5GoldGlovesOF,75

As I had hoped, if this had to happen, Bloom is going to guarantee a haul. Reports are starting to include names that some people laughed at all winter "for just one year" of Mookie Betts. They're only rumors -- even coming from the media -- but if Bloom was going to just do a salary dump, Mookie would've been gone already. A bidding war has upped the ante. Good for us.

If Mookie is gone, Price has to go -- but not necessarily in the same deal. A Mookie trade is a white flag on 2020, and if they're committed to changing the culture, next on the hit list has to be Price -- the anti-Betts as far as embarrassing the Red Sox with constant, bitter PR. Wipe it clean, Chaim.

I know, I meant inconsistent with not making sure that they take care of their best player. But I still have my doubts about whether Mookie is focused entirely on getting every last cent or if there are other personal factors involved in this inevitable breakup. Maybe agents and the front office do most of the negotiating, but employees that work for a company for nearly a decade develop various relationships with co-workers of different levels, and most likely confide in others about basics like the weather, traffic, media, etc. (I'm not trying to start rumors because we've all read them). It's as good as an explanation as any to explain why he's gone -- because the brass knows they can't sign him and won't overpay to change his mind. I'm not sticking up for management, and will be listening intently for any negative spin doctors after Mookie's departure.

Did you ever see a supposedly good defensive catcher miss so many catches on pitches than last year (and I'm not counting Tek or anyone else who couldn't catch a knuckleball)? I honestly have to wonder if all the panic about constantly changing signs caused more cross-ups, wild pitches and passed balls -- because, to quote the infamous article "illegal sign stealing, particularly through advanced technology, is everywhere." ...you know, the story that got three managers fired (but none anywhere else -- case closed -- with not even an investigation of the previous team we know too well in this next quote: "One was a hitter who was struggling at the plate and had benefited from sign stealing with a previous team, according to club sources; another was a coach who wanted to help." I won't name names, either, but both of those guys are now unemployed, while "the previous team" is favored by the planet to win it all this year.

Mookie's going to blast off in California this year, isn't he? I can see a happy 10 WAR MVP season in the NL, with a special section in the bleachers tabbed "Mookiewood." While we're Will Mired in Fenway...

What's frustrating and confusing as a Red Sox fan is why Henry and Co. suddenly picked now to become inconsistent with spending compared to the last two decades and even last year. Does anyone really think Dombro alone compelled billionaires to blow money on iffy pitchers when the Red Sox have an entire department who I'm sure prints out spreadsheets to show why Mookie Betts was such a better investment than injury-prone arms? I'm also sure John Henry himself can figure out how to use baseball-ref or fangraphs. But I confess I did attend an ivy league school; it was a middle school, and after chasing down a foul ball into the woods I caught such a rash I need cortizone cream to dry out.

Well, you know how poorly those 6'2, 200 lb. big guys who rely on muscle age... They still paid him, though.

Mookie's about to enter his age 27 season. At age 27, Carl Yastrzemski won the Triple Crown. At age 27, Wade Boggs had 240 hits and won the first of four straight batting crowns. At age 27, David Ortiz joined the Red Sox to lead them to three World Series rings. Here are the cumulative WARs produced for each from those age 27 seasons through the end of their careers: Yaz 71.5; Boggs 73.4; Ortiz 50.2 (just on offense). Betts averages 7 WAR per year, so is a good bet to join the the trio with 70 more WAR through the next decade. Many agree Mookie is the Sox best homegrown player since Yaz. Can you even imagine the Yawkeys not paying Yaz or Boggs -- or Henry and Werner not keeping Ortiz in Boston?

The boring and depressing cold stove season is about to turn. I fought all winter against the narrative that the Red Sox have to trade a Hall of Famer for players not as good so they can free up money to sign other players not as good. I'm burned out by prevailing logic and about to concede with a just-as-tired warning: be careful what you wish for. Look at Boston's needs and at next year's free agent class. If the Sox reset -- and don't re-sign Betts -- they may use the savings to target a starting pitcher, a closer and another outfielder. Say they sign three above-average players like Robbie Ray, Liam Hendriks and Starling Marte... I try to convince myself those pieces will make the team better than keeping Mookie. Then I calculate value: the above trio produced a cumulative 7.4 WAR last year; Mookie averages 7 WAR himself, per year, in every season of his career. Yes, longterm contracts almost always end up as burdens. But large market franchises like Boston are historically the few with financial resources that help cut their losses easier than others. But I believe Betts is a rare elite five-tool athlete with as good a chance as any other player in baseball to actually earn his salary. The argument that Mookie's frame or height guarantees he'll break down sooner than someone two or three inches taller is dubious (that's as nice as I can put it). I know guys 5'9" who never stopped practicing, working out and honing their talents, and who saw their game peak in their mid-30s -- and even some who hit better than ever in their 50s in old-timer's leagues vs. ex-pros and D1 hurlers. None were world class athletes like Betts. I'll end with this: one thing that could age Mookie faster is New England weather. His body and career will thrive better in whatever warmer and sunny city he chooses. I wish him good skill (he won't need any luck).

It doesn't look all that bad. I mean, your entire starting lineup won the World Series two years ago except for the second baseman (I know there are key bench pieces missing, like Leon, Kinsler, and MVP Pearce -- who replaced Ramirez, the Opening Day #3 batter). It's also 4/5ths of the same rotation -- I know, big IFs, but who honestly thought going into '19 that the starters wouldn't be a strength? Price and Eovaldi were both coming off the best clutch pitching in their careers, and expectations were they had figured it out and would continue to build and contribute. Sale was the most questionable, and even he had blown away the last three batters of the Series. Porcello took a step back and ERod a step forward; those are normal year-to-year developments... but lengthy injuries to a team's top three starters are not. Yes, we're still missing an established closer like Kimbrel, but Workman's '19 WAR of 3.2 was better than Kimbrel's '18 of 2.3. It may be unreasonable to expect Workman to repeat a career year, but he has to be better than Kimbrel's '19 WAR of -0.5. Some fans are down on Peraza but he's still 25 so let's give him a chance for a bounceback. He may not be Alomar, but he's not Nunez, either; Peraza had a 2.3 WAR in '18; Nunez was -1.1 in '18. As moon, notin and others have pointed out, a big problem last season -- and I agree a big concern right now -- was/is pitching depth and a reliable bench... underrated components of a winner, the #20-30 roster guys. Who can forget Pokey, Mientkiewicz, Roberts and Pesky's "Leskanic, you sonabitch!" Now please help me forget Owings, Gorkys and Cashner. Bloom hasn't altered the core, but made a lot of alterations to change the extra seats in the dugout and bullpen. Maybe that's the plan.

I count 17 votes so far, with 9 saying they'd pay Betts $32.5 million a year or less... Even if a Yankee fan or two voted, do half the posters on a Red Sox forum actually believe that Mookie Betts is worth less money per year than Anthony Rendon?

Those who've had the fortune and thereby misfortune of re-entering the singles scene know two truths: everyone falls for looks, but there is always a reason availables are available...

...or: "2020 May be the future, but you’re team isn’t gonna have a good 2020 without a damn miracle" These are the kinds of statements that reiterate this one: "It's amazing how assumptions and expectations are almost always made based on the previous season... and how many times even expert pundits are wrong." Bring on the pessimism -- or overconfidence, if you're a Yankme fan. But the 2020 Red Sox haven't given up until they trade Mookie.

I fully expect Betts to have a great year, with a higher WAR than Lux and May combined. That's not much of a prediction, comparing a HOFer to two guys entering what they hope will be their first full years in the majors... but that's the trend here. Even if he gets traded, Mookie will be hounded by reporters all season about extensions he won't sign and where he will sign, so I don't think his production will be affected much by location. Personally, I -- like many Red Sox fans -- prefer it be in Fenway. However, the distractions of the Betts situation may be most stressful of all for the front office in Boston. Imagine if Bloom can't get what he wants, Mookie stays, and hits the ground running like two years ago. If the Sox get off to a good start, the brass will be under more pressure than ever from fans and especially the fickle, two-faced media to "lock him up, give him the $400 million already!" Then Mookie will counter with half a billion.

Urueta sounds like the kind of guy who's trending now... with a background similar to Cora's: as an international manager, analytics dept. exec, and bench coach designee. Plus, he has the recommendation of Lovullo, a respected veteran of the Fenway dugout. Urueta may not have big league managerial experience (neither did AC), but may be a better transition for the Red Sox players who miss Cora, rather than an older retread coming out of retirement for one last go.

Donnie, I tried to get even the communists back on task, asking each and every one for the same contribution - $1 - to collect for Mookie. One collective, with The Who blaring ads for the cars: "Commie can you hear me? Commie? Commie...?"

Sorry, I didn't mean to offend anyone here. I mean, we may be some of the more erudite to argue whether a young man who plays a game for a living deserves $300 million or $400 million. Dollars. But when you get down to it, what really separates our opinions from kids on the playground or guys at bar? Answer: about two beers -- but that's only because recess is 15 minutes long!

Agreed -- Moreland means more as a veteran presence in that clubhouse in flux than 9/1000th of OPS. He's decent around the bag, too (though I've never heard of Adams being indecent there; not like Psycho Lyons, anyway).

Sorry, I forgot how serious a bunch of adults are about a kid's game that still compels us to bang away our days and nights on keyboards to strangers that only exist through code names...

I'm spot off. There isn't a single player on the entire Dodgers' 40-man or in their system that I would take in a straight trade for Mookie Betts for 2020. Interesting question for the board -- forget about salary, years and taxes for a moment -- what one MLB player on any team would you trade for Betts right now, for the coming year? In other words, if you could have any other player in the majors for one year on the Red Sox instead of Mookie at age 27, who would that be? I'm not picking Trout, because Mookie is more valuable in right in Fenway than Trout would be in center. I might say Arenado, but I think Devers may be the Sox best player this year. If I had to choose one guy... maybe Lindor, another best at his position, but in a spot on D that can impact more Ws. And that's only a maybe...

It's amazing how assumptions and expectations are almost always made based on the previous season... and how many times even expert pundits are wrong.

Now everybody put in a dollar each and pay Mookie!

If Verdugo is damaged goods then five years in the treehouse could become a cardboard box under a bridge. Luckily, no team would ever trade a guy they secretly thought was injured.

I think we all agree, even casual fans, that no matter what the return, trading Mookie Betts will be the white flag on the Sox 2020 season. I also think that most baseball fans -- beyond fan addicts like us -- will still watch their teams if young guys with potential are featured. The Sox teams of the mid-70s and late-80s, for example, were fun to follow because they were contenders with promising futures. It sure felt that way from 2016-18 (which is why I refuse to let one mediocre year destroy all that cumulative optimism). This is why it's so important for Bloom to net prospects with upside, because no one is falling for Myers or Pollock...

How are Verdugo's prospects when he already has a bad back at age 23? You just keep hoping for less of a return for Betts and I'll just keep pointing out you're a Yankee fan. As a Red Sox fan, I'll keep demanding the prospect haul that Bloom is holding out for. And even then, all of Red Sox Nation but a few forum posters will be equally depressed and disgusted that it came to that. Because we all know that watching the Sox won't be as fun, and even if they don't suck like you hope because of one down year, the path to the 2020 postseason for NY will become that much easier if they don't have to contend with Mookie Betts in 19 games anymore.