Mookie redux

Pat Spillane

lurker
Feb 12, 2021
5
I miss the Bees as players but that dance routine annoyed the shit out of me watching it. Wish they would just play the game. Hate the fact that most modern sports people dont just go for the game. Take the Bruins for example, most people there cant handle sitting in a seat for a few miutes without t shirt contests or some kind of shit being pushed at them from the big screen. Lots of people there to do "crazy dances" to get teir fiftenn minuts on a viral video. Rant over
 

NoMaRRaMoN

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2006
1,101
I miss the Bees as players but that dance routine annoyed the shit out of me watching it. Wish they would just play the game. Hate the fact that most modern sports people dont just go for the game. Take the Bruins for example, most people there cant handle sitting in a seat for a few miutes without t shirt contests or some kind of shit being pushed at them from the big screen. Lots of people there to do "crazy dances" to get teir fiftenn minuts on a viral video. Rant over
Are we still making sacrifices to the pagan god of BABIP? Andy Rooney over here looks like he’s volunteering as tribute.
 

AlNipper49

Huge Member
Dope
Apr 3, 2001
41,595
Mtigawi
I didn't like that dance thing either. I don't care about the actual dancing, but it all seemed a bit contrived and forced to me.

Contrast that to being pushed in a shopping cart after a dinger - that's awesome.
 

Shaky Walton

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 20, 2019
236
I loved Mookie, I loved Brady, but when players move on or are traded, they become "other" very quickly. This current Sox team has a chance to win the WS. Wow! Who knew?

Yup, first things first, you gotta get there. But I don't care if the opponent is the Dodgers, the Giants, the Braves or Malden HS. Beating any of them will have no particular significance for me. Just get that trophy and raise it high and wide.

And if they lose to Mookie and the Dodgers, big hat tip to them, Godspeed, and move on.
 

grimshaw

Member
SoSH Member
May 16, 2007
3,734
Portland
We are fortunate to have owners in all 4 sports who at the very least want to win, and spend every dime under the cap in order to do so. They would not be purchasing teams in this market otherwise. Our GM's are all pretty damn savvy too.

My default reaction to anyone popular being moved or not re-signed is just never going to be anger because there is, and always has been a plan with this organization to maintain long term success. Multiple year rebuilds - which are inevitabilities in all but a few MLB franchises , just don't happen here, and there is a 20 year sample size now with this ownership. They'll suck here and there for a season, but always find creative ways to bounce back into competitiveness within a season which is very difficult to do.

When Betts was moved and they didn't try to throw 400 million at him, I was relieved that they weren't breaking from that. I would not have been happy with that Dodgers contract.
 

Jimbodandy

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
5,895
around the way
Anyone who misses the killer Bs doesn't read Fangraphs or Baseball Reference. Frodo's big bounceback year was a 104+. Don't even look up JBJ.

2018 was awesome, and we'll never forget it. But we got a crapload more production out of our outfield this year than those guys would have given us.

And our guys are loosening up for the LCS tonight instead of preparing for their LDS elimination game.
 

chrisfont9

Member
SoSH Member
Mookie being a 4-win player and his dWAR dropping is making this much easier to swallow. $400m was going to be a terrible contract. I'm not sure the $342m left on his deal is terrible but it probably is from a value standpoint. If he stays a 4-win player, then the gap between salary and value is far too large for me to fall back on what I really loved about the guy -- that he seems like a genuinely good person and that he could be the face of the franchise, which is always a good thing and especially for a team like the Sox to have a person of color be that guy. All of those factors would be great for the Sox... but for $400m he would also need to be a 7-win five-tool player who is moving the needle on the field. Otherwise that salary is a problem for the roster. And I think he may be just that for the Dodgers, unless they just keep bringing great young talent in thru their pipeline.
 

TapeAndPosts

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2006
393
I mean, you can miss the B's outfield (and I do!) without wishing we had the same outfield now.

I've always seen the Betts trade as the right move given his apparent preferences, but I admit if you'd told me 7 months ago that Red Sock Kiké Hernandez would have more 2021 WAR than Mookie, I would have thought you were delusional.
 

TapeAndPosts

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2006
393
I'm fine with Verdugo
Original deal was Verdugo and Graterol; the replacements after the Sox balked at Brusdar's medicals were Downs and Wong..

We'll have to wait and see if Graterol's arm falls off in the next few years, and if Jeter stops sucking, to really judge, but certainly the 2021 Red Sox would have profited more from the original trade.
 

scottyno

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2008
8,553
Original deal was Verdugo and Graterol; the replacements after the Sox balked at Brusdar's medicals were Downs and Wong..

We'll have to wait and see if Graterol's arm falls off in the next few years, and if Jeter stops sucking, to really judge, but certainly the 2021 Red Sox would have profited more from the original trade.
Graterol had a 4.59 era this year, good for a 90 era+ and a 0 war, that's worse than guys like Workman and Rios who they had no interest in keeping with the big club, I don't think it's a guarantee at all that he would have helped the 2021 Sox more than nothing.
 

nvalvo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
19,138
Rogers Park
Graterol had a 4.59 era this year, good for a 90 era+ and a 0 war, that's worse than guys like Workman and Rios who they had no interest in keeping with the big club, I don't think it's a guarantee at all that he would have helped the 2021 Sox more than nothing.
FWIW (not much), Connor Wong had more 2021 bWAR than Graterol, 0.3 to 0.0 — but Graterol has 0.3 fWAR to Wong's 0.2.
 

Leskanic's Thread

lost underscore
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
1,571
Los Angeles
It was a rough evening for people who want to argue we shouldn't miss Mookie because he never comes through in the playoffs. He went 4 for 4, SB, R in a 2-1 elimination game. If they handed out single game MVPs, he would take the title for the Dodgers (assuming Gabe Morales isn't eligible).

Doesn't mean we shouldn't have traded him or that the team is a failure without him or that we would be favorites to win the Series if we had kept him and somehow resigned him or or or...just noting that he had an exceptional playoff game.
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

All Hail King Boron
Dope
May 20, 2003
32,210
Deep inside Muppet Labs
It was a rough evening for people who want to argue we shouldn't miss Mookie because he never comes through in the playoffs. He went 4 for 4, SB, R in a 2-1 elimination game. If they handed out single game MVPs, he would take the title for the Dodgers (assuming Gabe Morales isn't eligible).

Doesn't mean we shouldn't have traded him or that the team is a failure without him or that we would be favorites to win the Series if we had kept him and somehow resigned him or or or...just noting that he had an exceptional playoff game.
And with that night in the books he put up 450/455/600 in the NLDS, after going 2 for 4 in the WC play in game. He is having an outstanding postseason so far.

Small sample size caveats still apply, but if the rules say we could talk about mediocre numbers after 3 games we can talk about great ones after 5.
 

jezza1918

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
557
South Dartmouth, MA
And with that night in the books he put up 450/455/600 in the NLDS, after going 2 for 4 in the WC play in game. He is having an outstanding postseason so far.

Small sample size caveats still apply, but if the rules say we could talk about mediocre numbers after 3 games we can talk about great ones after 5.
As the person who (regretfully?) reinvigorated this thread, my reason for doing so was really using Mookie to ask the question at what point in someone's playoff career can we talk about the numbers in an actual meaningful way? The more I think about it, the answer is likely pretty close to never. If the Sox play the Dodgers in the WS this thread might end up breaking SOSH...
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

All Hail King Boron
Dope
May 20, 2003
32,210
Deep inside Muppet Labs
As the person who (regretfully?) reinvigorated this thread, my reason for doing so was really using Mookie to ask the question at what point in someone's playoff career can we talk about the numbers in an actual meaningful way? The more I think about it, the answer is likely pretty close to never. If the Sox play the Dodgers in the WS this thread might end up breaking SOSH...
I think the honest answer to that is "when we have enough data." Unfortunately that stage is extremely subjective and not held to any agreed definitions. It's an age-old problem.
 

Pitt the Elder

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 7, 2013
2,824
And with that night in the books he put up 450/455/600 in the NLDS, after going 2 for 4 in the WC play in game. He is having an outstanding postseason so far.

Small sample size caveats still apply, but if the rules say we could talk about mediocre numbers after 3 games we can talk about great ones after 5.
Pretty amazing what one game can do with sample sizes that small. Mookie's playoff slash went from 0.268/0.345/0.419/0.764 with a 101 wRC+ to 0.284/0.357/0.432/0.789 with a 108 wRC+. If he has a similarly good series in the NLCS, his overall numbers are going to be looking pretty good overall.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
28,208
Hingham, MA
He's been outstanding in the playoffs for LA. 24 games, 17-7 record, hitting .337 / .398 OBP / .516 SLG / .914 OPS, 3 HR / 12 RBI / 17 R, 8 SB / 0 CS. He's been fantastic for them in the playoffs.
 

Pitt the Elder

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 7, 2013
2,824
As the person who (regretfully?) reinvigorated this thread, my reason for doing so was really using Mookie to ask the question at what point in someone's playoff career can we talk about the numbers in an actual meaningful way? The more I think about it, the answer is likely pretty close to never. If the Sox play the Dodgers in the WS this thread might end up breaking SOSH...
It's a tough question, because athletes *do* have to perform in the moment and, as humans, it's hard not to apply narratives to the handful of small moments that you stitch together in the playoffs. I think the real problem is that narratives like "he's bad in the playoffs" vs "he's good in the playoffs!" are lazy and don't offer a lot of value.

I think the honest answer to that is "when we have enough data." Unfortunately that stage is extremely subjective and not held to any agreed definitions. It's an age-old problem.
It feels like you need something close to a half-season of PAs before you can start to tease out a player's performance in the playoffs, which means that most players simply won't reach that threshold. For example, Ortiz had 369 playoff PAs, which is, what, 2/3 of a season? Not surprisingly, his stats basically converged with his career stats Conversely, Mookie is at 207 playoff PA's, which is a little bit more than 2 months of baseball. To put that in context, Mookie's playoff stats right now would be equivalent of a someone's stats in early June. Plenty of guys have gotten off to slow starts with poor stats by early June that have turned around their seasons with monster backhalfs. Given Mookie's age and that he's playing for the Dodgers, he has a very good chance to accumulate close to a season's worth of PAs over his playoff career.

Edit: I know I'm speaking to the choir, but a big problem with small samples is those small variations in luck can have a big impact on your overall numbers - your slash line doesn't know if you had a bloop single or a barrelled ball for an out, for example. But, with Statcast, we should be able to evaluate the quality of a players performance much earlier by determining their quality of contact. Does anyone know if Baseball Savant does post-season splits?
 
Last edited:

Archer1979

shazowies
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
5,010
Right Here
I think the honest answer to that is "when we have enough data." Unfortunately that stage is extremely subjective and not held to any agreed definitions. It's an age-old problem.
And any judgement on Mookie's overall contract is going to be based on years worth of data. We've seen in baseball where anyone can get hot and deliver in high leverage situations in the playoffs (Bobby Kielty, Steve Pearce) but not really be worth mega-contracts.

The bottom-line judgment on Mookie's contract will be based on years of regular/post-season productivity.
 
Last edited:

John Marzano Olympic Hero

has fancy plans, and pants to match
Dope
Apr 12, 2001
20,786
As the person who (regretfully?) reinvigorated this thread, my reason for doing so was really using Mookie to ask the question at what point in someone's playoff career can we talk about the numbers in an actual meaningful way? The more I think about it, the answer is likely pretty close to never. If the Sox play the Dodgers in the WS this thread might end up breaking SOSH...
To definitively say? Probably when the player retires. But if you realize that baseball discussions whether it's season-long or career-long are fluid conversations, you can talk about it whenever you want. The problem iis there are people who talk as if the world is going to blow up tomorrow and this is the very last bit of data that we have.

It's sort of the same discussion that we had about the FO at the Trading Deadline. At the time, some of us were like, "This doesn't solve our needs now", others were like, "Yes it does. Have faith." Turns out after two more months of data, the latter were correct. However, the differing viewpoints were the two sides of the same coin, neither of us had the data to definitively say who was correct. We were both going on what we saw and what we thought we'd see in the future. But that's baseball. And that's sports. You don't need--and normally no one has--all of the data points to argue or talk or post. If we did have to wait, SoSH would be a very lonely place from April through October.
 

jezza1918

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
557
South Dartmouth, MA
To definitively say? Probably when the player retires. But if you realize that baseball discussions whether it's season-long or career-long are fluid conversations, you can talk about it whenever you want. The problem iis there are people who talk as if the world is going to blow up tomorrow and this is the very last bit of data that we have.

It's sort of the same discussion that we had about the FO at the Trading Deadline. At the time, some of us were like, "This doesn't solve our needs now", others were like, "Yes it does. Have faith." Turns out after two more months of data, the latter were correct. However, the differing viewpoints were the two sides of the same coin, neither of us had the data to definitively say who was correct. We were both going on what we saw and what we thought we'd see in the future. But that's baseball. And that's sports. You don't need--and normally no one has--all of the data points to argue or talk or post. If we did have to wait, SoSH would be a very lonely place from April through October.
Appreciate this, along with the other above responses. I'll now prepare to bang my head into the wall when my brother calls before the game tonight to tell me that Sale has no business starting game one and will make the definitive statement, "he's terrible in the playoffs."
 

cantor44

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 23, 2020
1,097
Chicago, IL
Graterol had a 4.59 era this year, good for a 90 era+ and a 0 war, that's worse than guys like Workman and Rios who they had no interest in keeping with the big club, I don't think it's a guarantee at all that he would have helped the 2021 Sox more than nothing.
And Downs couldn't hit .200 in AAA! Oh boy. Wong was considered merely the throw in, with Downs being the main substitute for Graterol. Graterol seems at worst, a solid major league reliever, with a very high ceiling. Be interesting to look at stats to see how often anyone had a season as bad as Downs' in the high minors, and went on to be a productive major leaguer.

Anyway, this is hindsight thinking. Just some wistful thinking watching Graterol last night.
 

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
1,552
To definitively say? Probably when the player retires. But if you realize that baseball discussions whether it's season-long or career-long are fluid conversations, you can talk about it whenever you want. The problem iis there are people who talk as if the world is going to blow up tomorrow and this is the very last bit of data that we have.

It's sort of the same discussion that we had about the FO at the Trading Deadline. At the time, some of us were like, "This doesn't solve our needs now", others were like, "Yes it does. Have faith." Turns out after two more months of data, the latter were correct. However, the differing viewpoints were the two sides of the same coin, neither of us had the data to definitively say who was correct. We were both going on what we saw and what we thought we'd see in the future. But that's baseball. And that's sports. You don't need--and normally no one has--all of the data points to argue or talk or post. If we did have to wait, SoSH would be a very lonely place from April through October.
Not only that, but many of the people who were “right” about the deadline were arguing that Bloom didn’t do more because he knew the team wasn’t a true contender…which isn’t how it worked out. There were a lot of possibilities as to how the season worked out- the Sox ended up making the playoffs by the slimmest of margins and that’s a testament to the team getting it done when they had to. But had they lost one more game while the Jays won more, would the deadline skeptics been vindicated? I don’t think so.

Ultimately though, we know it’s a results based business and the narrative quickly changes based on what actually happens, whether it was anticipated, predictable, or even within the control of who it happens to.
 

Max Power

thai good. you like shirt?
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
5,263
Boston, MA
As the person who (regretfully?) reinvigorated this thread, my reason for doing so was really using Mookie to ask the question at what point in someone's playoff career can we talk about the numbers in an actual meaningful way? The more I think about it, the answer is likely pretty close to never. If the Sox play the Dodgers in the WS this thread might end up breaking SOSH...
You can talk about the numbers and games that have happened in a very meaningful way. The original question was why Mookie isn't thought of like Ortiz, Brady, and Bird. It's because he wasn't around for as long and wasn't particularly good in the playoffs for the Red Sox. Those games happened and those are the numbers he put up.

Extrapolating from that and suggesting he won't ever do well in the playoffs was where you get into trouble. He might well be great for the Dodgers going forward, but unless $365 million buys a flux capacitor, that's not going to change anything about how he did when he was here.
 

Bob Montgomerys Helmet Hat

has big, douchey shoulders
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
And any judgement on Mookie's overall contract is going to be based on years worth of data. We've seen in baseball where anyone can get hot and deliver in high leverage situations in the playoffs (Bobby Kielty, Steve Pence) but not really be worth mega-contracts.

The bottom-line judgment on Mookie's contract will be based on years of regular/post-season productivity.
Steve Pence had his moments as Lt Gov, I suppose, but I don't see them as high lev.
 

scottyno

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2008
8,553
And Downs couldn't hit .200 in AAA! Oh boy. Wong was considered merely the throw in, with Downs being the main substitute for Graterol. Graterol seems at worst, a solid major league reliever, with a very high ceiling. Be interesting to look at stats to see how often anyone had a season as bad as Downs' in the high minors, and went on to be a productive major leaguer.

Anyway, this is hindsight thinking. Just some wistful thinking watching Graterol last night.
He now has a 106 era+ in 66.1 minor league innings, not sure how that makes his floor a solid major league reliever with a very high ceiling.
 

cantor44

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 23, 2020
1,097
Chicago, IL
He now has a 106 era+ in 66.1 minor league innings, not sure how that makes his floor a solid major league reliever with a very high ceiling.
Maybe you're right. His stuff is certainly lively, and watching you get the sense he could be formidable ... then again not all guys that throw hard have good careers. Certainly the Sox felt not having him was equal to Downs AND Wong ...so, they valued his ceiling, just didn't want a guy with wonky medicals.
 

TonyPenaNeverJuiced

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 7, 2015
259
Living out here in L.A., it's been pretty bonkers to see how quickly the city has taken to Betts. I think a big part of that is the sudden and shocking passing of Kobe Bryant, about a week before the trade. People here were/are devastated–there are so many tributes and murals. The trade at least gave the fans something to be excited about. Then the Dodgers and the Lakers won rings and the city has is still buzzing. I was eating some great al pastor on Friday and realized my back against a combined Kobe-Mookie mural. He's already becoming a definitional Dodger in the hearts and minds of fans, and I think it's gonna take a lot–especially after winning a ring in his first season–to knock him down off that level. Mookie plays the game with joy (a lot of Dodger fans miss Verdugo and Hernandez a lot), with confidence and passion and a bit of flair, all of which is very appreciated by Dodger fans.
 

Jimbodandy

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
5,895
around the way
Maybe you're right. His stuff is certainly lively, and watching you get the sense he could be formidable ... then again not all guys that throw hard have good careers. Certainly the Sox felt not having him was equal to Downs AND Wong ...so, they valued his ceiling, just didn't want a guy with wonky medicals.
He has decent stuff, but he's a 23yo with 50K in 66IP. I'd be happy if he were in our pen, but he's not likely a guy we'll spend a ton of tears on not having. If he were 21 or an 11 K/9 guy (or both), that would look like we took the wrong package even with wonky medicals.
 

cantor44

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 23, 2020
1,097
Chicago, IL
Living out here in L.A., it's been pretty bonkers to see how quickly the city has taken to Betts. I think a big part of that is the sudden and shocking passing of Kobe Bryant, about a week before the trade. People here were/are devastated–there are so many tributes and murals. The trade at least gave the fans something to be excited about. Then the Dodgers and the Lakers won rings and the city has is still buzzing. I was eating some great al pastor on Friday and realized my back against a combined Kobe-Mookie mural. He's already becoming a definitional Dodger in the hearts and minds of fans, and I think it's gonna take a lot–especially after winning a ring in his first season–to knock him down off that level. Mookie plays the game with joy (a lot of Dodger fans miss Verdugo and Hernandez a lot), with confidence and passion and a bit of flair, all of which is very appreciated by Dodger fans.
The other thing about Mookie is that he's an entirely likable personality. He's humble, he's intelligent, he's upbeat, he's unique in his way (300 bowler, can solve a rubik's cube in less than two minutes -- View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZeY_YaU4IU
). He's a total and absolute star. There's no doubt in my mind that the last few years of his contract will be saddlebags for the Dodgers. But ... it's rare a homegrown player checks every box for generational star/franchise cornerstone like Mookie .... it's a damn shame.