s*** for it. Spending is worth it when you are talking about a generational talent. Betts and Judge are generational talents. Thing is, Betts was going into his walk year on a team that was heading for the basement. Betts issue was more timing than anything else. If Betts hit FA when the sox were winning the AL East and were title contenders, I do not doubt that Henry would have made every push to sign him. You're running into the same thing now. Xander is a great talent. I wouldn't say generational like Betts, but he is a great Red Sox. If the sox werent doormats this year and staring at another year or two of doormat-dom, then it would be a no brainer. But it makes little sense to sign a 30+ yr old SS with limited range to a huge deal if the first couple years are not going to be successful for the team. If Bogey stays and goes .300/30/100 and the sox win 75 games, it was a waste

 

It's never a waste for fans to get to watch and root for star players on their favorite team.

 

It wasn't a waste for LA to trade three inferior players for a generational talent -- even five years of Verdugo for 12 years of Betts -- because for those convinced Betts never would've signed in Boston, there are also those convinced the Dodgers made the deal with every intention of keeping him longterm (though nobody who isn't related to Mookie or employed by the clubs knows anything for certain).

 

Except for posters who use this forum to get off by ripping other posters' opinions, few baseball fans care how many years of control their teams have on individual players. The only thing fans really have control of are their remotes, which they use to change the channel when what they're watching becomes irrelevant.

[Bellhorn04]

Except for posters who use this forum to get off by ripping other posters' opinions, few baseball fans care how many years of control their teams have on individual players. The only thing fans really have control of are their remotes, which they use to change the channel when what they're watching becomes irrelevant.

 

Well, we're all just here to jibber jabber, and that's all we can do, so I agree with that much. But I do think a lot of fans are aware which of the players are signed for a while and which are impending free agents and so on.

 

I don't think the "average fan" is quite the oblivious doofus they're sometimes made out to be.

[notin]

It's never a waste for fans to get to watch and root for star players on their favorite team.

 

It wasn't a waste for LA to trade three inferior players for a generational talent -- even five years of Verdugo for 12 years of Betts -- because for those convinced Betts never would've signed in Boston, there are also those convinced the Dodgers made the deal with every intention of keeping him longterm (though nobody who isn't related to Mookie or employed by the clubs knows anything for certain).

 

Except for posters who use this forum to get off by ripping other posters' opinions, few baseball fans care how many years of control their teams have on individual players. The only thing fans really have control of are their remotes, which they use to change the channel when what they're watching becomes irrelevant.

 

 

No but it was a waste for the Sox to give the largest contract in franchise history to David Price, making it that much more difficult to pay Betts. And it was certainly a waste to take half the money just offered to Betts and give it to an injured pitcher. No one wanted to see abetted go, just like no one wants to see Devers go. And they don’t have to if the Sox can stop thinking that overpaying players in their 30s for what they did in their 20s is a good idea and that the Boston market can even remotely support these kind of mistakes like anew York or Los Angeles can…

Edited October 5, 2022 by notin

[jad]

It's never a waste for fans to get to watch and root for star players on their favorite team.

 

It wasn't a waste for LA to trade three inferior players for a generational talent -- even five years of Verdugo for 12 years of Betts -- because for those convinced Betts never would've signed in Boston, there are also those convinced the Dodgers made the deal with every intention of keeping him longterm (though nobody who isn't related to Mookie or employed by the clubs knows anything for certain).

 

Except for posters who use this forum to get off by ripping other posters' opinions, few baseball fans care how many years of control their teams have on individual players. The only thing fans really have control of are their remotes, which they use to change the channel when what they're watching becomes irrelevant.

 

Spot on with this. And those arguing with you seem to be making your case even more strongly than you did.

 

Go to Fenway and survey the fans (i.e., those who put the pennies on the seats). Ask them what a qualifying offer is, how arbitration works, what the rule 5 draft is, or how many years of control a team has over a particular contract, or, say, who has the best WAR or how it is computed. Then ask them if they know who Rafy, Xander, or even Mookie are.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

No but it was a waste for the Sox to give the largest contract in franchise history to David Price, ma king it that much more difficult to post Betts. And it was certainly a waste to take half the money just offered to Betts and give it to an injured pitcher. No one wanted to see abetted go, just like no one wants to see Devers go. And they don’t have to if the Sox can stop thinking that overpaying players in their 30s for what they did in their 20s is a good idea and that the Boston market can even remotely support these kind of mistakes like anew York or Los Angeles can…

 

I'm glad you said Sox and didn't assign blame to one GM, CBO, analytics analyst or owner. Way too much time is spend arguing which way to point fingers, when we all know the woes are organizational failures by many overlapping employees and departments.

 

So what if the Red Sox have the MLB's number 5 payroll -- they need to invest it better so they won't be number 5 in the AL East.

 

Bogaerts, unfortunately, is one of those guys in his 30s who may soon be paid for his past. And yet, whatever he signs for will literally just be his current market value.

[notin]

Well, we're all just here to jibber jabber, and that's all we can do, so I agree with that much. But I do think a lot of fans are aware which of the players are signed for a while and which are impending free agents and so on.

 

I don't think the "average fan" is quite the oblivious doofus they're sometimes made out to be.

 

I don’t think the “average fan” comes to this forum for all 12 months of the year, either. That means going from the Fanatic Level to the Obsessive Level, and in some cases, the Addicted Level.

 

I have a parking pass for that last one…

[Hugh2]

No but it was a waste for the Sox to give the largest contract in franchise history to David Price, making it that much more difficult to pay Betts. And it was certainly a waste to take half the money just offered to Betts and give it to an injured pitcher. No one wanted to see abetted go, just like no one wants to see Devers go. And they don’t have to if the Sox can stop thinking that overpaying players in their 30s for what they did in their 20s is a good idea and that the Boston market can even remotely support these kind of mistakes like anew York or Los Angeles can…

 

It's a waste in hindsight, and this highlights the payoff vs. risk of making such moves if you consider this. If the Sox decided to open up their wallets and offer the best pitcher on the market... market setting money just one year earlier, they would have (maybe, dream with me) Max Scherzer instead. Up until those two points in their career, Scherzer and Price were both really good and you could have an argument over which one was better. But since then Scherzer actually got better and has pitched twice as many innings as Price.

 

Devers could easily be MVP caliber for the next 10 years, or just a few years and fall off a cliff. But that's kind of the reality of every good player, what they do in their 30's defines their career. It can be the difference between Nomar or Jeter.

[Hugh2]

No but it was a waste for the Sox to give the largest contract in franchise history to David Price, making it that much more difficult to pay Betts. And it was certainly a waste to take half the money just offered to Betts and give it to an injured pitcher. No one wanted to see abetted go, just like no one wants to see Devers go. And they don’t have to if the Sox can stop thinking that overpaying players in their 30s for what they did in their 20s is a good idea and that the Boston market can even remotely support these kind of mistakes like anew York or Los Angeles can…

 

It's a waste in hindsight, and this highlights the payoff vs. risk of making such moves if you consider this. If the Sox decided to open up their wallets and offer the best pitcher on the market... market-setting money just one year earlier, they would have (maybe, dream with me) Max Scherzer instead. Up until those two points in their career, in Which Price signed with Boston and Scherzer signed with Washington, both really good and you could have an argument over which one was better. But since then Scherzer actually got better and has pitched twice as many innings as Price. That's kind of crazy to think about, up until that point in their careers you could make an argument that Price was better.

 

Devers could easily be MVP caliber for the next 10 years, or just a few years and fall off a cliff. But that's kind of the reality of every good player, what they do in their 30's defines their career. It can be the difference between Nomar or Jeter.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

"Devers could easily be MVP caliber for the next 10 years, or just a few years and fall off a cliff. But that's kind of the reality of every good player, what they do in their 30's defines their career. It can be the difference between Nomar or Jeter."

 

Really good point. But one thing Jeter did in his 30s is play on the same team as Mariano Rivera. It's also luck (or skill on the part of management) to stay surrounded by good teammates.

 

This is something the Angels have always struggled to with in the Mike Trout years. Recruiting Rendon, alone, would never be enough support -- and we're seeing, not even Ohtani can help them make the postseason. But they're trying; remember the draft a few years ago when they selected pitchers with every single pick in the first 12 rounds?

[Bellhorn04]

Spot on with this. And those arguing with you seem to be making your case even more strongly than you did.

 

Go to Fenway and survey the fans (i.e., those who put the pennies on the seats). Ask them what a qualifying offer is, how arbitration works, what the rule 5 draft is, or how many years of control a team has over a particular contract, or, say, who has the best WAR or how it is computed. Then ask them if they know who Rafy, Xander, or even Mookie are.

 

I think you'd be surprised how many of them know a little about the contracts. Much of the coverage of the team this year has been about contract situations.

 

How many fans do you think are totally oblivious of the fact that Bogaerts may not be on the team next year? Or that JD and Eovaldi are likely gone?

[Bellhorn04]

I don’t think the “average fan” comes to this forum for all 12 months of the year, either. That means going from the Fanatic Level to the Obsessive Level, and in some cases, the Addicted Level.

 

I have a parking pass for that last one…

 

Not this forum, no. But there are plenty of other places for them to jabber, too.

[mvp 78]

One can argue that with the money saved, we signed Richards, Perez I, Perez II, Paxton, Marwin, Andriese, Diekman and others, or Wacha, Kike, Hill, Strahm and others, but actually, it's all of them.

 

Money well spent.

[mvp 78]

And you got jack s*** for it. Spending is worth it when you are talking about a generational talent. Betts and Judge are generational talents. Thing is, Betts was going into his walk year on a team that was heading for the basement. Betts issue was more timing than anything else. If Betts hit FA when the sox were winning the AL East and were title contenders, I do not doubt that Henry would have made every push to sign him. You're running into the same thing now. Xander is a great talent. I wouldn't say generational like Betts, but he is a great Red Sox. If the sox werent doormats this year and staring at another year or two of doormat-dom, then it would be a no brainer. But it makes little sense to sign a 30+ yr old SS with limited range to a huge deal if the first couple years are not going to be successful for the team. If Bogey stays and goes .300/30/100 and the sox win 75 games, it was a waste

 

Yankees fans are experts at recognizing SS's with limited range.

 

Xander isn't a great fielding SS, but c'mon...

[mvp 78]

Well, we're all just here to jibber jabber, and that's all we can do, so I agree with that much. But I do think a lot of fans are aware which of the players are signed for a while and which are impending free agents and so on.

 

I don't think the "average fan" is quite the oblivious doofus they're sometimes made out to be.

 

What's the definition of "average fan"?

 

Someone who goes to a game or two a year? Someone who watches a few games a month and generally knows most of the guys that will be starting?

[mvp 78]

No but it was a waste for the Sox to give the largest contract in franchise history to David Price, making it that much more difficult to pay Betts. And it was certainly a waste to take half the money just offered to Betts and give it to an injured pitcher. No one wanted to see abetted go, just like no one wants to see Devers go. And they don’t have to if the Sox can stop thinking that overpaying players in their 30s for what they did in their 20s is a good idea and that the Boston market can even remotely support these kind of mistakes like anew York or Los Angeles can…

 

Price wasn't a great contract, but they needed to bring in a guy to lead the staff. They just picked the wrong guy. I don't think Price was the main reason they couldn't re-sign Mookie though. I think they were more scared by the sticker shock.

[notin]

It's a waste in hindsight, and this highlights the payoff vs. risk of making such moves if you consider this. If the Sox decided to open up their wallets and offer the best pitcher on the market... market-setting money just one year earlier, they would have (maybe, dream with me) Max Scherzer instead. Up until those two points in their career, in Which Price signed with Boston and Scherzer signed with Washington, both really good and you could have an argument over which one was better. But since then Scherzer actually got better and has pitched twice as many innings as Price. That's kind of crazy to think about, up until that point in their careers you could make an argument that Price was better.

 

Devers could easily be MVP caliber for the next 10 years, or just a few years and fall off a cliff. But that's kind of the reality of every good player, what they do in their 30's defines their career. It can be the difference between Nomar or Jeter.

 

More often than not those deals go sour before they expire. Scherzer is a rare example that didn’t, as is Manny Ramirez.

 

And when they do, a team not only loses that star player’s production, but also the money it would take to replace him. And that’s where the Sox are now. And it’s not the first time…