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.
2020 Vision: Position Players
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Sept 11, 2019 12:48:06 GMT -5
The Dodgers sure seem like a team that could do something crazy. Seven straight division titles, no Championships with those owners and all the resources they have used. How could anyone to surprised if they traded for and signed Betts? The only thing on their minds has to be how do we take that final step. On paper Betts is that guy. Like don't give me full value type crap. You're talking about an upgrade that should double your war projections at a position. You can likely go from 4 to 8 war projections if Betts is playing CF next year. Where else can they get an upgrade like that? Bullpen arms are so up and down that it's almost impossible to project that type of upgrade. Yet I'd sell them on and include Workman to increase the return.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Sept 11, 2019 17:19:47 GMT -5
The Dodgers sure seem like a team that could do something crazy. Seven straight division titles, no Championships with those owners and all the resources they have used. How could anyone to surprised if they traded for and signed Betts? The only thing on their minds has to be how do we take that final step. On paper Betts is that guy. Like don't give me full value type crap. You're talking about an upgrade that should double your war projections at a position. You can likely go from 4 to 8 war projections if Betts is playing CF next year. Where else can they get an upgrade like that? Bullpen arms are so up and down that it's almost impossible to project that type of upgrade. Yet I'd sell them on and include Workman to increase the return. That's how they run their team.
|
|
|
Post by SALNotes on Sept 11, 2019 19:52:09 GMT -5
If you bring Mookie back and try for one more run and it's not working, flipping him at the deadline (especially if we pick up the remaining $$$) could net as big a return as flipping him this Winter.
Imagine if an NL Central team this year had picked up Mookie at the deadline, he could swing a race.
|
|
|
Post by soxjim on Sept 11, 2019 21:32:36 GMT -5
You didn't look to see who the Dodgers have in the OF, right?
They have a guy who's a great defensive RF and a good one in CF, and can hit a little, named Cody Bellinger.
They have a 23 y/o rookie, Alex Verdugo, who's a very good defensive CF and is having a 5.4 / 3.8 (bWAR / fWAR) season per 150 games.
They have A.J. Pollock, who had always been a plus defensive CF and a 3.0-3.5 WAR kind of guy, who's having a terrible defensive year and can, I think, be expected to bounce back. He's signed for 3 more years at $13.75M.
And they have Joc Pederson, strictly a platoon guy but so good in that role (including great LF defense) that he can give you close to 3 WAR in it.
They're not going to trade Verdugo, so to make room for Mookie, they'd have to trade Pollock, and with the year he's having, they'd likely have to eat a good chunk of his salary (because opposing GM's will be cautious and skeptical). And he's their fourth OFer now.
Mookie would be taking PT away from Verdugo and Peterson. It might be a 4 WAR upgrade but it could easily be 3 (and a draft pick if they don't re-sign him), for prospects sufficient to pry him away from us and not have the fans go nuts, for $25M, less what they can get another team to pay Pollock. It's hard to see this making sense for both clubs.
Here's the secret: if you're already good enough that replacing a so-so player with Mookie would turn you from a solid contender to a favorite (or a favorite to a super-favorite), you probably already have all good players in your OF. And that decreases the marginal value of a Mookie upgrade quite a bit.
Whereas the Red Sox without Mookie actually fit the description of a team that would be willing to trade for him, because they would get full value. And we can just keep him!
We can agree to disagree for most of what you said. Its like saying where do I put Larry Bird while I have LeBron and Durant? If you are the Dodgers and don't win-- other than Bellinger - who else would you say no to giving up for Mookie who automatically gives you the number 1 hitting team in all of baseball? With respect to Pollack, Verdugo and Peterson-- you trade one of these guys - it doesn't have to be to the Sox-- to get a guy who is one of the superstars in baseball if you are intent on winning a championship (if they don't win this year. IMO all bets are off if they win it all.). Maybe they will keep going the same route. And maybe they do win it all. But the issue becomes after a while - "I want to win it all!" Nothing is guaranteed. None of the guys you just mentioned other than Bellinger had a high obp. Mookie hitting in front of Bellinger and Muncy and as long as Turner is producing -- your offense becomes frightening. -- And with their pitching? Won't the Dodgers be favored to win if they trade for Mookie and trade a "good" package? I don't know "specifically" what is considered good but Mookie would make them frightening good. And you can stick Bellinger at 1st. "The horror" that they might have to break up their OF if they don't win it all this year in order to "accommodate" Mookie. Its easy for us to say - why can't the Dodgers just keep being patient as they always are? The Sox have won 4 titles in 15 years. I'm not saying Dodgers would do it-- just offered if they don't win this year it is 21 years going on 22 without a title. At some point not winning a championship but being so close has to get old. But I agree- they don't have to. How long will they being content knowing they have such great "value" but still have no championships to show for it? I hate to say this but as of right now it looks like the Yanks have found their 2nd starter in Paxson. With the Yanks deep bench for next year they can trade for a big time starter too. If and ofc it is a BIG IF-- if the Yanks (or Astros) move ahead or maintain being stronger while the Dodgers don't win it all yet again -- when do you say "screw this" - I'm getting a monster stud to compliment Bellinger? Betts would make Muncy, Turner and Bellinger much more dangerous, wouldn't he? A guy that gets on base like Betts and the baserunner that he is would be awesome. But yes -- they might be content doing what they're doing and feel eventually they will knock the door down. Maybe the Dodgers need DD? j/k
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Sept 12, 2019 6:17:52 GMT -5
Sure, the Dodgers didn't change their approach whatsoever after last year, but surely the seventh failure to win a World Series will instantly mold them into the exact shape that's most convenient for the Red Sox.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Sept 12, 2019 11:25:24 GMT -5
There's nothing more annoying than counting on other teams' stupidity to benefit your team.
|
|
|
Post by wcsoxfan on Sept 12, 2019 14:35:37 GMT -5
There's nothing more annoying than counting on other teams' stupidity to benefit your team. On the other hand, it has worked before...
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Sept 12, 2019 17:25:15 GMT -5
There's nothing more annoying than counting on other teams' stupidity to benefit your team. On the other hand, it has worked before... It cannot be expected to happen as a course of strategy.
|
|
|
Post by larrycook on Sept 12, 2019 20:30:48 GMT -5
My attitude is that the question of the health of the rotation is the issue, and the most important issue that no one can't derive from. Not performance. I'm not playing Russian roulette on this rotation and risking everything for one year. Chris Sale's medium projection shouldn't be 0 wins next year, but it *could* be with the questions of the elbow. Eovaldi is always hurt. Price is coming off a injury right now and is currently topping out at 90 mph again. Porcello is gone. You don't have a 5th starter. Mata is your only pitching depth at the moment. Hello, hello!! Thanks for blocking me, I'll agree to disagree from here because you don't see it from my side. Now Price is back on the IL. That's two starting pitchers who are going to end the year on the IL most likely and people want to keep Mookie for one year and go for it in 2020 knowing this? I am 100 percent for keeping Betts in Boston next season. He is a top talent in the league and going into a contract year, he should put up monster numbers. His career numbers seem to ride the picket fence, up in year one and a bit less in year two, then back up in year three.
|
|
|
Post by iakovos11 on Sept 12, 2019 20:54:28 GMT -5
From the Keith Law Chat today ->> meadowparty.com/blog/2019/09/12/klawchat-9-12-19/ Richard: Does JD Martinez opt out this year and if so, who signs him? Seems like his only serious suitors would be the Rangers, White Sox, and Blue Jays. Keith Law: I don’t think so, because I don’t think the White Sox or Jays would bid on him at a level that would make opting out the right move. Jason: You are the new Red Sox GM. What are you doing with Mookie Betts? Keith Law: Throwing large piles of money at him.
|
|
|
Post by soxjim on Sept 12, 2019 21:43:24 GMT -5
Sure, the Dodgers didn't change their approach whatsoever after last year, but surely the seventh failure to win a World Series will instantly mold them into the exact shape that's most convenient for the Red Sox. If you want to look at it "most convenient for Red Sox fans" that's fine. But wouldn't it be equally "convenient" for the Dodgers to finally win a championship after such a long drought? I've been wrong in that I was saying 21 year if they don't win this year - yet it will actually be 31. I'm sure you can recall all the negativity last year on here even as they were winning so often and SOx have laos won 3 in 14 before last year. Now the dodgers haven't won it all in so long -- maybe they will look for a trade that will be "convenient" for them by getting a guy that will help lead them to a championship. A trade that so good for both. That would be terrifically convenient for both. Nothing wrong with that. I just think sometimes some Sox fans get immune to winning titles. I;m sure there are a lot of Dodger Blue who aren't so happy being a bridesmaid for so long.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Sept 12, 2019 22:00:29 GMT -5
Sure, the Dodgers didn't change their approach whatsoever after last year, but surely the seventh failure to win a World Series will instantly mold them into the exact shape that's most convenient for the Red Sox. If you want to look at it "most convenient for Red Sox fans" that's fine. But wouldn't it be equally "convenient" for the Dodgers to finally win a championship after such a long drought? I've been wrong in that I was saying 21 year if they don't win this year - yet it will actually be 31. I'm sure you can recall all the negativity last year on here even as they were winning so often and SOx have laos won 3 in 14 before last year. Now the dodgers haven't won it all in so long -- maybe they will look for a trade that will be "convenient" for them by getting a guy that will help lead them to a championship. A trade that so good for both. That would be terrifically convenient for both. Nothing wrong with that. I just think sometimes some Sox fans get immune to winning titles. I;m sure there are a lot of Dodger Blue who aren't so happy being a bridesmaid for so long. The Dodgers are already going to win that division next year. And Betts, for all his virtues, is not a magical talisman who causes you to win postseason series. It's not a trade they need to make.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Sept 12, 2019 22:16:15 GMT -5
I expect the National League East to be the most active go for it division this coming off-season.
|
|
redsox04071318champs
Veteran
Always hoping to make my handle even longer...
Posts: 15,645
Member is Online
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Sept 12, 2019 22:31:12 GMT -5
If you want to look at it "most convenient for Red Sox fans" that's fine. But wouldn't it be equally "convenient" for the Dodgers to finally win a championship after such a long drought? I've been wrong in that I was saying 21 year if they don't win this year - yet it will actually be 31. I'm sure you can recall all the negativity last year on here even as they were winning so often and SOx have laos won 3 in 14 before last year. Now the dodgers haven't won it all in so long -- maybe they will look for a trade that will be "convenient" for them by getting a guy that will help lead them to a championship. A trade that so good for both. That would be terrifically convenient for both. Nothing wrong with that. I just think sometimes some Sox fans get immune to winning titles. I;m sure there are a lot of Dodger Blue who aren't so happy being a bridesmaid for so long. The Dodgers are already going to win that division next year. And Betts, for all his virtues, is not a magical talisman who causes you to win postseason series. It's not a trade they need to make. No he isn't, but that doesn't mean that the Dodgers don't try to upgrade in their OF. Not only does he improve their chances in 2020 but if they sign him long-term that could improve their chances of sustaining a Braves-like streak of division titles thus giving them more chances to win the elusive World Series. And who knows - perhaps in one of those post-seasons he busts loose the way David Price finally did and impacts that series? Talented players usually do break through at some point. And by trading for Betts, it gives Mookie a chance to see what LA is like and if he likes it, perhaps it gives the Dodgers the edge if the free agent bidding is close. There's not too many players in the game with Betts' skills. The Dodgers don't have to give up their whole farm system to rent him for a year but one top prospect and one really good player who would be displaced by Betts might make sense for them and the Red Sox.
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Sept 12, 2019 23:43:14 GMT -5
I think it is totally insane to consider trading Betts. Players like him only come along once in a generation. Law is correct. The Sox should spend whatever it takes to keep him.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Sept 13, 2019 7:36:53 GMT -5
The Dodgers are already going to win that division next year. And Betts, for all his virtues, is not a magical talisman who causes you to win postseason series. It's not a trade they need to make. No he isn't, but that doesn't mean that the Dodgers don't try to upgrade in their OF. Not only does he improve their chances in 2020 but if they sign him long-term that could improve their chances of sustaining a Braves-like streak of division titles thus giving them more chances to win the elusive World Series. And who knows - perhaps in one of those post-seasons he busts loose the way David Price finally did and impacts that series? Talented players usually do break through at some point. And by trading for Betts, it gives Mookie a chance to see what LA is like and if he likes it, perhaps it gives the Dodgers the edge if the free agent bidding is close. There's not too many players in the game with Betts' skills. The Dodgers don't have to give up their whole farm system to rent him for a year but one top prospect and one really good player who would be displaced by Betts might make sense for them and the Red Sox. Wow, that's great. The Red Sox should sign a guy like that. By the way, the Dodgers are already set up for a Braves-like streak of division titles, specifically as a result of their refusal to make short term moves like this! This team was content to use Julio Urias, a 23 year old phenom slinging 97 from the left side, as basically a Brian Johnson swingman type. If they were remotely interested in a "go for it" move, that guy would be gone, as would a half a dozen other qualified MLB starters that they keep on the bench.
|
|
redsox04071318champs
Veteran
Always hoping to make my handle even longer...
Posts: 15,645
Member is Online
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Sept 13, 2019 8:20:05 GMT -5
No he isn't, but that doesn't mean that the Dodgers don't try to upgrade in their OF. Not only does he improve their chances in 2020 but if they sign him long-term that could improve their chances of sustaining a Braves-like streak of division titles thus giving them more chances to win the elusive World Series. And who knows - perhaps in one of those post-seasons he busts loose the way David Price finally did and impacts that series? Talented players usually do break through at some point. And by trading for Betts, it gives Mookie a chance to see what LA is like and if he likes it, perhaps it gives the Dodgers the edge if the free agent bidding is close. There's not too many players in the game with Betts' skills. The Dodgers don't have to give up their whole farm system to rent him for a year but one top prospect and one really good player who would be displaced by Betts might make sense for them and the Red Sox. Wow, that's great. The Red Sox should sign a guy like that. By the way, the Dodgers are already set up for a Braves-like streak of division titles, specifically as a result of their refusal to make short term moves like this! This team was content to use Julio Urias, a 23 year old phenom slinging 97 from the left side, as basically a Brian Johnson swingman type. If they were remotely interested in a "go for it" move, that guy would be gone, as would a half a dozen other qualified MLB starters that they keep on the bench. It wouldn't be a short-term move. It would be an investment to a long-term move that a team with deep pockets can make. You act like players like Mookie grow on trees. They don't. He's one of the top 5 players in the game. Say it cost them a Verdugo and a May, do you really think that would kill that team - and let's say the Sox balance that out a little with a Workman. It's not a 1 year deal. The Dodgers would do so in order to expose Mookie to what it's like to be a Dodger and them show him the money. And yes, he should be a guy the Sox sign, but will they? They have other investments that they're tied into, apparently want to duck under the luxury tax limit sooner than later, and are of the mind that Mookie probably wants Trout-like money or will go to free agency even if the Sox give Mookie their version of a Godfather offer. If the Sox are convinced that Mookie isn't sticking around beyond 2020, they're likely going to trade him. I'd prefer they offer him something like 10 years $335 or something like that, but even that might not get him signed - and of course that's an easy number to throw out - it's not my money, but that offer is likely a competing offer because somebody might offer 11 years or do a higher annual $ figure or overall package. In other words if Mookie gets to free agency it's far from a guarantee that he signs with the Sox, so the Sox probably don't want to risk that he walks away for a 4th round pick.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Sept 13, 2019 8:23:47 GMT -5
If the Dodgers like Mookie Betts shouldn't they wait until he becomes a free agent and then just sign him without giving anyone up?
|
|
redsox04071318champs
Veteran
Always hoping to make my handle even longer...
Posts: 15,645
Member is Online
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Sept 13, 2019 8:28:55 GMT -5
If the Dodgers like Mookie Betts shouldn't they wait until he becomes a free agent and then just sign him without giving anyone up? Sometimes teams like to get players in to experience what it's like. The Cardinals did that with Mark McGwire. I guess they could have waited to sign him, but instead they traded for him mid-season to expose him to St. Louis.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Sept 13, 2019 8:41:18 GMT -5
You on board with trading Mookie Betts for Eric Ludwick, T.J. Mathews, and Blake Stein?
If the Dodgers can pull off Mookie Betts for a return that I'd be furious about then they should trade for him, yes.
EDIT: Also the different with McGwire was that the A's weren't going to be able to "afford" to resign him and they were out of contention. At that point it becomes a matter of getting a better return than draft pick compensation.
|
|
|
Post by huskies15 on Sept 13, 2019 9:17:45 GMT -5
Shifting things a bit here, Bennintendi has a pretty important offseason/next season coming up. The guy should be a much larger factor for this team right now but he has completely plateaued/regressed.
Before last season, I thought he had easy improvements to make to get to an all star level but since then he has been merely an average/slightly above player. Not sure how to project him now and I'm not really sure what his value is around the league as a guy who seems to have fallen behind this league wide power surge.
|
|
redsox04071318champs
Veteran
Always hoping to make my handle even longer...
Posts: 15,645
Member is Online
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Sept 13, 2019 9:59:09 GMT -5
You on board with trading Mookie Betts for Eric Ludwick, T.J. Mathews, and Blake Stein? If the Dodgers can pull off Mookie Betts for a return that I'd be furious about then they should trade for him, yes. EDIT: Also the different with McGwire was that the A's weren't going to be able to "afford" to resign him and they were out of contention. At that point it becomes a matter of getting a better return than draft pick compensation. No, I'm not on-board for that measly a return, no. I don't want him traded, period, frankly, but the Sox are soon going to be in a position where they wonder if they'll be able to "afford" to resign him. It'll be interesting to see what their godfather offer is and if it's enough to convince Mookie not to go to free agency. My gut feel is that he's going to free agency no matter what the Red Sox offer him, and if that's the case, he's likely dealt this winter unless the return is in the vicinity of the McGwire return, which I doubt. They'd get something for Mookie - just not nearly enough for what we'd value him at.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Sept 13, 2019 11:53:42 GMT -5
If the Dodgers like Mookie Betts shouldn't they wait until he becomes a free agent and then just sign him without giving anyone up? Again, they're going to win the division next year without him! The incentive for them is literally just next year's playoff run, and theoretically a chance to "audition" Betts, which seems like not that big an advantage given how crystal clear Mookie has been about his intention to hit free agency.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Sept 13, 2019 11:54:42 GMT -5
While I certainly get not wanting to even talk trade with Betts we are now past it being just an ten percent maybe. The Red Sox have started the PR machine about needing to reduce payroll and for a second time trading Betts. It's what they do, rather smart. You get pissed now, by the time it happens you already expected it or if they do sign him by some miracle it's like we got a gift.
You can look at any team and come up with a ton of reasons why it doesn't make sense to trade a lot for one year of a player. Yet versus the field of every team? You will get offers that will surprise you. So trying to slam every idea that people come up with because you don't want to move Betts seems way over the top.
Why does any team trade for a guy with one year left on his deal? Why did the Cardinals trade for Goldy? Why did they trade a rather big package for him?
Let's have some real debates about Betts without the bashing certain posters feel they have to give. Nothing more annoying then reading post after post how Betts won't fetch much in trade or he's not the type of guy that helps teams win playoff series. Like if Betts isn't the type of guy that could take the Dodgers to another level we shouldn't be thinking about signing him. You give him 350 million because he's a great player that can take over games and series. A guy that can change your lineup.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Sept 13, 2019 12:03:21 GMT -5
I personally think the Red Sox will explore trading Price and JDM (who I will bet does not opt-out), but not Mookie.
|
|
|