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.
|
Post by marrcus on Feb 5, 2020 16:15:59 GMT -5
Trade was 'ok.' The health of both is concerning. Particularly the big guy who's had a Tommy John. B
What was spent on Price is appalling and glad to have him finish his career in LA (hopefully heathly but I fear not). WS came with the miserable LH so there's that and it's big.
Betts is gone and even if I thought he'd come back --I don't-- ownership has made clear that they don't want onerous contracts of the nature, Mookie's asking for.
|
|
KB24
Rookie
Posts: 148
|
Post by KB24 on Feb 5, 2020 16:18:45 GMT -5
With Graterol being called up on 9/1/19 last year would the Sox be able to manipulate his service time enough to gain an extra year of eligibility? There's no way they'd keep him down until June is there?
|
|
|
Post by ramireja on Feb 5, 2020 16:22:20 GMT -5
With Graterol being called up on 9/1/19 last year would the Sox be able to manipulate his service time enough to gain an extra year of eligibility? There's no way they'd keep him down until June is there? He was only 20 years old last year and pitched a total of 15 innings above AA, all in relief. I think if the Red Sox wanted to try him as a starter, they'd be quite justified to send him to AAA and have him spend the entire year there while hoping for an innings total between 120-140.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Feb 5, 2020 16:25:33 GMT -5
He'd basically have to make like six starts in the minors to not reach a full year of service time. His first four starts being so dominant that it's forcing the issue would be a very pleasant problem.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Feb 5, 2020 16:47:16 GMT -5
This trade has no upside because even if Brusdar Graterol turns into an ace, we will have to suffer years of misspellings of his name on the forums. Truly devastating. This is a great point, he's the #1 contender in the Anthony Renauldo rankings. Wrong. New nickname: Punky. Problem solved.
|
|
cdj
Veteran
Posts: 14,082
|
Post by cdj on Feb 5, 2020 16:52:00 GMT -5
Bruiser Granderwall
|
|
|
Post by jmanny24 on Feb 5, 2020 17:11:45 GMT -5
I've read a lot of things today about how it was Henry and DD that put them in this spot with the bad contracts and I wholeheartedly agree. But, would I be wrong to think that Mookie deserves some as well for being so publically adamant about going to free agency. He is perfectly in his right to have that stance, but to do so in such a public way also hurt the team once they knew they were going to trade him.
|
|
|
Post by Ryanod1 on Feb 5, 2020 18:14:43 GMT -5
I absolutely love this trade. What made it was the fact they landed Graterol. He is in my top 3 favorite pitching prospects in baseball the last year and a half. His stuff is so good. The problem with a trade like this is trading a superstar, and not getting household names in return. People will very quickly get excited about Brusdar. Verdugo is very likable as well, but he will always be tied to Betts, unfortunately. He is not Mookie, but he is an outstanding hitter that doesn't strike out a ton. So, yes, losing Mookie sucks, but the return is sneaky good. There is value in getting our 1st rounder back, and next year plenty of money!
Note: Yes I would prefer Mookie. Who wouldn't...My evaluation is just taking the situation for what it is. We received the Dodgers top prospect (2018), and the Twins best pitching prospect in years.
|
|
|
Post by sarasoxer on Feb 5, 2020 19:36:20 GMT -5
Brutal. Trade one of the best players your organization has ever produced, who also happens to be a blast to watch (this is entertainment) for an OF who... yawn, sorry I fell asleep. And a 20-year old maybe future closer? They will be lucky if the package produces the value of one more year of Mookie. And, by the way, half-contract Price has the chance to be a steal. Guy is no longer an ace, but he was good last year before getting hurt. As a #3 starter with the Sox sharing the bill, the idea of getting him as an add-in makes me sick. The Sox got pantsed on value, and worse, somethings are beyond measure. A home grown, appealing superstar is not to be traded. Let him walk if he must. How would you have gotten below the cap now and in future years...especially with Mookie wanting 35 per for 12 at 420 Mil? Alternatively what would trading JBJ, JDM, Beni or others save/bring? What kind of lineup or outfield would we have then? Just how high would you be willing to go for Mookie...before it was too much for a homegrown superstar?...or is it at any cost? Devers was more productive than Mookie last year and hits to all fields. If Mookie gets 35 Mil, what should Devers get paid to lock him up for 10-12? We have no sure pitchers in our milb system and have historically been poor at finding/developing them. Our current starters have questions. So how do we add quality starters w/o winning high priced bids? If we did all that, wouldn't we find ourselves right back in the current pickle?.....or who cares, it's Big Bad John's money? And what if Mookie left anyway at year end? Where would we be; how many tickets would we sell; and who would we blame? I'll bet that Mookie's 2019 home hits, superimposed on the Dodger's field would not have yielded as good results as they did at Fenway. He's a lifetime .295 mostly pull hitter playing half his games at Fenway. Not that it's identical but I remember Fred Lynn fell from sainthood after leaving the confines.
|
|
steveofbradenton
Veteran
Watching Spring Training, the FCL, and the Florida State League
Posts: 1,826
|
Post by steveofbradenton on Feb 5, 2020 20:05:51 GMT -5
Brutal. Trade one of the best players your organization has ever produced, who also happens to be a blast to watch (this is entertainment) for an OF who... yawn, sorry I fell asleep. And a 20-year old maybe future closer? They will be lucky if the package produces the value of one more year of Mookie. And, by the way, half-contract Price has the chance to be a steal. Guy is no longer an ace, but he was good last year before getting hurt. As a #3 starter with the Sox sharing the bill, the idea of getting him as an add-in makes me sick. The Sox got pantsed on value, and worse, somethings are beyond measure. A home grown, appealing superstar is not to be traded. Let him walk if he must. How would you have gotten below the cap now and in future years...especially with Mookie wanting 35 per for 12 at 420 Mil? Alternatively what would trading JBJ, JDM, Beni or others save/bring? What kind of lineup or outfield would we have then? Just how high would you be willing to go for Mookie...before it was too much for a homegrown superstar?...or is it at any cost? Devers was more productive than Mookie last year and hits to all fields. If Mookie gets 35 Mil, what should Devers get paid to lock him up for 10-12? We have no sure pitchers in our milb system and have historically been poor at finding/developing them. Our current starters have questions. So how do we add quality starters w/o winning high priced bids?If we did all that, wouldn't we find ourselves right back in the current pickle?.....or who cares, it's Big Bad John's money? And what if Mookie left anyway at year end? Where would we be; how many tickets would we sell; and who would we blame? I'll bet that Mookie's 2019 home hits, superimposed on the Dodger's field would not have yielded as good results as they did at Fenway. He's a lifetime .295 mostly pull hitter playing half his games at Fenway. Not that it's identical but I remember Fred Lynn fell from sainthood after leaving the confines. All day I've been thinking up reasons why this was a good deal. This one point above did not come to me, but let's all think hard about that. We are in this situation because we have continually failed miserably in developing CHEAP young starters. When DD started this scenario by signing Price for $217,000,000 over 7 years, all restraint went out the window. And then, to show he had no idea how we could keep going on this destructive path, DD signs Sale for $145,000,000 and Evoldi (the often injured) for mucho millions also. A team can't field a team with 3 starters making this kind of money, and not run into BIG financial problems. Sarasoxer hit on a BIG reason we need to do a reset and develop our team, especially the pitching, differently.
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Feb 5, 2020 20:13:08 GMT -5
Brutal. Trade one of the best players your organization has ever produced, who also happens to be a blast to watch (this is entertainment) for an OF who... yawn, sorry I fell asleep. And a 20-year old maybe future closer? They will be lucky if the package produces the value of one more year of Mookie. And, by the way, half-contract Price has the chance to be a steal. Guy is no longer an ace, but he was good last year before getting hurt. As a #3 starter with the Sox sharing the bill, the idea of getting him as an add-in makes me sick. The Sox got pantsed on value, and worse, somethings are beyond measure. A home grown, appealing superstar is not to be traded. Let him walk if he must. How would you have gotten below the cap now and in future years...especially with Mookie wanting 35 per for 12 at 420 Mil? Alternatively what would trading JBJ, JDM, Beni or others save/bring? What kind of lineup or outfield would we have then? Just how high would you be willing to go for Mookie...before it was too much for a homegrown superstar?...or is it at any cost? Devers was more productive than Mookie last year and hits to all fields. If Mookie gets 35 Mil, what should Devers get paid to lock him up for 10-12? We have no sure pitchers in our milb system and have historically been poor at finding/developing them. Our current starters have questions. So how do we add quality starters w/o winning high priced bids? If we did all that, wouldn't we find ourselves right back in the current pickle?.....or who cares, it's Big Bad John's money? And what if Mookie left anyway at year end? Where would we be; how many tickets would we sell; and who would we blame? I'll bet that Mookie's 2019 home hits, superimposed on the Dodger's field would not have yielded as good results as they did at Fenway. He's a lifetime .295 mostly pull hitter playing half his games at Fenway. Not that it's identical but I remember Fred Lynn fell from sainthood after leaving the confines. Well, trading JDM and JBJ would be nearly $35 million next year. I am not confident the Sox got a guy who even projects as a starter. He might be a beast of a closer. Doesn’t light my fire.
|
|
|
Post by sarasoxer on Feb 5, 2020 21:51:44 GMT -5
Ok good. only 7 Mil short.. but what do you get back? Can you beat Verdugo and Graterol as low pay prospects?
And next year Mookie, if he stays and at 35 Mil, adds another 7 Mil to payroll so then it becomes 14 Mil short of current trade.
My issue with Verdugo is the nature of back injury. What is it that caused missing the last 2 months and he HOPES to be ready for Spring. This sounds like a spinal nerve impingement. Herniated disc, stenosis? Surgical intervention down the line?
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Feb 5, 2020 22:09:13 GMT -5
Ok good. only 7 Mil short.. but what do you get back? Can you beat Verdugo and Graterol as low pay prospects? And next year Mookie, if he stays and at 35 Mil, adds another 7 Mil to payroll so then it becomes 14 Mil short of current trade. My issue with Verdugo is the nature of back injury. What is it that caused missing the last 2 months and he HOPES to be ready for Spring. This sounds like a spinal nerve impingement. Herniated disc, stenosis? Surgical intervention down the line? Trade Sale, Eovaldi. Fine. What is the return? Who knows. Not much, likely. Keep Betts, though. Here’s the thing, as I’ve said before. Trading Betts for a big step down means basically more than half the high paid guys on the team become irrelevant. The Sox will not he an elite team for the life of their contracts or span of their remaining valuable years. So why keep Sale, for example, if you dump Betts? Verdugo may literally be half the player Betts is. Or less. So they are far worse... and being under control means much less when what is controlled is not that good. I know... top Dodger prospect. But his stats don’t blow me away, and he has a bad back. He will probably be fine. Fine. But that doesn’t cut it. The Sox have made themselves worse in the short run to be mediocre in the longer run.
|
|
|
Post by sarasoxer on Feb 5, 2020 22:21:18 GMT -5
Ok good. only 7 Mil short.. but what do you get back? Can you beat Verdugo and Graterol as low pay prospects? And next year Mookie, if he stays and at 35 Mil, adds another 7 Mil to payroll so then it becomes 14 Mil short of current trade. My issue with Verdugo is the nature of back injury. What is it that caused missing the last 2 months and he HOPES to be ready for Spring. This sounds like a spinal nerve impingement. Herniated disc, stenosis? Surgical intervention down the line? Trade Sale, Eovaldi. Fine. What is the return? Who knows. Not much, likely. Keep Betts, though. Here’s the thing, as I’ve said before. Trading Betts for a big step down means basically more than half the high paid guys on the team become irrelevant. The Sox will not he an elite team for the life of their contracts or span of their remaining valuable years. So why keep Sale, for example, if you dump Betts? Verdugo may literally be half the player Betts is. Or less. So they are far worse... and being under control means much less when what is controlled is not that good. I know... top Dodger prospect. But his stats don’t blow me away, and he has a bad back. He will probably be fine. Fine. But that doesn’t cut it. The Sox have made themselves worse in the short run to be mediocre in the longer run. Verdugo at age 23 hit for the same average as Mookie...this year and career wise. Without injury he probably would have hit 20 homers. He has a very strong arm rivaling Mookie's. He plays for a pittance of Mookie's current salary giving us leeway to sign others. I agree that Sale, particularly if he pitches well, is on the block. Eovaldi won't fetch. JDM might.
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Feb 5, 2020 22:25:26 GMT -5
Trade Sale, Eovaldi. Fine. What is the return? Who knows. Not much, likely. Keep Betts, though. Here’s the thing, as I’ve said before. Trading Betts for a big step down means basically more than half the high paid guys on the team become irrelevant. The Sox will not he an elite team for the life of their contracts or span of their remaining valuable years. So why keep Sale, for example, if you dump Betts? Verdugo may literally be half the player Betts is. Or less. So they are far worse... and being under control means much less when what is controlled is not that good. I know... top Dodger prospect. But his stats don’t blow me away, and he has a bad back. He will probably be fine. Fine. But that doesn’t cut it. The Sox have made themselves worse in the short run to be mediocre in the longer run. Verdugo at age 23 hit for the same average as Mookie...this year and career wise. Without injury he probably would have hit 20 homers. He has a very strong arm rivaling Mookie's. He plays for a pittance of Mookie's current salary giving us leeway to sign others. I agree that Sale, particularly if he pitches well, is on the block. Eovaldi won't fetch. JDM might. My hope is Verdugo can be almost as good as Beni. Comparing him to Betts? Nah.
|
|
cdj
Veteran
Posts: 14,082
|
Post by cdj on Feb 5, 2020 22:31:18 GMT -5
Verdugo at age 23 hit for the same average as Mookie...this year and career wise. Without injury he probably would have hit 20 homers. He has a very strong arm rivaling Mookie's. He plays for a pittance of Mookie's current salary giving us leeway to sign others. I agree that Sale, particularly if he pitches well, is on the block. Eovaldi won't fetch. JDM might. My hope is Verdugo can be almost as good as Beni. Comparing him to Betts? Nah. Well he did perform better than Benintendi last year.... At the dish, in the field. Everywhere. SSS but still, def very far from unrealistic to think he could come close to benintendi. He may surpass him. I am excited to see Benny this year, I feel like he will come back with a vengeance
|
|
dirtdog
Veteran
Posts: 1,882
Member is Online
|
Post by dirtdog on Feb 5, 2020 22:32:07 GMT -5
Listening to Buster Olney on LA ESPN radio this afternoon. The hosts were crowing about the most lopsided trade in Dodger history and asked Buster if he thought so. Buster said no and added that the vast majority of MLB execs he talked to about it "thought the Red Sox did just fine" FWIW.
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Feb 5, 2020 22:35:28 GMT -5
My hope is Verdugo can be almost as good as Beni. Comparing him to Betts? Nah. Well he did perform better than Benintendi last year.... At the dish, in the field. Everywhere. SSS but still, def very far from unrealistic to think he could come close to benintendi. He may surpass him. I am excited to see Benny this year, I feel like he will come back with a vengeance Beni at his worst was about the same. Beni at age 22-23 was better. We’ll see if AV ever has years that good. But it looks like those are the sort of numbers he is on pace for.
|
|
dirtdog
Veteran
Posts: 1,882
Member is Online
|
Post by dirtdog on Feb 5, 2020 22:38:08 GMT -5
My issue with Verdugo is the nature of back injury. What is it that caused missing the last 2 months and he HOPES to be ready for Spring. This sounds like a spinal nerve impingement. Herniated disc, stenosis? Surgical intervention down the line? Also on LA radio on Fox this afternoon was David Vassegh who works for Fox and has been their insider embedded with the team for years. When asked about Verdugo's health he mentioned that at the teams winter classic in January Verdugo said he hadnt swung a bat since the fall. However he did say that the the Dodger training staff had the reputation of being very conservative particularly with oblique and back issues like Verdugo had. Said that Verdugo had been running and lifting weights and fully expected to be ready for spring training. Again FWIW.
|
|
|
Post by Ryanod1 on Feb 5, 2020 23:06:40 GMT -5
Brutal. Trade one of the best players your organization has ever produced, who also happens to be a blast to watch (this is entertainment) for an OF who... yawn, sorry I fell asleep. And a 20-year old maybe future closer? They will be lucky if the package produces the value of one more year of Mookie. And, by the way, half-contract Price has the chance to be a steal. Guy is no longer an ace, but he was good last year before getting hurt. As a #3 starter with the Sox sharing the bill, the idea of getting him as an add-in makes me sick. The Sox got pantsed on value, and worse, somethings are beyond measure. A home grown, appealing superstar is not to be traded. Let him walk if he must. How would you have gotten below the cap now and in future years...especially with Mookie wanting 35 per for 12 at 420 Mil? Alternatively what would trading JBJ, JDM, Beni or others save/bring? What kind of lineup or outfield would we have then? Just how high would you be willing to go for Mookie...before it was too much for a homegrown superstar?...or is it at any cost? Devers was more productive than Mookie last year and hits to all fields. If Mookie gets 35 Mil, what should Devers get paid to lock him up for 10-12? We have no sure pitchers in our milb system and have historically been poor at finding/developing them. Our current starters have questions. So how do we add quality starters w/o winning high priced bids? If we did all that, wouldn't we find ourselves right back in the current pickle?.....or who cares, it's Big Bad John's money? And what if Mookie left anyway at year end? Where would we be; how many tickets would we sell; and who would we blame? I'll bet that Mookie's 2019 home hits, superimposed on the Dodger's field would not have yielded as good results as they did at Fenway. He's a lifetime .295 mostly pull hitter playing half his games at Fenway. Not that it's identical but I remember Fred Lynn fell from sainthood after leaving the confines. I do hope Mookie plays well of course, but I think there is a lot of room for regression. Not that its never happened before, but players his size tend to fall off quickly power wise. Where there is a difference is the fact that Mookie has exceptional hand eye coordination, and elite bat speed. So maybe it will be a gradual fall off. I can't decide if he tears it up this year, or if he has a year like Machado....who knows. I know people absolutely loathe this trade, but you can't make everyone happy. I would hope that most can see that the farm system is as important as the mlb roster now. The best teams are boasting a large portion of home grown talent with amazing farm systems to continue. Sustainability is the name of the game. This is what I always say to the win now screw later types.....No great business would sell out for profits this quarter at the expense of the next 10 years!
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Feb 5, 2020 23:11:12 GMT -5
Listening to Buster Olney on LA ESPN radio this afternoon. The hosts were crowing about the most lopsided trade in Dodger history and asked Buster if he thought so. Buster said no and added that the vast majority of MLB execs he talked to about it "thought the Red Sox did just fine" FWIW. It's possible for it to be both. That just might have been the most lopsided trade in Dodger history in their favor - I don't know. I have a very knowledgable Dodgers fan/friend with an encyclopedia memory and a vast knowledge of the history of the game so I'd have to ask him. Let's face it - it was a sensational trade by the Dodgers. Verdugo is good but he'll never be as good as Betts - how could he be? No fault of his own, but upgrading from Verdugo to Betts was substantial - my Dodgers friend likes Verdugo and was saying Betts will only be there for one year, but honestly who's going to outbid the Dodgers for Mookie? The Dodgers got him anticipating that they will find a way to give him his money to keep him beyond 2020. So they upgrades Verdugo to Betts, but what else did they lose? Maeda? He's a back end starter. They kept ALL of their prospects, every last single one of them. They kept Mays and Gonsolin. They even kept Caleb Ferguson. They kept all 3 catching prospects: Ruiz, Cartaya, and even Wong. They even held onto Jeter Downs. They didn't even lose that big reliever with huge K numbers - can't think of his name. Urias was never even considered. That's a sensational deal. They actually in my opinion made a far worse deal with the Angels, not that Pedersen is a huge loss - they wanted to get under the limit and they dealt their other swingman Stripling, but they also threw in that 19 year old kid with scary good power numbers in rookie ball. I don't think their return was that good from the Angels, so that deal wasn't so hot. But as far as the actual Betts deal, they must have had even greater joy than I did when I learned the Sox had traded Al Nipper and Calvin Schiraldi for Lee Smith. But Buster Olney said that evaluators felt that the Sox did well in the deal, and that's possible, too - particularly if Graterol is healthy and can be an impact starter and if Verdugo's back issues don't sabotage him. And when I said "did well", that's considering that they backed themselves into a financial corner (if you think that Henry shouldn't have to pay big taxes and should reset, which is debatable) if they did have to trade Mookie, they got a young OF with upside who has found success in the majors and a kid with a great arm and attitude who was a top 100 prospect (better actually). So from that standpoint, I guess it's possible for the Dodgers to make a ridiculously fantastic deal and for the Red Sox to do as well as they could given their situation (of course, we'll never know if Bloom passed up a better package) if things pan out.
|
|
|
Post by Ryanod1 on Feb 5, 2020 23:28:34 GMT -5
Listening to Buster Olney on LA ESPN radio this afternoon. The hosts were crowing about the most lopsided trade in Dodger history and asked Buster if he thought so. Buster said no and added that the vast majority of MLB execs he talked to about it "thought the Red Sox did just fine" FWIW. It's possible for it to be both. That just might have been the most lopsided trade in Dodger history in their favor - I don't know. I have a very knowledgable Dodgers fan/friend with an encyclopedia memory and a vast knowledge of the history of the game so I'd have to ask him. Let's face it - it was a sensational trade by the Dodgers. Verdugo is good but he'll never be as good as Betts - how could he be? No fault of his own, but upgrading from Verdugo to Betts was substantial - my Dodgers friend likes Verdugo and was saying Betts will only be there for one year, but honestly who's going to outbid the Dodgers for Mookie? The Dodgers got him anticipating that they will find a way to give him his money to keep him beyond 2020. So they upgrades Verdugo to Betts, but what else did they lose? Maeda? He's a back end starter. They kept ALL of their prospects, every last single one of them. They kept Mays and Gonsolin. They even kept Caleb Ferguson. They kept all 3 catching prospects: Ruiz, Cartaya, and even Wong. They even held onto Jeter Downs. They didn't even lose that big reliever with huge K numbers - can't think of his name. Urias was never even considered. That's a sensational deal. They actually in my opinion made a far worse deal with the Angels, not that Pedersen is a huge loss - they wanted to get under the limit and they dealt their other swingman Stripling, but they also threw in that 19 year old kid with scary good power numbers in rookie ball. I don't think their return was that good from the Angels, so that deal wasn't so hot. But as far as the actual Betts deal, they must have had even greater joy than I did when I learned the Sox had traded Al Nipper and Calvin Schiraldi for Lee Smith. But Buster Olney said that evaluators felt that the Sox did well in the deal, and that's possible, too - particularly if Graterol is healthy and can be an impact starter and if Verdugo's back issues don't sabotage him. And when I said "did well", that's considering that they backed themselves into a financial corner (if you think that Henry shouldn't have to pay big taxes and should reset, which is debatable) if they did have to trade Mookie, they got a young OF with upside who has found success in the majors and a kid with a great arm and attitude who was a top 100 prospect (better actually). So from that standpoint, I guess it's possible for the Dodgers to make a ridiculously fantastic deal and for the Red Sox to do as well as they could given their situation (of course, we'll never know if Bloom passed up a better package) if things pan out. Really good points. Like you said we can't expect a Betts out of a Verdugo. Unfortunately, that is the way it will always be seen, but Verdugo can give us 4-5 war per year for the duration of the contract (hopefully). That has value in itself. The kicker will be what Graterol becomes, but I think he becomes #2 starter for us eventually. Eventually we may see 10-15 war between the two? We also gain our 1st round picks back, and we also gain a lot more financial flexibility to spread out amongst more players. As far as the Dodgers "running away" with this trade I'm not so sure. They put themselves in a tighter spot financially, but at the same time they are probably set anyways. Their minors are more than stocked with stud replacements. People do need to consider that they needed to ship off Joc Pedersons salary to do this. So when looking at the Dodgers winning this trade its really Verdugo, Maeda, Stripling and Joc Pederson. No huge deal, but still a consideration where Pederson was very good for them.
|
|
|
Post by patford on Feb 5, 2020 23:28:34 GMT -5
Let me just say that I don't think Bloom is an idiot. As in I don't think there is anything a fan on the board mentions which Bloom didn't look at carefully.
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Feb 6, 2020 1:06:13 GMT -5
Let me just say that I don't think Bloom is an idiot. As in I don't think there is anything a fan on the board mentions which Bloom didn't look at carefully. I will remember this defense when a GM makes, well, any move. Dombrowski was no idiot... but a number of his moves ended us here.
|
|
|
Post by The Town Sports Cards on Feb 6, 2020 8:48:38 GMT -5
I think it's only a sensational trade for the Dodgers if they either win the World Series or end up re-signing Mookie (either during or after the season). Otherwise it's a tremendous failure because they gave up 2 long term assets for one year of Mookie. They could have easily made the playoffs and not won the WS in 2020 with Verdugo/Maeda (and they probably keep Pederson too). And if they're going into 2021 with no WS title and a hole in RF, what was the point?
|
|
|