May 10th Red Sox @ Braves

[moonslav59]

"Main piece??!!!" The Sox sent Mookie to LA because John Henry didn't want to sign him for long term megabucks--and LA did. LA also graciously took David Price off our hands (with the Sox still paying half his salary). I put "player to be named later" in quotation marks because I knew even then Dugo was more than that. But you have gone in the opposite direction and almost equated him with Mookie.

 

In his 2d and 3d seasons with the Sox--his 5th and 6th in MLB--Dugo's OPS's were 2.2 and 1.2. Based on those two numbers, I think calling Verdugo "no name" is not far off the mark--even though so far this year he looks really good.

 

Main piece does not mean great. He was expected to be the major return from the deal. He was much more of a known commodity than Downs and Wong.

 

The term "non name" is pretty subjective. I had heard of him before the trade talks.

 

Cordero was the "main piece" of the Beni trade. He was "non name," despite being called Franchy.

 

(Wink is, now.)

[notin]

"Main piece??!!!" The Sox sent Mookie to LA because John Henry didn't want to sign him for long term megabucks--and LA did. LA also graciously took David Price off our hands (with the Sox still paying half his salary). I put "player to be named later" in quotation marks because I knew even then Dugo was more than that. But you have gone in the opposite direction and almost equated him with Mookie.

 

In his 2d and 3d seasons with the Sox--his 5th and 6th in MLB--Dugo's OPS's were 2.2 and 1.2. Based on those two numbers, I think calling Verdugo "no name" is not far off the mark--even though so far this year he looks really good.

 

 

The “why” Mookie was dealt current make Verdugo an afterthought in the deal. He was the one player in both iterations of the trade. LA was able to include him likely because Mookie was taking his position.

 

I didn’t “equate” him with Mookie in the same way I don’t “equate” Cameron Maybin with Miguel Cabrera. But the deal was about getting back as much as possible while offloading Mookie (and his $25mill salary) and as much of Price as possible.

 

 

Also, are you really counting the 52 games Verdugo played in 2017 and 2018 combined at 2 full seasons?

[moonslav59]

Dugo was 22, when we got him, and he did have about 162 games under his belt with promising .784 OPS.

 

It was rather disappointing to see him not improve on that from age 22-25. He was .779 with the Sox before this year. To be fair, his OPS+ improved from 106 w LA to 111 w BOS.

 

The main idea pillars of the trade, IMO was mainly threefold:

 

1. Salary dump of Price as well as the one year cost of Betts.

 

2. 5-6 years of Dugo who looked like he could be a damn good player, although not close to the level of Betts, but it was 5-6 years to 1.

 

3. The possibility that one or both prospects might contribute, someday. (Downs and Wong)

 

Has the 6.6 bWAR from Verdugo over 4 years been enough to offset 1 year of Betts? I think the answers will surely involve subjectivity and bias.

 

To me, losing Betts sucked, bigtime.

Losing half or Price was a good thing, although we mostly failed to capitalize, except for 2021.

Gaining Dugu and Wong look to have been helpful, but the results are not final.

 

One thing is for sure, the trade look better, now, than it did 2 months ago- same with the Beni trade. If Hamilton amounts to anything, maybe we revisit that trade, too.

 

[Maxbialystock]

The “why” Mookie was dealt current make Verdugo an afterthought in the deal. He was the one player in both iterations of the trade. LA was able to include him likely because Mookie was taking his position.

 

I didn’t “equate” him with Mookie in the same way I don’t “equate” Cameron Maybin with Miguel Cabrera. But the deal was about getting back as much as possible while offloading Mookie (and his $25mill salary) and as much of Price as possible.

 

 

Also, are you really counting the 52 games Verdugo played in 2017 and 2018 combined at 2 full seasons?

 

I didn't count 2017 and 2018 as full seasons, but they do constitute Major League experience. This year is Dugo's 7th straight season at the MLB level. Were parts of 2017 and 2018 in the minors? Very possibly. 2021 and 2022 were full MLB seasons.

 

Mookie's $25M salary was a relative bargain, and I'm sure John Henry would have been thrilled to sign a 10 year contract circa 2020 with Mookie for $250M. He just didn't want to pay $365M for 12 years through age 40.

[Maxbialystock]

Dugo was 22, when we got him, and he did have about 162 games under his belt with promising .784 OPS.

 

It was rather disappointing to see him not improve on that from age 22-25. He was .779 with the Sox before this year. To be fair, his OPS+ improved from 106 w LA to 111 w BOS.

 

The main idea pillars of the trade, IMO was mainly threefold:

 

1. Salary dump of Price as well as the one year cost of Betts.

 

2. 5-6 years of Dugo who looked like he could be a damn good player, although not close to the level of Betts, but it was 5-6 years to 1.

 

3. The possibility that one or both prospects might contribute, someday. (Downs and Wong)

 

Has the 6.6 bWAR from Verdugo over 4 years been enough to offset 1 year of Betts? I think the answers will surely involve subjectivity and bias.

 

To me, losing Betts sucked, bigtime.

Losing half or Price was a good thing, although we mostly failed to capitalize, except for 2021.

Gaining Dugu and Wong look to have been helpful, but the results are not final.

 

One thing is for sure, the trade look better, now, than it did 2 months ago- same with the Beni trade. If Hamilton amounts to anything, maybe we revisit that trade, too.

 

 

As always, an authoritative laydown. I think Dugo has blossomed in RF, where he is way more effective than in LF. And I would be dishonest if I didn't think the Sox made out like bandits getting him. He ain't no Mookie, but Mookie is also vastly overpriced. And by overpriced I mean that one position player just can't make that much of a difference. However, the payoff for that huge salary could well be in the Dodgers attendance because Mookie probably is worth the price of admission. Same reason why the Sox attendance jumped when the Angels--with headliners Ohtani and Trout--came to town.

 

So allow me to simplify what I mean by "no name." It's someone who doesn't put butts in seats, and this team, which is surprising all of us with their winning record, has really lousy attendance this year. A whole bunch of guys are hitting and/or starting to hit, and they are great fun to watch, but that lineup, with the exception of Devers, doesn't put butts in seats. Same goes for the pitchers--no star power.

 

Does anyone on here besides me remember the 8 game winning streak? First six games were at Fenway, and games 3 thru 6 were against the Blue Jays. Average attendance for the 6 games: 29,068. Average attendance for the last 4 games against the Jays: 28,324.

[moonslav59]

As always, an authoritative laydown. I think Dugo has blossomed in RF, where he is way more effective than in LF. And I would be dishonest if I didn't think the Sox made out like bandits getting him. He ain't no Mookie, but Mookie is also vastly overpriced. And by overpriced I mean that one position player just can't make that much of a difference. However, the payoff for that huge salary could well be in the Dodgers attendance because Mookie probably is worth the price of admission. Same reason why the Sox attendance jumped when the Angels--with headliners Ohtani and Trout--came to town.

 

So allow me to simplify what I mean by "no name." It's someone who doesn't put butts in seats, and this team, which is surprising all of us with their winning record, has really lousy attendance this year. A whole bunch of guys are hitting and/or starting to hit, and they are great fun to watch, but that lineup, with the exception of Devers, doesn't put butts in seats. Same goes for the pitchers--no star power.

 

Does anyone on here besides me remember the 8 game winning streak? First six games were at Fenway, and games 3 thru 6 were against the Blue Jays. Average attendance for the 6 games: 29,068. Average attendance for the last 4 games against the Jays: 28,324.

 

I will agree, not many fans come to the park thinking, "Where is this Verdugo guy everyone is talking about."

 

We wasn't a big name, then, and he did very little to make a name for himself, in his first few year, here. Not bad, but not great, and not much different from what he gave LA at a very young age.

 

He's making a name for himself, now.

 

I have no issues with the term "noname offense." It fits in many ways.

 

Sure, we have Devers and a few scatterings of players who have had some moments in the sun, but so many players have come out of nowhere to contribute in meaningful ways. Dugo is kind of a tweener, IMO.

[notin]

I didn't count 2017 and 2018 as full seasons, but they do constitute Major League experience. This year is Dugo's 7th straight season at the MLB level. Were parts of 2017 and 2018 in the minors? Very possibly. 2021 and 2022 were full MLB seasons.

 

Mookie's $25M salary was a relative bargain, and I'm sure John Henry would have been thrilled to sign a 10 year contract circa 2020 with Mookie for $250M. He just didn't want to pay $365M for 12 years through age 40.

 

Betts’ $25mill salary was part of the trade package. And probably a big part of the reason only two teams made offers for the relative bargain…

[moonslav59]

Betts’ $25mill salary was part of the trade package. And probably a big part of the reason only two teams made offers for the relative bargain…

 

Yes. Most teams would or could not trade for just his salary, and the fact that giving up a lot of talent for 1 year also does not fit many team's plans or strategies. Throw in half-Price and you exclude 25-27 teams and reduce the expected return.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

Been over this a bunch since 2019, but bottom line is that Mookie wanted -- and deserved -- a top of the market salary. At his age and position, he had historic WAR; he and his agents knew it, but Boston chose not to pay for it. It wasn't the first or last time the Red Sox front office misread the current market...

 

As for wanting to leave Boston -- for those wondering about attendance the past month (and who don't live in the Northeast)... did you see on NESN what fans wore to Fenway? Down jackets, wool caps, gloves and blankets OR plastic garbage bags -- some with Sox logos so they charge you another $20 bucks to sit in cramped, obstructed seats.

[notin]

Been over this a bunch since 2019, but bottom line is that Mookie wanted -- and deserved -- a top of the market salary. At his age and position, he had historic WAR; he and his agents knew it, but Boston chose not to pay for it. It wasn't the first or last time the Red Sox front office misread the current market...

 

As for wanting to leave Boston -- for those wondering about attendance the past month (and who don't live in the Northeast)... did you see on NESN what fans wore to Fenway? Down jackets, wool caps, gloves and blankets OR plastic garbage bags -- some with Sox logos so they charge you another $20 bucks to sit in cramped, obstructed seats.

 

 

The Sox offered Mookie the same AAV but for 2 fewer seasons. At the time, that wasn’t enough. It’s certainly possible COVID played a factor (although not sure how), but his demands from Boston were $400mill over X years. Did he come down from that with LA? Or just accept their offer?

 

But it’s looking like Boston still did OK in that deal as compared to other superstar trades. (Who will truncate that sentence and then blast me for it?) What did Baltimore get for Manny Machado? Or Pitt for Gerrit Cole? Or Oakland for Chapman and Olson?

 

And none of them were making $25mill, let alone paired up with an additional salary dump…

[moonslav59]

Had we kept Betts, how would we have dumped Price?

 

Package him with Beni, Bogey or Devers?

 

Pay 75-80% of his salary?

 

Had our budget been set at the same as it was, we basically sign nobody for 2020 and 2021, and that's if we were able to dump three-quarter Price.

 

[Bellhorn04]

The Sox offered Mookie the same AAV but for 2 fewer seasons. At the time, that wasn’t enough. It’s certainly possible COVID played a factor (although not sure how), but his demands from Boston were $400mill over X years. Did he come down from that with LA? Or just accept their offer?

 

At the time COVID had already wiped out much of the 2020 season, which obviously had a big impact on MLB's revenues, and there was no certainty on when it would end, so it's understandable that Betts might be willing to accept a lower amount then.

[Bellhorn04]

Had we kept Betts, how would we have dumped Price?

 

Package him with Beni, Bogey or Devers?

 

Pay 75-80% of his salary?

 

Had our budget been set at the same as it was, we basically sign nobody for 2020 and 2021, and that's if we were able to dump three-quarter Price.

 

 

Of course if they were really adamant on getting under the tax threshold there were other high-priced assets that could have been dealt.

 

Under the circumstances, Bloom did a pretty good job, I've always said that. It's easier to say now that Verdugo and Wong are playing the way they are.

[notin]

At the time COVID had already wiped out much of the 2020 season, which obviously had a big impact on MLB's revenues, and there was no certainty on when it would end, so it's understandable that Betts might be willing to accept a lower amount then.

 

Certainty possible, but if his fear was the long term health of the game, he certainly knew any contract was a risk anyway. I mean, if MLB folded, what good is a guaranteed deal from them?

[Bellhorn04]

Certainty possible, but if his fear was the long term health of the game, he certainly knew any contract was a risk anyway. I mean, if MLB folded, what good is a guaranteed deal from them?

 

If MLB folded, none of it mattered one way or the other, so there was nothing to lose.

[moonslav59]

Of course if they were really adamant on getting under the tax threshold there were other high-priced assets that could have been dealt.

 

Under the circumstances, Bloom did a pretty good job, I've always said that. It's easier to say now that Verdugo and Wong are playing the way they are.

 

If Wink can keep this up, one could call the Beni trade a winner. (The money saved also allowed us to sign Renfroe- or Marwin, if you see the glass as half empty.)

 

It's hard to view losing Betts in any kind of positive light, but under the circumstances, to me, that trade now looks like a plus.

 

Everyone knows I hated the Renfroe-JBJ deal from day one, but I did say the only way it could work is if a prospect does better than what was expected from hamilton and Binelas, at that time. Hamilton is keeping a sliver of hope alive, but it still looks pretty bad, despite the fact that other teams have moved on from renfroe after having him, for a while, too.

 

The Pivetta trade is not looking quite as good as before.

 

The Vaz trade looks good.

 

The Diekman deal looks like a steal.

 

Most of the others look okay or are washes. (Aldo R for Schwarber worked.)

[Maxbialystock]

Been over this a bunch since 2019, but bottom line is that Mookie wanted -- and deserved -- a top of the market salary. At his age and position, he had historic WAR; he and his agents knew it, but Boston chose not to pay for it. It wasn't the first or last time the Red Sox front office misread the current market...

 

As for wanting to leave Boston -- for those wondering about attendance the past month (and who don't live in the Northeast)... did you see on NESN what fans wore to Fenway? Down jackets, wool caps, gloves and blankets OR plastic garbage bags -- some with Sox logos so they charge you another $20 bucks to sit in cramped, obstructed seats.

 

Excellent comments, especially the one about fan gear at the games at Fenway. You got me: I knew one of the reasons for poor attendance was absolutely abysmal weather. You are also the only one who's ever agreed with me that not all of the seats at Fenway Park are comfortable and unobstructed.

 

So tonight the weather should be decent. The Sox are above .500. They may be "no names," but right now our guys are playing pretty good baseball when the Sox starter doesn't crap out the first time through the opposing lineup.

 

Sox attendance to date, 20 games, averages 30,763, 12th in MLB. Last year--with a really lousy team (last in AL East)--they averaged 32,408, 10th in MLB. In 2021 it was covid-affected 21,300, 11th in MLB. So too 2020.

 

2019, the year after the spectacular 2018 season and with all those big (and/or popular with Sox fans) names--Mookie, Bogey, Devers, JDM, Beni, Sale, Price, JBJ, Vazquez, et al--the Sox average attendance was 36,106, 7th in MLB. And in 2018--the greatest season ever for the Sox, it was 35,747, 9th in MLB.

 

Why was attendance greater in 2019, a lousy season, than in 2018, a spectacular season? Simple: fans make ticket-buying decisions based on the previous season, not the current one. Remember that amazing, surprising 2013 season, ending in the Sox 3d WS win in the JH era? Attendance was 34,979, 9th in MLB. The next year, 2014, when the Sox weren't very good, it was 36,494, 6th in MLB.

 

So, given last season's lousy W-L record and the absence--except of course for Devers--of marquee players, my prediction is that this year's average attendance will be below last year's 32,408.

 

Indeed, you just have to read talksox to realize the disgruntlement with Chaim Bloom and his boss, John Henry. We all seem to believe they have no intention of paying for any good players or fielding a competitive team.

Edited May 12, 2023 by Maxbialystock

[moonslav59]

Excellent comments, especially the one about fan gear at the games at Fenway. You got me: I knew one of the reasons for poor attendance was absolutely abysmal weather. You are also the only one who's ever agreed with me that not all of the seats at Fenway Park are comfortable and unobstructed.

 

So tonight the weather should be decent. The Sox are above .500. They may be "no names," but right now our guys are playing pretty good baseball when the Sox starter doesn't crap out the first time through the opposing lineup.

 

Sox attendance to date, 20 games, averages 30,763, 12th in MLB. Last year--with a really lousy team (last in AL East)--they averaged 32,408, 10th in MLB. In 2021 it was covid-affected 21,300, 11th in MLB. So too 2020.

 

2019, the year after the spectacular 2018 season and with all those big (and/or popular with Sox fans) names--Mookie, Bogey, Devers, JDM, Beni, Sale, Price, JBJ, Vazquez, et al--the Sox average attendance was 36,106, 7th in MLB. And in 2018--the greatest season ever for the Sox, it was 35,747, 9th in MLB.

 

Why was attendance greater in 2019, a lousy season, than in 2018, a spectacular season? Simple: fans make ticket-buying decisions based on the previous season, not the current one. Remember that amazing, surprising 2013 season, ending in the Sox 3d WS win in the JH era? Attendance was 34,979, 9th in MLB. The next year, 2014, when the Sox weren't very good, it was 36,494, 6th in MLB.

 

So, given last season's lousy W-L record and the absence--except of course for Devers--of marquee players, my prediction is that this year's average attendance will be below last year's 32,408.

 

Indeed, you just have to read talksox to realize the disgruntlement with Chaim Bloom and his boss, John Henry. We all seem to believe they have no intention of paying for any good players or fielding a competitive team.

 

Looking at attendance rankings is greatly affected by the size of Fenway. Even when we sell out, we don't reach the 40K levels other parks can reach.

 

Even comparing eason to season makes little sense, sometimes, when you look at what years we won and seemingly had better teams to watch.

[Maxbialystock]

Looking at attendance rankings is greatly affected by the size of Fenway. Even when we sell out, we don't reach the 40K levels other parks can reach.

 

Even comparing eason to season makes little sense, sometimes, when you look at what years we won and seemingly had better teams to watch.

 

 

Agree 37K is about max at Fenway (night games actual max is 37,755), but there is compelling evidence that, if you want high average attendance vs. high peak attendance for when, say, the Yankees come to town--vs the A's or some other small market team--a smaller ballpark is better. The exceptions to smaller is better are the Dodgers and Yankees because both have very big fan bases. Dodger Stadium hold 56K and Yankee Stadium 54K.

 

I disagree about not comparing season average attendances at Fenway because I'm just about convinced that, not only are there significant ups and downs in average attendance, year to year, but also that they are not necessarily tied to how well that team is playing that year.

 

More to the point, I think it's very possible that Chaim Bloom and John Henry's joint commitment to cutting payroll will continue to have an effect on attendance--and probably on TV ratings.

 

When the Angels came to town, April 14-17, attendances were 36,680, 36,594, 34,790, 34,942--an average of 35,751.

 

In the other 16 home games this season, the average attendance has been 29,516. That's a swing over over 6,000 butts in seats per game of presumably avid Sox fans who actually wanted to see Shohei Ohtani and Mike Trout. And who can blame them? The four game temperatures were 58, 56, 54, and 50 degrees.

 

When the Jays came to town, May 1-4, the attendances were 27,438, 27,721, 27,863, and 30,173. And the game temperatures were 50, 50, 50, and 47 degrees. That 47 degree temp game, May 4, was the one with the biggest attendance, 30,173, so I'm not sure weather temp was a big factor in this series or in April series vs the Angels. Those Jays games were all wins in the middle of an 8 game win streak, which completely failed to get Sox fans to go to Fenway Park the way the did to see Ohtani and Trout.

[moonslav59]

Agree 37K is about max at Fenway (night games actual max is 37,755), but there is compelling evidence that, if you want high average attendance vs. high peak attendance for when, say, the Yankees come to town--vs the A's or some other small market team--a smaller ballpark is better. The exceptions to smaller is better are the Dodgers and Yankees because both have very big fan bases. Dodger Stadium hold 56K and Yankee Stadium 54K.

 

I disagree about not comparing season average attendances at Fenway because I'm just about convinced that, not only are there significant ups and downs in average attendance, year to year, but also that they are not necessarily tied to how well that team is playing that year.

 

More to the point, I think it's very possible that Chaim Bloom and John Henry's joint commitment to cutting payroll will continue to have an effect on attendance--and probably on TV ratings.

 

When the Angels came to town, April 14-17, attendances were 36,680, 36,594, 34,790, 34,942--an average of 35,751.

 

In the other 16 home games this season, the average attendance has been 29,516. That's a swing over over 6,000 butts in seats per game of presumably avid Sox fans who actually wanted to see Shohei Ohtani and Mike Trout. And who can blame them? The four game temperatures were 58, 56, 54, and 50 degrees.

 

When the Jays came to town, May 1-4, the attendances were 27,438, 27,721, 27,863, and 30,173. And the game temperatures were 50, 50, 50, and 47 degrees. That 47 degree temp game, May 4, was the one with the biggest attendance, 30,173, so I'm not sure weather temp was a big factor in this series or in April series vs the Angels. Those Jays games were all wins in the middle of an 8 game win streak, which completely failed to get Sox fans to go to Fenway Park the way the did to see Ohtani and Trout.

 

Sox attendance does not always gel with winning seasons or being loaded with stud supernova stars.

[Maxbialystock]

Sox attendance does not always gel with winning seasons or being loaded with stud supernova stars.

 

True. This season bears watching, however.

[Maxbialystock]

True. This season bears watching, however.

 

Weather was warm tonight, 82 degrees, and attendance was a solid 34,553 against a Cardinals team that has struggled so far this season. So it sure looks like the Sox fans will support a "no name" lineup, especially one that is winning games.