moonslav59

There will be a massive hole in the line-up.

Just so I got it straight, you prefer a contract with all 5 years at and post 30 year old years old at $22M versus a contract with 3 years under 30 plus 6 at and post 30 years old at $22M. (Note: I prefer JD, too, because JD>GS.)

He should figure in local and state taxes and advertising opportunity differences., but it's up to him

I would feel better, if he lost some weight, but I'm not so sure the situation is as dire as some seem to think it is. I think the saga of Pablito is scaring people.

I know Dr Jacko has all but written off Steven Wright, but I'm still hopeful he can work his way into a meaningful role with the 2019 team. I'm not all that optimistic about Johnson and Velazquez for any role beyond 6th or 7th starter and middle/long relief. (I'm hopeful they can do well in thos roles.)

No. I think of it as an emergency option. We did use Eovaldi a bit in that role in the playoffs. He was cheaper than Kimbrel will cost.

Shocking news!

Agreed. To me, it would be a last resort and could only happen, if someone like Wright, Johnson or Velazquez showed they could be a decent 5th starter, no other starter is hurt AND nobody shows they can close effectively out of Brasier, Barnes, Thornburg & Hembree or whoever we add. I think the odds are long.

Porcello is our horse. More chance of Eovaldi sliding over to closer, if another starter steps up (Wright?).

Good to see you, Danny. We will likely be worse in a few areas, but we have a good chance at staying the same or improving in a few areas. Will those improvements offset the declines enough for us to win the division again? I think so, but it won't be easy. Areas we may see improvement: 3B: Hopefully, Devers stays healthy and shows some gains after his step back on offense last season. 1B: Pearce all year should help. 2B: Pedey, Holt and Nunez- between them, maybe we improve over 2018. CF: Maybe JBJ stays steady all season long. SP: Eovaldi all year can help. ERod and Sale staying healthy is another way to improve. C: Both catchers had terrible offensive seasons. We don't need them to do better, but if they just return to their career norm, we could see a near 100 point gain in catcher OPS.

What explains the 180 point gain on the "with Papi" year?

Huh?

Well said, and although he may not be a monster, he's an incredible athlete with the gift of amazing reflexes and instincts. His all out play on defense may increase his injury chances, but it's a part of his character I do not want him to change. Besides, when I say "good chance," I don't think that necessarily means better than a 50% chance. Plus, I hedged my statement to "close to" doing better than 2018 in some season in the future. I don't see how that reached a "drinking Kool-Aid" level of optimism.

Exactly, except for Eovaldi, who they must gave viewed as a bargain and a projected plus for 4 years. He allows us to lose Porcello or Sale with a lesser big ouch.

That's why his remaining deal with the Yanks is good for the Yanks, unless he starts sucking sooner than expected.

The problem with the Stanton deal was paying him and giving up prospects to get him. In today's FA market, Stanton for $220M/10 is a bargain.

...but Betts achieved these numbers without hitting 33 HRs. One could argue, he can hit 40-45 HRs this year and see his BA dip. BTW, not all those guys were super big beefy hitters.

We have a bunch of players that have contracts expiring every year. The idea is not to expressly have to reset every 3 years. As it turns out, we will be going over the max line 2 years in a row. I'm not sure that is in the plans again, but when looking at our future budgets, it certainly looks easier to reset every now and again while trying to not go $40M ever again. Do we have to reset after 2019? No. Would not doind it after 2019 mean we have to after 2020, probably not, but it doesn't make sense to me, to stay at the 50% tax rate indefinitely, when dipping under every 3-5 years and maybe going $20-39M every now and again when you feal an extra push is needed is cheaper.

I'd sign him to $32M x 5 front end added to $12M x 5 back end.

Okay, throw those three out and it's 2 that repeated and 1 that did not. Still, good odds. I'm still not seeing why it's so "drink the kool aid" rare.

Very rare? I listed all the non steroid players in the top 20 over the last 20 years and only Luis Gonzalez and Carlos Delgado were "one and dones." The other 6 all came very close or beat a great season with an even better one. The Coors Field claim is lame. Both Helton and Walker did not have their first season outside of Coors then have a later, better one there. They had both seasons there. If you want to throw them out, too, the score is still 4-2 in favor of players repeating great years vs one and dones. That's certainly not "kool-aid" wishful thinking, when at least this evidence actually supports the idea that Betts might repeat.

Most could retire on $1-3M, and live better than they ever have.

I think Stanton at $22M is a steal.

I'll take Mookie's twitch skills over Judge's Shrek physicality 7 days a week. Look, I never said I'd bet on him repeating. I only said there's a good chance he comes close or does better at least one more year. There's also a good chance he doesn't. Same with Judge.

Want some live ones? I'll take the most recent 20 seasons' best OPS and throw out Bonds. I should throw out Sosa and McGwire, too as both of them used PEDs and saw a massive spike in their OPS and then equaled or topped that spike later in their careers. Here's the rest: #6 Larry Walker: He has a three seasons over .900 and a .912 OPS in 1996 before exploding with a 1.172 OPS in 1997 (6th best in 20 years). He ends up going over 1.013 5 more times, including coming very close to his 1997 high twice: 1.168 in 1999 and 1.111 in 2001. #7 Todd Heltom: His 2000 season was about 180 points better than his previous high (just like Mookie), and he came close the following year with a 1.116 OPS. He then had 3 more consecutive seasons over 1.006. #8 Manny Ramirez: He jumped up to a 1.105 OPS in an insane 1999 season (44 HRs and 131 RBI while batting .333)! Can't top that, right? Well, the very next year, he has his 1.154 OPS season the year before signing with the Sox. He ends up having 6 more seasons over 1.009, including one pretty close to his 2000 season in 2002, when he hit 1.097, which even as his second best of his career was still better than Mookies' 2018 season. #9 Jason Giambi, someone you know. A good example for my case. He jumps 100 points in 1999 with the A's to a .975 OPS. In 2000, he has a "career best year" of 1.123- a similar jump as Mookie of about 150 points. Except, it wasn't his career best. He did better the next year and by 124 POINTS! He hit 1.137 in 2001 the year before joining the Yanks and beginning his slow decline, despite a 1.034 first year with them. #10 Carlos Delgado: I agree he was sort of a one and done player. His 2000 season's 1.134 was a bout 180 points higher than his previous season, but he did have one more season at 1.019. #13 Jim Thome: in 1996, Thome jumped his OPS by about 70 points to 1.062. Pretty damn good. He followed it with a 1.001 OPS and 4 years later a 1.040 OPS. That 1996 season had to be his career best, right? After all, he was now past prime. WRONG! He went on to hit 1.222 in 2002 and even had a couple more seasons over 1.000 much later on. #15 Luis Gonzalez: The true one and done. .952 in 1999, 1.117 in 2001 and never above .934 afterwards. #17 Albert Pujols: He really had no spikes. He started off his career with amazing numbers right out of the gait. In 2003, he hit 1.106, which was almost 100 points better than his next highest. He then hit between .997 and 1.072 the next 4 years before topping his career best with a new one at 1.114 in 2008. He came close the next year at 1.101 (3rd best of career), then 1.011, .906 and then fell off a cliff with the Angels. Those are all the top 20 OPS seasons in the last 20 years not named Bonds, McGwire or Sosa. These guys are still alive.