SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
mobaz
Veteran
Posts: 2,780
|
Post by mobaz on Aug 15, 2019 13:16:07 GMT -5
Mookie paths and outcomes
1. Trade him this offseason for strong return. 2. Trade him this offseason for whatever can reasonably get. 3. Hold and trade him if out of it at deadline in 2020. 4. Hold him for WS 2020 push, and re-sign him for whatever it takes. 5. Hold him for WS 2020 push, and re-sign him to reasonable market deal. 6. Hold him for WS 2020 push, and he leaves for nothing.
Obviously we don't know the return until they put him on the table. I don't see a godfather offer coming, so I want to hold him for one more WS push. The outcomes include higher chance to win WS (there's no return for him that will give a BETTER chance to win next year) and higher chance to re-sign him at a "reasonable" deal. 8/280 probably won't do it, but it might.
|
|
gerry
Veteran
Enter your message here...
Posts: 1,667
|
Post by gerry on Aug 15, 2019 13:31:09 GMT -5
Mookie paths and outcomes 1. Trade him this offseason for strong return. 2. Trade him this offseason for whatever can reasonably get. 3. Hold and trade him if out of it at deadline in 2020. 4. Hold him for WS 2020 push, and re-sign him for whatever it takes. 5. Hold him for WS 2020 push, and re-sign him to reasonable market deal. 6. Hold him for WS 2020 push, and he leaves for nothing. Obviously we don't know the return until they put him on the table. I don't see a godfather offer coming, so I want to hold him for one more WS push. The outcomes include higher chance to win WS (there's no return for him that will give a BETTER chance to win next year) and higher chance to re-sign him at a "reasonable" deal. 8/280 probably won't do it, but it might. I really like your point that “there is no return for him that will give a better chance to win” the WS next year. So true. And that is the goal, even as the lower minors keeps developing the next wave. That first inning lineup of MB, Rafa, XB, JDM, Beni, Chavis, CV is WS worthy. Fix the darned pitching, power through this open window and watch Mookie not want to leave.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Aug 15, 2019 15:27:55 GMT -5
I'm so confused by so many supporting the go for it next year basically even if it means losing Betts for basically nothing. When so many people don't want to make trades that risk our future to go for it by trading our prospects.
Given the recent trades it seems like a fairly safe bet that what you could likely trade Betts for would increase your Champonship odds over the next 5-7 years more than Betts for only one year. Baseball is just unpredictable like that and no matter how good Betts is, it's on the rest of the team.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Aug 15, 2019 15:47:56 GMT -5
I'm so confused by so many supporting the go for it next year basically even if it means losing Betts for basically nothing. When so many people don't want to make trades that risk our future to go for it by trading our prospects. Given the recent trades it seems like a fairly safe bet that what you could likely trade Betts for would increase your Champonship odds over the next 5-7 years more than Betts for only one year. Baseball is just unpredictable like that and no matter how good Betts is, it's on the rest of the team. 1) People want to keep Betts for his whole career, and trading him away obviously reduces (probably eliminates) the odds of that happening. 2) I still don't think it's a "safe bet" that you can get a sufficient return in a trade. Yes, the Goldschmidt trade happened, there's a few other recent examples, I'm not saying it's impossible. That doesn't mean it's likely. Unless they’re desperate for a title and have a loaded farm, like Atl. Then you ask for Pasche and Anderson and see if they jump. Again, this is not even close to how Atlanta has been operating. They're going to offer those guys below-market extensions, not trade them for players who they'll actually have to pay.
|
|
|
Post by dcb26 on Aug 15, 2019 17:20:23 GMT -5
I'm so confused by so many supporting the go for it next year basically even if it means losing Betts for basically nothing. When so many people don't want to make trades that risk our future to go for it by trading our prospects. Given the recent trades it seems like a fairly safe bet that what you could likely trade Betts for would increase your Champonship odds over the next 5-7 years more than Betts for only one year. Baseball is just unpredictable like that and no matter how good Betts is, it's on the rest of the team. 1) People want to keep Betts for his whole career, and trading him away obviously reduces (probably eliminates) the odds of that happening. 2) I still don't think it's a "safe bet" that you can get a sufficient return in a trade. Yes, the Goldschmidt trade happened, there's a few other recent examples, I'm not saying it's impossible. That doesn't mean it's likely. 3) Not every decision is binary, and people are not automatically pro or anti prospect based on how they felt about the previous scenario. Personally, I think they have trouble making up for Mookie's production if they think he's a consistent 6-7+ win player going forward - but if there's an offer of 3 top-30 type prospects or something out there, they have to consider it.
|
|
gerry
Veteran
Enter your message here...
Posts: 1,667
|
Post by gerry on Aug 15, 2019 18:44:18 GMT -5
Who do they replace Mookie with, and/or JBJ for 2020 and beyond, AND contend. Our own MVP Mookie and GG Bradley will cost ~ $36M for 2020, about $8-10M more than 2019. What will it cost to replace them and remain in contention? Especially considering the need to get at minimum one good and costly RP and SP.
The point of this post is that this is a Championship team that had a down year. Mookie, in my opinion, needs to retire a Red Sox in a redux of the Williams, Pesky, Doerr, DiMaggio era, but this time with a few WS to their credit. Keep the core intact, continue to bring up prospects who can contribute in some ways. Save the FA $$ to extend this core as far as possible.
The Sox have a window open for several years if they maintain a lineup of MB, RD, XB, JDM, AB, CV that will cost ~80M. Instead of adding big contracts for 2B, 1B or OF like Scooter or Abreu, complete that Lineup and Bench in 2020-23 with 6 of our own among Chavis, Dalbec, Ockimey, Holt, Marco, Lin, Owings, Chatham, Duran. They should augment the Mookie lineup with ADDITIONAL power, speed, defense and versatility.. ALL of them cost a combined ~ $8M. We can afford Mookie.
The Rotation of Sale, Price, ERod, Eovaldi is/should be very solid. If not, 2020 and beyond is as screwed as 2019. Combined they will cost~ $80M. It would not be dumb to see if Darwinzon, Shawaryn, Houck, Hart, Johnson, whomever can be a good #5 in lieu of spending for another Cashner-type. (Cashner, at this stage of his career, might morph into an above average, low cost RP, but that is another discussion.)
This Pen is not perfect but it performed very well until consistent overwork. These RP’s are proven now. Barnes, Workman, Walden, Darwinzon, Taylor alreay form 5 of an 8 man Pen and will cost ~7.5M. Houck, Shawaryn, Brasier, Feltman, Velasquez, Lakins in the wings would cost 3.5M combined.
This would/should be a serious contender again. Our 2018 luck and the NYFY 2019 luck should equalize in 2020. The Division is up for grabs. Beyond that, the next wave forming in the minors, led by Mata, Groome, Song, Casas etc. is pretty good and can begin filling holes at Fenway in a couple of years. IMO, just keep Mookie and keep rolling.
|
|
|
Post by GyIantosca on Aug 16, 2019 6:40:24 GMT -5
This offseason is the key for Mookie. I keep hearing he wants to go to Atlanta on Weei. Probably just radio talk. I rather look at the Mets . I see how Mookie is approaching it and he bets on himself but the Sox can’t be left with a compensation pick. I can’t believe how much Devers exploded. I believed in him but Wow. A good Betts deal will tighten up the holes on the pitching staff. We will see.
It love Sale’s accountability in himself but getting that extension done after the last two years I don’t get it. Just when we’re are close to cleaning up these lousy deals. I hope it works out. I have a feeling some team will call about Jackie who knows someone light overpay for him.
Don’t get me wrong Mookie has to be a legit deal not a deal just for the sake of it.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Aug 16, 2019 10:59:02 GMT -5
Interesting article on weei.com about Devers.
Now we have the story from the horse's mouth.
Dombrowski said that the White Sox wanted Devers in addition to Moncada and either Kopech or Benintendi in the Chris Sale trade.
Dombrowski refused to make Devers part of the deal, so it was never Moncada or Devers. It was both that the White Sox wanted. Dombrowski walked away from the deal and eventually the White Sox relented offering to substitute Basabe and Diaz for Devers in the deal and that sealed it and obviously Dombrowski decided on Kopech being included in the deal over Benintendi, again, the right call there as well.
I think Dombrowski was always super impressed with Devers' skills and loathe to part with him.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Aug 16, 2019 11:15:04 GMT -5
I'm so confused by so many supporting the go for it next year basically even if it means losing Betts for basically nothing. When so many people don't want to make trades that risk our future to go for it by trading our prospects. Given the recent trades it seems like a fairly safe bet that what you could likely trade Betts for would increase your Champonship odds over the next 5-7 years more than Betts for only one year. Baseball is just unpredictable like that and no matter how good Betts is, it's on the rest of the team. 1) People want to keep Betts for his whole career, and trading him away obviously reduces (probably eliminates) the odds of that happening. 2) I still don't think it's a "safe bet" that you can get a sufficient return in a trade. Yes, the Goldschmidt trade happened, there's a few other recent examples, I'm not saying it's impossible. That doesn't mean it's likely. Unless they’re desperate for a title and have a loaded farm, like Atl. Then you ask for Pasche and Anderson and see if they jump. Again, this is not even close to how Atlanta has been operating. They're going to offer those guys below-market extensions, not trade them for players who they'll actually have to pay. 1). You miss the whole point, it's if we offer him our best offer and he rejects it like reports say we plan on doing this off season. He wants an contract our owner isn't willing to give. Your response to that was it was still better to keep him for one year even if you lose him for nothing. My point is losing a guy like Betts for nothing is crazy and not worth one slightly better chance at another title. If you can sign him or are willing to, then sign him. 2). Do you have any examples where they couldn't get good returns for a guy like Betts? You have this belief in your head that Baseball has changed. Teams are crazy smart now and won't make risky trades, but we have a ton of them made in the last year. Nevermind Betts is a different caliber then all of them. Like Goldschmidt was five years older and still had basically the same bwar Betts has now. Betts is the type of player teams do stupid stuff for. It only takes one team.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Aug 16, 2019 11:26:45 GMT -5
Teams do stupid stuff for Betts, such as keeping him until the end of his contract to try to win another WS.
|
|
|
Post by kevfc89 on Aug 16, 2019 11:33:13 GMT -5
Interesting article on weei.com about Devers. Now we have the story from the horse's mouth. Dombrowski said that the White Sox wanted Devers in addition to Moncada and either Kopech or Benintendi in the Chris Sale trade. Dombrowski refused to make Devers part of the deal, so it was never Moncada or Devers. It was both that the White Sox wanted. Dombrowski walked away from the deal and eventually the White Sox relented offering to substitute Basabe and Diaz for Devers in the deal and that sealed it and obviously Dombrowski decided on Kopech being included in the deal over Benintendi, again, the right call there as well. I think Dombrowski was always super impressed with Devers' skills and loathe to part with him. actually if you read that article and the one it's referencing by Tomase, the White Sox insisted on either Moncada OR Benintendi as the headliner. So he didn't hold onto Devers over Moncada, as one of Benny/Moncada were musts from the White Sox perspective or it wouldn't get done. Once that was decided they were also interested in Devers of course but DD correctly thought that with Moncada and Kopech already a part of it, no one else could match that and so he was able to build the rest of the deal around lesser parts. It's interesting to hear it from DD directly, as it does counter the speculation of some at the time that DD preferred Devers and that's why he held onto him over Moncada. Based on what he said, there's no evidence any Sale deal could have been done without Moncada or Benny.
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Aug 16, 2019 11:51:26 GMT -5
Teams do stupid stuff for Betts, such as keeping him until the end of his contract to try to win another WS. Only stupid if it doesn’t work. I’m 100% in the keep-him-for-another-run camp. I think if they want to, they can sign him after. I don’t think there will be enough teams driving the price to the extremes people are talking about. Relatedly, I don’t think you can get a return that isn’t at least a short term step back. That is, they don’t get a star and a top prospect in return.... the best they do would be package of great prospects (I don’t want to trade down for a very good player). I would far rather roll the dice next season with this core and an aging pitching staff than trade for prospects and look a couple years ahead when you will need almost an entirely new pitching staff.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Aug 16, 2019 11:57:25 GMT -5
Teams do stupid stuff for Betts, such as keeping him until the end of his contract to try to win another WS. Only stupid if it doesn’t work. I’m 100% in the keep-him-for-another-run camp. I think if they want to, they can sign him after. I don’t think there will be enough teams driving the price to the extremes people are talking about. Relatedly, I don’t think you can get a return that isn’t at least a short term step back. That is, they don’t get a star and a top prospect in return.... the best they do would be package of great prospects (I don’t want to trade down for a very good player). I would far rather roll the dice next season with this core and an aging pitching staff than trade for prospects and look a couple years ahead when you will need almost an entirely new pitching staff. I was actually being sarcastic when I said it. That's what they should do unless blown away, which I don't see happening for one year of control for anyone who absolutely must become a free agent. (if that is really true) One thing is absolutely certain. They would have to have a plan to replace Betts in 2020 if they were to trade him. And not some half-assed attempt either.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Aug 16, 2019 12:47:52 GMT -5
Interesting article on weei.com about Devers. Now we have the story from the horse's mouth. Dombrowski said that the White Sox wanted Devers in addition to Moncada and either Kopech or Benintendi in the Chris Sale trade. Dombrowski refused to make Devers part of the deal, so it was never Moncada or Devers. It was both that the White Sox wanted. Dombrowski walked away from the deal and eventually the White Sox relented offering to substitute Basabe and Diaz for Devers in the deal and that sealed it and obviously Dombrowski decided on Kopech being included in the deal over Benintendi, again, the right call there as well. I think Dombrowski was always super impressed with Devers' skills and loathe to part with him. actually if you read that article and the one it's referencing by Tomase, the White Sox insisted on either Moncada OR Benintendi as the headliner. So he didn't hold onto Devers over Moncada, as one of Benny/Moncada were musts from the White Sox perspective or it wouldn't get done. Once that was decided they were also interested in Devers of course but DD correctly thought that with Moncada and Kopech already a part of it, no one else could match that and so he was able to build the rest of the deal around lesser parts. It's interesting to hear it from DD directly, as it does counter the speculation of some at the time that DD preferred Devers and that's why he held onto him over Moncada. Based on what he said, there's no evidence any Sale deal could have been done without Moncada or Benny. I sped read at work so I mixed up the part about it being Moncada OR Benintendi (as opposed to Benintendi vs Kopech). But yeah, the main points I took away were that either Benintendi or Moncada was the guy the ChiSox had to have for the deal to have a chance of it happening. Kopech had to be part of the deal from the White Sox' standpoint. Makes sense. At the time Kopech was the #1 pitching prospect. Groome hadn't pitched much (still hasn't) and Espinoza had already been dealt. And the other part I got out of it was that the White Sox wanted Devers as the 3rd piece of the deal and that's where Dombrowski wisely drew the line in the sand. He figured he had the winning deal in his hand thinking that another team wasn't going to top his trade chips. If they had hopefully he would have walked away. I think he would have.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Aug 16, 2019 15:15:19 GMT -5
1) People want to keep Betts for his whole career, and trading him away obviously reduces (probably eliminates) the odds of that happening. 2) I still don't think it's a "safe bet" that you can get a sufficient return in a trade. Yes, the Goldschmidt trade happened, there's a few other recent examples, I'm not saying it's impossible. That doesn't mean it's likely. Again, this is not even close to how Atlanta has been operating. They're going to offer those guys below-market extensions, not trade them for players who they'll actually have to pay. 1). You miss the whole point, it's if we offer him our best offer and he rejects it like reports say we plan on doing this off season. He wants an contract our owner isn't willing to give. Your response to that was it was still better to keep him for one year even if you lose him for nothing. My point is losing a guy like Betts for nothing is crazy and not worth one slightly better chance at another title. If you can sign him or are willing to, then sign him. 2). Do you have any examples where they couldn't get good returns for a guy like Betts? You have this belief in your head that Baseball has changed. Teams are crazy smart now and won't make risky trades, but we have a ton of them made in the last year. Nevermind Betts is a different caliber then all of them. Like Goldschmidt was five years older and still had basically the same bwar Betts has now. Betts is the type of player teams do stupid stuff for. It only takes one team. 1. Even if he doesn't take the Red Sox best offer this offseason, that doesn't mean the Red Sox are definitely going to be outbid in free agency. I would go as far as to say that the Red Sox re-signing Betts in free agency may be the most likely of all the possible scenarios. He's worth the most to them and the market may well reflect that. 2. "You have this belief in your head that Baseball has changed." I mean... isn't that all we've been talking about for the last two off-seasons? I'm hardly the only one who's picked up on this. Baseball has changed to the extent that most people think we're headed for another strike. This is not some pet theory of my own creation. 3. Do I have examples of trades that didn't get made? I mean... yeah, every good player who made it to free agency without getting traded. Of which there are several, I believe. 4. I'm sure it will fall on deaf ears, but let me again, again, AGAIN state that my contention isn't that a Betts trade is impossible, it is that it is not easy.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Aug 17, 2019 6:02:15 GMT -5
1). You miss the whole point, it's if we offer him our best offer and he rejects it like reports say we plan on doing this off season. He wants an contract our owner isn't willing to give. Your response to that was it was still better to keep him for one year even if you lose him for nothing. My point is losing a guy like Betts for nothing is crazy and not worth one slightly better chance at another title. If you can sign him or are willing to, then sign him. 2). Do you have any examples where they couldn't get good returns for a guy like Betts? You have this belief in your head that Baseball has changed. Teams are crazy smart now and won't make risky trades, but we have a ton of them made in the last year. Nevermind Betts is a different caliber then all of them. Like Goldschmidt was five years older and still had basically the same bwar Betts has now. Betts is the type of player teams do stupid stuff for. It only takes one team. 1. Even if he doesn't take the Red Sox best offer this offseason, that doesn't mean the Red Sox are definitely going to be outbid in free agency. I would go as far as to say that the Red Sox re-signing Betts in free agency may be the most likely of all the possible scenarios. He's worth the most to them and the market may well reflect that. He's worth most to everybody. Betts' ability to play CF for the first 3-4 years of a megacontract gives any team extra value on the front end. There are a ton of teams with money now laying around. The Blue Jays for example have less than 20 million AAV dollars comitted past 2020. The White Sox just offered 250 million to a worse player in Machado. The Braves were once a mid market team a decade ago and don't have a ton of long term dollars comitted. I wouldn't say that the Red Sox have the best chance. When you're betting with one team against the entire field, you normally take the field. Unless you're the one exception in the New England Patriots in the AFC Championship game lol.
|
|
|
Post by ryan24 on Aug 17, 2019 8:53:13 GMT -5
Well now we have beat this extension to death. And came up with we agree to disagree. No one knows what Mookie wants except Mookie. No one knows how much Dave and John will pay. No one knows what the trade market is for Mookie. We all seem to agree that we will not get equal value back right away for Mookie. We agree to disagree on whether the goal is to keep Mookie regardless of the return and go for the WS. Case closed.
|
|
|
Post by ryan24 on Aug 17, 2019 8:53:58 GMT -5
Maybe we should start a thread on whether we think Mookie is a HOF player?
|
|
|
Post by ryan24 on Aug 17, 2019 8:58:48 GMT -5
It appears that JBJ is the next player up for extension. Is he part of the core? If so what should his market be? Keep him for next year and wait for Duran to come up? If we lose Mookie does that mean we should keep him because we do not want to lose both the CF and the RF in the same year? What does everyone think?
|
|
|
Post by ryan24 on Aug 17, 2019 9:00:42 GMT -5
How soon is EROD up for extension? Is he part of the core?
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Aug 17, 2019 9:16:32 GMT -5
It appears that JBJ is the next player up for extension. Is he part of the core? If so what should his market be? Keep him for next year and wait for Duran to come up? If we lose Mookie does that mean we should keep him because we do not want to lose both the CF and the RF in the same year? What does everyone think? It's kind of a slam dunk as far as extending JBJ goes. No. The guy's hitting .220 and hasn't even gotten to his 30th birthday yet. It's not going to get better offensively for him as he ages and it's not like defense improves as a player ages. They have plenty of other players to spend money on. The bigger question re: JBJ is whether they trade him this offseason. Doubtful they do, but it's not out of the realm of possibility. CF is likely Duran's come 2021 and Jimenez within a year or two later might be going after that job. Or they get somebody else, but it's highly doubtful you see JBJ in CF come 2021 and beyond.
|
|
|
Post by ryan24 on Aug 17, 2019 9:32:09 GMT -5
It appears that JBJ is the next player up for extension. Is he part of the core? If so what should his market be? Keep him for next year and wait for Duran to come up? If we lose Mookie does that mean we should keep him because we do not want to lose both the CF and the RF in the same year? What does everyone think? It's kind of a slam dunk as far as extending JBJ goes. No. The guy's hitting .220 and hasn't even gotten to his 30th birthday yet. It's not going to get better offensively for him as he ages and it's not like defense improves as a player ages. They have plenty of other players to spend money on. The bigger question re: JBJ is whether they trade him this offseason. Doubtful they do, but it's not out of the realm of possibility. CF is likely Duran's come 2021 and Jimenez within a year or two later might be going after that job. Or they get somebody else, but it's highly doubtful you see JBJ in CF come 2021 and beyond. So JBJ is not part of the core? And we move to the next core extension player.
|
|
|
Post by ryan24 on Aug 17, 2019 10:06:50 GMT -5
Who is the next core extension player?
|
|
|
Post by voiceofreason on Aug 17, 2019 10:35:25 GMT -5
Trade Mookie for the moon then overwhelm him with a big contract during FA so he comes back. That wasn't hard, this baseball stuff is easy.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Aug 17, 2019 10:57:37 GMT -5
1). You miss the whole point, it's if we offer him our best offer and he rejects it like reports say we plan on doing this off season. He wants an contract our owner isn't willing to give. Your response to that was it was still better to keep him for one year even if you lose him for nothing. My point is losing a guy like Betts for nothing is crazy and not worth one slightly better chance at another title. If you can sign him or are willing to, then sign him. 2). Do you have any examples where they couldn't get good returns for a guy like Betts? You have this belief in your head that Baseball has changed. Teams are crazy smart now and won't make risky trades, but we have a ton of them made in the last year. Nevermind Betts is a different caliber then all of them. Like Goldschmidt was five years older and still had basically the same bwar Betts has now. Betts is the type of player teams do stupid stuff for. It only takes one team. 1. Even if he doesn't take the Red Sox best offer this offseason, that doesn't mean the Red Sox are definitely going to be outbid in free agency. I would go as far as to say that the Red Sox re-signing Betts in free agency may be the most likely of all the possible scenarios. He's worth the most to them and the market may well reflect that. 2. "You have this belief in your head that Baseball has changed." I mean... isn't that all we've been talking about for the last two off-seasons? I'm hardly the only one who's picked up on this. Baseball has changed to the extent that most people think we're headed for another strike. This is not some pet theory of my own creation. 3. Do I have examples of trades that didn't get made? I mean... yeah, every good player who made it to free agency without getting traded. Of which there are several, I believe. 4. I'm sure it will fall on deaf ears, but let me again, again, AGAIN state that my contention isn't that a Betts trade is impossible, it is that it is not easy. 1). You base this on what? John Henry's history of giving out mega deals? I'll never call him cheap, but he's stayed away from deals like that. Now we are talking about a deal that could be 10 to 13 years, heck I wouldn't be surprised if he got 15 years on the open market if Harper got 13 even though he's older. No one has a clue what Henry will do, but him and my point is he will know by this off-season if he's willing to even get in the ballpark of what Betts wants, with the years being the big factor in my opinion. I was trying to have a discussion based on the article that was posted, which basically said we'll give him our best offer and if we can't get a deal done, we'll look at trading him. That article paints a much different picture than the one you'd like to see play out, not that a blame you. We all want to keep Betts, yet at some point we need to also discuss how long is too long for a guy who's value isn't just his bat. A seven year deal could have a few bad years, a 13 year deal could be like Pujol's. Point being we'll know this off-season depending on what they offer Betts. 2). Teams cutting spending, some teams not even spending on the free agent market. Yet last off-season showed the elite guys will get paid. Just look at the contracts and extensions signed. It's the mid-range and lower level guys that are getting hurt. It also means most teams have money to burn, because their books are clear now. Something you haven't seen a ton of in the past. The Yankees and Dodgers have hundreds of millions per year they could spend if they wanted too and the Dodgers went after Harper. If anything this market scares me more than most, because so many teams have so much money to spend and we know for a fact they will all try and make a splash at some point. You love to throw around it's not the Braves way to give out big deals and that is 100% true, yet the same thing was true for the Padres, until they did. 3). I was talking about teams wanting to trade guys like Betts and not being able to because you don't think teams will trade any value for them. Even Harper in a down year could have been traded at the deadline for what was described as a very good package and I'm sure the owner is now kicking himself for not doing it. We won't even get a first round pick if he leaves like so many other teams would. You basically get nothing. 4). What trades for elite players are easy? That's different than when we started and you kept saying I don't see a team that will do it or teams won't offer you anything etc. because Baseball has changed. You put a player like Betts on the market, espically with this free agent class and your going to get so many offers it will blow your mind. Now sure finding the right one won't be easy. Yet I'm on the opposite side of this than you, the chances you can't get a good offer a very slim. Like how many times does a young player, who's basically been the second best player in Baseball the last five years hit the trade market? I love Betts, but let's not be Washington either. They did what we plan on doing, made their best offer and Harper turned it down. Kept him and went for it, still had a chance to get good value and still didn't trade him. Then surprise the market gave him more than Washington was willing to spend. It tends to do that for elite guys, espically guys that are young.
|
|
|