Betts/Price to LA for Verdugo/Jeter Downs/TBA

Status
Not open for further replies.

johnnywayback

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 8, 2004
1,259
How can you say this...we have no idea if Mookie would have accepted, say, 10/360, because the Sox never offered it, because they were dead-set on trading Mookie.
They were so dead-set on trading Mookie that they made repeated attempts to sign him to a long-term contract? And we absolutely know that Mookie would not have accepted 10/360, because he kept saying he wanted to go to free agency. The only suggestion we have that he was even willing to engage at all is Merloni's report that he wanted 12/420. If, despite all the reporting, he had been willing to accept 10/360, and the Red Sox were offering 10/300, they'd have found common ground.
 

chawson

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
2,092
Reminds me a little of the Austin Meadows/Tyler Glasnow haul the Rays got.

Different situation of course, but I trust in Bloom’s evaluation, particularly of pitchers.
 

OurF'ingCity

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 22, 2016
5,465
New York City
They were so dead-set on trading Mookie that they made repeated attempts to sign him to a long-term contract? And we absolutely know that Mookie would not have accepted 10/360, because he kept saying he wanted to go to free agency. The only suggestion we have that he was even willing to engage at all is Merloni's report that he wanted 12/420. If, despite all the reporting, he had been willing to accept 10/360, and the Red Sox were offering 10/300, they'd have found common ground.
They made one attempt to sign him and it was a ridiculous lowball offer no more realistic than Mookie’s 12/420.
 

SouthernBoSox

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2005
11,115
Maybe I missed it but I don’t think I did. Has there been anything, like anything at all, on Verduga’s back?

That situation seems very odd.
 

In my lifetime

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 18, 2003
939
Connecticut
I tried to put the trade through baseball trade values. It wouldn't go due to the Twins getting the short end.

But basically the values as calculated on their site
Betts 50 M
Price -55 M
Verdugo 48M
Graterol 21M
Maeda 11M

So the Red Sox before their cash is added to the deal is sitting at +74 M.
So if 46 M being sent out, the RS are still + 28 M

Of course, this is just one site's opinion as to the baseball value of each player.

However, it seems about correct that Price + Betts is basically trading no excess value since negative asset of 3 years of Price is at least equal to Betts' positive value for next year. GFIN mode for Dodgers, while RS get value back and reset both cap and time frame for WC competitiveness.
 

johnnywayback

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 8, 2004
1,259
They made one attempt to sign him and it was a ridiculous lowball offer no more realistic than Mookie’s 12/420.
I mean, that's just not true! They offered him 8/200 a year or two ago, and then they offered him 10/300, which would have been the largest contract in franchise history and one of the, what, three largest contracts in MLB history?
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
20,225
They were so dead-set on trading Mookie that they made repeated attempts to sign him to a long-term contract? And we absolutely know that Mookie would not have accepted 10/360, because he kept saying he wanted to go to free agency. The only suggestion we have that he was even willing to engage at all is Merloni's report that he wanted 12/420. If, despite all the reporting, he had been willing to accept 10/360, and the Red Sox were offering 10/300, they'd have found common ground.
Would they have? I doubt it. Considering that the 10/300 is the number that leaked, and earlier in this thread was a leak about how some in the organization were uncomfortable with 300M for a player his size..... I really doubt they were going 20% over that number. If they had gone higher they would leak it, that's been the M.O. under this ownership group.
 

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,783
The wrong side of the bridge....
mind posting the values?
Sox get +68.8 (Verdugo 47.7, Graterol 21.1) while giving up -4.6 (Mookie 50.7, Price -55.3); net +73.4
Dodgers get -4.6 (see above) while giving up 59.9 (Verdugo/Maeda 12.2); net -64.5
Twins get 12.2 (Maeda) while giving up 21.1 (Graterol); net -8.9

(Edited to correct errors pointed out below.)
 
Last edited:

Rough Carrigan

reasons within Reason
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
In the context of what Bloom was handed I think this is a decent deal.

I think Mookie's an excellent player. But he's hit close to Trout level once, not every year and his fielding numbers have declined from truly awesome to top couple in the league in the last few years. If you think he's 2018 hitting Mookie Betts combined with 2016 fielding Mookie Betts as the baseline expectation of his production, you're being unrealistic.

As to Price, while his contract being for a pitcher better than he is at this point, it's at least as big a problem that he seems to be getting injured with increasing frequency.

For what seemed likely to be only 2020 Betts they're getting 2020-2024 Verdugo and 2020-2025 Graterol.

And it's not just money that's being saved. If you're over the luxury tax, you also get the penalty of your top pick moving back 10 places. Being, say, 19, you end up picking 29th. There's real cost to that, too.

As to Verdugo, he was an immature 22 year old, not unprecedented. Nor is snapping out of it. I looked at his minor league numbers the other day and he didn't have much power in the minors but a pretty good slugging percentage (.475) in LA. I sort of wonder if he worked out to get stronger and that contributed to hurting his back. Just a guess from afar. I don't know anything at all about Graterol. But I would bet Bloom does.

We'll see how this goes. I wish Betts could stay. I'm glad they got out from under Price with the likely injury possibilities. I'll watch this team.
 

jtn46

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 10, 2004
8,395
Norwalk, CT
I'm planting my flag in the I HATE IT camp and I don't particularly care about the return. A generation's Yaz is gone because of the luxury tax. Gross.
Lots of sports fans lose players like this for payroll reasons so while it is a bummer, we are lucky in the grand scheme that the team spends too much, not too little.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
20,101
Pretty easy decision, can’t pay him 35 million a year until he’s nearly 40. Do what you gotta do.

This isn’t the Lester debacle, not close really.
Agreed. This is game thread level emotions on display in here.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
20,225
Sox get +68.8 (Verdugo 47.7, Graterol 21.1) while giving up -4.6 (Mookie 50.7, Price -55.3)
Dodgers get -4.6 (see above) while giving up 81.0 (Verdugo/Graterol/Maeda 12.2)
Twins get 12.2 (Maeda) while giving up 21.1 (Graterol)
How in the world is a heavily subsidised Price -55.3?
 

ponch73

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jun 14, 2006
696
Stumptown via Chelmsford
I tried to put the trade through baseball trade values. It wouldn't go due to the Twins getting the short end.

But basically the values as calculated on their site
Betts 50 M
Price -55 M
Verdugo 48M
Graterol 21M
Maeda 11M

So the Red Sox before their cash is added to the deal is sitting at +74 M.
So if 46 M being sent out, the RS are still + 28 M

Of course, this is just one site's opinion as to the baseball value of each player.

However, it seems about correct that Price + Betts is basically trading no excess value since negative asset of 3 years of Price is at least equal to Betts' positive value for next year. GFIN mode for Dodgers, while RS get value back and reset both cap and time frame for WC competitiveness.
Red Sox +24M (assuming they're sending out $50M to Dodgers)
Dodgers -14M
Twins -10M

I think Bloom did well here.
 

OurF'ingCity

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 22, 2016
5,465
New York City
I mean, that's just not true! They offered him 8/200 a year or two ago, and then they offered him 10/300, which would have been the largest contract in franchise history and one of the, what, three largest contracts in MLB history?
And which would have been a massive underpay. Whatever Mookie gets next year it’s likely to be closer to that 420 number than it is to 300.
 

bosockboy

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
13,654
St. Louis, MO
In the context of what Bloom was handed I think this is a decent deal.

I think Mookie's an excellent player. But he's hit close to Trout level once, not every year and his fielding numbers have declined from truly awesome to top couple in the league in the last few years. If you think he's 2018 hitting Mookie Betts combined with 2016 fielding Mookie Betts as the baseline expectation of his production, you're being unrealistic.

As to Price, while his contract being for a pitcher better than he is at this point, it's at least as big a problem that he seems to be getting injured with increasing frequency.

For what seemed likely to be only 2020 Betts they're getting 2020-2024 Verdugo and 2020-2025 Graterol.

And it's not just money that's being saved. If you're over the luxury tax, you also get the penalty of your top pick moving back 10 places. Being, say, 19, you end up picking 29th. There's real cost to that, too.

As to Verdugo, he was an immature 22 year old, not unprecedented. Nor is snapping out of it. I looked at his minor league numbers the other day and he didn't have much power in the minors but a pretty good slugging percentage (.475) in LA. I sort of wonder if he worked out to get stronger and that contributed to hurting his back. Just a guess from afar. I don't know anything at all about Graterol. But I would bet Bloom does.

We'll see how this goes. I wish Betts could stay. I'm glad they got out from under Price with the likely injury possibilities. I'll watch this team.
Good post. Dodging Price’s 10/5 rights is also a factor.
 

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,783
The wrong side of the bridge....
Lots of sports fans lose players like this for payroll reasons so while it is a bummer, we are lucky in the grand scheme that the team spends too much, not too little.
Also, there's no justification for saying Betts is gone "because of the luxury tax". More likely, Betts is gone because the Sox FO foresaw that they would have a slim chance of signing him, and that this might be a blessing in disguise given the size of the contract he was going to get. They decided that they might as well get something now. The fact that doing so would help them get under the luxury tax this year certainly wasn't irrelevant, but there's no reason to assume it was the primary driver.

In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if Henry's decision to get under the limit this year was partly a result of, not a cause of, the realization that Mookie was probably gone in a year and therefore it might be smart to take the initiative and get a return for him now.
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
30,603
AZ
There is no salary cap in baseball. There is no excuse for being cheap. We're supposed to believe that this guy who has a NASCAR team as a toy is up against some financial hardship? Own your mistakes and pay the guys who deserve it. Especially when JBJ and X are anything but cost-prohibitive.
We’re supposed to believe this is about Henry putting a desire for money above the team? Horseshit. There is zero evidence to suggest this.

I believe that Henry genuinely believes this is in the best long term interests of the club. We can debate whether that is the case but there is zero evidence over two decades to suggest Henry wants anything other than the best for the Club. Zero.

Of all the fans in the world, you would think that New England sports fans would have the most insight into what makes a franchise successful year in and year out. Belichick has taught us there are no sacred cows and you need to be ruthless in putting club ahead of sentiment.

Again, I am prepared to listen to arguments about why this doesn’t make the Red Sox a better club. And I get that baseball is a more sentimental game than football. You see their faces, they become a part of your daily routine for 162 days of the year. Their personalities come out more.

But the truth is this. If you want a club that competes year in and year out you need to be prepared to make hard choices that can go down in flames. This one may be that. But you will never convince me it is because John Henry doesn’t want what is best for the team.
 

mikeot

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2006
6,555
In the context of what Bloom was handed I think this is a decent deal.

I think Mookie's an excellent player. But he's hit close to Trout level once, not every year and his fielding numbers have declined from truly awesome to top couple in the league in the last few years. If you think he's 2018 hitting Mookie Betts combined with 2016 fielding Mookie Betts as the baseline expectation of his production, you're being unrealistic.

As to Price, while his contract being for a pitcher better than he is at this point, it's at least as big a problem that he seems to be getting injured with increasing frequency.

For what seemed likely to be only 2020 Betts they're getting 2020-2024 Verdugo and 2020-2025 Graterol.

And it's not just money that's being saved. If you're over the luxury tax, you also get the penalty of your top pick moving back 10 places. Being, say, 19, you end up picking 29th. There's real cost to that, too.

As to Verdugo, he was an immature 22 year old, not unprecedented. Nor is snapping out of it. I looked at his minor league numbers the other day and he didn't have much power in the minors but a pretty good slugging percentage (.475) in LA. I sort of wonder if he worked out to get stronger and that contributed to hurting his back. Just a guess from afar. I don't know anything at all about Graterol. But I would bet Bloom does.

We'll see how this goes. I wish Betts could stay. I'm glad they got out from under Price with the likely injury possibilities. I'll watch this team.
Me too. For better or worse, it’s a new era.
 

ponch73

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jun 14, 2006
696
Stumptown via Chelmsford
How in the world is a heavily subsidised Price -55.3?
Sox get +68.8 (Verdugo 47.7, Graterol 21.1) while giving up -4.6 (Mookie 50.7, Price -55.3)
Dodgers get -4.6 (see above) while giving up 81.0 (Verdugo/Graterol/Maeda 12.2)
Twins get 12.2 (Maeda) while giving up 21.1 (Graterol)
You're overstating what the Dodgers are giving up. They're giving up Verdugo and Maeda. That's it.
 

johnnywayback

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 8, 2004
1,259
And which would have been a massive underpay. Whatever Mookie gets next year it’s likely to be closer to that 420 number than it is to 300.
I don't see how you can call a 10-year, $300 million contract a "massive underpay." It's exactly what Manny Machado got. Would I expect Betts to sign that deal? No. Is it an insult? No.

You may be right that he can get the Mike Trout contract this winter. But the Red Sox don't want to be the team giving him that contract, and I think I agree with their valuation.

In any case, none of this supports the conclusion that the Red Sox were "dead set" on getting rid of their best player. If you want to disagree with the Red Sox's valuation of Betts, or with their reading of his likely free agent market, fine. But I see no reason to assume they weren't acting in good faith.
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
28,404
Verdugo's back issue (and background) sours me on this deal, which otherwise would make perfect sense as Bloom's first big move. As mentioned by posters above, Price with a 50% subsidy would have been traded separately if there were other teams interested in such a deal.

Sox need to hook Graterol up with Pedro to improve that change-up. There's some potential for Bloom to line up openers for both Graterol and Perez.
 
Last edited:

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
53,368
You're overstating what the Dodgers are giving up. They're giving up Verdugo and Maeda. That's it.
Kind of, they are moving Pederson to clear salary and that deal has not been fully announced yet, but it looks like LAD will be sending better assets than they get back as of now.
 

In my lifetime

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 18, 2003
939
Connecticut
Sox get +68.8 (Verdugo 47.7, Graterol 21.1) while giving up -4.6 (Mookie 50.7, Price -55.3)
Dodgers get -4.6 (see above) while giving up 81.0 (Verdugo/Graterol/Maeda 12.2)
Twins get 12.2 (Maeda) while giving up 21.1 (Graterol)
This is wrong. Graterol is not coming from the Dodgers. so they are giving up net 60 before cash

RS are getting net 70

Twins getting net - 9

So as long as cash is less than 60 M, it is tough to be hypercritical of deal. Of course, there are other factors Dodgers GFIN; RS saving 50% of real money or another 30M in luxury cap savings + no penalty on next year's pick (which depending on MLB technology penalty may or may not be relevant) + savings in 2021 and beyond for the tax reset.

It just shows you that with analytics these long term large contracts (Price) have very large negative values that teams are no longer ignoring a la the Punto trade.
 

SoxRoxCT27

lurker
Oct 31, 2013
4
Ehhh lets see how Springer does when he doesn't know a fastball is coming down the middle of the plate.

I'm stunned how many people are happy to see Price go. He is a good pitcher. Yes you probably hated the guy but 2018 does not happen without him.
i know you can look up a split as easy as the rest of us. Typically hits better away from Home, including 2017 when the banging/whistling was obvious.
I don't think Springer is the end all, but if he's available and interested, so should be the the Sox
 

flymrfreakjar

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 30, 2006
2,761
Brooklyn
I really hate it. A big part of the joy for me in watching sports is following certain players— and Mookie is one of my favorite players I’ve ever rooted for. I think I might rather watch a mediocre team with players I love than a good team with guys I don’t care about. I realize I’m certainly in the minority on that, but from my perspective this a huge loss.
 

FredCDobbs

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 5, 2004
557
Austin
I'm sorry, but when an ownership group wins

4
4
4

Mad Dog voice: "World's Championships!" they get some slack from me. Mookie is going to free agency and his contract is going to be ugly. I love the guy, I promise, but its happening. There's also no indication they have any indication of doing anything other than trying to win more.

You want to see a shit show look at the Mets
 

DeadlySplitter

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 20, 2015
23,198
I really hate it. A big part of the joy for me in watching sports is following certain players— and Mookie is one of my favorite players I’ve ever rooted for. I think I might rather watch a mediocre team with players I love than a good team with guys I don’t care about. I realize I’m certainly in the minority on that, but from my perspective this a huge loss.
and this right here is why the modern economics / analytics of the sport is running counter to what we think of as rooting for a team... and makes the sport that much worse

baseball economics needs a major shake-up. redo the arbitration system entirely, add a way for non-guaranteed portions of contracts.
 

cornwalls@6

Less observant than others
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
2,649
from the wilds of western ma
If you haven’t already, I strongly suggest going into the thread about Verdugo, and read the linked articles. Maturity issues is underselling his baggage, in regards to a very disturbing, and violent assault on an underage girl, and his, at least peripheral, involvement in it. I think this has the potential to blow up in the Red Sox faces, badly.
 

Beomoose

Member
SoSH Member
May 28, 2006
18,212
Wherabouts Unknown
Verdugo injured his back in May, played through "nagging pain" until his oblique issue in August. The August DL trip was supposed to be pretty minor, until it turned into him getting shut down after exactly one rehab game. Can one of the doctors in the house work with entirely too little information and reassure me none of that points to something like a lingering disk issue?
 

PseuFighter

Silent scenester
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2003
13,951
11211
" I think I might rather watch a mediocre team with players I love than a good team with guys I don’t care about."

i like this and (for me) is what made a team like the mets a lot of fun to watch last year, especially in the second half. that kind of stuff (likeability) definitely goes a long way with fans, who ultimately pay to see this stuff.
 

nvalvo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
17,898
Rogers Park
People were scoffing at the other trade packages because they didn't have enough upside. They were just a quarter-for-three-dimes kinds of trades. Well, Bloom went out and got some legit upside, and now people want more pieces?

I wouldn't have traded Betts, but that's a question of strategy. Once that's the decision, the next questions are tactics and implementation. With the understanding that it's a given that Betts is being traded, I really like this trade.

I like Verdugo fine, but for me, Graterol is the centerpiece here. He's 20, he throws a 99 MPH two-seamer, a very good slider, and a passable changeup to lefties. He had very reasonable walk rates all through the minors. It's like if Anderson Espinoza hadn't gotten hurt, except Graterol throws harder. (The Espinoza-Pomeranz deal is a pretty good comp for Graterol-Maeda IMO.) Graterol has legit ace upside, with a floor as a high-end closer/relief ace type. Normally, such prospects do not change hands. We can only get him because the Twins are in GFIN mode, and he has an injury history. I'm assuming they like the medicals, and I'm assuming they are going to give him another crack at starting.

Like, we were all hoping that Luis Patiño would be in a Padres package. Graterol isn't really a worse prospect.
 

bosockboy

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
13,654
St. Louis, MO
People were scoffing at the other trade packages because they didn't have enough upside. They were just a quarter-for-three-dimes kinds of trades. Well, Bloom went out and got some legit upside, and now people want more pieces?

I wouldn't have traded Betts, but that's a question of strategy. Once that's the decision, the next questions are tactics and implementation. With the understanding that it's a given that Betts is being traded, I really like this trade.

I like Verdugo fine, but for me, Graterol is the centerpiece here. He's 20, he throws a 99 MPH two-seamer, a very good slider, and a passable changeup to lefties. He had very reasonable walk rates all through the minors. It's like if Anderson Espinoza hadn't gotten hurt, except Graterol throws harder. (The Espinoza-Pomeranz deal is a pretty good comp for Graterol-Maeda IMO.) Graterol has legit ace upside, with a floor as a high-end closer/relief ace type. Normally, such prospects do not change hands. We can only get him because the Twins are in GFIN mode, and he has an injury history. I'm assuming they like the medicals, and I'm assuming they are going to give him another crack at starting.

Like, we were all hoping that Luis Patiño would be in a Padres package. Graterol isn't really a worse prospect.
I’d staple Pedro to him.
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
28,404
Verdugo injured his back in May, played through "nagging pain" until his oblique issue in August. The August DL trip was supposed to be pretty minor, until it turned into him getting shut down after exactly one rehab game. Can one of the doctors in the house work with entirely too little information and reassure me none of that points to something like a lingering disk issue?
Apparently he hasn't recovered enough to swing a bat, but why worry?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.