Hitch

Why do you continually post that we don't know what's going on behind the scenes when we discuss things? Is it some vein attempt to feel superior? Mostly everyone knows we don't have all the information at hand, but this is a discussion board, where people pass the time by playing out scenarios and discussing possibilities. We do so knowing we don't have access to information the GM's that run our clubs do. And so we make guesses and summations, based on reports and assumptions, knowing it has no effect on anything other than the discussion at hand. It's a strange way to pass the time I grant you, but far less odd than consistently going to a forum to tell people they don't know enough when discussing fantasy propositions.

All of them by Swilhart!

It's something I'm greatly enjoying. I think it's obvious Dodgers and Padres want Betts. Sweat them out.

I'm not sure why anyone would read a Swilhart's Ghost post and give it any credibility whatsoever. Have you all suffered collective amnesia and forgotten the rivers of s*** he's been posting for the past few months?

The voice of sanity and reason returns!

Virtually everyone worried about the trade is worried about the effect such a contract has on the squad right now, and later when he's in decline. Why people are trying to paint it as - we don't see him as valuable as other player/contracts, and/or we're worried about JH's pocket is mystifying. And wearing.

Many of your posts on this subject contain a non sequitur. Why you don't debate people's opinions rather than make up fantasy arguments, or deflect to another point, is hard to know. Maybe because you don't like the validity of the arguments being put forward and want to stick your fingers in your ears?

Sound the non sequitur Klaxon!

I'm not sure what to make of such a nonsense reply. Nobody can accuse you of not trying to force non sequiturs into many of your posts at least, I guess.

That's why I said the money he wants would be approaching that. 17%. That much of a percentage on any one player is probably a mistake - almost certainly when that contract is 12 years long. It's definitely a mistake if we extended now as we'd be paying 5 players 65% of the wage bill for the next 3 years. That's not healthy (to say the least) when we have such a barren farm.

The 2003 Marlins are the only team in the Competitive Balance Tax era to allocate more than 20% of its payroll to one player and win the World Series. Betts is after money close to that. I don't see us bucking the trend somehow. Especially with the contracts we have on the books for the next 3/4 years.

Same, I'd be very surprised. If he is, get it done.

I very much hope you're right. I don't see it personally, but I'd be even happier with the deal if they're taking Price and we're getting Verdugo and some of the prospects mentioned.

I do believe him when he says that we don't have to be under. If we can't make the trade work we'll got at hard again this year, but it'll mean the end of any lingering hope of signing Betts to an extension and then they'll try and get under again next year. It will have to happen at some point in the next two years. Trading Betts is the right move for me, and getting rid of Price is dreamland, but if they're packaged it really will undercut what could be a good haul for Mookie. I can't see a scenario where they give the Sox Verdugo in just a Betts trade, never mind with Price involved too.

It's not about what's logical on the trade simulator. The FO have been to shown to have no interest in moving either of those two in these possible trades.

Yeah, I think almost certainly. I like that Bloom is holding out. There seems to be this fake deadline being bandied about because ST is a couple of weeks ago. But he can make Padres and Dodgers sweat it out for a lot longer, yet.

I'm not sure why you insist on putting Workman and Barnes in these trade possibilities. There's not been even the smallest mention they are going in any trade. It's not going to be a 4/5 man trade on each side. No matter how much you ask the trade simulator. Eovaldi has been mentioned little more.

And we have Sale and Price on monster deals for the next 3/4 years. Evaoldi and JD on big contracts the next 3 years. So we already have our Pujol's and more. Unless we're buying Mookie now for four years time when he starts the decline. That would be awesome.

Good post.

Yup. All of this.

Apologies if the last line of my post seemed hostile, I wasn't going for that, it's just not a concept worth discussing as you've pulled it out of thin air and presented it as almost certain. Let me preface this by saying *IF* we could at least get rid of Price, but also possibly Evoaldi, I wouldn't be as hostile to offering him a longer term deal, however, I'm mostly against long deals to anyone. He will probably be great for the next three years - years in which we are stuck with Price (Could see the physio's room often), Sale (could see the physio's room often) Evoaldi (has literally moved his own bed into the physio's room)and JD. You're talking near enough around $130/$140 a year on 5 players (3 of which are highly suspect) including Mookie. Five that's it. We're also paying Bogey $20m and Devers will make big leaps up in arbitration, ERod, Beni, too, to name a few. So the only way I can see us winning or being there or thereabouts is by going over the cap repeatedly, hammering us on Draft picks and Int money. If we don't go over the cap repeatedly, I don't see how we contend, wasting Mookie's best years. So now we're into Mookie's 30/31 aged seasons, and the big money has come off the books, but we have a desolate farm which is bad at the moment, but close to useless in two or three years if we stay over the cap all the time. Can we supply a great team to go around Mookie then? We'll likely have little coming through but much more ability to move around financially. You keep suggesting we will make stupid splashes with the Mookie money, what's to stop us making stupid splashes then? When we have holes, EVERYWHERE? Then we're in to to Mookie's 33+ seasons when the contract will be start to become a harsh anchor on us. We know it will hurt us in later years. It's an absurd idea to give a man that speed and twitch muscles are is his primary weapons. I like the guy, I hate long contracts. I just don't see how we make it work without offloading at least Price for the full amount. And even then it'll be tough.

I'm not repulsed by the dollars. The market set the price and it is what it is, as ridiculous as it's gotten, but I am worried about what the dollars will do to the ability to invest in other areas. Your last point is just baseless. There's little point discussing such things.

You can't forget what he's asking because it directly affects the amount of investment in the rest of the playing staff. That said, I do think he's worth as much as those players, I don't think any of those players should have got the contract they did. More madness. I agree he deserves a good pay day and if he is to get what he wants, I hope it is with somebody else who is happy to use so much of their payroll on one player because as much as I like the guy, it shouldn't be here.

The issue isn't about affording him. We know the Red Sox can afford him, it's about being able to put a balanced team on the field without getting hammered on draft picks/int money every few years because we're consistently over the cap. If he got anywhere near this, the next 3/4 years we're going to have an insane amount of money of our cap tied up with just a few players. And after they clear and we need to bring in new players and build a new squad (less some picks and Int money) and Mookie will still have 8/9 years on a contract and edging ever closer to a decline that is inevitable with a player so blessed with speed as a tool. I like the guy and would love to keep him, but for the numbers being bandied around - its crazy.

Unless his settle number comes way down - trade him. A 12 year contract for a player who depends fairly heavily on his speed is insanity. Even more so when it's at anything near $35 a year. Trade him and move on.