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

Status
Not open for further replies.

barbed wire Bob

crippled by fear
SoSH Member
I don't understand the proposed Betts deal from the Padres' perspective. Is San Diego a potential playoff team with Betts? Maybe, but fringe-y wildcard at best, I think. So why trade prospects for a player you would likely lose to free agency after 2020 and you wouldn't even make the playoffs in 2020?

I guess San Diego could boost revenue to some degree with ticket sales if you sign Betts. Maybe San Diego thinks they could replenish some of the lost prospect talent by themselves trading Betts at the deadline if they're out of it this summer. I get the Dodgers' rationale, but I don't understand the Padres' interest.
Preller is under a great deal of pressure to get the Padres into the playoffs at least.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
16,296
This is a strange counterargument since the Sox are the 3rd biggest market with the 2nd most revenue/fan (https://www.forbes.com/sites/mikeozanian/2019/04/10/baseball-team-values-2019-yankees-lead-league-at-46-billion/#316883469b2e) so of course they're consistently at or near the top. Unless we know how well any of these top teams balance their books I don't see any obvious reason Henry is better (or worse) than the other top-5 owners. He might have a 0.0 VORO!
Even with unlimited money, the penalties for spending that money make it difficult to sustain success.
 

geoflin

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 26, 2004
434
Melrose MA
Ahh, do we know the rules if something that has never happened before happens, but only if a draft choice is traded AND the league makes a specific ruling?

let me get back to you.
It has happened before. It just happened to Houston. Has MLB made or announced a determination about what would happen if Houston were to trade for a first or second round draft pick in 2020 or 2021? Having lost their first two draft pick in each of those years, Houston would seem to have some incentive to trade with another team to receive such a pick should they be allowed to use it. Whether or not MLB would allow them to use that pick would obviously affect whether or not they were to pursue such a trade. Sorry I phrased my question incorrectly for you.
 
Last edited:

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
8,858
I don't understand the proposed Betts deal from the Padres' perspective. Is San Diego a potential playoff team with Betts? Maybe, but fringe-y wildcard at best, I think. So why trade prospects for a player you would likely lose to free agency after 2020 and you wouldn't even make the playoffs in 2020?

I guess San Diego could boost revenue to some degree with ticket sales if you sign Betts. Maybe San Diego thinks they could replenish some of the lost prospect talent by themselves trading Betts at the deadline if they're out of it this summer. I get the Dodgers' rationale, but I don't understand the Padres' interest.
Make the playoffs while simultaneously getting rid of Myers’ contract.
 

Marbleheader

Dope
Dope
Sep 27, 2004
10,466
I'm guessing these articles (Lin, Speier, Rosenthal) are coming out because the Red Sox have signaled that they are planning on moving forward with a trade and are beginning to prep the public for it.

Keep in mind that, as of now, the Red Sox are projected to be $21-23mm over the luxury tax threshold. A Mookie trade alone is unlikely to get the Red Sox under the threshold, given the salaries they may be taking back. The threshold is not calculated until the end of the year, so it is still reasonably likely that a Price trade occurs during the year, if not now.
I was thinking they leaked this too, also to set low expectations. Who's going to be excited about Wil Myers? If and when they get a better return, people have been prepared for a disappointing scenario and are more likely to see a better deal as a win.
 

OurF'ingCity

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Apr 22, 2016
4,685
New York City
It has happened before. It just happened to Houston. Has MLB made or announced a determination about what would happen if Houston were to trade for a first or second round draft pick in 2020 or 2021? Having lost their first two draft pick in each of those years, Houston would seem to have some incentive to trade with another team to receive such a pick should they be allowed to use it. Whether or not MLB would allow them to use that pick would obviously affect whether or not they were to pursue such a trade. Sorry I phrased my question incorrectly for you.
The report says the Astros forfeited their "regular" first and second round picks, so I think that implies that they could trade for other picks in those rounds. If the Red Sox get any draft pick penalties I assume it would be the same.
 

OCD SS

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Even with unlimited money, the penalties for spending that money make it difficult to sustain success.
This has been a really big stumbling block in how the Players Union negotiates CBAs. It's pretty ironic that a team like the Red Sox can have a generational talent that they want to lock up and make the face of the franchise, and because of the CBT and draft penalties being different for a large market team, it's become very difficult for them to do this. The money is too tight that the Sox FO can't afford to whiff on this if Mookie walks and all they come away with is a 4th round pick

If they already know they won't meet his price and don't want to admit that to the public, it changes things somewhat, but if the Players Union is looking to bring up spending on players across the board, letting the owners impose a de-facto salary cap in the name of competitive & revenue balance undercuts that (and leads to the depressed market for players that we saw the last couple off-seasons, which shouldn't be forgotten).
 

Al Zarilla

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
51,673
San Andreas Fault
I don't understand the proposed Betts deal from the Padres' perspective. Is San Diego a potential playoff team with Betts? Maybe, but fringe-y wildcard at best, I think. So why trade prospects for a player you would likely lose to free agency after 2020 and you wouldn't even make the playoffs in 2020?

I guess San Diego could boost revenue to some degree with ticket sales if you sign Betts. Maybe San Diego thinks they could replenish some of the lost prospect talent by themselves trading Betts at the deadline if they're out of it this summer. I get the Dodgers' rationale, but I don't understand the Padres' interest.
Even if getting Mookie might not get them into serious contention, management might be thinking that having a star of that magnitude might help get Pads fans more passionate about games. I’ve been to multiple games there, and you notice their fans are into the game for an inning or three, and then it’s man, that surf today, or where they’re going after the game, or that barbecue they just had. I’m all wtf, the bases are loaded with none out, pay the f attention. But then again, nobody is going to change laid back SoCal that much.

If Mookie moves there, I’ll go see him even if the Sox aren’t in town. Not betting he does though.
 

BaseballJones

goalpost mover
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
9,455
View: https://mobile.twitter.com/bostonsportsinf/status/1221823683519557632?s=12


“American League history through first six seasons

HR >= 125
SB >= 125
BA >= .300
OPS >= .875

Mookie Betts
Mike Trout

End of list”
Trout's first six seasons (which includes 40 games is his first season, in which he didn't qualify for ROY - he'd win that his second year):
600 r, 917 h, 175 2b, 37 3b, 168 hr, 497 rbi, 143 sb, 1670 tb, .306/.405/.557/.963, 170 ops+

Betts' first six seasons (which includes 52 games in his first season)
613 r, 965 h, 229 2b, 26 3b, 139 hr, 470 rbi, 126 sb, 1663 tb, .301/.374/.519/.893, 134 ops+
 

snowmanny

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
11,365
This is a strange counterargument since the Sox are the 3rd biggest market with the 2nd most revenue/fan (https://www.forbes.com/sites/mikeozanian/2019/04/10/baseball-team-values-2019-yankees-lead-league-at-46-billion/#316883469b2e) so of course they're consistently at or near the top. Unless we know how well any of these top teams balance their books I don't see any obvious reason Henry is better (or worse) than the other top-5 owners. He might have a 0.0 VORO!
You act as if the Red Sox ownership has nothing to do with the popularity of the team and the amount of revenue that is generated. Boston is not close to being the third biggest market in the US+Toronto in terms of population/potential customers. Henry gets a lot of credit for generating more revenue than the White Sox and the Angels and the Astros and the Phillies and the Blue Jays and other teams in big big markets. In the 1990's the Red Sox looked as if they were going to buried money-wise by the Yankees and the Orioles and the Blue Jays, especially as Boston was saddled with a crumbling Fenway Park that was too small and had crappy amenities.
 

DeadlySplitter

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 20, 2015
21,654

Multiple sources, speaking on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the talks between the teams, said the Padres are willing to send two young major leaguers and at least one prospect to Boston along with Myers in exchange for Betts, the 2018 American League MVP.

But in order for the Padres to assume the $27 million salary due Betts on what would essentially be a one-year rental, the team wants the Red Sox to come up significantly in the portion of Myers’ contract they are willing to pay. Myers is owed $61 million over the next three seasons, and the Red Sox are offering to assume about half that. Sources said the Padres would prefer to eat only about a quarter of the money owed Myers in order to take on Betts’ salary.

The Padres, the sources said, are willing to include outfielder Manuel Margot or Josh Naylor and starting pitcher Cal Quantrill or Joey Lucchesi in the deal.
not very exciting... but it is the Padres' side of the reporting.
 

JBJ_HOF

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 5, 2014
389
Luis Campusano
Quantrill/Lucchesi
Josh Naylor

Campusano is a Top 50-75 guy at a premium position with helium, Naylor was a Top 100 guy when he graduated in 2019, the pitcher you hope will be a mid-roation starter with 4-6 years of control. That's a legit offer for 1 year of Betts, but also one that if LA offers Verdugo it would be hard to not to lean that package.

Also, way too many people saying none of these guys will be Betts, but they are all new chess pieces for Bloom to move as well, he needs ammo more than anything.
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
64,915
Oregon

VORP Speed

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
4,554
Ground Zero
Not very exciting? ... That's a much better potential package for one year of Mookie than I was thinking they'd get
Yeah, you guys should be thrilled. Bloom is going to fleece Preller and this is going to be a fantastic deal for the Sox. It also sets the stage for good deals for JBJ and Price. I really really hate that the Mets were so stupid and Henry so smart when it came to Bloom.
 

burstnbloom

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 12, 2005
1,891
Luis Campusano
Quantrill/Lucchesi
Josh Naylor

Campusano is a Top 50-75 guy at a premium position with helium, Naylor was a Top 100 guy when he graduated in 2019, the pitcher you hope will be a mid-roation starter with 4-6 years of control. That's a legit offer for 1 year of Betts, but also one that if LA offers Verdugo it would be hard to not to lean that package.

Also, way too many people saying none of these guys will be Betts, but they are all new chess pieces for Bloom to move as well, he needs ammo more than anything.
Campusano really changes everything. If he is in, thats a good package. If he's not, its the proverbial nickels for a quarter trade. Naylor's bat is intriguing but he's not a great fielder. I think I'd prefer Quantrill even if the performance isn't there yet. I don't think Lucchesi has the fastball to be successful in the American League East.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
16,296
This is a strange counterargument since the Sox are the 3rd biggest market with the 2nd most revenue/fan (https://www.forbes.com/sites/mikeozanian/2019/04/10/baseball-team-values-2019-yankees-lead-league-at-46-billion/#316883469b2e) so of course they're consistently at or near the top. Unless we know how well any of these top teams balance their books I don't see any obvious reason Henry is better (or worse) than the other top-5 owners. He might have a 0.0 VORO!
3rd biggest market?
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
64,915
Oregon
The trade simulator app has Betts for Myers/Campusano/Lucchesi/Naylor as a big steal for the Padres--which only gets worse if you swap in Quantrill and/or Margot--and that's how it looks to me.
I don't know how it works, but does the simulator take into account Betts being a one-and-done for the Padres?
 

ehaz

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 30, 2007
2,838
"in order to take on Betts' salary."

What. The article makes it sound as if Betts for 1/$27M is such an albatross that the Red Sox will just have to take on Myers' contract almost in full to be rid of him.

If the package, as suggested, is something like Lucchessi, Naylor, and one prospect (let's say Campusano), I'd rather just keep Mookie. I feel like you could make a run for the playoffs and if it doesn't work out, get at least most of that package at the deadline.

- Lucchessi is a league average (in Petco) 26 year old soft-tossing lefty. I guess there is value as a #4 rotation starter under team control for many years, but you have to really squint to see any real upside.
- Naylor is a 22 year old LHH, poor defensive OF. Clearly has some pedigree as a former #12 overall pick, but his track record in the minors (.791 OPS in ~450 games) is rather disappointing for a LF/1B type outside of a torrid 50 game stretch in the notoriously hitter friendly PCL this year. Held his own in MLB this season, but nothing close to impressive.
- Campusano is a 21 year old C coming off an excellent breakout offensive season in A+ ball. Probably going to be a consensus top ~50 prospect once industry lists are updated. But catchers have a high bust rate and he hasn't even reached AA.

Lucchessi and Naylor are valuable pieces at minimum salaries with team control, but those kinds of players (fringe #4 starter and LHH platoon 1B/LF/DH type) are easily found in FA. Naylor in particular has upside to be more, I guess, but I'm not high on him.

Basically you're giving up a top 3 player in baseball and taking on Myers' albatross in exchange for two rather fungible players and a top 50 prospect. No thanks.
 

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,781
The wrong side of the bridge....
Campusano really changes everything. If he is in, thats a good package. If he's not, its the proverbial nickels for a quarter trade. Naylor's bat is intriguing but he's not a great fielder. I think I'd prefer Quantrill even if the performance isn't there yet. I don't think Lucchesi has the fastball to be successful in the American League East.
What puzzles me about this is that it's not like Quantrill is having trouble adjusting to the majors--he's been ordinary or worse at every level aside from a good 5-game stint in A- in 2016. Fangraphs has him as a 40 FV prospect, and that's certainly what his pro numbers look like. What's the attraction? I mean, sure he throws 95, but lots of mediocre pitchers throw 95.
 

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,781
The wrong side of the bridge....
I don't know how it works, but does the simulator take into account Betts being a one-and-done for the Padres?
They do factor in years of control, though they don't go into deal about how that works.

Methodology here:

 

bosockboy

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
11,900
St. Louis, MO
The trade simulator app has Betts for Myers/Campusano/Lucchesi/Naylor as a big steal for the Padres--which only gets worse if you swap in Quantrill and/or Margot--and that's how it looks to me.
Yes agreed. You have to get at least one MLB ready starting caliber player, which is why Verdugo and the Dodgers make much more sense. And Myers doesn’t count.
 

edoug

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
3,397
"in order to take on Betts' salary."

What. The article makes it sound as if Betts for 1/$27M is such an albatross that the Red Sox will just have to take on Myers' contract almost in full to be rid of him.

If the package, as suggested, is something like Lucchessi, Naylor, and one prospect (let's say Campusano), I'd rather just keep Mookie. I feel like you could make a run for the playoffs and if it doesn't work out, get at least most of that package at the deadline.

- Lucchessi is a league average (in Petco) 26 year old soft-tossing lefty. I guess there is value as a #4 rotation starter under team control for many years, but you have to really squint to see any real upside.
- Naylor is a 22 year old LHH, poor defensive OF. Clearly has some pedigree as a former #12 overall pick, but his track record in the minors (.791 OPS in ~450 games) is rather disappointing for a LF/1B type outside of a torrid 50 game stretch in the notoriously hitter friendly PCL this year. Held his own in MLB this season, but nothing close to impressive.
- Campusano is a 21 year old C coming off an excellent breakout offensive season in A+ ball. Probably going to be a consensus top ~50 prospect once industry lists are updated. But catchers have a high bust rate and he hasn't even reached AA.

Lucchessi and Naylor are valuable pieces at minimum salaries with team control, but those kinds of players (fringe #4 starter and LHH platoon 1B/LF/DH type) are easily found in FA. Naylor in particular has upside to be more, I guess, but I'm not high on him.

Basically you're giving up a top 3 player in baseball and taking on Myers' albatross in exchange for two rather fungible players and a top 50 prospect. No thanks.
Naylor is also 5'11" and weighs 250 at 22.
 

johnnywayback

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 8, 2004
1,215
If there's one position where the Red Sox can plausibly say they're going to be covered by oncoming talent for the near-to-mid-term future, it's 1B. Chavis, Dalbec, and eventually Casas all project to be playable there. No idea why they'd be interested in Naylor unless they see something in his profile that suggests he'd be a fit for Fenway, and even then you're probably DHing him. And I don't know that you want to commit to a DH unless you're positive you get Ortiz-like production, which ain't coming from Josh Naylor.
 

DeadlySplitter

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 20, 2015
21,654
"in order to take on Betts' salary."

What. The article makes it sound as if Betts for 1/$27M is such an albatross that the Red Sox will just have to take on Myers' contract almost in full to be rid of him.
the Padres seem to be up against their spending limit, which is way below the luxury tax line. another reason why the Dodgers might be the better fit in a trade, or ~ mystery team ~
 

nvalvo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
17,393
Rogers Park
Okay, so if it’s indeed Betts for...

Wil Myers and $30m — his AAV comes down to around $9m, around where he starts being an interesting bounce back candidate. He's under contract through 2022, and there's a 2023 club option.
Margot/Naylor — Manny Margot's 24, a good defender in CF and a .700 OPS bat; Naylor is 22 and has some real upside with the bat, but there are questions about his glove.
Lucchesi/Quantrill — Lucchesi has had better results, but has meh stuff; Quantrill has good stuff, but has had mediocre results. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Campusano — seems like a very good prospect, a catcher who just had an eye-popping season in A+.

...that is a respectable package IMO. (If it's less money, it's a worse package.) Campusano is the player with real upside at a position where our system is basically bereft, and the other guys are useful, affordable big leaguers. Whether it makes sense to pull the trigger depends on what else you're doing. It gets the team under the cap, the value of which depends on what the FO's plans are.

(It's also not as good a package as the Goldschmidt package, IMO. I also imagine that LAD can beat this package.)
 
Last edited:
Oct 17, 2018
24
View: https://twitter.com/Mike_Dyer13/status/1221858924275609605


Here are the situations where the Red Sox should trade Mookie - Mookie has told the team he doesn’t plan on re-signing next winter, even if the Sox have the best offer, because (reason X). If he has told them that, go for it. If not, these trade returns are laughable

Edit: The twitter link is just there because this (somewhat anonymous) person I follow summed up how if feel accurately and succinctly, and I wanted to credit him.
 
Last edited:

Papelbon's Poutine

Homeland Security
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2005
19,410
Portsmouth, NH

Sandy Leon Trotsky

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2007
2,711
View: https://twitter.com/Mike_Dyer13/status/1221858924275609605


Here are the situations where the Red Sox should trade Mookie - Mookie has told the team he doesn’t plan on re-signing next winter, even if the Sox have the best offer, because (reason X). If he has told them that, go for it. If not, these trade returns are laughable
The problem with this though... is that if Mookie would actually tell the Sox management that he ABSOLUTELY would not sign with the Sox... then he's removing one of the major competitors in driving up his price. Keeping that to himself is smart if he's trying to maximize his cost- which he appears to be doing. I'm sure there's some Mystery Team that could always function as a 4th or 5th team willing to blow a crazy amount of it's budget on one player for 12 years with only 3 remaining prime years left
 

chawson

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
1,941
Arizona closing in on a trade for Starling Marte. Mets were rumored to be in on him, so hopefully they get in on Mookie along with SD and LAD.

Edit: Yaz4ever beat me to it, albeit with a different angle
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
64,915
Oregon

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,781
The wrong side of the bridge....
...that is a respectable package IMO. (If it's less money, it's a worse package.) Campusano is the player with real upside at a position where our system is basically bereft, and the other guys are useful, affordable big leaguers. Whether it makes sense to pull the trigger depends on what else you're doing. It gets the team under the cap, the value of which depends on what the FO's plans are.

(It's also not as good a package as the Goldschmidt package, IMO. I also imagine that LAD can beat this package.)
I don't think it does, not if we're paying Myers $9M for tax purposes. That's a net $18M savings. Last I heard, we need at least $21M. That's not even counting the $2M+ going to Margot if he's in the deal.

Naylor is also 5'11" and weighs 250 at 22.
What could go wrong?
 

edoug

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
3,397
With Marte going to the dbacks, I wonder if that accelerates anything in their pursuit of Betts.
Arizona closing in on a trade for Starling Marte. Mets were rumored to be in on him, so hopefully they get in on Mookie along with SD and LAD.

Edit: Yaz4ever beat me to it, albeit with a different angle
View: https://twitter.com/Ken_Rosenthal/status/1221877948074070016?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1221877948074070016&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Flarrybrownsports.com%2Fbaseball%2Fstarling-marte-traded-from-pirates-to-diamondbacks%2F535448


Source confirms: #DBacks acquiring Starling Marte from #Pirates. Return is two prospects, names to come. On this:
@JonHeyman
,
@JeffPassan
,
@ByRobertMurray
.
 

edoug

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
3,397
I don't think it does, not if we're paying Myers $9M for tax purposes. That's a net $18M savings. Last I heard, we need at least $21M. That's not even counting the $2M+ going to Margot if he's in the deal.



What could go wrong?
Are suspenders allowed?

On the proposed Padres trade, eff them. They're trying to get one of the best players in baseball for players they don't want.
 

Lose Remerswaal

Missing an “R”
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Trout's first six seasons (which includes 40 games is his first season, in which he didn't qualify for ROY - he'd win that his second year):
600 r, 917 h, 175 2b, 37 3b, 168 hr, 497 rbi, 143 sb, 1670 tb, .306/.405/.557/.963, 170 ops+

Betts' first six seasons (which includes 52 games in his first season)
613 r, 965 h, 229 2b, 26 3b, 139 hr, 470 rbi, 126 sb, 1663 tb, .301/.374/.519/.893, 134 ops+
So if you raise ANY of those stats a couple numbers the list is even shorter: TROUT.

Funny how easy it is to get statistics to say whatever you want

Add "perfect 300 games" to the list and you get a list of: MOOKIE
 

chrisfont9

Member
SoSH Member
Bradford also has said multiple times on the air and in podcasts over the last several months that Mookie wants more than $400 million.
This is a smart negotiating tactic. It doesn't mean he truly wants more than $400 million. It means he's a year out from free agency, and he's not going to negotiate against himself. If he says "I'm OK taking under $400m" then he's already setting his market lower. He's no fool, so he says this and sits back while everyone argues what they should pay him. That's all this is. If the best offer he gets is 10/$380, he'll sign it.
 

DanoooME

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Mar 16, 2008
16,563
Richmond, VA
View: https://mobile.twitter.com/bostonsportsinf/status/1221823683519557632?s=12


“American League history through first six seasons

HR >= 125
SB >= 125
BA >= .300
OPS >= .875

Mookie Betts
Mike Trout

End of list”
Trout's first six seasons (which includes 40 games is his first season, in which he didn't qualify for ROY - he'd win that his second year):
600 r, 917 h, 175 2b, 37 3b, 168 hr, 497 rbi, 143 sb, 1670 tb, .306/.405/.557/.963, 170 ops+

Betts' first six seasons (which includes 52 games in his first season)
613 r, 965 h, 229 2b, 26 3b, 139 hr, 470 rbi, 126 sb, 1663 tb, .301/.374/.519/.893, 134 ops+
So if you raise ANY of those stats a couple numbers the list is even shorter: TROUT.

Funny how easy it is to get statistics to say whatever you want

Add "perfect 300 games" to the list and you get a list of: MOOKIE
And if you add in the National League, you get Ryan Braun. I guess that makes the list less impressive?
 

amfox1

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 6, 2003
5,418
The back of your computer
Okay, so if it’s indeed Betts for...

Wil Myers and $30m — his AAV comes down to around $9m, around where he starts being an interesting bounce back candidate. He's under contract through 2022, and there's a 2023 club option.
Margot/Naylor — Manny Margot's 24, a good defender in CF and a .700 OPS bat; Naylor is 22 and has some real upside with the bat, but there are questions about his glove.
Lucchesi/Quantrill — Lucchesi has had better results, but has meh stuff; Quantrill has good stuff, but has had mediocre results. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Campusano — seems like a very good prospect, a catcher who just had an eye-popping season in A+.

...that is a respectable package IMO. (If it's less money, it's a worse package.) Campusano is the player with real upside at a position where our system is basically bereft, and the other guys are useful, affordable big leaguers. Whether it makes sense to pull the trigger depends on what else you're doing. It gets the team under the cap, the value of which depends on what the FO's plans are.
First, Myers could definitely be a change-of-scenery candidate. Also, working with JDM could help Myers regain his prior hitting form. If SD covers $30mm, his AAV falls from $13.83mm to $3.83mm, I believe, and puts the Red Sox at or under the luxury tax threshold. Note that Myers was paid $22mm in the first three years and is owed $61mm for the last three years, assuming he is bought out after the sixth year. It should be a no-brainer to get SD to pay at least $20mm (which lowers Myers' AAV to $7.17mm, but keeps the Red Sox over the luxury tax threshold), just so SD pays half of Myers' overall contract.

Second, the rumor around SD is that Naylor lost some weight this offseason. Cannot confirm but, if true, would show that Naylor knows that his path to staying in the majors involves being fit enough for the OF. I would definitely want Naylor over Margot, whose ceiling appears limited.

Third, I'm not excited about Lucchesi or Quantrill. Lucchesi is a cheap 5th starter, but his upside is limited unless he develops another pitch. Quantrill is higher risk/higher return and has an extra year of control. I'd take Q over L but I'm not thrilled about either. This would be the area to push for more.

Fourth, I like Campusano based on the little I know and he's a nice piece to get back. He would become our 2nd or 3rd ranked prospect.

I think they are probably negotiating between how much SD pays between $20mm and $30mm, the quality of the pitcher coming back and, maybe, the identity of a lotto ticket sweetener..
 

Dewey'sCannon

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
693
Maryland
On the subject of Mookie suitors, the Mets still have a super odd surplus throughout the ML roster.

OF: Conforto, Nimmo, Davis, Cespedes, Marisnick, McNeil
2B/3B: McNeil, Cano, Lowrie, Davis, (Nuñez)
SP: DeGrom, Syndergaard, Matz, Stroman, Porcello, Wacha, (Lugo)

To me, J.D. Davis is just screaming to be wriggled out from that mess. He was a monster at the plate last year, to little fanfare, and has no real position besides first, where he’s blocked by the rookie of the year. Dominic Smith has been discussed plenty on this board, but I think he’s forgettable. Davis on the other hand would make a hell of a first baseman for us until Casas is ready, and could slide into JDM’s DH spot when he goes.

To expand (and wishcast) it out a bit, Betts, Workman and Jarren Duran (who we can sell them as a Jarred Kelenic replacement) for Syndergaard, Davis and Familia is fair, and would shave $11m off the 2020 payroll. It wouldn’t be the prospect haul many of us are looking for, but Syndergaard seems a lot more likely than Betts to sign an extension here, be a solid counter to Gerrit Cole, and signal that the team intends to compete in 2020.
With the Mets losing out on Sterling Marte, it would be worth a call to see if they're interested. But the package suggested above is not enough to get the Sox under the CBT threshold. But if the deal is built around Thor coming to the Sox, then maybe we can get them to take Price in the deal as a replacement in their rotation. Syndergaard is reasonably priced at 9.7M, so we'd probably have to eat a bunch of Price's contract, or take another one back, like Lowrie at 10M. Mookie + Price for Thor and Lowrie saves the Sox more than enough to avoid the luxury tax and penalties, and I think we could get more from NY in this deal - JD Davis, Dominic Smith and/or another prospect from their top 10.

Not sure how I feel about this, but it's a deal I think I'd consider if I were either team.
 

curly2

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 8, 2003
4,123
Lucchesi and Quantrill seems like fifth starters at best, and neither should be a meaningful piece of a Betts trade.

Quantrill's not really young -- he'll be 25 next month -- and he's never really had success, even in the minors. In his minor-league career he's averaged 10.3 hits per 9 innings.

Lucchesi's "success" last year was all a product of a pitching his home games at a pitchers parl. Last year at Petco, he pitched 91.1 innings with a 2.56 ERA and 8 homers allowed. On the road, 72.1 innings, 6.22 ERA and 15 homers allowed.
 

high cheese

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2001
125
An all time great for a bunch of mediocrity and an A ball catcher. Right.

Outside of a stud return I say go for it in 2020, try to sign him, and let him walk if that’s what he wants to do.
 

section15

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 23, 2007
160
Bradford, MA and section 15
View: https://twitter.com/Mike_Dyer13/status/1221858924275609605


Here are the situations where the Red Sox should trade Mookie - Mookie has told the team he doesn’t plan on re-signing next winter, even if the Sox have the best offer, because (reason X). If he has told them that, go for it. If not, these trade returns are laughable

Edit: The twitter link is just there because this (somewhat anonymous) person I follow summed up how if feel accurately and succinctly, and I wanted to credit him.
Makes no sense for him to tell the team he's not re-signing. Limits your value on the open market. And, whether he's traded or stays, the Red Sox will certainly be in the bidding for his services in free agency.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.