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.
Has anyone announced the actual money involved here that BOS is picking up? Hard to put a value on the deal without knowing that.
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?
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.
Sox get +68.8 (Verdugo 47.7, Graterol 21.1) while giving up -4.6 (Mookie 50.7, Price -55.3); net +73.4
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.
Red Sox +24M (assuming they're sending out $50M to Dodgers)
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.
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.
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.
You're overstating what the Dodgers are giving up. They're giving up Verdugo and Maeda. That's it.
I don't see how you can call a 10-year, $300 million contract a "massive underpay." It's exactly what Manny Machado got. Would I expect Betts to sign that deal? No. Is it an insult? No.
This can go right under 'Terry Francona is a pill popper' as the second dumbest media plant from this ownership group as a beloved Red Sox was shipped out of town.
That seems a bit farfetched. Didn’t they let Carlton Fisk leave because they didn’t do the contract on time? Didn’t Babe Ruth go to NY because Harry Frazee needed to finance his play? Come on.
Kind of, they are moving Pederson to clear salary and that deal has not been fully announced yet, but it looks like LAD will be sending better assets than they get back as of now.
This is wrong. Graterol is not coming from the Dodgers. so they are giving up net 60 before cash
i know you can look up a split as easy as the rest of us. Typically hits better away from Home, including 2017 when the banging/whistling was obvious.
More angry than the Lester Fiasco. How do you dump the best homegrown player in a generation? This is like the Bankee$ dumping Jeter in his prime...but worse. So fed up with the Sox.
Huh? Cano was like 31 when the Yankees let him go. Mookie is 4 years younger and a far superior talent.
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
