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 kevfc89 on Feb 17, 2020 13:41:03 GMT -5
At the press conference held by ownership today, someone asked if they would pursue Mookie in free agency next year.
Sam Kennedy answered that while he can't talk about a specific player in another uniform, he mentioned the new flexibility and that the Red Sox have always carried a large payroll and spent money strategically when the time is right.
So they're saying there's a chance...
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Feb 17, 2020 14:09:30 GMT -5
At the press conference held by ownership today, someone asked if they would pursue Mookie in free agency next year. Sam Kennedy answered that while he can't talk about a specific player in another uniform, he mentioned the new flexibility and that the Red Sox have always carried a large payroll and spent money strategically when the time is right. So they're saying there's a chance... Can't find it now, but I saw somewhere (or possibly dreamed) that Red Sox ticket sales are down 15% on last season? If so, add that to the Green Monster and Fenway's right field among the reasons that Betts is especially valuable to the Red Sox.
|
|
|
Post by adiospaydro2005 on Feb 18, 2020 5:46:11 GMT -5
I watched the most recent Godzilla movie over the weekend. This is the one that features Boston and Fenway Park. Yesterday’s press conference with Henry , Werner and Kennedy stating that the Mookie trade was not about the money reminded me about the three headed dragon destroying Fenway Park at the end of the movie. The Mookie trade was all about the money as the Red Sox decided that they were not going to pay Mookie what he was worth as the second best player in baseball. Resetting for the future is going to take a 3 to 5 years given their current roster and weak farm system.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Feb 18, 2020 7:45:05 GMT -5
I watched the most recent Godzilla movie over the weekend. This is the one that features Boston and Fenway Park. Yesterday’s press conference with Henry , Werner and Kennedy stating that the Mookie trade was not about the money reminded me about the three headed dragon destroying Fenway Park at the end of the movie. The Mookie trade was all about the money as the Red Sox decided that they were not going to pay Mookie what he was worth as the second best player in baseball. Resetting for the future is going to take a 3 to 5 years given their current roster and weak farm system. I appreciated the effort - to be the "I understand how you must be feeling" thing with Henry citing how he would have felt as a fan had Stan Musial been dealt away. The examples they cited for the Sox were off, though. It was tough to lose Nomar, but his prime was clearly in the past and he had left that rough image of him sitting instead of pinch-hitting in that extra inning loss in NY. Ellsbury was let go but I don't think anybody shed a tear. Pedro was let go and that was sad but I think most of us were aware that he didn't have much left in the future. Betts is a totally different story. He's a guy who was traded away who happened to be smack dab in the middle of his prime and according to WAR measures, had at least one season of being up there with the all-time Red Sox performers. If they were being truly genuine and honest, instead, they would have admitted that they didn't want to pay Mookie his market value (which of course they wouldn't because how do you do that??). On one hand, you get Henry saying that players deserve the right to go to free agency, which Musial and Williams didn't have, but yet I don't remember ever reading about any offers that weren't considered a hometown discount by market standards. I think the truth is that they didn't want to pay market value for him, and I think a reasonable guess isn't necessarily because of the annual although had he offered say 10 years and $350 million and was turned down, which still might have been turned down, I think it would feel a bit different. I'm sure the years were the big turnoff, but if the Sox ever do land a premier free agent, they're going to have to give in terms of years which won't feel comfortable, and if that's ever the case, then why go to an outside free agent and give it to him versus your own player? I always thought it was interesting when I was reading David Ortiz's book about how the Sox will go crazy to get somebody else's free agent but then suddenly be very restrictive when it comes to their own free agent if they don't sense that they're getting some sort of discount. I'd like to think that seeing Mookie in another uniform will make them treat him like he's another team's player, but they keep talking about long-term sustainability and flexibility which makes me think that we're not going to see another offer to get Mookie but only if they go through a sustained 2 or 3 year period where they don't make the playoffs that they'll relax their thinking and go sign the money on a premier free agent.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Feb 18, 2020 8:51:30 GMT -5
If they were being truly genuine and honest, instead, they would have admitted that they didn't want to pay Mookie his market value ( which of course they wouldn't because how do you do that??). On one hand, you get Henry saying that players deserve the right to go to free agency, which Musial and Williams didn't have, but yet I don't remember ever reading about any offers that weren't considered a hometown discount by market standards. I think the truth is that they didn't want to pay market value for him, and I think a reasonable guess isn't necessarily because of the annual although had he offered say 10 years and $350 million and was turned down, which still might have been turned down, I think it would feel a bit different. I'm sure the years were the big turnoff, but if the Sox ever do land a premier free agent, they're going to have to give in terms of years which won't feel comfortable, and if that's ever the case, then why go to an outside free agent and give it to him versus your own player? I always thought it was interesting when I was reading David Ortiz's book about how the Sox will go crazy to get somebody else's free agent but then suddenly be very restrictive when it comes to their own free agent if they don't sense that they're getting some sort of discount. There's no world in which the Red Sox can't afford to keep Betts. Math, however, is hard.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Feb 18, 2020 12:46:00 GMT -5
I watched the most recent Godzilla movie over the weekend. This is the one that features Boston and Fenway Park. Yesterday’s press conference with Henry , Werner and Kennedy stating that the Mookie trade was not about the money reminded me about the three headed dragon destroying Fenway Park at the end of the movie. The Mookie trade was all about the money as the Red Sox decided that they were not going to pay Mookie what he was worth as the second best player in baseball. Resetting for the future is going to take a 3 to 5 years given their current roster and weak farm system. I appreciated the effort - to be the "I understand how you must be feeling" thing with Henry citing how he would have felt as a fan had Stan Musial been dealt away. The examples they cited for the Sox were off, though. It was tough to lose Nomar, but his prime was clearly in the past and he had left that rough image of him sitting instead of pinch-hitting in that extra inning loss in NY. Ellsbury was let go but I don't think anybody shed a tear. Pedro was let go and that was sad but I think most of us were aware that he didn't have much left in the future. Betts is a totally different story. He's a guy who was traded away who happened to be smack dab in the middle of his prime and according to WAR measures, had at least one season of being up there with the all-time Red Sox performers. If they were being truly genuine and honest, instead, they would have admitted that they didn't want to pay Mookie his market value (which of course they wouldn't because how do you do that??). On one hand, you get Henry saying that players deserve the right to go to free agency, which Musial and Williams didn't have, but yet I don't remember ever reading about any offers that weren't considered a hometown discount by market standards. I think the truth is that they didn't want to pay market value for him, and I think a reasonable guess isn't necessarily because of the annual although had he offered say 10 years and $350 million and was turned down, which still might have been turned down, I think it would feel a bit different. I'm sure the years were the big turnoff, but if the Sox ever do land a premier free agent, they're going to have to give in terms of years which won't feel comfortable, and if that's ever the case, then why go to an outside free agent and give it to him versus your own player? I always thought it was interesting when I was reading David Ortiz's book about how the Sox will go crazy to get somebody else's free agent but then suddenly be very restrictive when it comes to their own free agent if they don't sense that they're getting some sort of discount. I'd like to think that seeing Mookie in another uniform will make them treat him like he's another team's player, but they keep talking about long-term sustainability and flexibility which makes me think that we're not going to see another offer to get Mookie but only if they go through a sustained 2 or 3 year period where they don't make the playoffs that they'll relax their thinking and go sign the money on a premier free agent. This comment makes perfect sense as a response to the Red Sox choosing not to sign Mookie back as a free agent next off-season. However, I'm assuming you don't have a time machine, so I don't really understand how you know that's going to happen. As it is we only know that the Red Sox were willing to trade away one season's worth of Mookie in order to benefit the team over the long haul. Are they willing to pay market price for his services? Well, we'll see next off-season. Also, can we please stop bringing up the David Ortiz quote about the team not liking its own free agents? That's from 3 GMs ago; I'm not sure who it even applies to other than Lester; and the current payroll situation was caused by Dombrowski signing too many of the team's own free agents.
|
|
|
Post by redsoxfan2 on Feb 18, 2020 13:02:06 GMT -5
Honestly, he didn't look happy at that press conference. It will be interesting to see what numbers he puts up in that park, especially in the first half of the season. My cruel heart wants to see him go into a major slump, depreciate at least a bit of market value, and come back to Boston, (inappropriate content deleted. - Mods). Anyone that wishes poorly on Mookie after all he gave the Red Sox has no place calling themselves a Red Sox fan. Especially because he isn’t the one that made the trade. Be upset with the front office all you want but get out of here with that crap. I hope Mookie kills it in LA. I'm really conflicted. The fan in me wants him to have a 1.038 OPS, an MVP and a WS MVP. Love the player, love the guy and want him to come back. The contrarian in me wants him to struggle this year. Not for anything Mookie has said or done, but the fans, and especially the sports talk show hosts, that continue to fail to grasp why this move was made and those who continue calling it a salary dump and claim they should have gotten more. Anyone calling Henry cheap is completely obtuse and I can't wait till 2021 and 2022 when he blows past the luxury tax. The obvious answer is to have both Mookie and Verdugo have big years. To your second point, accordingly, Mookie wasn't moving off his number. He's partly to blame for getting traded, IF you want to put blame. He has every right to want the most money he deserves.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Feb 18, 2020 14:15:14 GMT -5
I appreciated the effort - to be the "I understand how you must be feeling" thing with Henry citing how he would have felt as a fan had Stan Musial been dealt away. The examples they cited for the Sox were off, though. It was tough to lose Nomar, but his prime was clearly in the past and he had left that rough image of him sitting instead of pinch-hitting in that extra inning loss in NY. Ellsbury was let go but I don't think anybody shed a tear. Pedro was let go and that was sad but I think most of us were aware that he didn't have much left in the future. Betts is a totally different story. He's a guy who was traded away who happened to be smack dab in the middle of his prime and according to WAR measures, had at least one season of being up there with the all-time Red Sox performers. If they were being truly genuine and honest, instead, they would have admitted that they didn't want to pay Mookie his market value (which of course they wouldn't because how do you do that??). On one hand, you get Henry saying that players deserve the right to go to free agency, which Musial and Williams didn't have, but yet I don't remember ever reading about any offers that weren't considered a hometown discount by market standards. I think the truth is that they didn't want to pay market value for him, and I think a reasonable guess isn't necessarily because of the annual although had he offered say 10 years and $350 million and was turned down, which still might have been turned down, I think it would feel a bit different. I'm sure the years were the big turnoff, but if the Sox ever do land a premier free agent, they're going to have to give in terms of years which won't feel comfortable, and if that's ever the case, then why go to an outside free agent and give it to him versus your own player? I always thought it was interesting when I was reading David Ortiz's book about how the Sox will go crazy to get somebody else's free agent but then suddenly be very restrictive when it comes to their own free agent if they don't sense that they're getting some sort of discount. I'd like to think that seeing Mookie in another uniform will make them treat him like he's another team's player, but they keep talking about long-term sustainability and flexibility which makes me think that we're not going to see another offer to get Mookie but only if they go through a sustained 2 or 3 year period where they don't make the playoffs that they'll relax their thinking and go sign the money on a premier free agent. This comment makes perfect sense as a response to the Red Sox choosing not to sign Mookie back as a free agent next off-season. However, I'm assuming you don't have a time machine, so I don't really understand how you know that's going to happen. As it is we only know that the Red Sox were willing to trade away one season's worth of Mookie in order to benefit the team over the long haul. Are they willing to pay market price for his services? Well, we'll see next off-season. Also, can we please stop bringing up the David Ortiz quote about the team not liking its own free agents? That's from 3 GMs ago; I'm not sure who it even applies to other than Lester; and the current payroll situation was caused by Dombrowski signing too many of the team's own free agents. Like I said, I have heard no rumors of offers to Mookie that would not be considered a hometown discount. Have you? I've heard 10 years $300 million. Does that sound like something he'd be tempted to sign? And no I don't have a time machine, nor do you. So the best we can do is speculate. This is a chat board. People speculate. Since nothing can happen we can say nothing until after it happens and then react basically meaning we cannot discuss it until then whether we believe he'll re-sign or not re-sign. Right now I'm speculating on who the Sox can get if they take on Myers. Should we not discuss it because we don't have a crystal ball? I prefer not to wait a year to discuss it or give an opinion on it. My ego isn't too big to say, "Gee, I had that one wrong" if I am wrong. I mean, we do watch or listen to sportstalk, don't we (or are we too good to admit it)? If we're not allowed to have an opinion of what will happen, what the hell is the point of talking about it? We can discuss what's currently going on in politics or what has happened. Don't even need to speculate. That sounds fun doesn't it? No.....not really. Much rather talk or speculate about sports. As far as the Ortiz quote goes, I don't see it being any less pertinent. It's the same ownership group, isn't it? Big deals are signed off by them, aren't they? Doesn't matter who the GM is really. The buck still stops with ownership.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Feb 18, 2020 14:26:09 GMT -5
This comment makes perfect sense as a response to the Red Sox choosing not to sign Mookie back as a free agent next off-season. However, I'm assuming you don't have a time machine, so I don't really understand how you know that's going to happen. As it is we only know that the Red Sox were willing to trade away one season's worth of Mookie in order to benefit the team over the long haul. Are they willing to pay market price for his services? Well, we'll see next off-season. Also, can we please stop bringing up the David Ortiz quote about the team not liking its own free agents? That's from 3 GMs ago; I'm not sure who it even applies to other than Lester; and the current payroll situation was caused by Dombrowski signing too many of the team's own free agents. Like I said, I have heard no rumors of offers to Mookie that would not be considered a hometown discount. Have you? I've heard 10 years $300 million. Does that sound like something he'd be tempted to sign? And no I don't have a time machine, nor do you. So the best we can do is speculate. This is a chat board. People speculate. Since nothing can happen we can say nothing until after it happens and then react basically meaning we cannot discuss it until then whether we believe he'll re-sign or not re-sign. Right now I'm speculating on who the Sox can get if they take on Myers. Should we not discuss it because we don't have a crystal ball? I prefer not to wait a year to discuss it or give an opinion on it. My ego isn't too big to say, "Gee, I had that one wrong" if I am wrong. I mean, we do watch or listen to sportstalk, don't we (or are we too good to admit it)? If we're not allowed to have an opinion of what will happen, what the hell is the point of talking about it? We can discuss what's currently going on in politics or what has happened. Don't even need to speculate. That sounds fun doesn't it? No.....not really. Much rather talk or speculate about sports. As far as the Ortiz quote goes, I don't see it being any less pertinent. It's the same ownership group, isn't it? Big deals are signed off by them, aren't they? Doesn't matter who the GM is really. The buck still stops with ownership. Haha, I definitely don't watch or listen to sportstalk; as with cable news, I don't understand the appeal of imbibing something that would just make me both more agitated and dumber. Anyway, if you're just speculating on what they're going to do in the future, that's fine. But you were making a bunch of definitive statements - not saying "I think that..." - etc., that implied you thought the Sox' behavior had already demonstrated that they wouldn't pay market rate for Betts. I don't think that evidence exists. Mookie had made it clear he wasn't going to negotiate an extension. If the Red Sox said "we're not going to simply write a blank check for whatever number you want" ($420 million, I think he asked for?), that hardly means they definitely won't pay market rate for him. So... let's see what happens. And again, on the Ortiz quote, it clearly does not apply to the recent behavior of the organization. And just on the face of it, the argument that the Red Sox value Mookie Betts less because he was developed within the organization is just not a credible argument. I can't believe that you actually believe that argument.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Feb 18, 2020 14:49:27 GMT -5
Like I said, I have heard no rumors of offers to Mookie that would not be considered a hometown discount. Have you? I've heard 10 years $300 million. Does that sound like something he'd be tempted to sign? And no I don't have a time machine, nor do you. So the best we can do is speculate. This is a chat board. People speculate. Since nothing can happen we can say nothing until after it happens and then react basically meaning we cannot discuss it until then whether we believe he'll re-sign or not re-sign. Right now I'm speculating on who the Sox can get if they take on Myers. Should we not discuss it because we don't have a crystal ball? I prefer not to wait a year to discuss it or give an opinion on it. My ego isn't too big to say, "Gee, I had that one wrong" if I am wrong. I mean, we do watch or listen to sportstalk, don't we (or are we too good to admit it)? If we're not allowed to have an opinion of what will happen, what the hell is the point of talking about it? We can discuss what's currently going on in politics or what has happened. Don't even need to speculate. That sounds fun doesn't it? No.....not really. Much rather talk or speculate about sports. As far as the Ortiz quote goes, I don't see it being any less pertinent. It's the same ownership group, isn't it? Big deals are signed off by them, aren't they? Doesn't matter who the GM is really. The buck still stops with ownership. Haha, I definitely don't watch or listen to sportstalk; as with cable news, I don't understand the appeal of imbibing something that would just make me both more agitated and dumber. Anyway, if you're just speculating on what they're going to do in the future, that's fine. But you were making a bunch of definitive statements - not saying "I think that..." - etc., that implied you thought the Sox' behavior had already demonstrated that they wouldn't pay market rate for Betts. I don't think that evidence exists. Mookie had made it clear he wasn't going to negotiate an extension. If the Red Sox said "we're not going to simply write a blank check for whatever number you want" ($420 million, I think he asked for?), that hardly means they definitely won't pay market rate for him. So... let's see what happens. And again, on the Ortiz quote, it clearly does not apply to the recent behavior of the organization. And just on the face of it, the argument that the Red Sox value Mookie Betts less because he was developed within the organization is just not a credible argument. I can't believe that you actually believe that argument. As far as the bold goes, I enjoy sportstalk very much and get so very precious little of it at my household. My wife has no use for sports and my 7 year old son isn't exactly a nuanced sports talker (which I guess would put him on par with several sports talking heads, haha), and my 3 cats don't contribute much to the conversation either, so yeah, I've starved for sportstalk, even at various levels of conversation. And everything I say that's future related is implied as "I think this will happen" because nobody has a crystal ball. Other than death and taxes you really can't count on much. And like I said, if I'm wrong, I'm wrong. I have no problem saying I got things wrong. I'm wrong quite often. Once in awhile I even get things right. Broken clock and all. I'm reading the tea leaves of what I hear and read. I've read nothing about market value offers. I'm not talking blank check. I mean if I heard the Sox offered Mookie 10 years $350 million and he turned it down, then I wouldn't claim that the Sox were looking for a hometown discount. And I keep hearing about flexibility and long-term sustainability. I read that to mean, we'll spend money but we don't want to put all our eggs in the same basket. Hence, my belief that Mookie isn't coming back. Frankly, I don't think anybody is giving Mookie 12 years $420 million. I could be wrong, but I think his end goal is $400 million in free agency or perhaps topping Trout's annual if it's 10 or 11 years. As far as their own system, why wouldn't I? Who have they re-signed at market value from their own system at free agency?
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Feb 18, 2020 15:29:25 GMT -5
There have not been any actual negotiations with Mookie because it takes two sides to engage. So there is NO market to speak of until that happens. So all we know is absolutely nothing.
|
|
|
Post by redsoxfan2 on Feb 18, 2020 15:59:29 GMT -5
If they were being truly genuine and honest, instead, they would have admitted that they didn't want to pay Mookie his market value ( which of course they wouldn't because how do you do that??). On one hand, you get Henry saying that players deserve the right to go to free agency, which Musial and Williams didn't have, but yet I don't remember ever reading about any offers that weren't considered a hometown discount by market standards. I think the truth is that they didn't want to pay market value for him, and I think a reasonable guess isn't necessarily because of the annual although had he offered say 10 years and $350 million and was turned down, which still might have been turned down, I think it would feel a bit different. I'm sure the years were the big turnoff, but if the Sox ever do land a premier free agent, they're going to have to give in terms of years which won't feel comfortable, and if that's ever the case, then why go to an outside free agent and give it to him versus your own player? I always thought it was interesting when I was reading David Ortiz's book about how the Sox will go crazy to get somebody else's free agent but then suddenly be very restrictive when it comes to their own free agent if they don't sense that they're getting some sort of discount. There's no world in which the Red Sox can't afford to keep Betts. Math, however, is hard. I too have been finding myself using old Simpson's to express myself on the daily. Completely agree with the captioned meme, but until the Yankees (or anyone) sustain going over then it's just billionaires playing by the billionaire club rules.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Feb 18, 2020 16:06:37 GMT -5
There's no world in which the Red Sox can't afford to keep Betts. Math, however, is hard. I too have been finding myself using old Simpson's to express myself on the daily. Completely agree with the captioned meme, but until the Yankees (or anyone) sustain going over then it's just billionaires playing by the billionaire club rules. We'll see if those rules change when the strike of 2022 hits. Something will change. Can't see things staying the same. I think this time the Union will be very dug in.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,923
|
Post by ericmvan on Feb 29, 2020 23:50:20 GMT -5
I've started looking into park effects as measured by wOBA - xwOBA. Since the former is the actual result and the latter is the average result based on EV and Launch Angle across all of MLB regardless of the direction the ball was hit, you can look at things like ... fly balls pulled by RH hitters.
It's quite tricky, because if you look at what home hitters have done, you've got a small group of hitters who may have been selected for the ballpark, and a larger group of defenders who are less familiar with it. If you look at what road hitters have done, you are absolutely looking at the home defense quality (which might be largely one guy), not just the park effect on the average road hitter.
Be that as it may, from 2017 to 2019, on fly balls pulled by RHB:
Fenway Park ranked 2nd in MLB for road hitters (behind Minute Maid), while Dodger Stadium ranked 19th.
Fenway ranked 1st for home hitters while Dodger Stadium ranked 23rd.
But just stating the ranks doesn't express the actual magnitude of the difference. As you can probably guess by the evidence of your eyeballs, Fenway and Minutemaid are off in the stratosphere for RH pulled fly balls.
Fenway is 3.1 standard deviations better than Dodger Stadium for home hitters (.432 to .199, 2.4 SD to -0.7). It's 2.7 SD better for road hitters (.481 to .219, 2.4 to -0.3).
Now, hitting fly balls to LF is not all of Mookie's offensive game. (I probably should have included LD, and will the next time I run these numbers!). Out of 206 RHB with 500+ PA the last three years, he ranked just 34th in park-neutral value (xwOBA x number of balls hit). But he did that ranking 43rd in frequency and 78th in xwOBA. He has really benefited from his fit to the park.
Mookie re-signing with the Dodgers instead of coming back to Boston would be like a bit like Fred Lynn trading himself to the Angels. Not that extreme, but just as hard to justify.
I'd be surprised if Mookie doesn't already know about the Fenway / Chavez Ravine difference. The Red Sox have probably told him, in fact. He'll be experiencing it first hand this year.
|
|
|
Post by sarasoxer on Mar 1, 2020 9:32:40 GMT -5
I've started looking into park effects as measured by wOBA - xwOBA. Since the former is the actual result and the latter is the average result based on EV and Launch Angle across all of MLB regardless of the direction the ball was hit, you can look at things like ... fly balls pulled by RH hitters. It's quite tricky, because if you look at what home hitters have done, you've got a small group of hitters who may have been selected for the ballpark, and a larger group of defenders who are less familiar with it. If you look at what road hitters have done, you are absolutely looking at the home defense quality (which might be largely one guy), not just the park effect on the average road hitter. Be that as it may, from 2017 to 2019, on fly balls pulled by RHB: Fenway Park ranked 2nd in MLB for road hitters (behind Minute Maid), while Dodger Stadium ranked 19th. Fenway ranked 1st for home hitters while Dodger Stadium ranked 23rd. But just stating the ranks doesn't express the actual magnitude of the difference. As you can probably guess by the evidence of your eyeballs, Fenway and Minutemaid are off in the stratosphere for RH pulled fly balls. Fenway is 3.1 standard deviations better than Dodger Stadium for home hitters (.432 to .199, 2.4 SD to -0.7). It's 2.7 SD better for road hitters (.481 to .219, 2.4 to -0.3). Now, hitting fly balls to LF is not all of Mookie's offensive game. (I probably should have included LD, and will the next time I run these numbers!). Out of 206 RHB with 500+ PA the last three years, he ranked just 34th in park-neutral value (xwOBA x number of balls hit). But he did that ranking 43rd in frequency and 78th in xwOBA. He has really benefited from his fit to the park.
Mookie re-signing with the Dodgers instead of coming back to Boston would be like a bit like Fred Lynn trading himself to the Angels. Not that extreme, but just as hard to justify.
I'd be surprised if Mookie doesn't already know about the Fenway / Chavez Ravine difference. The Red Sox have probably told him, in fact. He'll be experiencing it first hand this year.
Not sure that I could absorb all the detail but the gist is what I supposed. One would suspect that Mookie knew this, but if so, he obviously risks denting his value. If he hits .285-.290 with 23 Hrs., is he commanding 12/35? Maybe he will be back next year! The Fred Lynn situation is what had come to my mind.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Mar 1, 2020 10:07:39 GMT -5
Not sure that I could absorb all the detail but the gist is what I supposed. One would suspect that Mookie knew this, but if so, he obviously risks denting his value. If he hits .285-.290 with 23 Hrs., is he commanding 12/35? Maybe he will be back next year! The Fred Lynn situation is what had come to my mind. Or he'll just lower his launch angle and go up the middle a little more and hit .330 with a 15% walk rate.
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Mar 1, 2020 10:52:13 GMT -5
Not sure that I could absorb all the detail but the gist is what I supposed. One would suspect that Mookie knew this, but if so, he obviously risks denting his value. If he hits .285-.290 with 23 Hrs., is he commanding 12/35? Maybe he will be back next year! The Fred Lynn situation is what had come to my mind. Or he'll just lower his launch angle and go up the middle a little more and hit .330 with a 15% walk rate. This is exactly the thing about these predictions: the best players adjust. And Mookie, who is good at everything, can take a hit to his power and still be awesome. And a comparison to Lynn should always have the caveat that after he left Boston he basically never played a full season again. A chronically injured guy playing age-29 forward is a good case for declining numbers anywhere. Edit: indeed, Lynn had one of his best years in 1982 in CA. Setting his two huge seasons aside, this was as good as he was in Boston (4.7 WAR, 3rd highest OPS+ of his career). He also played over 130 games for one of only two times in his post-Boston career.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Mar 1, 2020 11:10:18 GMT -5
I've started looking into park effects as measured by wOBA - xwOBA. Since the former is the actual result and the latter is the average result based on EV and Launch Angle across all of MLB regardless of the direction the ball was hit, you can look at things like ... fly balls pulled by RH hitters. It's quite tricky, because if you look at what home hitters have done, you've got a small group of hitters who may have been selected for the ballpark, and a larger group of defenders who are less familiar with it. If you look at what road hitters have done, you are absolutely looking at the home defense quality (which might be largely one guy), not just the park effect on the average road hitter. Be that as it may, from 2017 to 2019, on fly balls pulled by RHB: Fenway Park ranked 2nd in MLB for road hitters (behind Minute Maid), while Dodger Stadium ranked 19th. Fenway ranked 1st for home hitters while Dodger Stadium ranked 23rd. But just stating the ranks doesn't express the actual magnitude of the difference. As you can probably guess by the evidence of your eyeballs, Fenway and Minutemaid are off in the stratosphere for RH pulled fly balls. Fenway is 3.1 standard deviations better than Dodger Stadium for home hitters (.432 to .199, 2.4 SD to -0.7). It's 2.7 SD better for road hitters (.481 to .219, 2.4 to -0.3). Now, hitting fly balls to LF is not all of Mookie's offensive game. (I probably should have included LD, and will the next time I run these numbers!). Out of 206 RHB with 500+ PA the last three years, he ranked just 34th in park-neutral value (xwOBA x number of balls hit). But he did that ranking 43rd in frequency and 78th in xwOBA. He has really benefited from his fit to the park.
Mookie re-signing with the Dodgers instead of coming back to Boston would be like a bit like Fred Lynn trading himself to the Angels. Not that extreme, but just as hard to justify.
I'd be surprised if Mookie doesn't already know about the Fenway / Chavez Ravine difference. The Red Sox have probably told him, in fact. He'll be experiencing it first hand this year.
Doubt that would stop Mookie from re-signing with the Dodgers. He'll go where the best contract is. It's that simple. It's a business decision for him (not that there's anything wrong with that). As far as the Sox telling Mookie that LA isn't the right park for him, I kind of doubt it. Players aren't interested in being told what they can't do as in "you wouldn't hit as well in this park" - and I sincerely doubt the Red Sox would even imply that to him. Mookie is smart and will adjust his game and still be one of the elite players in baseball. It's pretty simple. Mookie feels his true market value is well above $300 million and the Sox don't want to pay his true market value. The Sox will keep guys that have a "strike" against him, but keeping a guy like Mookie they won't do. They were able to retain Ortiz because he had the "DH factor" working against him, so he was never going to get top dollar no matter how well he hit. Wakefield and Varitek were never elite players. Pedroia, well he's a different kind of cat, as is Sale who has the lack of durability factor working against him. But Mookie, you can't knock anything off him at all. He excels in every phase of baseball including the intangibles such as intelligence, being a leader, a good teammate, and being durable - so with Mookie you HAVE to pay top dollar. And I don't think the Sox are truly willing to do that.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Mar 1, 2020 11:15:17 GMT -5
I've started looking into park effects as measured by wOBA - xwOBA. Since the former is the actual result and the latter is the average result based on EV and Launch Angle across all of MLB regardless of the direction the ball was hit, you can look at things like ... fly balls pulled by RH hitters. It's quite tricky, because if you look at what home hitters have done, you've got a small group of hitters who may have been selected for the ballpark, and a larger group of defenders who are less familiar with it. If you look at what road hitters have done, you are absolutely looking at the home defense quality (which might be largely one guy), not just the park effect on the average road hitter. Be that as it may, from 2017 to 2019, on fly balls pulled by RHB: Fenway Park ranked 2nd in MLB for road hitters (behind Minute Maid), while Dodger Stadium ranked 19th. Fenway ranked 1st for home hitters while Dodger Stadium ranked 23rd. But just stating the ranks doesn't express the actual magnitude of the difference. As you can probably guess by the evidence of your eyeballs, Fenway and Minutemaid are off in the stratosphere for RH pulled fly balls. Fenway is 3.1 standard deviations better than Dodger Stadium for home hitters (.432 to .199, 2.4 SD to -0.7). It's 2.7 SD better for road hitters (.481 to .219, 2.4 to -0.3). Now, hitting fly balls to LF is not all of Mookie's offensive game. (I probably should have included LD, and will the next time I run these numbers!). Out of 206 RHB with 500+ PA the last three years, he ranked just 34th in park-neutral value (xwOBA x number of balls hit). But he did that ranking 43rd in frequency and 78th in xwOBA. He has really benefited from his fit to the park.
Mookie re-signing with the Dodgers instead of coming back to Boston would be like a bit like Fred Lynn trading himself to the Angels. Not that extreme, but just as hard to justify.
I'd be surprised if Mookie doesn't already know about the Fenway / Chavez Ravine difference. The Red Sox have probably told him, in fact. He'll be experiencing it first hand this year.
Not sure that I could absorb all the detail but the gist is what I supposed. One would suspect that Mookie knew this, but if so, he obviously risks denting his value. If he hits .285-.290 with 23 Hrs., is he commanding 12/35? Maybe he will be back next year! The Fred Lynn situation is what had come to my mind. Lynn is the closest parallel, but like others have said - they called him Fragile Freddy for a reason - he had a lot of injury issues, unlike Betts who has been durable. Plus he lacked Betts' speed and baserunning abilities and wasn't the defensive player Mookie was. Mookie has been playing RF but I have no doubt he would have been a Gold Glove CF if not for having the one guy who was even better in JBJ. Lynn had no choice but to play CF, but he wasn't a very rangy CF and his arm wouldn't have compared to Betts in RF (nor Evans). Offensively Lynn is a close parallel to Mookie, but the rest of the game - Mookie has been better. But Lynn going at age 28 is the closest parallel. Will always wonder what Lynn could have accomplished had he stayed healthy - and yeah, if he had been a Red Sox his whole career and healthy, his numbers would have been ridiculous. Do wonder if we would have ever seen Wade Boggs though. The Sox got Lansford in a deal and wouldn't have dealt him for Tony Armas. Ah, maybe Boggs would have been a 1b meaning no Bill Buckner or Lansford simply would have been dealt for somebody else.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Mar 1, 2020 11:32:15 GMT -5
The point that Eric brought up touches on something I've said for years. Mookie is worth much more to the Red Sox than to other teams. One, because they need two CFers. Two, because of how he has a swing built for Fenway. The point is not whether Mookie wants to play in Boston or LA. The point is which team is going to offer him more money? It's kind of like Beltre in Seattle. The Mariners wouldn't ever outbid another team to sign him after they saw how much Seattle killed his production. But if that happens to Mookie in LA, will the Dodgers outbid the Red Sox?
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Mar 1, 2020 11:33:56 GMT -5
Okay, all you wannabe economists. There is no market value established for Mookie Betts at this time. So you can stop projecting that. MLB doesn't work that way now and it may never work that way. Players are constrained within the confines of a pre-arb and arbitration framework till they hit free-agency. The bidding hasn't started yet.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Mar 1, 2020 13:27:41 GMT -5
Okay, all you wannabe economists. There is no market value established for Mookie Betts at this time. So you can stop projecting that. MLB doesn't work that way now and it may never work that way. Players are constrained within the confines of a pre-arb and arbitration framework till they hit free-agency. The bidding hasn't started yet. I'm certainly no economist and while there may be no established market value, Mookie already made it clear that he believes his market will exceed 10 years $300 million. An educated guess would be around $35 million. I mean it's not going to be 20 million/year and it's not going to be $50 million/year. The bigger question is for how long.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Mar 1, 2020 14:10:19 GMT -5
All well and good. But what Betts or anyone else believes is irrelevant to a price set by the market. It has not spoken.
Should the Sox offer him the number he threw out there? That's the crux of the discussion on this board and I've been interested in what people here have to say. But it isn't about the market value. That hasn't been determined.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Mar 1, 2020 14:59:26 GMT -5
I don't think the current plan is to re-sign Betts, yet that could change.
You might not know Betts Market exactly, yet we know the market conditions. We know Betts mindset about getting the biggest deal and we know the Dodgers with tons of money will be involved. We know the big prior contracts he'll use as examples why he's worth more. Make no mistake his current plan is to top Trouts deal.
Dodger Stadium could certainly reduce Betts overall numbers, yet wouldn't his war be adjusted? Which is what really matters.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Mar 1, 2020 15:50:19 GMT -5
I don't think the current plan is to re-sign Betts, yet that could change. You might not know Betts Market exactly, yet we know the market conditions. We know Betts mindset about getting the biggest deal and we know the Dodgers with tons of money will be involved. We know the big prior contracts he'll use as examples why he's worth more. Make no mistake his current plan is to top Trouts deal. Dodger Stadium could certainly reduce Betts overall numbers, yet wouldn't his war be adjusted? Which is what really matters. What good are his adjusted numbers to the Dodgers though? They'll still be getting less from him than the Red Sox would be getting.
|
|
|