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.
A Mookie Betts Trade Return
dd
Veteran
Posts: 979
|
Post by dd on Nov 25, 2019 17:28:43 GMT -5
Maybe I've been reading too much philosophy of late, but I believe the following two propositions are independent and compatible: P1. Marcus Lynn Betts very much wants to get as much money as possible as a free agent a year from now.
P2. Marcus Lynn Betts very much wants to play his entire career with the Boston Red Sox. Given P1, you would be a fool to say anything that would suggest the truth of P2. Which is why it doesn't seem to be true.
However, if you apply some basic reasoning, P2 seems likely to be true.
- Betts is very close to a number of his teammates (source: Speier's book)
- The Red Sox, given their current roster strength and their financial resources, project to be one of the handful of most competitive teams in baseball, especially if Betts is a team member
- Boston is widely regarded as one of the best places to play (if not the best) in terms of fan passion, appreciation and knowledge
- Fenway Park is ideally suited for Bett's talents, with its huge RF that he doesn't often hit baseballs towards
- All things being equal, human beings prefer to remain in a situation they like rather than risk a move to an unfamiliar situation
I don't see a reason why they can't re-sign him a year from now. So the question comes down to trading either Betts or Martinez (along with JBJ) to get under the tax limit. JDM, as I've discussed earlier, is also a player whom you can likely re-sign in a year. (I don't think eating part of Price's contract is viable. Not enough $ saved, and too big a hole opens up. You have to wait a year on the health of all of the Big Hurt Three. Roll the dice on comebacks.)
If you could get a good RF as part of the return for Betts, that may well be the better option. You have about $6M more to spend to upgrade other positions, and you don't have to add a fourth position player to the lineup (in addition to 1B, 2B, and CF). Does that upgrade more than compensate for the 1-year WAR difference between Mookie and JDM? If the OF in question has more than a year of control, that's almost certain. I'm with those who can't see why the Dodgers would trade Verdugo for Betts, even 1-for-1. He's been a 5.0 bWAR player per 650 PA at ages 22 and 23. You can regress that a lot to the mean and still have a first division starter -- and he has 5 years of control. Getting Verdugo and then signing Betts a year later (one of them plays CF, replacing the stopgap solution) would be an absolute steal. Of course, if Betts leads the Dodgers to their long-elusive WS title, they'll probably think it's worth it, and maybe that's the way they're thinking.
The wild card in this calculus is whether teams value JDM's reputation as a second hitting coach. He has a lot more value as a one-year rental if a team believes he has a chance to permanently change a clubhouse culture regarding hitting preparation and approach, and/or positively influence a young core of position players.
I have no idea if you're right, Eric, but I desperately want you to be right!
|
|
|
Post by larrycook on Nov 25, 2019 21:44:41 GMT -5
Any trade with the dodgers must include may. His stuff is amazing. Better than anybody in our pipeline. I would prefer we not trade a homegrown players, especially Betts! Due to his pending free agent status, he could have a monster season! Ideally the two contracts we need to unload are Martinez and price. If we could somehow get gray from Colorado this offseason, I think he could excel in Fenway. I’d love to put something together for Gray. What about a deal centered around Chavis? I think Colorado is looking for pitching.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Nov 26, 2019 0:36:49 GMT -5
I know it's a dream of some on here, but according to what I saw on MLBtraderumors.com the Rockies aren't looking to move Jon Gray in a trade.
Rockies Reportedly Do Not Intend To Trade Jon Gray By Jeff Todd and Anthony Franco | November 25, 2019 at 9:33pm CDT
While there has been some early chatter surrounding Rockies righty Jon Gray, that doesn’t mean we’re on the cusp of a major swap. Rather, per MLB.com’s Thomas Harding, the Rox are leaving rival organizations with the expectation that Gray will remain in Colorado.
|
|
|
Post by grandsalami on Nov 26, 2019 10:41:26 GMT -5
He has apparently unfollowed the Sox on Instagram and Twitter
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Nov 26, 2019 11:22:15 GMT -5
Eric what is your take on the park adjustments Baseball Reference made this year?
I asked because it seems like the Red Sox hitters were hurt and the pitchers were really helped. Look at ERods huge bwar or Porcello's.
Yet the Dodgers were the opposite, the hitters were really helped and the pitchers were really hurt. I have a hard time understanding Verdugo's 3.1 bwar vs. Walker Buehlers 2.2 bwar for example. Nevermind comparing ERod vs. Buehler who is a darn good pitcher.
It seems the park effects were massive this year and a little crazy.
|
|
|
Post by Canseco on Nov 26, 2019 12:47:45 GMT -5
He has apparently unfollowed the Sox on Instagram and Twitter Who has?
|
|
mobaz
Veteran
Posts: 2,771
|
Post by mobaz on Nov 26, 2019 12:55:13 GMT -5
Don't worry, he (Mookie) refollowed, per Speier. Crisis averted.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Nov 26, 2019 13:41:53 GMT -5
Don't worry, he (Mookie) refollowed, per Speier. Crisis averted. Oh good, it must mean that he and the Red Sox have agreed to a 12 year $360 million deal.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,926
|
Post by ericmvan on Nov 27, 2019 1:43:19 GMT -5
Eric what is your take on the park adjustments Baseball Reference made this year? I asked because it seems like the Red Sox hitters were hurt and the pitchers were really helped. Look at ERods huge bwar or Porcello's. Yet the Dodgers were the opposite, the hitters were really helped and the pitchers were really hurt. I have a hard time understanding Verdugo's 3.1 bwar vs. Walker Buehlers 2.2 bwar for example. Nevermind comparing ERod vs. Buehler who is a darn good pitcher. It seems the park effects were massive this year and a little crazy. B-ref has the same park factor for Fenway this year as always: 104 or 105 (where 100 favors hitters).
Dodger Stadium was a little bit less of a pitcher's park this year: 98 versus 96 measured over 3 years.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Nov 27, 2019 9:32:58 GMT -5
It's also worth noting that 14% of the runs Buehler allowed this year went as unearned. A 3.80 RAA in less impressive than a 3.26 ERA, especially when doing the Dodgers Stadium thing, leaving him only only 23 runs above replacement level (which is still quite good, of course, as it means he was worth about one run above replacement every eight innings). Verdugo was 20 runs above replacement as a hitter - the rest of his value came from his defense, which checks out.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Nov 27, 2019 9:43:18 GMT -5
Sometimes, FIP makes a lot more sense than RAA, which is why I prefer fWAR for starting pitchers. Buehler had a 5 fWAR season, which seems like a better description of his performance.
Also, I hate b-ref's layout. I want to see WAR in the top section at the far right for every player like on fangraphs instead of scrolling down one section and hunting for the right WAR column. And it gets harder to find when the player has a long career. It's the stat that I bet is looked up more than any other. Make it the easiest stat to see! I realize that they have career and last season WAR at the top, but I'm talking about all seasons.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Nov 27, 2019 9:56:29 GMT -5
Yeah, like I've often said, over one season you have to take a case-by-case basis. If there's some reason a pitcher out-performed or under-performer his FIP then RAA usually captures that. In Buehler's case, it looks like really just a sequencing thing, which is probably bad luck until I see otherwise. I'll take the guy with that stuff and a 1.8 BB/9 any day. The question, though, was specifically about bWAR's park effects. And I don't think park effects is the reason why Buehler's bWAR seems on the low side, it's just that his RAA wasn't particularly great this year.
|
|
|
Post by kingstephanos on Dec 16, 2019 19:16:47 GMT -5
Xander was 19th on the Fangraphs trade value rankings this year in no small part due to his contract. The only true SS ahead of him were Tatis at 2 (5 years of team control) and Lindor at 13 (2 arb years left). There's no chance they'd get adequate value in return for him, a true Role 7 player signed to a team-friendly deal for at least 3 more years. Betts you only even consider trading because he's on a one-year deal and you might lose him, but it's becoming clear he's probably not moving for the same reason - they're not going to get adequate value in return for losing a year of him (plus the draft pick). I'm genuinely curious what makes you think Betts is less likely to be traded (paraphrasing)? I am by no means suggesting his departure is immanent, but the adage 'better to trade a player a year early, than a year late' could be apropos in this situation as he's made his intent to hit free agency clear on numerous occasions. www.google.com/amp/s/www.nbcsports.com/boston/red-sox/mookie-betts-doesnt-expect-sign-contract-extension-red-sox%3famp
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Dec 17, 2019 11:01:53 GMT -5
Xander was 19th on the Fangraphs trade value rankings this year in no small part due to his contract. The only true SS ahead of him were Tatis at 2 (5 years of team control) and Lindor at 13 (2 arb years left). There's no chance they'd get adequate value in return for him, a true Role 7 player signed to a team-friendly deal for at least 3 more years. Betts you only even consider trading because he's on a one-year deal and you might lose him, but it's becoming clear he's probably not moving for the same reason - they're not going to get adequate value in return for losing a year of him (plus the draft pick). I'm genuinely curious what makes you think Betts is less likely to be traded (paraphrasing)? I am by no means suggesting his departure is immanent, but the adage 'better to trade a player a year early, than a year late' could be apropos in this situation as he's made his intent to hit free agency clear on numerous occasions. www.google.com/amp/s/www.nbcsports.com/boston/red-sox/mookie-betts-doesnt-expect-sign-contract-extension-red-sox%3fampThe risk of Betts leaving applies even moreso for the team trading for him, which would be giving up players to acquire him. It'd be one thing if the Red Sox weren't trying to win this year (which I say hoping not to open that Pandora's Box) and the value he provides in 2020 is meaningless, but it's not meaningless. I'm skeptical they'll get an offer that is worth more than his 2020 production + the potential draft pick if he walks + what I figure to be the decreased likelihood he'd re-sign. There is risk to keeping Betts. There is more risk to trading for him.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Dec 17, 2019 11:21:11 GMT -5
The risk of Betts leaving applies even moreso for the team trading for him, which would be giving up players to acquire him. It'd be one thing if the Red Sox weren't trying to win this year (which I say hoping not to open that Pandora's Box) and the value he provides in 2020 is meaningless, but it's not meaningless. I'm skeptical they'll get an offer that is worth more than his 2020 production + the potential draft pick if he walks + what I figure to be the decreased likelihood he'd re-sign.There is risk to keeping Betts. There is more risk to trading for him. On top of all that, they also retain the option to trade him in season. They probably get less of a return, but how much less really? Like maybe it's the difference of one 45 FV guy in the deal?
|
|
|
Post by stevedillard on Dec 17, 2019 11:32:24 GMT -5
Lester was traded at the deadline of his walk year. We got Cespedes and a pick, and Cespedes turned into Porcello. The question is whether trading him now opens the market for teams that dream of competing, vs. trading him at the deadline in which its a smaller pool, but more motivated buyers.
That's actually two separate questions. The first is getting under 208 for next year, which implicates Price. The second, though, is a belief on team building - is a $35 mill Mookie better than two $15 mill guys. With Bloom's experience in Tampa, whether by necessity or preference, he may see the value of depths vs. elite talent.
|
|
|
Post by ramireja on Dec 17, 2019 11:32:29 GMT -5
All of this conversation though ignores the fact that we're trying to get payroll under $208M. My wager is that it's more of an order to do so than a suggestion behind closed doors. If you can't trade Price and the majority of his salary, the only other way to get under is to trade Betts (or I suppose JD Martinez) and doing so midway through the year wouldn't even get you under. If you can't do either of those things, all of a sudden you would need to trade a combination of players to get under $208M (e.g., JBJ + Eovaldi, Bogaerts + Workman, etc.), and that's without adding any other players to the roster. It's really unfortunate there wasn't enough foresight to avoid this situation, but there wasn't under DD and here we are.
|
|
|
Post by wcsoxfan on Dec 17, 2019 11:38:02 GMT -5
The risk of Betts leaving applies even moreso for the team trading for him, which would be giving up players to acquire him. It'd be one thing if the Red Sox weren't trying to win this year (which I say hoping not to open that Pandora's Box) and the value he provides in 2020 is meaningless, but it's not meaningless. I'm skeptical they'll get an offer that is worth more than his 2020 production + the potential draft pick if he walks + what I figure to be the decreased likelihood he'd re-sign. There is risk to keeping Betts. There is more risk to trading for him. Keep in mind, the formula above should also include '- cost of 2020 salary'. Accounting for the salary doesn't make a trade more likely but it does reduce what the Red Sox should expect in a trade. What we don't know is where Betts is more likely to sign. Although he had publicly stated that he's aiming for the most $$, it's possible he prefers to stay in Boston, or prefers to be closer to home (Atlanta maybe?). Typically a team trading for a superstar in these situations have a MUCH greater chance of resigning the player as they are willing to spend the $$ and believe they have an inside shot to resign said player - that team has not shown itself yet (deep pockets of the Red Sox likely diminishes the chance of a trade for multiple reasons). But against your point above, I would argue that by reducing salary without trading Betts the Red Sox are unlikely to put a championship contender in the field and therefore Betts is more valuable to a team looking to win in 2020. I understand that some are optimistic for a bounce back in 2020, but without some brilliant move from Chaim, I don't see it as we are relying on older players to do the bouncing.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Dec 17, 2019 11:50:20 GMT -5
The sad part to me is that fans are doing the Red Sox' PR work for them already instead of rightfully not accepting that wasting Mookie's final season is a smart move. Trying to compete while lowering payroll significantly is a great way to be mediocre for the foreseeable future.
|
|
|
Post by Legion of Bloom on Dec 17, 2019 14:02:54 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Dec 17, 2019 14:10:14 GMT -5
You have to wonder if a trade like that can be expanded to include Price. The Dodgers are looking for starting pitching and I'd have to think they'd have to seriously consider Price. I definitely think these two teams match up well in a trade, one that even contains both Price and Betts. I would guess that Seager's presence would move Bogaerts to 2b and improve the defense as Bogaerts' range at SS is rather suspect, and Verdugo would replace Betts or more likely JBJ's spot in the OF once he gets dealt. Perhaps the Sox can snag one of LA's better starting pitching prospects as part of the deal with the Dodgers (Gray?) as well with Price included in a deal. I could definitely see the Sox re-shaping/resetting their team using the Dodgers, once again, as the team that allows them to do that, although this is definitely a different scenario than the Punto deal.
|
|
|
Post by soxcentral on Dec 17, 2019 14:13:10 GMT -5
If Mookie won't sign an extension that's the level of return I'd be on board with. Anything more is unrealistic I think.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Dec 17, 2019 14:15:00 GMT -5
The sad part to me is that fans are doing the Red Sox' PR work for them already instead of rightfully not accepting that wasting Mookie's final season is a smart move. Trying to compete while lowering payroll significantly is a great way to be mediocre for the foreseeable future. They're already going to do that anyways. Not sure why putting the blame on Red Sox fans make any sense. It's not like the fans demanded that ownership cut the payroll by at least 30 million from last year's payroll. Surrounding Mookie with middling/mediocre talent or more bluntly, not improving, while other teams are improving this offseason, doesn't increase the Red Sox' chances of winning even with Mookie around. I don't want Mookie dealt. I want him re-signed to a long-term deal, but given that it'll cost $400 million to do so, the ownership might not want to go that far or they may sense that Betts doesn't want to stick around beyond 2020, so if that'st he case and they're cutting payroll anyways, then it's sensible for fans to discuss whether it makes sense for Mookie to be on a Red Sox team that might only win 87 - 90 games and at best be a coin toss in a wild card game. This isn't a Red Sox fan being a PR guy for the Sox. This is a Red Sox fan accepting reality because what choice does he/she have? Ownership is going to do what ownership does, regardless of their fans' wishes. It's not like we sit on the board and have a vote in the matter.
|
|
|
Post by Legion of Bloom on Dec 17, 2019 14:15:30 GMT -5
I wouldn’t include Price if it just complicates the Betts return. Dodgers would argue that by absorbing such an exorbitant amount of money, that the return would have to be less. If we did get Seager, I’d imagine that he would be the one to shift over to 2B and not Xander, specially after just signing Xander to a team-friendly deal not long ago.
If Seager+ is indeed on the table, I would seriously consider this a win for us. Hopefully Cleveland decides to keep Lindor and we can get a haul from the Dodgers for Betts.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Dec 17, 2019 14:19:53 GMT -5
The sad part to me is that fans are doing the Red Sox' PR work for them already instead of rightfully not accepting that wasting Mookie's final season is a smart move. Trying to compete while lowering payroll significantly is a great way to be mediocre for the foreseeable future. They're already going to do that anyways. Not sure why putting the blame on Red Sox fans make any sense. It's not like the fans demanded that ownership cut the payroll by at least 30 million from last year's payroll. Surrounding Mookie with middling/mediocre talent or more bluntly, not improving, while other teams are improving this offseason, doesn't increase the Red Sox' chances of winning even with Mookie around. I don't want Mookie dealt. I want him re-signed to a long-term deal, but given that it'll cost $400 million to do so, the ownership might not want to go that far or they may sense that Betts doesn't want to stick around beyond 2020, so if that'st he case and they're cutting payroll anyways, then it's sensible for fans to discuss whether it makes sense for Mookie to be on a Red Sox team that might only win 87 - 90 games and at best be a coin toss in a wild card game. This isn't a Red Sox fan being a PR guy for the Sox. This is a Red Sox fan accepting reality because what choice does he/she have? Ownership is going to do what ownership does, regardless of their fans' wishes. It's not like we sit on the board and have a vote in the matter. If they trade Mookie, they should trade everyone else other than Devers, Xander and ERod and do a proper rebuild. In between is death. I still believe this team is capable of being in between last season and 2018, which puts them in the mid to high 90s for wins. But every trade cuts away at that and puts them in no-man's land without improving their future outlook. They currently have an incredible core roster with huge upside, with almost none of that being realized last season. There is no reason to believe that this is a true talent 84 win team.
|
|
|