5GoldGlovesOF,75

I'd rather have Betts in his prime in his salary-drive season than this century's versions of Tanana and Rudi. To me as a Red Sox fan, one more year of Mookie is better than barely warm bodies already halfway to rigor mortis. As for Dombroski, a lot of folks forget that after his Marlins won in '97, the owner ordered him to gut the team. DD went full fire-sale for one calendar year and completely turned over the Fish... He didn't get much back in return, as far as prospects who'd become future stars (but it's not like he was trading future Hall of Famers, either). Point is, DD has done a reset in his past -- which makes comments about how he wasn't the right man going forward for Boston curious. Maybe Dave told Henry and Co. he couldn't stomach another tear-down in his old age. Or more likely, they felt Bloom, with all his peer connections and modern research, is better-poised for acquiring cheaper talent with upside -- instead of the kind of established talent that the senior Dombro targets and relies upon.

First basemen have a lot more responsibilities than corner outfielders -- by default, because of the much greater percentage of fielding chances. Of course, fast outfielders can be competent first basemen, while slow first basemen don't make decent outfielders. But good first basemen have to do more than just scoop; they have to make good throws all the time: starting the 3-6-3 DP, after pouncing on bunts, and maybe most importantly -- getting into position to take and make relays. Outfielders usually just have to hit the cutoff... while the first sacker is the cutoff, on two-thirds of the diamond with runners in scoring position. Good teams can get by with mediocrity at first, but great first basemen can make good teams great. For example, Keith Hernandez was a defensive weapon, and it's no coincidence he won rings manning first for two different franchises (ok, maybe he was more offensive to Elaine).

The thing is: everyone drops a ball in the outfield once in awhile -- we're all human and susceptible to losing one in the sun or the lights or the infamous gloaming... It sucks, but it happens. Luckily, even bad outfielders can stand around for innings and innings without getting a ball hit in their direction. But a first baseman who misses throws kills a defense. Those lost "automatic" outs are such a downer, and put more pressure on the other infielders to make perfect throws, and ultimately stress the pitcher, who may strain his arm trying to strike everybody out. Consider just from a spectator point-of-view -- what's more ugh-worthy: a baserunner going first to third on a misplayed ball by the rightfielder... or on a pick-off throw that eludes the first baseman and bounces down the foul line?

Nowadays, all MLB small markets understand the fear of losing stars to free agency, and getting nothing back in return. It makes less sense in a big market like Boston, though many players have walked away over the years – Hurst, Pedro, Lowe, Esasky, Bay – when the Sox didn’t quite match top offers. The early days of free agency were different, when guys like Fisk or all the Oakland A’s stars, for example, bolted because of bitter contract issues. The Fred Lynn situation was most similar to Betts, except for one big difference. Like Mookie, Freddie was a year removed from being the best player in baseball (he led 1979 in WAR, but finished 4th in MVP voting; those were the days when writers still favored guys on first-place teams). Everyone assumed Lynn, a California boy, was eager to go back home when he became a free agent. The kicker was that Boston in 1980 was no longer run by a front office eager to spend to retain its stars. Tom Yawkey had died a few years earlier, and his widow and “trust” weren’t quite as invested to invest. The Angels at the time were the West coast Yankees (and had already nabbed All-Star shortstop Rick Burleson; another cog Boston wasn’t going to pay) – and since the Sox knew they weren’t going to win any auctions, they dumped Lynn for a bucket of BP balls... which the front office pinched with penny-ante fingers. Word of caution: Boston baseball was pretty mediocre for the next half decade, before Clemens emerged from the farm to turn things around.

Something has been bothering me about this whole Betts dilemma in the past year: I can’t imagine this ownership is unwilling to pay or even overpay with the ultimate top bid to keep a fan favorite – one that already led Boston to a world title -- who is now about to enter his prime. I just don’t believe that billionaire owners of a billion-dollar franchise who have always been willing to spend to sustain and improve a competitive product have suddenly drawn the line with their best player… not after throwing money at shiny baubles, trinkets and fugazis for years and years (Renteria, Drew, Lugo, Crawford, Panda, Hanley, Price, etc. – not to mention damaged goods like Sale and Eovaldi). There is no way I will believe the Sox can’t afford whatever Betts wants, or can't absorb any accompanying tax penalties. There is also no way I will believe that a few bad (so far) contracts to pitchers – guys who play maybe once a week during the season – has anything to do with Boston affording their best everyday regular. I also don’t believe that the owners – after 20 years -- have suddenly changed their minds about how they approach casting a successful show in what is nothing more than an entertainment business. Adults don’t change who they are, and in most cases, old adults can’t change who they are. The quotes, columns and stories that have been circulating for months have to be management’s spin to the public that they’re trying to make the best of a situation they know has gotten beyond their control. If Mookie had said just once, “I want to be a Red Sox for life” – and the Sox replied, “We will make sure you are” – that would have ended daily speculation long ago, and all would be quiet until the presser to announce his extension.

I don't see JD opting out, unless he has a monster 2020. His back and ankle will be another year older, and the collective bargaining agreement expires after 2021 -- which might mean even less suitors willing to extend an already-expensive DH. A lot of clubs may want to see how new compromises could affect market prices... this may also be a factor for Betts and his agents when considering possible offers by Boston in the next year.

Here are a few contemporaries of Mays, Clemente and Aaron -- except I can't report their age 37 seasons, because they were all out of baseball by then... so here are numbers for the final year of each: AGE 36 Frank Howard: 255 pounds, .789 OPS, 0.0 WAR AGE 35 Boog Powell: 230 pounds, .659 OPS, 0.0 WAR AGE 33 Bull Luzinski: 220 pounds, .693 OPS, -0.3 WAR

Only 180?!?!? I tried as hard as I could to research other puny guys to see how they aged, and could only come up with these shrimps (so far): AGE 37 Mays 170 pounds, .860 OPS, 5.7 WAR Clemente 175 pounds, .835 OPS, 4.8 WAR Aaron 180 pounds, 1.079 OPS, 7.2 WAR

This is a smart, thoughtful post. The Red Sox have to consider the silent majority... that's "silent" as in fans who don't type daily during the offseason on forums like us -- but people who regularly watch games on TV, listen on radio, attend games with families, do the wave, sing to Neil Diamond, and couldn't tell you who Triston Casas is. As for Betts and the caution that small guys don't age well: if I were a GM investing in a ballplayer long term, I'd much rather take the chance on a five-tool talent than a "big guy" who's game relies on big muscles. Look at how well the Pujols and Cabrera contracts have aged... not very.

I think we all know what (and who) Sam Kennedy was referring to when he said, "There is a way to keep both Mookie and JD -- but it won't be easy." One of the reasons Bloom may have been hired is because he was the best man to achieve that difficult task...

Does anyone here not think Price is one of the first guys the Sox will try to jettison? We can bemoan the Sale and Eovaldi contracts in hindsight, but still hope Chris' offyear was an anomaly, and that he heals and evolves into a productive -- if not spectacular -- starter once again. As for Nate, he's still under 30 and throwing 100 mph with upside that new coaches will seek to hone. Plus, his AAV is a little more than half of Price's pay. David Price is the high maintenance man we no longer want to maintain: can't pitch in the cold, can't pitch at night, can't pitch in Yankee Stadium, can't handle announcers hating his hatred... can't handle holding all the cards. For an organization intent on making changes (especially one looking at bottom line dollars) one of the first changes should be making Price change the name on the front of his jersey.

I wrote the stupid statement, and it's based on my perceptions after reading around 400 posts by mostly Sox fans in their reactions to two columns in the Globe last week -- Saughnessey's "Mookie is overrated" and Abraham's proposed Betts-Yankee trade -- plus, the posts on the Fangraphs article. But I don't dismiss opinions here, either. Another Red Sox player going over to the dark side might not be the end of the world -- it's not like blowing the pennant in extra-innings of Game Seven in the ALCS in NY -- but it will certainly make the world less fun... unless you're a frustrated Yankee fan or FOX, salivating to replay more endless clips of Ruth/Dent/Boone and Buckner, with another Mookie haunting New England.

They're all professional athletes, but Betts is an exceptional athlete among his peers. Wiry sinew and quick-twitch hand-eye outlasts bulk built in a gym. Every contract is a risk with career-ending injuries just around the corner, so consideration has to be given to how a man achieves his status in the first place when projecting long range...

2020 will be his age 27 season, so a 10-year extension would encompass 28 through 37 -- unless the Sox renegotiate this winter with a Godfather contract that starts next March.

I like it -- just no opt outs every year like JD's. If we're paying Mookie 40+ per, he has to agree to wear our uni through (preferably) age 32...

I don't think you'll take this personally, because you said you "could see" such scenarios maybe happening -- but weren't advocating any of them. They are all possible, but I'd say improbable -- and not because any wouldn't necessarily work going forward. I just don't think a trade of Mookie Betts that is anything but an immediate lateral move -- bringing back equal or better value that looks obvious to the average fan -- will be acceptable and not met with total uproar by Red Sox Nation. I know these types of considerations may not have been issues in Bloom's past or even in his character as an MLB executive, but they absolutely have to be now, in his new market.

I know a lot of guys here like Fangraphs -- there's a lengthy article by Ben Clemens titled "The Red Sox Shouldn't Trade Mookie Betts", with a lot of reply posts. The writer uses WAR to quantify why it is such a bad idea; here's his conclusion: "Trading Betts, even if the cold hard surplus value math balances, doesn’t make sense. The Red Sox should stick to their guns and try to spike a World Series in 2020, then figure out what to do in 2021 later." As for ex-Red Sox in pinstripes, I'm used to it. Most were If-you-can't-beat-em, join-em decisions, but besides Sparky Lyle, all I can recall were past-their-primers: Boggs, Clemens (I know he won a puffed-up Cy, but got torched by Boston in '99 & '03 LCS), Damon, Ellsbury (we knew neither could throw), and Tiant -- though that one hurt the most. But if Betts becomes a Yankee -- in his prime -- that would be a back-breaker for Boston, a likely point-of-no-return for many fans, from which the brand may never recover. Because that would mean that he stays in the Northeast and it really was all about just the money... and that the Sox let him get away (it certainly won't be in a trade for NY's worst infield glove and worst outfield glove, as suggested in the Globe, in a proposal that would be laughable if it wasn't so vomit-inducing).

I really think that's what they'll do because it will be best for the team in 2020 and hopefully beyond... all the while keeping open the option of finding one would-be contender willing to meet their price.

No way Bloom settles for anything less than high end MLB ready prospects -- plural. Sox Nation would run him out of town if he took back a .221-hitting outfielder. And if a Betts deal does ever materialize, I'd be surprised if any MLB outfielder is part of the package, because the Red Sox are smart enough to know that no one labeled as Mookie's replacement will ever be able to fill his shoes... at least not in the eyes of fandom, who will be constantly reminded of the guy's status by the meddling mass media.

...And thus the current "market value" for guys at the top of the payscale. This is why I'm all in on Betts -- because he's better than Harper and Machado, and he both deserves and is going to get top-of-the-market pay. But if one of the four or five richest franchises in the industry can't afford that right now and going forward, then the entire system is broken. I don't think the latter is the case -- I suspect the guy just wants to take his services elsewhere -- leaving the company with no choice but to plan for such an inevitability.

I totally agree. I've been advocating shorter term, higher AAV for Mookie... but more clubs are offering longer and -- I hate to say this -- cheaper contracts, like 10 years for $100 million -- to lock up players in their early-20s. Because of that trend, every agent for every player at different ages and levels wants more years. I'm not advocating collusion, but if all teams scaled back years, the MLB game would benefit, with more clubs able to field competitive rosters more often. Superstars will still be rich beyond their dreams. Problem is, it only takes one owner -- like the one that gave ARod 10 years way back when -- to drive up costs and drive down a lot of future rosters.

But the idea of signing an established young player long term entails both living for today and planning for tomorrow. That is the opportunity that many clubs may consider when it comes to Betts... and that is the opportunity I hope -- as a fan -- that Boston's billions will be able to prevent. If he wants to stay...

I think poor value on the back end of long contracts is the price you pay for tying up a great player. Not many of those on Moon's list turned out to be great contracts, but teams have to take a shot sometimes at the investment -- to ensure some combo of competitiveness and continuity with their fanbase. The guys you can count on with proven track records are a safer bet than continually rolling the dice by recycling through unproven prospects. The latter is a reality for small market clubs. The next great player is never guaranteed. The next Mookie Betts may never be a Red Sox, unless they sign a guy like Soto or Acuna when they hit free agency in their primes. In the meantime, we know what we have in Mookie.

You're right on, again. That's why virtually every postseason features unsung heroes like Steve Pearce going off... not even great pitchers can make great pitches to all batters in a line-up -- especially the best batting orders in the game. Human shoulders, elbows and legs get tired.

Another factor that can negate stats in the short postseason is how teams strategize their game plans. Alex Bregman's seeming struggles in the past two postseasons can't just be attributed to choking under pressure, because both Boston in '18 and New York in '19 decided beforehand that he was the one Astro they wouldn't let beat them. Bregman got basically pitched around for two years, as both the Sox and Yanks walked him seven times each. Bregman's batting averages were way down, but he had the Astros highest combined On Base Percentage... and the AL East powers were just fine with that. You know he wanted to swing... but you also know that Cora and Boone are buds and talk often.