mission27 Posted February 5, 2020 Share Posted February 5, 2020 2 hours ago, flyguy1609 said: I’m surprised more teams weren’t in on price/Betts for what they went for... i saw Boston is paying half of prices contract or so... 3 yrs 48 mil of price isn’t that bad(wheeler got 5 yrs 118 mil) and worst case with Betts if you don’t resign him you get a comp pick correct? Yeah although I'm sure they were pretty picky about where they sent him. Probably no AL teams on the list, maybe not the Mets or Phillies either to keep him out of the area. But should've been 29 teams making a phone call. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TLO Posted February 5, 2020 Share Posted February 5, 2020 3 hours ago, Thelonebillsfan said: Separate deal. Don't uh. Don't really know what the Angels are doing (well I do, they're being incompetent as is their want). How are they being incompetent? We gave up basically nothing to get a 3 WAR OF who’s gonna be making under $10 million. Adell was always gonna start the season in AAA. I see no downside here from the Angels perspective. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mission27 Posted February 5, 2020 Share Posted February 5, 2020 22 minutes ago, TLO said: How are they being incompetent? We gave up basically nothing to get a 3 WAR OF who’s gonna be making under $10 million. Adell was always gonna start the season in AAA. I see no downside here from the Angels perspective. Joc is a true cocksucker tbh 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N4L Posted February 5, 2020 Share Posted February 5, 2020 1 hour ago, mse326 said: This wasn't about money. He was never going to sign an extension. He wanted to test FA. Everyone is ragging on the Sox but to me this is simple 1. Were they going to compete this year with the team they had 2a. If yes then this is stupid 2b. If no then this is smart I think the answer to 1 is no so this smart. Trading Betts is fine, it gets them below the tax alone. Using him as a way to get rid of additional salary beyond that is why it's a bad move. If you were committed to winning you would have been happy to get below the tax and gotten better prospects. But instead they just dumped price and still ate half the money. It's not like they are going to use that money to sign a bunch of players. Also, what does this say to the lockeroom? Think it inspires a lot of confidence? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lions017 Posted February 5, 2020 Share Posted February 5, 2020 The luxury tax has to disappear or be significantly changed in the next CBA, right? There's no way that the intent was for teams like the Red Sox and Cubs to stop spending money and shop around their star players. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1ForTheThumb Posted February 5, 2020 Share Posted February 5, 2020 6 hours ago, mission27 said: I mean tbf guys they kind of lowball him if the reports are accurate. They offered him $200M after last season the same time Bryce was getting $330M, Machado was getting $300M, and Trout was getting $426M. More recent reports say he had $300M on the table at some point which is closer to his market value if true, but still. If I'm him, I'm a step up from Harper and Machado and trying to get as close to Trout money as possible and $200M for probably the second best player in baseball is a joke. No he's not Trout as TLO has established in his endless wars with Boston sports writers but if the Sox had offered him 350-400 after last season, my guess is he'd have been in Boston for life. That was his market value at the time and probably still is. Edit: I guess the $200M was after the 2017 season and $300M after last year. That's a little more reasonable but still feels like a bit of a lowball offer compared to what the other three guys signed up for. He almost exactly the same age as Harper and a much better player. He's younger than Trout. He was coming off a historic 10 WAR season. I think it would be fair to think 10/350+ should've been the starting point. I don't disagree with anything you said, except for your second paragraph. It didn't matter what was offered- he was dead set on hitting free agency. At that point, the only rationale for keeping Mookie for this season is if you think you can win it all. They clearly felt they didn't have the roster to compete, so it makes sense to re-set at this point and load up in 2021/22. Now, if I said if I wasn't worried about ownership losing patience and not seeing this process through, I'd be lying. I'm very concerned that they will suck for a couple years, ownership will overact and force Bloom to sign some terrible contracts. Just let him do what you brought him in to do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1ForTheThumb Posted February 5, 2020 Share Posted February 5, 2020 7 hours ago, mse326 said: This wasn't about money. He was never going to sign an extension. He wanted to test FA. Everyone is ragging on the Sox but to me this is simple 1. Were they going to compete this year with the team they had 2a. If yes then this is stupid 2b. If no then this is smart I think the answer to 1 is no so this smart. This guy gets it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slateman Posted February 5, 2020 Share Posted February 5, 2020 18 minutes ago, Lions017 said: The luxury tax has to disappear or be significantly changed in the next CBA, right? There's no way that the intent was for teams like the Red Sox and Cubs to stop spending money and shop around their star players. They aren't shopping them because of money. They're shopping them because they have zero shot at competing this season and want to maximize their value to the franchise. Alex Verdugo is better than just about any other team could offer. He has success at the big league level and is young. It's less if a gamble than prospects. Its definitely more valuable than a comp pick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1ForTheThumb Posted February 5, 2020 Share Posted February 5, 2020 Quote Buster Olney @buster_ESPN·9mMookie Betts understands his importance to the union and wanted to get to free agency, as Gerrit Cole did, to push the free agent $ ceiling for the union brethren. That is his right. Leaving Red Sox with a choice: deal him, or get almost nothing for him if he walked away. As I was saying Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mission27 Posted February 5, 2020 Share Posted February 5, 2020 1 hour ago, 1ForTheThumb said: At that point, the only rationale for keeping Mookie for this season is if you think you can win it all. Or if you want to re-sign him long term. Yeah hypothetically he could still come back to Boston in a year. But when's the last time a big name player was traded one year from the place they'd spent their entire career and a year later came back in free agency? Thats pretty unusual. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tgrades3 Posted February 5, 2020 Share Posted February 5, 2020 26 minutes ago, mission27 said: Or if you want to re-sign him long term. Yeah hypothetically he could still come back to Boston in a year. But when's the last time a big name player was traded one year from the place they'd spent their entire career and a year later came back in free agency? Thats pretty unusual. Chapman is probably the closest example but was only in NY for a year Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mission27 Posted February 5, 2020 Share Posted February 5, 2020 8 minutes ago, tgrades3 said: Chapman is probably the closest example but was only in NY for a year Yep. I think it’s a different when a guys been around their entire career and has such a strong connection with fans. This was pretty embarrassing for the Sox as an org so hard to see either side coming back together a year from now. Chapman was a hired gun in New York and went to be a hired gun for three months somewhere else. No hard feelings their. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mission27 Posted February 5, 2020 Share Posted February 5, 2020 1 hour ago, 1ForTheThumb said: As I was saying It’s one thing to say that, it’s another thing to turn down $400m to stay with one of baseballs marquee franchises. He’s yet to do that. If the Dodgers offer $400m what will he do? Imo 9/10 when people say “he couldn’t do it because of his obligation to the MLBPA” it means the guy wanted to make what he was worth (the most he can, as he should want) and doesn’t want to look like a greedy **** in front of fans, so their people leak that it’s a union thing. It’s code for it was a money thing. If the Sox has offered him market value and he’d turned it down I’d believe that explanation a bit more. And what would have been the downside to putting that type of proposal on the table from their perspective? Worst he can do is turn it down again and then you can tell your fans you tried. Unless you don’t want to pay him $400m and are afraid he’ll say yes. My 2 cents... Mookie wanted to be paid like Mike Trout, he’s not Mike Trout but you’re the freaking Red Sox and Trout took below market value so pay the man! But Henry didn’t want to commit $400m and he figured we can rebuild again and be good in a few years either way without paying millions in luxury tax. Bad move tbh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kgarrett12486 Posted February 5, 2020 Share Posted February 5, 2020 I kind of have a different view on this than most, but I actually think this was a good trade by all 3 teams involved... 1. Dodgers obviously did well landing an MVP candidate to pair with Bellinger. Even with only 1 year control, the Dodgers window to win is now and they continue to takes steps to improve an already loaded team. Plus, they be right in hunt to resign him at FA... 2. Twins get another needed SP to bolster their rotation, while not having to give up from top of their farm... 3. Sox had to shed Price and did. Betts was going to hit the market. They got back a legit and already somewhat MLB proven player with a high ceiling. They also got a potential lottery ticket SP, who at worst is their closer down the line. I like what they chose for return... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1ForTheThumb Posted February 5, 2020 Share Posted February 5, 2020 8 minutes ago, mission27 said: It’s one thing to say that, it’s another thing to turn down $400m to stay with one of baseballs marquee franchises. He’s yet to do that. If the Dodgers offer $400m what will he do? Imo 9/10 when people say “he couldn’t do it because of his obligation to the MLBPA” it means the guy wanted to make what he was worth (the most he can, as he should want) and doesn’t want to look like a greedy **** in front of fans, so their people leak that it’s a union thing. It’s code for it was a money thing. If the Sox has offered him market value and he’d turned it down I’d believe that explanation a bit more. And what would have been the downside to putting that type of proposal on the table from their perspective? Worst he can do is turn it down again and then you can tell your fans you tried. Unless you don’t want to pay him $400m and are afraid he’ll say yes. My 2 cents... Mookie wanted to be paid like Mike Trout, he’s not Mike Trout but you’re the freaking Red Sox and Trout took below market value so pay the man! But Henry didn’t want to commit $400m and he figured we can rebuild again and be good in a few years either way without paying millions in luxury tax. Bad move tbh. He wasn't signing a $400M extension even if it was on the table. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.