It has nothing to do with WAR or replacement value. For one, we would not replace Kimbrel with a closer having a zero WAR.
KImbrel certainly helped us last year, but I feel we probably would have still won it all without him, and I'm not even getting into his playoff performances.
I'd say about $31-32M x 12, including the buy out years.
Betts is likely to make $45M in his last 2 arb years. That's $25M less than $35M a year, so if you take that off the next 10 years, it's $2.5M from $35M or $32.5M x 12.
I'd think offering him $31M x 12 might do it. He gets more security and we save $23 over 12 years.
$45M (arbs)+ $350M($35M x 10)= $395M over 12 years
$31M x 12 years= $372M
Or, offer him $31.5M x 12= $378M - a savings of $17M.
$32M x 12= $384M - a $11M savings.
Give him an opt out after 6 years.
Or, we could sign Mookie for what we paid Pablo & HRam per year.
BTW, for those who think you can't field a team while paying someone $35M, we paid Pable & HRam over $40M this year.
I agree, but an issue may arise with options, especially if we pick up a RP'er or two without trading a pitcher with options.
I have all 3 making the opening day roster with Velazquez starting in AAA. This assumes no injuries (doubtful) and no new additions (doubtful).
I get it, but people are looking at all the failed 8+ year deals and assuming Mookie's will, too.
Yes, it can. It's a huge risk. One thing to notice is that many of the failed 8+ year deals went to ages 39-42. A 12 year deal right now would go to age 37.
I realize $35M a year can be spent differently, and the risk reward being put on just one guy is scary, but to me, Betts is the best Sox player I've ever seen. (Pedro is close.)
I'd keep Hembree over Workman.
Velzquez has options, so Hembree is over him, too.
I'd only keep Johnson over Hembree, because our SP'er depth needs him. (Both are out of options.)
True, but that doesn't mean we spend freely every single year.
Right now, we have Beni, Devers and ERod as key players on the cheap. How many do the Yanks and Dodgers have?