Brooks shows that he used his curve more and his FB less in the second half--maybe that was part of the fix:
Sox talking Mookie trade with Dodgers, Padres - News & Discussion
- Thread starter RedOctober3829
- Start date
- Status
One thing I do know. The inevitable trade will inevitably leave us disappointed with the return.
No doubt. One year of control is not going to bring multiple blue chip prospects.
I'd be THRILLED with that return. It's way more than I was expecting to get from 1 year of Betts.
Yeah, the curve is the high spin rate pitch. The Dodgers took him away from it for some reason in 2018 and early 2019.
Yes, Gammons used that phrase in his original tweet. Rob is saying that Gammons' tweet is wrong about the specifics of the people involved, presumably he is implying that BOS would not actually get that much in return.
Verdugo, Downs and Ferguson would be a good haul. I assume Verdugo and Ferguson would start at MLB and Downs would go to high A or AA?
I always thought the consensus is the Sox will get more if they wait until the trade deadline. Otherwise let's just keep him if we really can't get much for him. I know it's a longshot but offer him a decent 5 year deal and see if he wants to stay here.
Mookie might be cheaper for the acquiring team from a salary perspective, but in every other respect, he'll have less value to other teams in July than he will now. Two months of Mookie is not worth more than 6 months of Mookie. Acquiring Mookie now also comes with the benefit of being able to give him a qualifying offer and netting a compensation pick if he leaves via free agency. You don't get that if you get him in July instead.
And from the Red Sox perspective, if they're moving him to save salary, saving all $27M by trading him now for 2-3 prospects is way better than trading him in July and saving ~$12M instead. Even if the prospect return is better in July, will it be $15M+ better?
As for offering him a "decent" 5-year deal...have you been paying attention at all? He's turned down quite decent 10 year offers and has expressed a desire to test the market. A 5-year deal is unlikely to persuade him.
I'm sure there is a price point where Mookie would take a 5 year deal. I'm just not sure what it is. It probably would be better to just sign him to 12 years.
I know they've offered him 10 year deals. But on the other side what team other then Stankees or Dodgers would give him that. And Cashman has said they are avoiding the luxury tax.
Only 1 team needs to give him that so why's it matter how many teams will? A 5 year deal would have to be like $270 million if not more.
If thats the best they can do, I'd rather roll with Betts in 2020 and see if they can make a playoff run
Cashman has absolutely not said that, but NY is not going to be in the market for Betts with Judge/Stanton on board, same way they were not in the Bryce Harper market.
I like your optimism, but I don't like the gamble of being stuck with a 4th round compensatory pick. Plus keeping Betts doesn't achieve the payroll shedding mandate.
The Padres, Phillies, and Angels have all signed players to 10+ year deals in excess of $300M in the last 18 months. The idea that only the Yankees or Dodgers could pony up for Mookie is ludicrous.
Let's see now...
The Nationals, Phillies and White Sox all offered Bryce Harper a 10+ year deal.
Joey Votto is carrying a 10-year contract from the Reds.
Manny Machado got a 10-year contract from the Padres.
Giancarlo Stanton got a 13-year contract from the Marlins.
Robinson Cano got a 10-year contract from the Mariners.
Which is not to say those teams will also necessarily want a 10-year deal with Mookie, but that 10-year offers, at super-lucrative AAVs, can come from ANYWHERE. The notion that the Red Sox, Yankees and Dodgers are the only teams whose abacus goes that high is obsolete.
Edit: @Red(s)HawksFan beat me as I tend to be too verbose and that takes some time.
Yeah, I don't think the Padres deal for Betts without the hope of being able to retain him.
I know I'm going to regret this, but just out of curiosity, what do you think the AAV on a five year deal would have to be for anyone in Mookie's camp to regard it as being "decent?"
There are a few obvious truths at play and none of them involve Betts and a 5 year deal.
1. Mookie Betts wants to be a free agent. He has made this clear a long time ago when he chose arbitration over buying out his arb years.
2. Why does he want to be a free agent? He wants to get paid. Hitting the free agent market is the best way to get paid full freight.
3. The Red Sox want/need/have determined it to be in the best interest of the team to get under the luxury tax.
4. You'd have to be a magician to get under the luxury tax without trading Mookie. I guess you could try and package Devers with Price and/or Eovaldi but the options aren't pretty.
5. Trading Mookie now is the best way to maximize his return to the Red Sox for all of the reasons mentioned in this thread.
6. The Red Sox know better than anyone the health of their pitchers. They understand the strengths of the competition. And they've determined that it is highly unlikely they content for anything more than a WC spot in 2020.
Look it sucks. In a perfect world Mookie retires a member of the Red Sox. Though decisions made prior to this year by both Betts and the Sox have made trading him near inevitable.
Last edited:
Agreed.
This isn’t a case where Mookie is saying “I want to be a Red Sox my entire career” and the Sox just aren’t willing to make an offer. He wants to see his value which he has every right to do.
I just won’t be surprised if he signs elsewhere and isn't regarded as well as he would if he stayed here. Boston has a way of idolizing their stars.
Ignoring the 5 year offer part, the other issue with waiting til July is if the Sox are in the race. You think it's a potential PR hit now, imagine what it would be if the Sox are in the East or WC hunt.
I'd be pretty happy with a Betts for Verdugo/Downs/Ferguson deal. Verdugo could be a 4+ WAR guy they'll have all the control years on. Downs could easily be a high .700's/low .800's OPS 2B by 2021, a gaping hole in teh org. if you assume Chavis isn't going to have the footwork to stick there. Ferguson is probably a #4/#5 SP at best, but maybe a strong late inning guy.
Verdugo and Downs does a lot for the Sox on the positional side. The three hardest to fill infield spots would be locked up for 4+ years. They'd have the rest of Benintendi's control years with him and all of Verdugo's. They'd probably have a solid chance to keep Bradley if they wanted when he hits FA, probably for less than they're going to pay him this year. They'd really just need two of Chavis/Dalbec/Casas to hold up at 1B/DH to have a real solid positional starting crew.
Or it could mean that Bradford is hearing a real SP capable prospect is a pre-req. Both the most mentioned San Diego proposals (Quantrill) and the most floated Dodgers deals (Gonsolin) included an MLB ready SP.
Wouldn't be a big stretch to think LAD countered a Verdugo/Gonsolin/high upside low minors guy with a Verdugo/Downs/Ferguson package, either because they liked the A ball names thrown around too much to be an add-on, think Gonsolin would be a more valuable depth arm or deadline chip, or a combination of the two.
A resolution regarding the fate of Mookie Betts may be nearing.
Major league sources familiar with the trade negotiations between the Red Sox and the Padres and Dodgers believe that a decision by the Red Sox could come within the next few days. According to the sources, both San Diego and Los Angeles have outlined multiple trade offers for the 2018 AL MVP, with talks with both teams at a relatively advanced stage – though according to a source with one of those teams, the Red Sox have not made a request for a last and best offer for their superstar right fielder.
https://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/redsox/2020/02/02/red-sox-nearing-decision-mookie-betts/Nqf6hjjVn1SuDUoD0LQ3pM/story.html
Major league sources familiar with the trade negotiations between the Red Sox and the Padres and Dodgers believe that a decision by the Red Sox could come within the next few days. According to the sources, both San Diego and Los Angeles have outlined multiple trade offers for the 2018 AL MVP, with talks with both teams at a relatively advanced stage – though according to a source with one of those teams, the Red Sox have not made a request for a last and best offer for their superstar right fielder.
https://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/redsox/2020/02/02/red-sox-nearing-decision-mookie-betts/Nqf6hjjVn1SuDUoD0LQ3pM/story.html
I agree with JA's interpretation as in Bradford is saying Gammons offer is not as good as we've been proposed - at least yet.
I like the whole "OK, NOW is the time to give us your last BEST offer" to both teams. And in the end, if you don't like it, just roll the dice and trade Betts, J.D., and maybe a health Price at the deadline.
I like the whole "OK, NOW is the time to give us your last BEST offer" to both teams. And in the end, if you don't like it, just roll the dice and trade Betts, J.D., and maybe a health Price at the deadline.
With the revelation that Betts is looking for $35 million on a long term deal, I think the Dodgers would be comfortable given the system depth. They could afford to sign him to an 11 year extension that would get him to his desired plateau (the $400 million one) given their ability to plug new guys in. Put another way I don’t think the Dodgers are worried about losing him.
And I’d prefer that they just hold on to Price if they have to subsidize him in trade anyway. If he’s healthy and makes a few good starts someone in GFIN mode will take him at 3/$51 million and give Boston a prospect for it. I’d much prefer that if they insist on offloading salary in the LA deal that it be something like an Eovaldi for Kelly.
I have the oppo sense. Lack of updates tells me they're locked in the inner rooms and no one gets out until the deal is dead or done.
Well, since the Phillies and the Padres just gave out such...what's to make you think the Twins, ChiSox, Rangers, Braves, Dodgers, or D'Backs etc won't?
If 12/420 is really on the deal, 5/225 wouldn't cause them to think about it. 6/300 might not even get it done. That would still require him to get 6/120 at age 34.
From the player POV the reason to have a long contract is to guarantee being paid a prime salary during the decline phase of their career. Splitting the contract into 2 parts is a useful exercise for me as it shows just how much we can are willing or expect to pay to cover the front end vs the back end, which looks pretty bad (at least to me).
Mookie put up 35.4 fWAR in his first 5 full years with the Sox (2015 - 2019, age 22 - 26); at $9M per WAR that's $318.6 M in "value." The questions then in the exercise are then:
Mookie put up 35.4 fWAR in his first 5 full years with the Sox (2015 - 2019, age 22 - 26); at $9M per WAR that's $318.6 M in "value." The questions then in the exercise are then:
- Do we think it's likely that he'll match that in his age 28 - 32 seasons?
- How much do we need to discount that figure to cover the shortfall (if the answer is no) and then his decline in his age 33 - 37 seasons?
Actually, the key question is whether the $9M per WAR valuation is even remotely realistic.
That figure gets thrown around like it's holy writ, and yet no one seems to know (or is able to explain) what it's based on and whether it has any relevance in contract negotiations.
I linked this piece from a few weeks ago earlier in the thread, I think it answers your questions.
https://blogs.fangraphs.com/the-cost-of-a-win-in-free-agency-in-2020/
- Status