moonslav59

I like the Ian Kennedy idea better. I'm still not sure $11M JBJ is worse than $16.5M Kennedy ($14M on lux line), but with Pillar on the team, I'd do it. I'm not sure KC would do it it just to save $5.5M. They could get a nice prospect for Kennedy and $5.5M cash towards his deal. What are your thoughts on JBJ for Danny Duffy? He's owed $15.25M and $15.5M over the next 2 years and $13M x 2 on the lux tax line. He's declined recently and would add to the 2021 budget. Chris Archer has $9M/1 left, but Pitt won't want JBJ, unless we paid down much of his deal. Anyone else?

I should have put Chatham in the 2B depth chart, but I need to see more from him before I move him above Lin and Chavis. Moreland will start every game vs RHPs, if healthy, so in a sense, he's the starter at 1B. Chavis or Dalbec (if he shows life) will play 1B vs LHPs. I doubt Chavis plays 2B vs RHPs, unless Peraza stinks up the place, so I see Peraza as the FT 2Bman, unless and until he loses the job.

So everything was fine up until the 2018 decisions not to trade Price and to sign Eovaldi? (BTW, Eovalid was signed as part of the whole "win now at the expense of the future" philosophy DD has followed for a long time.) Our farm was crap and even though it improved a little with the Betts-Price deal, our future is not really brightened by our projected input from our farm. The Eovaldi deal fell apart quickly. The Price deal was know to be worrisome towards the end of his deal. There were a lot of other deals that severely mortgaged the future for the here and now (2-4 year window). I'm glad we won the ring in 2018. I'd have a totally different attitude, right now, had we not. But, I knew all along we'd come to a point like we are today. Maybe it won't be a "cliff," but it certainly isn't pretty, right now. All those deals combined contributed to where we are today. It's easy to blame it all on one or two "take-back" what ifs, but the day of reckoning is upon us. Let's hope it does not last long, and IMO the Betts-Price deal was the first move we've made in years that improves the long term outlook. We've made a step in the right direction and may need more like it to hasten the comeback to serious competitiveness.

"Anymore" sounds too permanent. I'm not giving up hope on a reunion, until he signs the long term deal with someone else.

True, and if the bidding on Betts gets way out of hand, the money we prepared to pay him for can be used elsewhere to help us get back to the top. I won't be crushed, if we lose Betts for good, but I think we need to go pretty large and long to try to get him back.

Several fans wildly applauded nearly every move DD made and explained away the future with vague statements like "we'll build the farm back up, like always." Several denied the day of reckoning (or "cliff) would ever happen.

So, you want us to be the highest bidder next winter (within limits)? I'm getting mixed messages. What is the most you'd pay him? What do you think he may get (top end estimate)?

I think I'm one of the few fans that are more about the long term. I loved Ben's approach, criticized DD's "win now" approach and was all for trading Betts and Price to reset and hasten the rebuild and rise to the top. It's my belief, and I realize it's just speculation and appear to be in a minority here, that Betts will age well. He may not be great from ages 35-39, but he won't be big drain either. My suggestion to greatly front end load the deal would give some insurance in case we need to make a Price dump-like trade with Mookie later in his career, if needed. It's not full insurance, I know, but if Betts does like I think he will the next 5-6 years, it will more than offset any drag the end of his career might place upon us.

Injuries can and do often enough to make anyone hesitant to make any deal like Betts will likely get. Most truly special players seem to age well, unless an injury causes decline or a premature end to their career. Signing Betts to a 9-12 year deal and watching him get hurt or decline sharply would be horrific and a big drag on a long period of Sox history. It's a huge gamble on just one guy, and although I did say, if we were ever going to sign a pitcher to $31M x 7 years, Price was the guy, I never felt this strongly about Price as I do about Betts. Betts is the best Sox player I have ever seen- not even close. Watching him continue his greatness for another team will hurt like hell. IMO, he will earn $420/12.

It's hard to project how any player will age. People keep talking about how smaller, quick players age poorly, and maybe that's true, but where's the evidence. Plus how many of those quick, smaller players had the twitch times Betts has- reportedly off the charts good and the power he has? He's unique, so he's hard to project. I love his attitude. His drive to excel. His ability to adjust to a new position and become the best in a matter of days not years. His 5 tool brilliance. To me, he's likely worth $60-75M a year for the next 5-6 years- maybe not free agent market-wise but actual value to a team. If he makes $35-40M a year on a long term deal, the team makes $25-50M a year for 5-6 years. That would more than make up for the back end 5-6 years, where he may be worth near to well below the $35-40M/yr. I realize this is pure conjecture, and it's just my opinion, but those 5-6 years would be worth it. I know I could be wrong. Although I knew the Price deal was too much and for too long, I thought he'd earn it the first 3-4 years- enough to offset the final 3-4 years, and if he declined too quickly, we could trade him to cut some of our losses. I was not an enthusiastic fan of the signing, but I thought it was necessary. It turns out I was wrong, even though he did help us win a ring, I was wrong. I could be wrong about Betts, too. I don't think I am. I want to watch Betts play in Boston from ages 28-37+.

News on failed Mets-Betts deal... https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2020/02/details-on-mets-pursuit-of-mookie-betts.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=facebook

How could they know? Why even have medical check-ups, if you should know everything beforehand? They got burned with Pom, and maybe they got more thorough.

Beni has one more arb after this deal, so 3 years of control. I wouldn't trade Beni. He's got a lot of upside, still and he's underpaid. We need underpaid players. The only reason I mentioned Matz & Smith , is because I heard the Mets want a CF'er and don't need D Smith. I'm not sure they need or like Chavis, but I'd change him to Dalbec if they insisted. I love Workman, but he's got one year left and may be a sell high type player. I've considered suggesting deals where they dump Familia's deal on us ($11.7M x 2 but just $10M x 2 on lux tax). He's basically cancelout JBJ's deal and give them savings next year. They get Workman to replace Familia, and we pray Familia bounces back. What sucks for us is, if he doesn't we've eaten up much of the savings from the Price deal for 2021. There's lots of moving parts, but I'm thinking some combination of JBJ, Workman, Walden, Chavis or Dalebec might get is Matz and Smith. I realize it hurts their rotation, but they have a good history of replacing SP'ers from withing their own system. We are not.

Who said they expected a perfect MRI, or that the MRI was the only evidence that surprised the Sox docs? He looked like a bigger risk than the expected, and balked at the deal.

.858 is pretty good, but point well taken. Someone else mentioned the comp to Aaron, and of course, there's only one Hammerin' Hank, but I think there are a lot of similarities. Hank won 3 GGs early on, stole over 20 bases 6 times and had power, too. His first 5 full seasons, he hit 27, 26, 44, 30 and 39 HRs (ending at age 25). Starting at age 32 he hit 44, 39, 29, 44, 38, 47, 34, 40 (465 PA at age 39), 20 (382 at age 40 .832 OPS) and 12 at age 41 (543 PAs). His OPS never dipped below.852 from age 21 to 39, when he hit .832. More amazingly, he only hit under .900 twice in that period: .895 at age 32 .852 at age 34. In no way am I trying to say Betts might duplicate Hank's career, but Hank showed it can be done. His body proportions changed over his career, but his power actually improved at age 32: 24-31: 288 HRs in 5346 PAs/4786 ABs .962 OPS 32-39: 315 HRs in 4853 PAs/4208 ABs .954 OPS First 12 years: 398 HRs .943 OPS in 7855 PAs Last 11 years: 357 HRs .909 OPS in 6086 PAs Betts is way below Hank in HRs by age 26. Betts has 31, 24, 32 and 29 his last 4 years. He has 116 HRs over the last 4 years (2762 PAs) and a .917 OPS. He will almost certainly not come close to Hank's numbers, but he may have a long career with little loss of power, if not an increase in power.

We don't have great infield depth, but Down might be up in 1-2 years. 1B: Moreland, Chavis, Dalbec, Ockimey (JD?) 2B: Peraza, Chavis, Lin, Arauz (Dalbec?) Marco (not on 40) 3B: Devers, Chavis, Dalbec (Marco not on 40) SS: Bogey, Lin, Arauz, Chatham (Marco not on 40)

Good one!

Assuming we could get Holt for $4M x 2, does even $4M prevent us from getting the 2 decent pitchers we need?

One now and one at the deadline.

Of course, the risk is great. I just don't see Betts substantially declining as quickly as many seem to think he will. He will lose value as his speed declines, but he has power and quick wrists, like Henry Aaron.

Do they still want an OF'er? (JBJ?)

I'm certainly not high on many of the players on this list, but chances are a few look good enough in ST'ing to be chosen over Houck and Mata. If healthy locks (9): Sale, ERod, Eovaldi, Perez, Workman, Barnes, Taylor, Walden, DHern Out of options (3): Hembree, Weber & Brice (will have to DFA) Assuming no or 1 DFA, that leaves 1-2 slot for... Brasier Velazquez Brewer Shawaryn Osich Mazza Hart Springs MHall Not on 40 man roster: Johnson Poyner Houck McGrath (Projected to start in AA) Reyes Mata Ward Feltman

JBJ, Workman and Chavis for Matz & Smith (maybe Marisnick- the cheater?)

Yes!

No. Even if he looks good.