Mookie BBetts - 2019 Campaign

[Savin Hillbilly]

While I agree with everything else you said here..... I actually think 10/400 is going to be above his market.

I think you're right. Either that length or that AAV seems possible, but not both in the same deal. The likely surplus value of the first 3-4 years does not seem like enough to outweigh the risk of paying a guy $40M a year for his age 35-37 years, no matter who he is. Something like 8/$300M seems more realistic.

I really do think he wants to play in San Fransisco or Los Angeles.

Curious what this is based on.

He's currently making me think of Robinson Cano, who very quickly turned into an overpriced underperformer.... that I don't think anyone saw happening as quickly as it did.

Cano didn't "quickly turn into an overpriced underperformer." In fact according to FG, the first year in his MLB career where he underperformed his salary by as much as 10% was....2019. Cano's deal was a bad one only because it was a 10-year deal and they signed him to it at 31, which is idiotic. If they had been able to get him for a slightly higher AAV and fewer years -- say, 7/$180M -- it would look like a near-perfect deal. He'd have earned most of it by now (he's earned about $170M according to FG) with a year left to go. He has been exactly what it was reasonable to expect him to be when the deal was signed. The deal was just too damn long.

 

[Red(s)HawksFan]

Cano didn't "quickly turn into an overpriced underperformer." In fact according to FG, the first year in his MLB career where he underperformed his salary by as much as 10% was....2019. Cano's deal was a bad one only because it was a 10-year deal and they signed him to it at 31, which is idiotic. If they had been able to get him for a slightly higher AAV and fewer years -- say, 7/$180M -- it would look like a near-perfect deal. He'd have earned most of it by now (he's earned about $170M according to FG) with a year left to go. He has been exactly what it was reasonable to expect him to be when the deal was signed. The deal was just too damn long.

Cano only feels like he quickly turned overpriced because he disappeared into the obscurity of the Pacific Northwest. He had four really good years out there, then got whacked for PEDs last year, then fell off playing for the Mets this year.

 

[shaggydog2000]

Cano only feels like he quickly turned overpriced because he disappeared into the obscurity of the Pacific Northwest. He had four really good years out there, then got whacked for PEDs last year, then fell off playing for the Mets this year.

His second year in Seattle wasn't great, just good. I think there were a lot of stories that year about him starting to decline and what were they going to do with that big contract, etc. But he bounced back the next year. and then dropped off again. I think overall his numbers there were good, but there were two seasons that each scared people and made them predict the end was nigh.

 

[BaseballJones]

Cano with NYY: 126 ops+
Cano with Sea: 129 ops+

Cano with NYY: 45.5 bWAR (5.05/year)
Cano with Sea: 23.8 bWAR (4.76/year)

Ah, but....

Cano with NYY: $57.8 million ($6.42/year)
Cano with Sea: $108.3 million ($21.66/year)

Cano with NYY: $1.27 million per 1 bWAR
Cano with Sea: $4.55 million per 1 bWAR

Which, obviously, is what happens when you get a player during his cheap, cost-controlled seasons.

 

[DeadlySplitter]

Speier article on the overall situation.

https://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/redsox/2019/09/21/some-context-for-mookie-betts-thoughts-legacy-contracts/kSj5Vk3bB38odO8SdHou6N/story.html

To date, every time the subject of a long-term deal has been broached, there’s been a significant gap between what the team has offered and what Betts has believed he’s worth. And at every turn, it seems like Betts has been right (at least in a financial sense) not to sell himself short. Every time the Red Sox have talked about a long-term deal, they’ve shown a willingness to move the goalposts and to offer more money with their next proposal. Betts is following a pattern established by other stars such as Max Scherzer: Don’t be afraid to bet on yourself if you know you’re good. That outlook is often a trademark of the most ferocious competitors and best players.

 

[sean1562]

I dont think we should trade the guy in the offseason, but i dont see a way we can give him some 10 year 350 million dollar contract. it sucks that he will probably leave, but I think we are gonna have to bet on Devers and X, and hope that we can develop some other talent.

 

[RedOctober3829]

I dont think we should trade the guy in the offseason, but i dont see a way we can give him some 10 year 350 million dollar contract. it sucks that he will probably leave, but I think we are gonna have to bet on Devers and X, and hope that we can develop some other talent.

So if you don't want to sign him you are going to let him leave for nothing?

 

[Red(s)HawksFan]

So if you don't want to sign him you are going to let him leave for nothing?

The QO will yield a draft pick if he signs somewhere else, so it's impossible that the Sox will get nothing if he leaves.

The debate is then whether his contribution to 2020 plus a 2021 draft pick is more valuable than his absence in 2020 plus whatever they get in return for him. If this team is going to be a contender in 2020, it's a hard case to make that they'll make out better by trading him this winter.

 

[RedOctober3829]

The QO will yield a draft pick if he signs somewhere else, so it's impossible that the Sox will get nothing if he leaves.

The debate is then whether his contribution to 2020 plus a 2021 draft pick is more valuable than his absence in 2020 plus whatever they get in return for him. If this team is going to be a contender in 2020, it's a hard case to make that they'll make out better by trading him this winter.

A comp pick is basically nothing for a top 5 player in the game.

 

[Yelling At Clouds]

Why, no comp pick could ever turn into a great player!

 

[BoSox Rule]

Why, no comp pick could ever turn into a great player!

The rules are a little different than 2009. You’re not getting a first round pick anymore.

 

[Yelling At Clouds]

Why, no player drafted after the first round could ever turn into a great player!

 

[section15]

I've been saying all along - the Red Sox will somehow come up with the dough. But the Sox' past transgressions (particularly forcing Mookie into arbitration two years ago ) has eliminated any possibility of him accepting a hometown discount. The only exception to this that I can see is he MIGHT accept a deferral of 2021 money to the latter years of his contract enabling the Sox to mitigate the effect of the last year of Pedroia's dead contract.

And I've also believed that he;ll cast his fate in 2021 where the baseball future looks brightest.

 

[DeJesus Built My Hotrod]

View: https://twitter.com/redsoxstats/status/1176308667123195904?s=20

Apologies for the language in the Tweet. Not sorry for the video. Its not my money but I don't see how you can trade this guy when he is just about to turn 27, hits like he does and does this stuff.

 

[stepson_and_toe]

...But the Sox' past transgressions (particularly forcing Mookie into arbitration two years ago ) has eliminated any possibility of him accepting a hometown discount....

Well, according to CBS Sports, Betts winning the arbitration would have gained him $3M a year baseline for his next two arbitration hearings, with an expectation of $17M in 2019. The Red Sox gave him $20M, so was there really a transgression? His performance in the 2017 season was the lowest (from an OPS+ perspective) of his career, which is probably why they tried to low-ball him in arbitration. When he put up an MVP season in 2018, they nearly doubled his salary.

Are they now going to jump Betts up to $30M+ after a season when his OPS+ dropped over 50 points? I would hate to see Betts leave this team but it is a business, one that has been screwed up because of several bad contract decisions.

 

[nattysez]

At The Ringer, Michael Baumann makes the case that the Sox can and should extend Mookie.

I hope whoever takes over for DD reads this article, because it's basically where I'm at. Move Jackie, dump Sandy Leon, and figure out a few more ways to get creative. Even if Sale is hurt and the team is mediocre next year, I want Mookie on the Red Sox long-term.

This article seems spectacularly ill-informed. Maybe someone can explain to me what I'm missing. He just throws this out without any explanation:

Even factoring in projected arbitration raises—including one for Betts—Baseball-Reference predicts that Boston’s Opening Day payroll will be $215 million, or just $7 million over the tax threshold.

Spotrac has the Sox with $57m in space to fit under the bottom tax number after accounting for Price ($31), JDM ($22), Sale ($26), X ($20), Eovaldi ($17), Pedroia ($14), Vazquez ($4.5), and estimated minor-league salaries and benefits ($17.5m). If Mookie gets paid $25, that leaves $32m. Is anyone going to seriously contend that the Sox can acquire a fourth and fifth starter, rebuild the entire bullpen (since no bullpen salaries are accounted for), and fill the bench for $32m? That seems highly unlikely.

 

[CarolinaBeerGuy]

View: https://twitter.com/redsoxstats/status/1176308667123195904?s=20

Apologies for the language in the Tweet. Not sorry for the video. Its not my money but I don't see how you can trade this guy when he is just about to turn 27, hits like he does and does this stuff.

That’s insane. Anyone see the velocity on that one?

 

[Red(s)HawksFan]

This article seems spectacularly ill-informed. Maybe someone can explain to me what I'm missing. He just throws this out without any explanation:



Spotrac has the Sox with $57m in space to fit under the bottom tax number after accounting for Price ($31), JDM ($22), Sale ($26), X ($20), Eovaldi ($17), Pedroia ($14), Vazquez ($4.5), and estimated minor-league salaries and benefits ($17.5m). If Mookie gets paid $25, that leaves $32m. Is anyone going to seriously contend that the Sox can acquire a fourth and fifth starter, rebuild the entire bullpen (since no bullpen salaries are accounted for), and fill the bench for $32m? That seems highly unlikely.

The article is mis-informed if it's using Baseball Reference salary numbers. From what I can tell, those are actual dollars, not the AAV amounts that count against the luxury tax, so the total derived from them will be a bit higher than the actual taxable cap hit.

Also, no one is expecting this team to be under the luxury tax cap next year ($208M). Not without some sort of firesale to shed salary (more than simply moving Mookie anyway). My guess is they're most likely going to come in somewhere around $15-20M over that bottom figure, even keeping all their arbitration eligible guys like Mookie and JBJ.

 

[chawson]

The double-bind is that the compensation pick for Mookie would be a fourth rounder *unless* the Sox get under the first tax threshold, though doing that would probably mean the team is not built for contention next year, which means they should probably trade Mookie.

 

[DJnVa]

Mookie went to the hitting guru that help Vazquez:

https://theathletic.com/1229764/2019/09/21/the-hitting-guru-and-the-subtle-fix-that-turned-around-mookie-betts-season/

 

[Cesar Crespo]

Well, according to CBS Sports, Betts winning the arbitration would have gained him $3M a year baseline for his next two arbitration hearings, with an expectation of $17M in 2019. The Red Sox gave him $20M, so was there really a transgression? His performance in the 2017 season was the lowest (from an OPS+ perspective) of his career, which is probably why they tried to low-ball him in arbitration. When he put up an MVP season in 2018, they nearly doubled his salary.

Are they now going to jump Betts up to $30M+ after a season when his OPS+ dropped over 50 points? I would hate to see Betts leave this team but it is a business, one that has been screwed up because of several bad contract decisions.

As much as I love Betts, at best his next contract is a break even proposition. I don't think any player is worth signing to 10 years, especially at that kind of money. He'll want to get paid for his 2018 season but it's looking like 2018 was an outlier and he's around a 6-7 WAR player.

As a side note, it's amazing how cheap they got Xander to sign for. Even if he opts out after 2022, he'll be entering FA as a 30 year old so you'd have to think his market will be limited... maybe to the point he doesn't even opt out. It'll never happen but Xander probably has a TON of trade value. He's pretty much wanted to be a Redsox player since he was a teenager though so I think he finishes his career here at a discounted price a la Pedroia. Even assuming Dustin never plays again, using 9 mil per 1 war, he was worth $120.6 mil. The Sox were freerolling after 2016.

Of course at $9mil per 1 WAR, Betts would only need to put up 40 WAR over 10 years to be worth a $350 million contract. At 6-7 WAR a year, he'd get there in year 6 or 7. If you are using $9 mil per 1 WAR, the bar isn't really that hard to clear. His 2018 alone would have been worth 98.1 million. I have a hard time believing that but it is what it is. In his first 5 full seasons, he's currently at 39.7 WAR so he would have already been worth $350 million over just 5 years. That doesn't include 2014. If you truly believe in the $9 mil per 1 WAR, you'd have to sign him at 10/350. I don't agree with 1 WAR being worth $9 mil though. A 1 WAR player is most likely a guy being paid the minimum and no one is going to sign a 2 WAR player for $18 mil a year or a 3 WAR player to $27.... at least not intentionally. The MLB is so broken in regards to contracts.

 

[stepson_and_toe]

I don't agree with 1 WAR being worth $9 mil though

Has the value of 1 WAR been increasing over time?

WAR also includes defense and that is position adjusted. Speed is another factor of WAR and is largely based on SB, CS, GIDP, and extra bases taken. If you play for a team with a high SLG, you may not try to steal or take an extra base as often as a player on a team that relies on running to score. For batting, adjustments are made for ballparks a player appears in and compared to league averages. But how well does that really work? One club plays half its games in a given park and that is a large factor. If that club does not do well that year, it will affect an opponent's adjustment, will it not?

I'm not a big fan of WAR or a lot of the other complicated sabermetric models. They are approximations...aah, this one gives a slightly better predictive fit to what happened than that one so it is now the model du jour. I've been a member of SABR for a long time and went to national conventions, attending their Statistical Analysis Committee meetings and listening to people trying to introduce new analytic measures...some would get annihilated in open discussion, some would get suggestions for improvement. But as a spectator, one would learn that one is only seeing the best approximation available. For those of you who have never read it, I would suggest trying The Hidden Game of Baseball by John Thorn and Pete Palmer, which talks about the history of statistical baseball analysis. It is dated but it has also had an update since it was first published.

 

[Cesar Crespo]

Has the value of 1 WAR been increasing over time?

Yes.

 

[BaseballJones]

All data from b-ref....

With a handful of games left, the 2019 Boston Red Sox have accumulated 23.5 bWAR for position players and 19.1 bWAR for pitchers. That's 42.6 bWAR total.

Their 2019 payroll is $248.6 million. So the Sox have spent $5.8 million per WAR.

Here's how that compares to some other teams...

Bos: 42.6 bWAR, $248.6m = $5.8 million per WAR
NYY: 49.4 bWAR, $221.7m = $4.5 million per WAR
Hou: 64.3 bWAR, $198.6m = $3.1 million per WAR
LAD: 41.1 bWAR, $202.8m = $4.9 million per WAR
Atl: 38.0 bWAR, $156.8m = $4.1 million per WAR
TB: 46.7 bWAR, $59.3m = $1.3 million per WAR
SF: 20.8 bWAR, $142.5m = $6.9 million per WAR
Phi: 26.3 bWAR, $185.9m = $7.1 million per WAR

I guess I am not seeing how each WAR is worth $9 million. Philly is on the high end of the cost per WAR, and they're "only" at $7.1 million per WAR.

 

[JBJ_HOF]

8 to 9 million per WAR figure is just in free agency.

 

[Cesar Crespo]

All data from b-ref....

With a handful of games left, the 2019 Boston Red Sox have accumulated 23.5 bWAR for position players and 19.1 bWAR for pitchers. That's 42.6 bWAR total.

Their 2019 payroll is $248.6 million. So the Sox have spent $5.8 million per WAR.

Here's how that compares to some other teams...

Bos: 42.6 bWAR, $248.6m = $5.8 million per WAR
NYY: 49.4 bWAR, $221.7m = $4.5 million per WAR
Hou: 64.3 bWAR, $198.6m = $3.1 million per WAR
LAD: 41.1 bWAR, $202.8m = $4.9 million per WAR
Atl: 38.0 bWAR, $156.8m = $4.1 million per WAR
TB: 46.7 bWAR, $59.3m = $1.3 million per WAR
SF: 20.8 bWAR, $142.5m = $6.9 million per WAR
Phi: 26.3 bWAR, $185.9m = $7.1 million per WAR

I guess I am not seeing how each WAR is worth $9 million. Philly is on the high end of the cost per WAR, and they're "only" at $7.1 million per WAR.

Yeah, I guess it's $9 mil per 1 WAR in regards to FA but that seems absurd to me. I don't know where the $9 mil figure comes from.

 

[BaseballJones]

Yeah, I guess it's $9 mil per 1 WAR in regards to FA but that seems absurd to me. I don't know where the $9 mil figure comes from.

There's no doubt that free agency inflates the cost. I don't know how they calculate all that though, because it sure doesn't seem like, on average, MLB teams (even including their free agent signings) are spending anywhere near $9 million per WAR.

Just because this is fun...here's Jacoby Ellsbury's $ per WAR figure from 2017-2019:

bWAR: 1.7
Salary: $63.4 million

So the Yankees are paying him $37.3 million per bWAR from 2017 to the present. I know this year I can't make fun of them because they're burying the Sox, but still...this contract.....

Heh...on the flip side, here's what Sandoval gave the Sox...

bWAR: -2.1 bWAR
Salary: $59 million

So the Sox paid, um, $-28 million per bWAR?

 

[Cesar Crespo]

There's no doubt that free agency inflates the cost. I don't know how they calculate all that though, because it sure doesn't seem like, on average, MLB teams (even including their free agent signings) are spending anywhere near $9 million per WAR.

Just because this is fun...here's Jacoby Ellsbury's $ per WAR figure from 2017-2019:

bWAR: 1.7
Salary: $63.4 million

So the Yankees are paying him $37.3 million per bWAR from 2017 to the present. I know this year I can't make fun of them because they're burying the Sox, but still...this contract.....

I think players like Jacoby Ellsbury are the reason it's $9 million per 1 WAR. It just goes to show that FA is a really bad way to build a team. For every Mike Trout who is "underpaid" there's a Jacoby Ellsbury and Chris Davis. That $9 mil figure doesn't say that's what 1 WAR is actually worth, just what teams are paying. I think, anyway.

 

[BaseballJones]

I think players like Jacoby Ellsbury are the reason it's $9 million per 1 WAR. It just goes to show that FA is a really bad way to build a team. For every Mike Trout who is "underpaid" there's a Jacoby Ellsbury and Chris Davis. That $9 mil figure doesn't say that's what 1 WAR is actually worth, just what teams are paying. I think, anyway.

Well no, because Ellsbury's number is baked into the Yankees' overall number. So even with Ellsbury included, the Yanks spent $4.5 million per bWAR in 2019.

 

[Cesar Crespo]

Well no, because Ellsbury's number is baked into the Yankees' overall number. So even with Ellsbury included, the Yanks spent $4.5 million per bWAR in 2019.

Yeah, but we are talking FA only. Teams are spending about $9 mil per 1 WAR on free agents.

 

[BaseballJones]

Yeah, but we are talking FA only. Teams are spending about $9 mil per 1 WAR on free agents.

Ok gotcha. It would appear, then, that the FA route is highly...inefficient.

 

[Cesar Crespo]

As far as I can tell, the 2019 Redsox paid FA players $83 million for a return of 4.1 WAR. The FA players are JD Martinez, Mitch Moreland, Steven Pearce, Eduardo Nunez, David Price and Nathan Eovaldi.

I think everyone else was re-signed or on their initial deal. Wow. More than $20 mil per 1 WAR. That doesn't even include Pablo Sandoval. So it's more like $103 million for 4.1 WAR.

 

[Manramsclan]

View: https://twitter.com/redsoxstats/status/1176308667123195904?s=20

Apologies for the language in the Tweet. Not sorry for the video. Its not my money but I don't see how you can trade this guy when he is just about to turn 27, hits like he does and does this stuff.

This 100%. Mookie is a generational talent who excels at all aspects of the game. Pay him his money. A franchise as financially successful as the Red Sox can't be letting players like this go, even if they have to pay him a premium. He checks every single box both on and off the field.

If the luxury tax implications are the issue, eat money on other contracts to get rid of them and reduce their impact. Letting Mookie walk because of other mistakes made on other contracts compounds those mistakes and makes them even worse.

 

[nattysez]

If the luxury tax implications are the issue, eat money on other contracts to get rid of them and reduce their impact. Letting Mookie walk because of other mistakes made on other contracts compounds those mistakes and makes them even worse.

This amounts to asking the new GM to figure out how to trade Price and Sale -- two guys with injuries and owed huge money -- in a way that gets enough money off the books that you can pay Mookie AND a replacement starter. The GM who pulls that off deserves a Nobel.

Less intimidating would be trading JDM if he opts in, but you're not going to get too much for a guy who makes a bundle and can opt-out after each year.

 

[Murderer's Crow]

Ok gotcha. It would appear, then, that the FA route is highly...inefficient.

Or that arbitration eligible players are wildly efficient.

 

[Cesar Crespo]

In 2004, the Redsox spent $62.6625 million on 27.7 WAR. Those players were David Ortiz, Johnny Damon, Jason Varitek, Manny Ramirez, Pokey Reese, Bill Mueller, Doug Mirabelli, Adam Hyzdu, Brian Daubach, Ellis Burks, Keith Foulke, Mike Timlin, Ramiro Mendoza, Tim Wakefield, Curtis Leskanic, Phil Siebel, Lenny DiNardo, Frank Castillo, Bobby Jones, Jamie Brown, Joe Nelson, Pedro Astacio.

In 2007, the Redsox spent $111.158048m on 28.9 WAR. Those players were Wakefield, Timlin, Schilling, Julian Tavarez, JC Romero, Joel Pineiro, Okajima, Devern Hansack, Ortiz, Lowell, Vtek, JD Drew, Manny, Julio Lugo, Alex Cora, Bobby Kielty, Royce Clayton and Kevin Cash.

In 2013, the Redsox spent $87.483m on 28.1 WAR. Those players were Ryan Dempster, Alfredo Aceves, Tazawa, Lackey, Koji, Brandon Snyder, Pedro Ciriaco, Jonathan Diaz, David Ross, Johnny Gomes, Daniel Nava, Stephen Drew, Mike Napoli, David Ortiz, and Shane Victorino.

In 2018, the Redsox spent 88.942m (not including Panda) on 13.5 WAR. Those players were Walden, Velazquez, Carson Smith, Robby Scott, William Cuevas, Ryan Brasier, Nunez, Dan Butler, Brandon Phillips, Tony Renda, Hanley, Moreland, and JD.

Even if you include all the smaller players for 2019, it only adds .6 WAR and probably close to $3-4 mil in salary so it doesn't help any. 4.7 WAR from FA players. That's awful. And I get some of these names can be argued but baseball reference listed them as being acquired as FA. Players released while still under control are counted as FA.

 

[Manramsclan]

This amounts to asking the new GM to figure out how to trade Price and Sale -- two guys with injuries and owed huge money -- in a way that gets enough money off the books that you can pay Mookie AND a replacement starter. The GM who pulls that off deserves a Nobel.

I have three main issues with this line of thinking.
1) So the team is better off without Mookie but with an injured Sale and Price?
2) So the team is worse off with Mookie but without a replacement starter for two injured pitchers?
3) So it's going to be difficult, so let's just let Mookie go and get the draft pick.

The Red Sox find themselves in a difficult spot due to the contracts they have handed out. Unlike other franchises who have to make bad baseball decisions because of financial constraints, the Red Sox have enough financial might to mitigate the impact of these decisions.

It may mean trading Price OR Sale OR Eovaldi and eating part a contract, or it may mean attaching an asset to one of them. Or it may mean going cheap at 2B, 1B, CF, LF and/or the bullpen. Or it may mean identifying pitchers who can pitch effectively for 2 or 3 innings at a time and using them as Tamp Bay has done.

Other teams find cost efficient players. The Red Sox can do so too. Some of the issues with the payroll this year are the death by 1,000 cuts transactions of Pearce, Moreland, Nunez who totaled almost $20 M in payroll.

All of which to say, other teams remain competitive with financial constraints. The Red Sox have a unique opportunity to do so while retaining an MVP caliber player in his prime.

 

[Red(s)HawksFan]

Or that pre-arbitration eligible players are wildly efficient.

Mildly corrected that for you. The 4.7 bWAR for ~$600K they get out of Devers is far more efficient than the 6.8 bWAR for $20M they get from Betts or the 4.8 bWAR for $12M they get from Bogaerts.

 

[nattysez]

I have three main issues with this line of thinking.
1) So the team is better off without Mookie but with an injured Sale and Price?
2) So the team is worse off with Mookie but without a replacement starter for two injured pitchers?
3) So it's going to be difficult, so let's just let Mookie go and get the draft pick.

This is not a "line of thinking" -- it's analyzing the facts of the matter. If you want to wishcast Price and his whole salary being traded a few weeks after he's had wrist surgery, be my guest. But that's not realistic, nor is thinking that this ownership is willing to keep Mookie if it requires blowing through the top tax number.

The best-case solution to this problem is either JDM opting-out or him opting-in and getting traded. Then the Sox can pay Mookie all of JDM's money, plus a little more, and follow the austerity plan you've outlined -- Travis at 1b, Chavis at 2b, finding a cheap CF, filling the pen and rotation with cheap guys and hoping a few stick (which experiment failed this year).

So the cost of Mookie is, in the best-case scenario, losing JDM and rolling the dice with cheap guys on most of your roster. That can work (witness the Giants' OF this year), but it may not (witness the Sox bullpen this year).

 

[DeadlySplitter]

hit his 29th HR to dead center on a low & away pitch, really impressive piece of hitting. but then his left foot acted up and he left the game, and there's a good chance his season will be over as a precaution.

 

[Pitt the Elder]

I'll update this once Mookie's season is complete, but here are his monthly splits dating back to last season:

Month	WRC+	PA	Avg	OBP	SLG	OPS	ISO	r	hr	sb	bb%	kk%	tb	hard %	hr/fb %	pa/hr
Apr-18	206	107	0.344	0.439	0.733	1.172	0.389	29	8	3	12.10%	11.20%	66	49.4%	19.5%	13.4
May-18	214	106	0.372	0.434	0.766	1.200	0.394	23	9	10	10.40%	12.30%	72	42.7%	26.5%	11.8
Jun-18	139	77	0.290	0.416	0.468	0.884	0.177	12	3	2	16.90%	14.30%	29	38.5%	12.5%	25.7
Jul-18	156	115	0.330	0.400	0.573	0.973	0.243	20	5	5	9.60%	15.70%	59	48.2%	13.9%	23.0
Aug-18	185	124	0.353	0.460	0.618	1.078	0.265	25	4	6	15.30%	15.30%	63	44.1%	10.5%	31.0
Sep-18	200	85	0.377	0.482	0.638	1.120	0.261	20	3	4	16.50%	21.20%	44	40.4%	13.6%	28.3
Apr-19	134	132	0.295	0.394	0.527	0.921	0.232	22	6	1	13.60%	14.40%	59	39.40%	15.00%	22.0
May-19	114	127	0.269	0.394	0.413	0.807	0.144	23	3	5	16.50%	14.20%	43	39.10%	7.00%	42.3
Jun-19	102	129	0.217	0.357	0.415	0.772	0.198	21	4	3	17.80%	16.30%	44	42.40%	10.80%	32.3
Jul-19	173	121	0.373	0.438	0.647	1.085	0.275	33	5	3	12.40%	13.20%	66	46.70%	13.50%	24.2
Aug-19	128	125	0.287	0.360	0.546	0.906	0.259	23	5	2	10.40%	16.80%	59	48.90%	11.40%	25.0
Sep-19	181	63	0.351	0.413	0.684	1.097	0.333	12	6	2	9.50%	7.90%	35	38.50%	33.30%	10.5
Mean	161	109	0.322	0.416	0.586	1.001	0.264	21.92	5	4	13.42%	14.40%	53	43.19%	15.63%	24.1
Median	165	118	0.337	0.415	0.596	1.026	0.260	22.50	5	3	13.00%	14.35%	59	42.55%	13.55%	24.6

The two outliers in this list are April/May 2018, when Mookie was absolutely insane, and May/Jun 2019, when he was clearly struggling. In both cases, Mookie basically reverted to his mean, which is still an elite, MVP-caliber player. I'm not sure how that affects things going into next season, but Mookie seems to have established that his *floor* his a 5-6 WAR and that his *ceiling* is 10-11 WAR (of course, aging curves apply). Considering that protecting against downside risk is a big part of long-term contracts (hello David Price, Chris Sale), knowing that Mookie is going to be very good to elite even in his worst seasons has to factor into the calculus.

Edit: Cleaned up the table.

 

[JimD]

The worst thing that the next Red Sox PoBO/GM can do is to be told or decide that they 'have to' re-sign Mookie Betts. I want to see Mookie retire as a Red Sock but not at any cost. My hope is that the owners hire an excellent executive and then let them do their job. The new exec should publicly state that the Sox intend to compete in 2020 with Mookie on the team, as there is no need to send any further messages that Betts can be had by trade. If some team wants to make a crazy offer then you listen, but otherwise the last thing you want is word to get out that you're shopping Mookie around (and it will). Keep the lines of communication open with Mookie's representatives and after the 2020 season decide what a fair contract is worth, relative to the team's payroll, strategic direction, etc. Take a cue from Dave Dombrowski and resist the urge to negotiate in public. If some other team decides to break the bank for Betts, so be it - I will be disappointed but I can live with the results if it means that the Sox front office is wisely following the right strategic path going forward, even if the right process doesn't always yield the desired result.

 

[TheoShmeo]

Your mileage may vary but some in the twitter world have pointed out that Mookie is not pictured on whatever it is that the Sox send out to season ticket holders. Xander, Rafael and Eduardo are.

Now those three were arguably the team’s best players.

But it’s a little weird not to include Mookie. Explainable. But weird.

Needless to say, JDM isn’t on there, either.

 

[Savin Hillbilly]

Your mileage may vary but some in the twitter world have pointed out that Mookie is not pictured on whatever it is that the Sox send out to season ticket holders. Xander, Rafael and Eduardo are.

Now those three were arguably the team’s best players.

But it’s a little weird not to include Mookie. Explainable. But weird.

Needless to say, JDM isn’t on there, either.

'Twere considering too curiously, I think, to consider so. Good as Mookie was, those other three guys were the story this year.

 

[Al Zarilla]

'Twere considering too curiously, I think, to consider so. Good as Mookie was, those other three guys were the story this year.

Still, Mookie has been the face of the franchise if anybody has and I think it’s weird to drop him from this literature. Yaz had an up and down career, but I don’t think he’d have gotten dropped from this kind of thing because he hit .254 one year in the middle of his career.

 

[chrisfont9]

Or that arbitration eligible players are wildly efficient.

Well at some point you need x number of WAR, i.e. whatever it takes to win 95 games. Almost no team will ever get there with just developing pre-FA players so the rest come from FA. And that's the price tag. So it's interesting to compare the two sources of wins but in the end teams almost always rely on both.

 

[chrisfont9]

The two outliers in this list are April/May 2018, when Mookie was absolutely insane, and May/Jun 2019, when he was clearly struggling. In both cases, Mookie basically reverted to his mean, which is still an elite, MVP-caliber player. I'm not sure how that affects things going into next season, but Mookie seems to have established that his *floor* his a 5-6 WAR and that his *ceiling* is 10-11 WAR (of course, aging curves apply). Considering that protecting against downside risk is a big part of long-term contracts (hello David Price, Chris Sale), knowing that Mookie is going to be very good to elite even in his worst seasons has to factor into the calculus.

Edit: Cleaned up the table.

IOW who he is is probably about an 8-win player, setting aside the outliers. That's worth $72m, in theory, so paying him $35 is a bargain for maybe the next 4-5 years. After that... ?

 

[DeJesus Built My Hotrod]

IOW who he is is probably about an 8-win player, setting aside the outliers. That's worth $72m, in theory, so paying him $35 is a bargain for maybe the next 4-5 years. After that... ?

I get that the back-end of contracts are always scary but the market has shown that teams are willing to throw that in to get deals done. It feels like the MLB market has arrived at the idea that a fourth through sixth years are essentially throw aways but they also may allow teams to get to a lower AAV which is worth a lot given the payroll constraints.

Back to Betts, I get the pragmatism around looking at him as a trade candidate but aside from the Sox freeing themselves from having to pay him, they are highly unlikely to get anything close to equal value - especially since if he is being offered out, teams will know the Sox are motivated to move him.

Players like Betts are fairly rare (hence his looming massive price tag) and while some here may be getting all lathered up about some new prospects to fawn over, the reality is that the Sox may be sending out a ~6-8 WAR player for what effectively amounts to salary relief. As outlined in this thread, it may be necessary given the Sox current financial situation but that doesn't make it any easier to swallow.

 

[chrisfont9]

I get that the back-end of contracts are always scary but the market has shown that teams are willing to throw that in to get deals done. It feels like the MLB market has arrived at the idea that a fourth through sixth years are essentially throw aways but they also may allow teams to get to a lower AAV which is worth a lot given the payroll constraints.

Back to Betts, I get the pragmatism around looking at him as a trade candidate but aside from the Sox freeing themselves from having to pay him, they are highly unlikely to get anything close to equal value - especially since if he is being offered out, teams will know the Sox are motivated to move him.

Players like Betts are fairly rare (hence his looming massive price tag) and while some here may be getting all lathered up about some new prospects to fawn over, the reality is that the Sox may be sending out a ~6-8 WAR player for what effectively amounts to salary relief. As outlined in this thread, it may be necessary given the Sox current financial situation but that doesn't make it any easier to swallow.

Oh I agree. I wasn't suggesting that the later years aren't justifiable, just that the number of wins drops off from there probably. I 100% want him re-signed because you have to collect a bunch of guys to add up to a 95(ish) win team, and Mookie gets you a chunk of the way there by himself. The alternative is to go looking for 8 wins somewhere else. Good luck.

 

[DeJesus Built My Hotrod]

Oh I agree. I wasn't suggesting that the later years aren't justifiable, just that the number of wins drops off from there probably. I 100% want him re-signed because you have to collect a bunch of guys to add up to a 95(ish) win team, and Mookie gets you a chunk of the way there by himself. The alternative is to go looking for 8 wins somewhere else. Good luck.

Apologies - I got the point you were making and I was simply expanding on it. We are good. Unfortunately, as others have pointed out, the Sox are going to have to at least consider moving Betts given the state of their payroll. Unless you are the type who just loves prospects so much that having them to discuss is more fun than rooting for a winner, a potential Betts deal is depressing.