0-2 with 2 walks almost seems like a mini slump with the way Mookie has hit so far this season.
Mookie Betts appreciation thread
- Thread starter Sandy Leon Trotsky
- Start date
Another great article about Mookie's superlatives ...
https://www.theringer.com/mlb/2018/5/24/17387168/mookie-betts-boston-red-sox-mike-trout-war
https://www.theringer.com/mlb/2018/5/24/17387168/mookie-betts-boston-red-sox-mike-trout-war
We've got about 7.5 weeks before the ASG.
How many dingers is Betts going to have at the break? It's 47 games to play compared to 51 already played.
If I set the over/under at 30.5, are you betting the over or the under?
How many does he need to get people starting to talk about 61?
How many dingers is Betts going to have at the break? It's 47 games to play compared to 51 already played.
If I set the over/under at 30.5, are you betting the over or the under?
How many does he need to get people starting to talk about 61?
Clearly he likes to be the sole leader.... I like that about him!
I'm betting he'll get to 31 by the AS Break.
I'm betting he'll get to 31 by the AS Break.
Trout's up to .313/.461/.687 after beating up on the MFYs yesterday, and he now has a slight lead over Mookie in OPS+. 12 SB and 0 CS for good measure. Not a lot of difference between the two at this point--the MVP race will be something to see if this keeps up.
I'd gladly let Trout have it if he single-handedly won 5 or 10 games against the mfy. Unfortunately, the Angels are 1-4 against them this year, with only today's contest left in the season series. Regardless, I hope we get a fun MVP race that runs all year. Not only for entertainment value, but also because it means Mookie's continues at such a high level.
I was out and about the other day wearing one of my SoSH secret santa Red Sox caps and a young guy asked if I was a Red Sox fan. I naturally said yes and he replied that one of his best friends plays for them. I asked who and his response? "Mookie."
Me: Mookie Betts? He's phenomenal!
Guy: And baseball isn't even his best sport!
Me: Bowling?
Guy: Basketball. Or golf. He can play anything without even trying. I hate him. I was a Yankees fan but now I'm a Red Sox fan. Have to root for the home boy. Maybe he'll give me $200 some day.
I have no idea what that last sentence means but it made my day talking to him.
Me: Mookie Betts? He's phenomenal!
Guy: And baseball isn't even his best sport!
Me: Bowling?
Guy: Basketball. Or golf. He can play anything without even trying. I hate him. I was a Yankees fan but now I'm a Red Sox fan. Have to root for the home boy. Maybe he'll give me $200 some day.
I have no idea what that last sentence means but it made my day talking to him.
He could dunk in high school despite being 5'9" - https://www.overthemonster.com/2015/6/30/8422417/mookie-betts-dunking-basketballs-and-being-generally-awesome
Great article and smart of Mama to keep him out of football. Who knows, he may have had a future there too, but the danger of injury wasn’t worth it when he’s so great in other sports.
I love the above post. Trout is LeBron in a few ways.
This post made me check Trout's baseball reference page again.
Trout is a first ballot unanimous HOF guy if he never plays another inning.
He is 26.
Sorry to say, but Mookie Betts is one of maybe five active players in the world who can hold his jock. Beating him out is a stretch, at any point in their respective careers.
Mike Trout will be talked about as among the greatest players of all time by our great grandchildren.
I will take it a step farther... Once upon a time I read an article that suggested that one year Michael Jordan didn't win the MVP simply because the voters got tired of giving it to him. This is Mookie's best shot at the MVP.
Sorry to be the devil's advocate on the Mookie love in this thread, but again, Trout surprises me every time I check.
East Coast bias is really real! We have to watch ESPN commercials about Judge and not this guy:
https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/t/troutmi01.shtml
I'd have to push back on the "first-ballot, unanimous HOF guy," only because first-ballot unanimous is such an impossible standard. Pedro didn't even get it, so I'd be surprised if Trout did if his career ended today; add on a handful more years like he's had and that's another story...
Everything else, though, seems on point. Dude is insane.
Everything else, though, seems on point. Dude is insane.
And yet when I think of Trout and MVP awards, the first thing that comes to mind is that he was probably robbed of two ('12 and '15) simply because...he was young and his turn would come later?
As to another one of your points, some voter somewhere (probably a few of them) would say that Trout doesn't deserve first-ballot HOF entry because (pick one): 1) no playoff heroics; 2) no "defining moments"; 3) "not memorable".... in any case, some kind of bullshit.
The thing about Trout is that he's been consistently MVP level in every season, but hasn't really had a single all time great season with the bat yet. His best year for OPS+...
https://www.baseball-reference.com/leaders/onbase_plus_slugging_plus_season.shtml
is 119 all time. His 2018 is on pace to be his best by far, so that might change by October.
https://www.baseball-reference.com/leaders/onbase_plus_slugging_plus_season.shtml
is 119 all time. His 2018 is on pace to be his best by far, so that might change by October.
That's slightly misleading, as it makes it sounds as if 118 guys had better OPS+ seasons than Trout's best. 37 of those 118 seasons are either Ruth, Bonds, Williams, or Cobb.
If you ask "how many guys have had a season of 500 PA or more, with an OPS+ better than Trout's best full-year mark to date?", the answer is 35. If you ask how many of them did it at age 25 or younger, the answer is 12. And they are, with one or two exceptions, the guys you would name if asked "who are the best hitters ever?".
Since coming off the DL, Mookie's exit velocity and launch angle on batted balls:
- 103.6 / 19 (lineout)
- 95.2 / - 4 (groundout)
- 99.8 / 40 (flyout)
- 84.0 / 5 (single)
- 94.7 / 57 (flyout)
- 102.2 / 26 (barrel / HR)
- 99.9 / 43 (flyout)
A couple of post games ago Guerin asked Benintendi how it felt to be locked in. Kind of sheepishly, he said he wasn’t. I like that attitude.
Alex Speier had an article in the Globe today detailing how for as many lead-off homeruns as he hits, where he really does his damage the second and third time he sees a pitcher in an outing. This season he's hitting .302/.375/.628 the first time he faces a pitcher, and then an absurd .429/.468/.881 and .438/.500/.844 the second and third. I get the feeling he and JD Martinez are constantly breaking down what the opposing pitcher is trying to do and bouncing ideas about how to obliterate baseballs off each other.
As Harlan Ellison would say, "Pay the writer."
Which is to say, I don't want any of our players obliterating baseballs off each other. That sounds like it would hurt.
Why do we keep repeating the leading in BA thing after all that time on the DL thing?
It’s not a counting stat. So it’s nkt that surprising.
Really, the only thing remarkable about it is that he still qualifies after the DL trip. I suppose that's a testament to his being a lead-off hitter who racks up more ABs than the average and the fact that he wasn't really on the DL for all that long.
In 75 games, Betts is now right around 6 fWAR. Per 162 games that's about a 13 WAR season.
He is on pace for right around 10 WAR as it is.
There have only been 4 seasons in history where a player cleared 10 in fewer than 140 games. Trout did it in 139 games.
He is on pace for right around 10 WAR as it is.
There have only been 4 seasons in history where a player cleared 10 in fewer than 140 games. Trout did it in 139 games.
Last edited:
So (minus the missed games), Mookie is essentially making the same impact as Yaz in 67, which is the gold standard for legendary Sox seasons (.406 not withstanding). That sounds about right--he has been that good. Provided he stays healthy, he should get his MVP this year.
Let's say he and Trout continue at the same pace they're going now. MVP might come down to voters valuing the Red Sox' incredible season (vs. LAA's less-than-incredible season) versus the Sox having another MVP candidate in the same lineup (Martinez) that could siphon some votes away from Betts. Plus, of course, the argument that Trout is STILL having a better season than Mookie. Articles like this will help Trout's MVP candidacy: https://www.si.com/mlb/2018/07/12/mike-trout-los-angeles-angels
Long story short - Trout, already a multiple MVP winner, is having the best season of his career. So how can he NOT be the MVP this year? (the article doesn't argue that; that's my argument based on the article's claim that this is Trout's best season ever)
Trout could win the MVP pretty much every year, but he doesn't. "Fair" or not, there's probably a voting bias towards recognizing another great player having an MVP quality season for a winning team (Mookie this year, Altuve last year) vs. giving it to Trout yet again. And as you noted, Mookie vs. Trout is a valid argument as it stands right now--it's a talking point, but it won't be some kind of travesty if Trout finishes 2nd.
Edit: It's also a major accomplishment to finish in the top 3 MVP voting year in and year out. It's not an insult if Trout doesn't win every year--at least that's how I view it.
Edit: It's also a major accomplishment to finish in the top 3 MVP voting year in and year out. It's not an insult if Trout doesn't win every year--at least that's how I view it.
The thing is, Mookie's rate stats are *better* than Trout's. In 19 fewer games and 75 fewer PAs, Mookie's big game last night nearly closed the gap, or exceeded his lead, in nearly every meaningful offensive counting stat. If the two players both keep their current paces (and neither misses meaningful time), Mookie will comfortably outpace Trout over the remainder of the season.
Oh course, Jose Ramirez is going nuts and Trout still has a meaningful lead over Betts in fWAR (6.5 to 5.9) for reasons that aren't entirely clear to me, but Mookie has reasserted himself into the MVP conversation with authority.
https://www.fangraphs.com/library/misc/war/positional-adjustment/
RF has a positional adjustment of -7.5 runs, CF has a positional adjustment of +2.5. That’s +10 runs for Trout just based on him being a CF, despite RF in Fenway being atypical in that it is almost a second CF.
Right, Trout's WAR lead is based on defensive positional adjustments (which in this particular case seems silly because not only is Fenway's RF basically like playing CF everywhere else, but also because if you put Betts in CF, he'd be a gold glove caliber CF. Moreover, because he plays RF, he cedes a lot of catches to Bradley, even some in Betts' zone, because that's what you're supposed to do - the CF gets everything he can handle, period. So the fact that Bradley is so good somehow negatively impacts Betts, which, frankly, is absurd.
But the other reason is that WAR is a counting stat, not a rate stat. If player A goes 30-30 with 20 homers, he won't accumulate as many WAR as a player who goes 200-600 with 40 homers. Even though his rate stats will be far far better. So Trout's extra playing time helps him considerably here.
But the other reason is that WAR is a counting stat, not a rate stat. If player A goes 30-30 with 20 homers, he won't accumulate as many WAR as a player who goes 200-600 with 40 homers. Even though his rate stats will be far far better. So Trout's extra playing time helps him considerably here.
I said it in the game thread, but it’s time to pay Mookie. I’d come at him with a 5 year extension worth between $30-$35 million per year. It’s a win-win for both sides. Betts gets a huge payday 2 years early while getting back on the open market still in his prime. The Red Sox get him on the books long term while protected from having a super long term deal on the books in case of injury.
The fact that RF in Fenway is larger than the average RF is irrelevant to the position adjustment. The position adjustment is necessary because Trout's UZR statistics are calculated by comparing him to the average Center Fielder while Betts' UZR statistics are calculated by comparing him to the average right fielder. A history of baseball has traditionally shown that players get about 10 runs better/worse defensively if they move from CF to RF or RF to CF.
You're correct about rate stats vs counting stats, although Trout's rate stats are nearly as good as Mookie's. Trout has a 190 wRC+ and Mookie has a 199. This is smaller than if you just looked at raw batting stats as Trout plays in a smaller park. If you go to the WAR value tab on Fangraphs this will break it all down for you. The position adjustment is actually a relatively small factor because Trout has played a decent number of games outside of CF.
If Betts had the same amount of plate appearances as Trout, assuming the same rates - Mookie would be ahead of him by half a win.
Betts has contributed slightly more defensive value per game played regardless of positional adjustment, he just hasn't played as much.
Betts has contributed slightly more defensive value per game played regardless of positional adjustment, he just hasn't played as much.
If there were message boards in the 1950s, I imagine the Mantle/Mays discussion was similar to this. Yeah, Mookie is that good.
I'd start construction on that bowling lane where the visitors batting cage is now.
I think you mean REconstruction, as there was an alley down there (at what is now Game On) many years back
I said this in another thread, but if Martinez can somehow win the triple crown, he's in the conversation.
Nitpick: Trout was out with an injury and only played 114 games last year. Extrapolating the fWAR rate per game he finished at, he would have easily surpassed Altuve if he’d played near a whole season.
If the season ended right here, Mookie might win the MVP because of the Sox season vs. Angels (although that didn’t happen in 2016). Also, enough of the writers might still be blown away by the more traditional stats of BA and OPS, in which Mookie exceeds Trout.
Trout hasn't played any other defensive positions. He's DHed 13 times, but he's played more games in CF (80) than Mookie has played games.
Mookie exceeds Trout in the non-traditional stats, too. The only reason it's close now is that Trout has played almost 25% more games. That's a lot, but will look smaller if they both stay healthy the rest of the year.
I wonder if Mookie would consider it. 30/31 is right on the edge of where he probably would want to become a free agent. Trout's extension takes him only to 28/29, so he truly should, barring injury, be eligible for another huge deal.
What's Mookie looking at if he doesn't sign an extension? Probably upwards of $35 million I would think in the next two years of arbitration, and then presumably at least a 7 year deals as a 27/28 year old. Possibly even a 10 year deal.
I don't know what you do. I would clearly think it's worth it to pay him off for the next two years if the Sox can get a Trout like deal, but I'm a little concerned the timing makes it so that Mookie just decides that hitting the market at 27/28 is the way to go. If both Trout and Mookie are on the market in 2020, that's going to really be crazy.
