5GoldGlovesOF,75

"We have the money in the budget, just give him what he wants," said Theo Epstein, on draft deadline signing day, 2011 (Speier, Homegrown, 2018, p. 27). Speaking words of wisdom -- get Mookie...

I'm beginning to sense that one is dependent upon the other, and that that may be Boston's plan; the Sox have to reset so they can re-up Mookie... and not lose another hundred million in taxes, draft picks and additional funding for international signings. It's kind of ridiculous since they haven't signed any major free agents from other teams since JD nearly two years ago... and before that the last significant contributor to a title was Moreland in 2016. But them's the rules.

2020 derision. Just kidding.

Well, we are the fingertips of fandom. Urg, that's about as bad as the '18 postseason promo Is you ready? How many days exactly before pitchers and catchers? Stat men, assist me, please...

I like this prediction from today: MLB 2020 season predictions WWW.MLB.COM Hindsight is 20/20, but my foresight is 2020. I don’t need to consult with a crystal ball to learn what the future holds in MLB, for I am an expert on the subject. If you want proof, you need look no further than my past predictions (trust me, no need "3. The Red Sox won’t trade Mookie Betts. They’ll extend (or re-sign) him by year’s end." ... and this quote: "if one of baseball’s most successful and relevant franchises in one of its biggest markets can’t retain a homegrown superstar, something’s amiss." Sometimes it seems like the only difference between the professional writers and guys like us is that we only get paid in intrinsic rewards.

Right, and the Sox tried to steal Pettitte, too -- and he said he could never sign with Boston, just on principle. Instead he followed his buddy Roger to Houston and back to New York again. I asked an ancient Yankee-fan friend of mine, and all he could think of was when Murcer left... but he had no choice because he was traded. And then also landed back in NY eventually.

"Another possibility is that he loses some speed and twitch reflexes but gains in power. There are many examples ofplayers who hit 20-30 Hrs in their 20's then hit 30-40 from 30-35 or later." Moon, you just described Hank Aaron. The Hammer is also the first guy I thought of most comparable to Mookie, when I first watched those quick lethal wrists turn on a fastball. If the Red Sox are betting on Betts to sustain greatness like Aaron through his 30s -- they are both listed at 180 pounds on baseball-ref -- then back up the truck. Someone will...

And I can't possibly in my wildest dreams envision any scenario where the New York frigging Yankees let a homegrown, face-of-the-franchise fan favorite walk away...

"Someone is gonna go nutty." The market dictates the numbers. Betts, about to enter his prime, will get a top of the market salary. It may be impractical to compare him to Cole or Lindor -- but not to other active outfielders. The general consensus is most evaluators rate Betts somewhere between Trout and Harper, if not in dollars, at least in overall talent and accomplishments. Bellinger, Yelich and K.Marte had higher WAR than Betts in '19. Soto and Acuna are younger with unlimited upside. All make less than Mookie's arbitration salary and are under contract past when Betts reaches free agency. They're all going to get paid, but Mookie already has five years of 5.9 WAR or better -- more than Bellinger, Yelich, Marte, Soto and Acuna combined. Even Judge will be rich soon. But did you know that he's actually older than Betts by 164 days?

Maybe I was unclear. I wasn't suggesting trading Betts... but was instead considering all the other names who will also be free agents after 2020. One option the Red Sox may be weighing is whether to use the boatloads of cash saved by not signing Mookie to instead sign several other good players... (of course, they'd need to reset by the end of 2019 first). I know I'm not the first to suggest that here, but thought it'd be worth a look to see who will be available -- at least in the outfield and on the mound.

BTW, I don't get what "Mookie downgrade" means. ...none of the other outfielders in his free agent class are as good. But -- would you trade Betts for George Springer and Robbie Ray? How about Betts for David Peralta, Liam Hendricks and Trevor Bauer? Never mind what the simulator says, because these are not actual trade proposals... but to Bloom and Co., they might be considering such possible trade-offs, since they could use the $400 million that Mookie will demand to instead acquire a combination of quality depth that could make the Red Sox better.

It pains me to type this, but it's probably something the real front office is contemplating... Bradford posted that Betts is asking for a salary closer to Trout's than Harper's or Machado's. We've read a lot of debates the past two months, with many Red Sox fans and writers imploring Boston to lock up Mookie forever... while dissenters counter with quotes like "overrated", "unworthy", "undersized", "strangle the roster for years", "death and taxes", and the all-time fallback: "nobody deserves that much money to play baseball". So here's a list of upcoming free agent outfielders for 2021 (all are older than Betts, with most already in their 30s): Cespedes, Springer, Brantley, Bruce, Reddick, Peralta, Pederson, S.Marte, Canha, Markakis, Grossman, Taylor, Marisnick, Kiki Hernandez... JBJ. The question is: (barring a trade for a "controllable" outfielder) if you don't think the Red Sox should invest in Mookie -- or don't think he'll sign with Boston, anyway -- then who would you prefer that may be available? We should be able to sign two for the price of one Betts, or one plus a free agent pitcher... Hendricks, Ray, Bauer, Stroman may be the best as of now.

Thanks for coming clean and finally not pretending to help the Betts situation. Now let's be totally honest... Yankee fans should be hoping in this order: 1A) Mookie is traded to NY for their two worst defensive players who don't have a position, plus a few minor leaguers who are not top prospects... and 1B) he signs with the Yanks for the next decade, wins some rings and wears their cap on his plaque... or 1C) he is traded to anyone else this year, because as long as he's a Red Sox they have a better chance to beat NY... and finally 4) your scenario.

Unless they're infernal-- I mean, internal.

I'm all for spreading the wealth -- if the smaller markets use it to retain their homegrown favorites; that would be best for fans everywhere and the good of the game. But I don't know how something like that can be enforced, since owners in a free world can choose whatever they want to do with their own money. I'm also not that spoiled that I don't realize that a lot of Boston's trade acquisitions were the result of a partner not being able to afford a player's impending market rate; Pedro says hi, Schilling too... and Beckett, and Sale, etc. (starting pitching). But I can't feel bad for those teams who once thought they needed to ship out their stars, and then years later Arizona throws money at Greinke, Miami at Stanton, and Chicago at Abreu, Grandal, Keuchel and Edwing...

We're not irrational, but the professional sport we love is, if current structures in place cause one of its bellwether franchises to lose some of their best players. It's one thing to have checks and balances so big markets won't buy all the free agents, but it's another when a rich company gets penalized for wanting to pay its own employees the most money. The 2018 Red Sox may have had the highest salary of any champion, but the nine that clinched the Series in LA had zero free agents on the field, and only two overall that made a difference vs. the Dodgers... trivia hint: one was an All-Star in '18. All others were either homegrown or acquisitions that we already paid a price for in prospects. Many were soon rewarded for their heroics with new contracts, but Boston didn't pursue or sign a single new MLB free agent from another team the past year. It's sad when small market teams can't afford to keep their own players. But there's something seriously wrong with a tax system that prevents even large market teams from keeping its fan favorites together as a unit. I'm bitter, but don't call me entitled; remember, I lived through ownership that couldn't afford to pay Fisk, Lynn and Burleson. These owners could, but then they'd lose draft picks and international signing funds?

I know, I'd rather talk about more rational topics, like a billion-dollar franchise that's not sure it can sign its best player or why it might break up the MLB's best outfield this century or why it might not be able to trade everyone's favorite pitcher who just tweeted his latest gripe about peeing in a cup.

Retooling, yes. Garbage, no. I agree Workman had a career year and no one wants to see Barnes in the 9th ever again, but Darwinzon and Taylor still have some upside to their arms. After seeing Tampa use openers and then trade one of their best -- Stanik -- for a guy even better -- Anderson -- I'm confident building quality depth in the pen is a forte of Bloom's. As important as bullpens are to contenders, the most inconsistent position in MLB is reliever. Teams will always pay big for someone they hope is reliable because there's nothing worse than blowing a win at the end of a game. But every season it seems like at least half the money relievers go bad. Give Dombro credit for getting Kimbrel in his prime, and walking away from him when he was cooked. All ballplayers are human, but the main problem with relievers is chronology; they perform in the most crucial moments of the game. Nobody is perfect, except Eckersly for a few years, the first almost-automatic guy who every other team has futilely sought to replicate ever since (except for NY's Mo). Blame it on Eck... Price, call a press conference!

The quiet we're hearing from the front office is typical. It's just a contrast from Dombro, who would announce/admit he needed a starter, closer, set-up man, DH, back-up infielder -- and go get one, a week or two later. That candor and ugh, transparency, was atypical.

Not saying Casas is or ever will be the hitter that Devers is -- but Rafie proves that the Red Sox, even before Bloom, will promote a 20-year-old if they think he's ready or see a need (for example, of a big lefthanded bopper). Casas, after all, is our number one prospect; if he makes it up to Portland next summer, he's right at the doorstep.

They're going low budget, so Chavis or Dalbec and maybe Moreland on a one-year to platoon and then mentor Casas when they bring him up. The latter will only be 20, but I won't be surprised if we see him sooner than later because Bloom likes youngsters at big league minimums and recognizes the testing era as a young man's game. Devers made the majors at 20, after hitting 20 HRs in the minors. Casas hit 20 bombs at age 19...

I agree, Jax. The return for Mookie Betts doesn't have to be good; it has to be great... especially if you're the new GM for one of the MLB's marquee franchises.

"Mu guess would be it simply is not worth it to deal Price and Bloom has to deal Mookie..." Mine is that Bloom -- in the best interests of both edifice and edification -- is waiting out the few teams who really covet Betts until one finally caves and gives up the farm. Literally... Lupica on MLB.com just wrote that the Dodgers could be one of those clubs, feeling the pressure to make a blockbuster that can put them over the top. This is where Mookie's immediate value applies to the needs of the now, future be damned. Mookie Betts is certainly not getting dealt for some of the pennies-on-the-dollar proposals we've seen all over the internet the past two months. Sorry, Pederson and Pollock; MLB-ready prospect haul, come on over... I predict when a Betts trade finally occurs, the trade simulator may short-circuit like Will Robinson's robot from Lost In Space.

I'm gonna guess it isn't that Perkins didn't look like a whack job, but because he didn't look like he could whack a fastball...

The intention is to reset, not rebuild. Trading a high-priced pitcher and replacing him with a cheaper option will not eliminate the Red Sox from contending in 2020. And I refuse to believe any fans -- even posters who say they care more about future prospects (pun intended) -- don't want Boston to try to make the playoffs in the coming year. The Sox young core of position players is intact and as good as anyone else's in the game. It really wouldn't be much of a stretch if someone like Benintendi rebounds and someone like Betts (in his walk year) plays again like an MVP. Maybe the only changes will be different bench players and the development of younger arms, from a combination of internal promotions and low-key acquisitions. It makes for a boring offseason, but there's no way a team with Devers, Bogie, Betts, JD, Vaz and Beni is going to suck, because their established starting pitchers -- the majority of whom were injured last season -- aren't all going to be worse than 2019... when they still helped Boston post a winning record.