Sox talking Mookie trade with Dodgers, Padres - News & Discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.

JimD

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 29, 2001
6,911
If the Sox reset, it's fair to assume they would be right at the negotiating table with Mookie next year, right? Has there been any bad blood or just normal indicators that he'll look for the biggest contract?

Little bit of a gamble but we would all be calling Bloom brilliant if he somehow manages to field a competitive team in 2020, trade Mookie, and resign him. Yankee fans worst nightmare.
All indication are that this is entirely about Mookie wanting to test the market. Multiple reports have stressed that relationships with the Sox front office are good, and that in particular there is strong bond between Betts and Raquel Ferreira.

It should go without saying that getting below the tax threshold is absolutely essential if the Red Sox are going to be competitive for Mookie's services beyond 2020 and field a competitive team around him if he does resign with Boston, but the lazy narrative that this is solely about Scrooge McHenry wanting to count his billions still persists.
 

bosockboy

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
11,149
St. Louis, MO
Because the other guys were worse.


If they really needed an OF, wouldn't they have re-signed Ozuna and not traded anything? They are running with Fowler, O'Neill and Carlson with Bader as a fallback.
They were really sour on Ozuna. But the bigger issue is they are cheap.
 

StuckOnYouk

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 26, 2006
3,113
CT
I still think we can get real prospect value for players like Betts and J.D at the deadline when there are multiple teams in the thick of the playoffs..whether it be out of the blue contenders, struggling heavyweights who need a shot in the arm, teams dealing with OF injuries, etc.
With the extra wild card more teams are buyers. We just have to be honest with ourselves and sell if we dont think we are legit WS contenders.
 

bosockboy

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
11,149
St. Louis, MO
Sixth-highest payroll in MLB last season. Where exactly do you draw the line on cheapness?
They had a press conference this week where they announced they won’t add payroll. They have enormous revenues and a massive new TV deal. Under immense local pressure to trade for Arenado and the fan base definitely believes they have went cheap.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
8,280
I still think we can get real prospect value for players like Betts and J.D at the deadline when there are multiple teams in the thick of the playoffs..whether it be out of the blue contenders, struggling heavyweights who need a shot in the arm, teams dealing with OF injuries, etc.
With the extra wild card more teams are buyers. We just have to be honest with ourselves and sell if we dont think we are legit WS contenders.
But not what you'd get now when those other teams know that they'll get a first for Betts if he leaves. If they're going to trade him, it's better to do it now when you can get better prospects than A ball lottery tickets.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
11,511
Maine
ah, 2013. when Matt Moore started game 1 and Middlebrooks was actually a solid player.
Nah, this was definitely post Middlebrooks as a solid player. He spent time in Pawtucket that season that was not a rehab assignment. Then got benched in the playoffs for some rookie playing out of position.
 

John Marzano Olympic Hero

has fancy plans, and pants to match
Dope
Apr 12, 2001
20,557
All indication are that this is entirely about Mookie wanting to test the market. Multiple reports have stressed that relationships with the Sox front office are good, and that in particular there is strong bond between Betts and Raquel Ferreira.

It should go without saying that getting below the tax threshold is absolutely essential if the Red Sox are going to be competitive for Mookie's services beyond 2020 and field a competitive team around him if he does resign with Boston, but the lazy narrative that this is solely about Scrooge McHenry wanting to count his billions still persists.
What are the chances of this actually happening? In the free agent era, it's happened three (?) times. Once with Chapman, once with Rick Aguilera and the other one escapes me. This idea that the Sox will trade Mookie away and then swoop in and sign him (this worked awesome the last time they did this, see Lester, Jon) is incredibly optimistic. If it did happen this way, I would be overjoyed. But it won't. So maybe we have dueling lazy narratives.
 

nvalvo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
16,886
Rogers Park
Campusano is definitely interesting. He posted a .900ish OPS in 487 PA in high A as a 20 year old catcher.

edit: Here's Fangraphs' writeup before his standout 2019:

Campusano was a bad-bodied, defense-first catcher on the summer showcase circuit, but then he completely remade his body for his senior spring. He showed above-average power, some bat control, and much improved agility behind the plate, leading to him going 39th overall in 2017. He didn’t catch much velocity in high school and struggled receiving pro arms at first. There’s still some work to be done on that end, but Campusano has gotten better on defense, he has plus raw power, plus arm strength, and some feel to hit. He’s a potential regular on tools, but the attrition rate of teenage catching prospects is pretty scary.
 

johnnywayback

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 8, 2004
1,174
Yeah, I vastly prefer Campusano to Morejon, although they're generally rated in the same area. MLB Pipeline write-up:

With potential on both offense and defense, Campusano became the first catcher picked in 2017, going to the Padres in the second round with the No. 39 overall pick. He signed for $1.3 million and then made his professional debut in the Rookie-level Arizona League. In '18, he caught 70 games in the Midwest League with strong numbers on offense and an impressive showing behind the plate. But Campusano's season came to an early end in August because of a concussion.

Campusano has a pair of plus tools in his raw power and arm strength, but his approach is too aggressive and his right-handed swing too long at times. Still, Campusano's bat speed and penchant for making loud contact both bode well if he can make the necessary adjustments. His power is almost exclusively to the pull side, but he'd begun to make adjustments and use the entire field before his 2018 season ended early due to injury.

Campusano should remain behind the plate, as he shows solid blocking technique and receiving skills that have gotten better. His best weapon is an accurate and strong arm, and he consistently delivers sub-2.0 second pop times. Campusano will need time to develop his game, but the final product could be an everyday catcher who contributes on both sides of the ball.
 

moondog80

heart is two sizes two small
SoSH Member
Sep 20, 2005
5,314
What are the chances of this actually happening? In the free agent era, it's happened three (?) times. Once with Chapman, once with Rick Aguilera and the other one escapes me. This idea that the Sox will trade Mookie away and then swoop in and sign him (this worked awesome the last time they did this, see Lester, Jon) is incredibly optimistic. If it did happen this way, I would be overjoyed. But it won't. So maybe we have dueling lazy narratives.

This is kind of like the old line about the Celtics were never going to be able to sign a major FA. It's true that they never had for a while, but it was also true that the circumstances were never right. And then, once they were right, they did it three times.

In this case, the team trading the guy away is often doing so because they know they simply don't have the resources to re-sign him. But that *maybe* does not apply to the Red Sox. I'm not familiar with the details of the luxury tax, but if it's true that they simply need to get under it for one year and then can spend freely for a while, and they also believe that they are a longshot to contend this year, and maybe somehow offload Price or Eovaldi, that might be a perfect storm where this would be a plausible scenario.
 

nvalvo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
16,886
Rogers Park
Yeah, I vastly prefer Campusano to Morejon, although they're generally rated in the same area. MLB Pipeline write-up:
This also sounds like it was written before his stellar 2019 campaign.

57SO/52BB. .325/.396/.509

He's not a top-5 prospect in the deep SD system, but he'd likely be our best prospect.
 

Green Monster

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 29, 2000
2,124
CT
Dennis Lin: In the Mookie Betts trade talks, catching prospect Luis Campusano is one player the Red Sox have expressed interest in. The Padres value him highly; Campusano, a Cal League co-MVP last season, is 79th on Baseball America’s top-100 list.
I have no idea how these values are determined but a quick look at the trade simulator has the following as nearly a dead even trade (with no cash exchanged). It would also appear to reduce the LT number by over $42M which would seemingly free up enough to sign another OF (Puig?) so that Myers wasn't needed everyday.........

Betts
Price

Campusano
Lamet
Myers
 

John Marzano Olympic Hero

has fancy plans, and pants to match
Dope
Apr 12, 2001
20,557
This is kind of like the old line about the Celtics were never going to be able to sign a major FA. It's true that they never had for a while, but it was also true that the circumstances were never right. And then, once they were right, they did it three times.

In this case, the team trading the guy away is often doing so because they know they simply don't have the resources to re-sign him. But that *maybe* does not apply to the Red Sox. I'm not familiar with the details of the luxury tax, but if it's true that they simply need to get under it for one year and then can spend freely for a while, and they also believe that they are a longshot to contend this year, and maybe somehow offload Price or Eovaldi, that might be a perfect storm where this would be a plausible scenario.
I don't agree with your Celtics analogy at all. How many MLB free agents have there been since free agency started? Probably about a thousand or so. How many of those players were traded prior to their walk year? Much less, let's say for argument, 200-300. Once they were traded, how many of those players were then signed by their old team? I can think of three (there may be more, but not much). So yes, it happens. At about a 1% return rate.

The Celts not signing free agents is something completely and totally different based on a lot of factors that a. the team could not control (weather, city and team perception) and b. the team could control (cap space and team record). In the 90s and early 00s, the Celts were a dead franchise. Why would a premiere free agent want to sign here?

These two ideas don't have much in common with each other except maybe, "Well, it can happen!" which is something that I'd rather not hang my hat on regarding Mookie Betts.

Also, if the Sox are able to offload Price and Eovaldi then there is absolutely no reason to deal Betts as the Sox would be well under the luxury tax.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
11,511
Maine
Thanks - I believe that offer was after the 2017 season. But nothing since then right?
Nothing reported. But if the guy rejects your offer, makes no counter offer, and states unequivocally that he wants to go to free agency, how much effort should the team really be putting into making long term offers to him?
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
22,873
Hingham, MA
Nothing reported. But if the guy rejects your offer, makes no counter offer, and states unequivocally that he wants to go to free agency, how much effort should the team really be putting into making long term offers to him?
Can you point me where he stated unequivocally he wants to go to free agency? Not being snarky, just trying to understand.
 

moondog80

heart is two sizes two small
SoSH Member
Sep 20, 2005
5,314
I don't agree with your Celtics analogy at all. How many MLB free agents have there been since free agency started? Probably about a thousand or so. How many of those players were traded prior to their walk year? Much less, let's say for argument, 200-300. Once they were traded, how many of those players were then signed by their old team? I can think of three (there may be more, but not much). So yes, it happens. At about a 1% return rate.
How many of them were traded by teams like Tampa and Cleveland, where they knew re-signing them was virtually impossible? You should eliminate them form the denominator. The Marlins trading Derrek Lee and not signing him back is a very different situation.


In the 90s and early 00s, the Celts were a dead franchise. Why would a premiere free agent want to sign here?
Exactly. When the circumstances changed, the lazy rule was exposed. It was never Boston that people were avoiding, it was the situation at that time. Likewise, it's not that free agents don't want to go back to their old teams, it's that the teams who traded them are usually not in a position to re-sign them, either financially or in their contention cycle (or both). That will maybe be different here.

Also, if the Sox are able to offload Price and Eovaldi then there is absolutely no reason to deal Betts as the Sox would be well under the luxury tax.
The reason to trade Betts would be that they think their chances of winning this year were such that the prospects they could get back make it worth losing one year of Betts.

I don't think it will happen. At the end of the day, I think that regardless of luxury tax considerations, they don't want to give him what he will ask for. But, while I agree that you can usually dismiss the idea, this could be the rare situation where it happens.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
11,511
Maine
Can you point me where he stated unequivocally he wants to go to free agency? Not being snarky, just trying to understand.
At the same time he acknowledged he rejected that offer, he said he wasn't interested in any extension.

Speaking openly about his contract situation Wednesday in Fort Myers, Betts insisted he's not interested in signing an extension before his contract expires and wants to become an unrestricted free agent following the 2020 season.

"That’s exactly what I expect. I don’t expect anything to happen till I’m a free agent," Betts said when asked if he expects to enter this season without a long-term contract, via The Boston Globe's Alex Speier.
To be thorough, he also suggested he is/was quite open to staying in Boston long term.
"But I love it here. This is a great place to be, to spend your career here. That doesn't mean you sell yourself short."
 

EvilEmpire

Dope
Staff member
Dope
Gold Supporter
Apr 9, 2007
10,682
Washington
Nothing reported. But if the guy rejects your offer, makes no counter offer, and states unequivocally that he wants to go to free agency, how much effort should the team really be putting into making long term offers to him?
You can make a offer much closer to market value and see if he bites. Letting the fans know you're willing to pay full freight sends a message too. If Mookie then refused and wanted to try and reset market benchmarks, I think a lot fans would find it easier to move on.
 

Bob Montgomerys Helmet Hat

has big, douchey shoulders
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
You can make a offer much closer to market value and see if he bites. Letting the fans know you're willing to pay full freight sends a message too. If Mookie then refused and wanted to try and reset market benchmarks, I think a lot fans would find it easier to move on.
Sure, unless you believe, as I do, that Henry and Co have no interest in paying Mookie $300-$400M because they know it's likely to be an albatross. They offered what they were comfortable with.
 

JBJ_HOF

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 5, 2014
351
Per Rob Bradford: https://weei.radio.com/media/audio-channel/bradfo-sho-ep-144-the-mookie-betts-david-price-conundrums

Last spring training the Red Sox offered Mookie Betts more than Manny Machado, presumed to be 10 years, 320 million. Betts rejected that, and word was he wanted 420 million. We do not know what the Red Sox offered this winter, but Tom Werner said the Red Sox have made new offers, and last weekend Sam Kennedy said that Mookie Betts rejected their offers and told them he is now focused on playing out the 2020 season.

So we know Betts has rejected over the last few years: 5-100, 8-200, 10-320.
 

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,645
The wrong side of the bridge....
You can make a offer much closer to market value and see if he bites. Letting the fans know you're willing to pay full freight sends a message too. If Mookie then refused and wanted to try and reset market benchmarks, I think a lot fans would find it easier to move on.
Sure, unless you believe, as I do, that Henry and Co have no interest in paying Mookie $300-$400M because they know it's likely to be an albatross. They offered what they were comfortable with.
If it's true that the 8/$200M offer was made during the winter of 2017-18, that would have been a very fair offer, maybe even an aggressive one, at that point. Mookie gambled on himself, successfully.
 

DeadlySplitter

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 20, 2015
20,469
the argument for trading him assuming he wants more than 400M is:

-if he has a great year
--you trade him: you had no shot at signing him anyways (I'm guessing 10/320 is about our max limit), and you got some pieces back for the next window while resetting the tax
--you don't trade him: you probably don't win it all anyways, he definitely leaves for nothing but a QO pick
-if he has a down year
--you trade him: you got great value (presumably) in the trade while resetting the tax, and you have a chance to resign him to a reasonable deal
--you don't trade him: you got nothing and you don't contend this year, and he might leave for nothing but a QO pick

no matter what type of year he has the argument is trading him is likely the better outcome. again, assuming he is impossible to sign. not what I'd do, but I see the logic.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
22,873
Hingham, MA
If it's true that the 8/$200M offer was made during the winter of 2017-18, that would have been a very fair offer, maybe even an aggressive one, at that point. Mookie gambled on himself, successfully.
Exactly. Mookie made $10.5M in 2018, $20M in 2019, and will make $27M in 2020, for a total of $57.5M. That would mean the remaining 5 years would be worth $142.5M or $28.5M per year. It was a very fair offer. Mookie bet on himself and will win big. He has "cost" himself $17.5M from 2018-2020 but will likely make that up within 2 years of signing his deal.
 

ehaz

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 30, 2007
2,505
Mike Trout's extension was 12/$426M. Perhaps you go long on the years at ~14/$430M to keep the AAV & luxury tax low?
 

Minneapolis Millers

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
2,059
Twin Cities
Mike Trout's extension was 12/$426M. Perhaps you go long on the years at ~14/$430M to keep the AAV & luxury tax low?
14 years?! I guess there's a decent chance the team only regrets half of that contract.

We all love Mookie. But why do people think he's going to get more money than Trout? Why should he? 10/$365M would give him the highest AAV and 2d most money. And that's probably too much.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
22,873
Hingham, MA
14 years?! I guess there's a decent chance the team only regrets half of that contract.

We all love Mookie. But why do people think he's going to get more money than Trout? Why should he? 10/$365M would give him the highest AAV and 2d most money. And that's probably too much.
Completely agree. Mookie has had an OPS+ above 135 precisely once in his career. From 2016 to 2019 he ranks 13th in wOBA and 14th in wRC+. He is a great player. He is NOT worth anything within 10% of Trout.

Edit: I'd offer him something like 8 / 260 (32.5 AAV) and be willing to go up to 8 / 280 (35 AAV) and if he walks, he walks.
 

VORP Speed

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
4,383
Ground Zero
It would be shocking if one of Chaim Bloom’s first major moves is to give out a mega-contract. It goes against everything he’s done to get where he is today. Look at Friedman when he graduated from the Rays, he didn’t transform into a prodigal GM. He’s the blueprint.

The Mookie - SD deal fits the M.O. Myers has more value to the Sox than SD because of the low LT AAV, paying some of his freight doesn’t hit the LT threshold hard but lets them use their plentiful resource (cash) to buy what they’re lacking (prospects and/or cost-controlled talent). Myers can fill a gap at 1B as well as have positional flexibility to play corner OF and benefits from Fenway. Mookie’s gone after 2020. Preller needs to win now and is a frequent trading partner with the Rays FO and Bloom knows that system cold. It all fits as long as they get the talent haul they feel they need. My guess is Bloom will pick Preller’s pocket—even if 75% of SOSH hates the deal.
 

pjheff

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2003
486
But why do people think he's going to get more money than Trout? Why should he? 10/$365M would give him the highest AAV and 2d most money. And that's probably too much.
I’m not sure people think he will or should, but Mookie will essentially be signing his contract two years after Trout.
 

Average Game James

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Apr 28, 2016
1,529
14 years?! I guess there's a decent chance the team only regrets half of that contract.

We all love Mookie. But why do people think he's going to get more money than Trout? Why should he? 10/$365M would give him the highest AAV and 2d most money. And that's probably too much.
I think the reason people think he can get more than Trout is that he will be a free agent. Trout had two years left on his deal at the time he signed.
 

Manramsclan

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
2,653
Completely agree. Mookie has had an OPS+ above 135 precisely once in his career. From 2016 to 2019 he ranks 13th in wOBA and 14th in wRC+. He is a great player. He is NOT worth anything within 10% of Trout.

Edit: I'd offer him something like 8 / 260 (32.5 AAV) and be willing to go up to 8 / 280 (35 AAV) and if he walks, he walks.
It's not that I don't agree with you about value, but since this is lower than an offer made previously, 10/$320, this would seem to be a losing strategy on its face.
 

OurF'ingCity

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Apr 22, 2016
3,981
New York City
If he’s made it clear he needs to exceed Trout I’m ok with extracting the most value now and moving on.
It doesn't really matter if he told the Red Sox he wanted to exceed Trout because he's not going to exceed Trout on the open market unless some team is really dumb. So one option is for the Sox to take the approach the Patriots often take with high-priced free agents - go test the market, come back and tell us what the best offer you got was, and then we'll decide if we want to beat that.

If some team is stupid enough to give Mookie Trout-level money then sure, the Red Sox can walk away and they should walk away. But if Mookie comes back and says he has an offer for 10/$350 do the Sox match/slightly exceed that? That's the tougher question. At minimum, I don't think it's a given that Mookie is gone after this year regardless - a lot depends on if and to what extent the Sox are able to shed payroll elsewhere (JBJ is a free agent and JDM might opt-out, among other things).
 

drbretto

guidence counselor
SoSH Member
Apr 10, 2009
9,454
Concord, NH
There exist trade options that involve moving Mookie Betts. This isn't one of them unless the prospects are the real highlight. I don't see any rush to moving him.

I think this "interest" is to get the public to consider the idea of moving Mookie. They're setting the bar with the fans so we'll accept a good trade if it comes up. It makes a lot of sense to move Mookie. Not just to shave some cash off the roster but he should be worth a decent haul. Everyone will have him in the backs of their minds right up to the deadline. If someone does make a preemptive strike worth taking.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.