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.
8/25-8/27 Red Sox vs. Dodgers Series Thread
|
Post by costpet on Aug 28, 2023 7:57:53 GMT -5
Mookie beat us, plain and simple. He even came close on the 2nd game.
|
|
cdj
Veteran
Posts: 14,149
|
Post by cdj on Aug 28, 2023 8:02:22 GMT -5
Mookie went 1-4 in game 1, that’s hardly beating us. Yesterday, sure. A typical Bettsian performance
Freeman killed us too
I’m just glad Verdugo had a good series, the discourse would not be fun if he didn’t
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 28, 2023 8:13:56 GMT -5
They aren't in must-win territory yet, but the margin for error is getting thin. They can realistically only lose 1 or 2 more series and expect to make the playoffs. Essentially, they need to be the anti-Yankees. It's stunning how bad they've become, 1-12-3 in their last 16 series (with Oakland in June being their only win). FYI they literally can’t lose a series for the rest of this season if they are to win 89 games. Trying to stay positive, but if they even lose one series, it would take a complete meltdown of either Texas, Seattle or Houston in order for them to grab the 3rd wildcard. Fangraphs projects: Mariners 91-71 Astros 91-71 Rangers 90-72 Blue Jays 89-73 Red Sox 85-77 Even as a sunny optimist, 89-90 wins feels tough to reach. Would need to go 20-11 basically rest of the way - not impossible obviously, but very tough. It feels like their best path is to overperform what's left of their projections by just a few games (87 wins?) and see Rangers (or another AL West Team) and Toronto blow a handful of games on their end. Which isn't exactly crazy. Getting the WC deficit down to 2ish games ASAP seems paramount. Feels like you need to be in a position by the middle of next month where one really good week for you and one really bad week for the other 2-3 teams gives you a chance to sneak in.
|
|
|
Post by scottysmalls on Aug 28, 2023 8:20:53 GMT -5
They aren't in must-win territory yet, but the margin for error is getting thin. They can realistically only lose 1 or 2 more series and expect to make the playoffs. Essentially, they need to be the anti-Yankees. It's stunning how bad they've become, 1-12-3 in their last 16 series (with Oakland in June being their only win). FYI they literally can’t lose a series for the rest of this season if they are to win 89 games. Trying to stay positive, but if they even lose one series, it would take a complete meltdown of either Texas, Seattle or Houston in order for them to grab the 3rd wildcard. ”Literally” isn’t quite accurate here. Ex: if they sweep the White Sox and lose 2/3 to the Rangers they still win 89 games in the tweeted scenario.
|
|
|
Post by yuchangclan on Aug 28, 2023 9:15:11 GMT -5
Quote just read from the WEEI site in the after game report.. "It's a trade that can never be defended and a stain that will never be erased, the trade of Mookie Betts by the Red Sox." That was the assessment from Sean McDonough on the Mookie Betts trade just moments after the former Red Sox superstar blasted his 35th home run of the season (Tying his career-high), putting the Dodgers on top 4-0. Yup. Not only has Mookie tied his career high in homers, but Verdugo is just 1 HR from tying HIS career high. Only problem is that Verdugo’s career high is 13.
|
|
|
Post by patford on Aug 28, 2023 10:34:51 GMT -5
Quote just read from the WEEI site in the after game report.. "It's a trade that can never be defended and a stain that will never be erased, the trade of Mookie Betts by the Red Sox." That was the assessment from Sean McDonough on the Mookie Betts trade just moments after the former Red Sox superstar blasted his 35th home run of the season (Tying his career-high), putting the Dodgers on top 4-0. Yup. Not only has Mookie tied his career high in homers, but Verdugo is just 1 HR from tying HIS career high. Only problem is that Verdugo’s career high is 13. News flash. Sports reporter makes stupid remark.
|
|
|
Post by patford on Aug 28, 2023 10:41:44 GMT -5
FYI they literally can’t lose a series for the rest of this season if they are to win 89 games. Trying to stay positive, but if they even lose one series, it would take a complete meltdown of either Texas, Seattle or Houston in order for them to grab the 3rd wildcard. ”Literally” isn’t quite accurate here. Ex: if they sweep the White Sox and lose 2/3 to the Rangers they still win 89 games in the tweeted scenario. There's a number of factors in play and situations can change very quickly. Texas seems to be in free fall and Toronto just lost the left side of it's infield. With the Sox, even if they sneak in, the real hope they might go on some kind of post season run came down to the hope Paxton-Sale-Bello would all be clicking at the right time. At the moment Paxton looks to be wearing down and should probably be skipped a turn but that's highly unlikely. Bello also looks to be not as sharp (possibly fatigue) and Sale has been only okay. So bottom line for me is the Sox aren't going anywhere but of course if they sweep the Astros that would change everything for a week.
|
|
|
Post by soxfansince67 on Aug 28, 2023 10:41:56 GMT -5
Not only has Mookie tied his career high in homers, but Verdugo is just 1 HR from tying HIS career high. Only problem is that Verdugo’s career high is 13. News flash. Sports reporter makes stupid remark. I thought the sports reporter was spot on.
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Aug 28, 2023 10:42:44 GMT -5
Not only has Mookie tied his career high in homers, but Verdugo is just 1 HR from tying HIS career high. Only problem is that Verdugo’s career high is 13. News flash. Sports reporter makes stupid remark. Except that he is actually speaking on behalf of a lot of people. So you are free to disagree, but you can’t say it doesn’t represent a widely held sentiment.
|
|
|
Post by scottysmalls on Aug 28, 2023 10:50:00 GMT -5
News flash. Sports reporter makes stupid remark. Except that he is actually speaking on behalf of a lot of people. So you are free to disagree, but you can’t say it doesn’t represent a widely held sentiment. Not talking about this statement, but there are plenty of stupid beliefs held by a lot of people, so that alone isn't exculpatory.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Aug 28, 2023 10:51:20 GMT -5
News flash. Sports reporter makes stupid remark. Except that he is actually speaking on behalf of a lot of people. So you are free to disagree, but you can’t say it doesn’t represent a widely held sentiment. No, it wasn't a sound statement. "The Red Sox shouldn't have traded Mookie Betts" is a reasonable and defensible statement that reflects a widely shared sentiment. "The Mookie Betts trade can't be defended" is stupid and false, because there is obviously a reasonable and defensible view that it was necessary for them to make the trade.
Does anyone say this about the Nationals trading Juan Soto? Was that a trade that "can't be defended"? The umbrage of the national media seems monomaniacally focused on the Red Sox trading Mookie for reasons that seem to go a little beyond reason. (Which I say as someone who is still pained by the fact that they let Mookie leave.)
|
|
|
Post by awalkinthepark on Aug 28, 2023 10:54:39 GMT -5
Was letting Corey Seager leave "a stain that will never be erased" for the Dodgers? What about Harper and the Nats? Correa and the Astros? The Braves with Freddie Freeman and Dansby Swanson? It's a serious question, do the media outlets for those teams constantly harp on good players that signed elsewhere?
|
|
|
Post by yuchangclan on Aug 28, 2023 11:06:42 GMT -5
Was letting Corey Seager leave "a stain that will never be erased" for the Dodgers? What about Harper and the Nats? Correa and the Astros? The Braves with Freddie Freeman and Dansby Swanson? It's a serious question, do the media outlets for those teams constantly harp on good players that signed elsewhere? The players you listed all left their respective teams via free agency rather than trade. I guess the fact that Mookie left via trade makes it much worse in the eyes of the masses??
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Aug 28, 2023 11:11:43 GMT -5
Except that he is actually speaking on behalf of a lot of people. So you are free to disagree, but you can’t say it doesn’t represent a widely held sentiment. No, it wasn't a sound statement. "The Red Sox shouldn't have traded Mookie Betts" is a reasonable and defensible statement that reflects a widely shared sentiment. "The Mookie Betts trade can't be defended" is stupid and false, because there is obviously a reasonable and defensible view that it was necessary for them to make the trade.
Does anyone say this about the Nationals trading Juan Soto? Was that a trade that "can't be defended"? The umbrage of the national media seems monomaniacally focused on the Red Sox trading Mookie for reasons that seem to go a little beyond reason. (Which I say as someone who is still pained by the fact that they let Mookie leave.)
Well, in the case of Soto, it is different because a) they suck; and b) they got a big package back. And Soto is about 1/2 Mookie’s value this year. In the immortal words of Larry Holmes, he can’t carry Mookie’s jockstrap. I don’t want to relitigate, but I will say that there are almost no precedents in baseball history for the Mookie trade. Babe, obviously. Frank Robinson? You have a team a season removed from its best year ever trading one of the best players in franchise history as he enters his prime for a sub-prime return. I think the media are fixated on it because there are so few comparable moves in baseball (sports?) history. It is a massive story and will remain so decades from now. Trading Nomar was *nothing* compared to it.
|
|
|
Post by soxfansince67 on Aug 28, 2023 11:11:51 GMT -5
Mookie was a generational talent and important to the Red Sox fan base. All other examples noted above are comparing apples and oranges.
|
|
|
Post by awalkinthepark on Aug 28, 2023 11:13:46 GMT -5
Was letting Corey Seager leave "a stain that will never be erased" for the Dodgers? What about Harper and the Nats? Correa and the Astros? The Braves with Freddie Freeman and Dansby Swanson? It's a serious question, do the media outlets for those teams constantly harp on good players that signed elsewhere? The players you listed all left their respective teams via free agency rather than trade. I guess the fact that Mookie left via trade makes it much worse in the eyes of the masses?? Right. The Red Sox got 2 MLB starters plus Downs who was a top 100 prospect in baseball for 1 year of Mookie, and a COVID shortened one at that. Without looking, can anyone name any player that was drafted with a comp pick the above teams got by letting those players walk?
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Aug 28, 2023 11:25:24 GMT -5
No, it wasn't a sound statement. "The Red Sox shouldn't have traded Mookie Betts" is a reasonable and defensible statement that reflects a widely shared sentiment. "The Mookie Betts trade can't be defended" is stupid and false, because there is obviously a reasonable and defensible view that it was necessary for them to make the trade.
Does anyone say this about the Nationals trading Juan Soto? Was that a trade that "can't be defended"? The umbrage of the national media seems monomaniacally focused on the Red Sox trading Mookie for reasons that seem to go a little beyond reason. (Which I say as someone who is still pained by the fact that they let Mookie leave.)
Well, in the case of Soto, it is different because a) they suck; and b) they got a big package back. And Soto is about 1/2 Mookie’s value this year. In the immortal words of Larry Holmes, he can’t carry Mookie’s jockstrap. I don’t want to relitigate, but I will say that there are almost no precedents in baseball history for the Mookie trade. Babe, obviously. Frank Robinson? You have a team a season removed from its best year ever trading one of the best players in franchise history as he enters his prime for a sub-prime return. I think the media are fixated on it because there are so few comparable moves in baseball (sports?) history. It is a massive story and will remain so decades from now. Trading Nomar was *nothing* compared to it. Oh yeah, Nomar! That's another one that has hardly lived in infamy the way the Mookie trade has. An obvious mitigating factor is that the Red Sox broke the curse that same season, but it nonetheless goes to show that it is just not unheard of for teams to trade away franchise players when it serves the long-term interests of the franchise.
As for the Soto comparison, they were trading away 2.5 seasons of Soto vs. 1 season of Mookie; of course it was a bigger return. And for that matter it is hardly a fait accompli that the Nationals will get more out of that haul then the Red Sox have gotten out of Verdugo/Downs/Wong; beyond Gore those prospects are kind of struggling.
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Aug 28, 2023 11:28:11 GMT -5
Well, in the case of Soto, it is different because a) they suck; and b) they got a big package back. And Soto is about 1/2 Mookie’s value this year. In the immortal words of Larry Holmes, he can’t carry Mookie’s jockstrap. I don’t want to relitigate, but I will say that there are almost no precedents in baseball history for the Mookie trade. Babe, obviously. Frank Robinson? You have a team a season removed from its best year ever trading one of the best players in franchise history as he enters his prime for a sub-prime return. I think the media are fixated on it because there are so few comparable moves in baseball (sports?) history. It is a massive story and will remain so decades from now. Trading Nomar was *nothing* compared to it. Oh yeah, Nomar! That's another one that has hardly lived in infamy the way the Mookie trade has. An obvious mitigating factor is that the Red Sox broke the curse that same season, but it nonetheless goes to show that it is just not unheard of for teams to trade away franchise players when it serves the long-term interests of the franchise.
As for the Soto comparison, they were trading away 2.5 seasons of Soto vs. 1 season of Mookie; of course it was a bigger return. And for that matter it is hardly a fait accompli that the Nationals will get more out of that haul then the Red Sox have gotten out of Verdugo/Downs/Wong; beyond Gore those prospects are kind of struggling.
Yeah, I think the fact that they broke the Curse — and that trade was key in doing it! — makes it very different. And Nomar was already in decline, as well. Trades that make you *better* tend not to get as scrutinized.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Aug 28, 2023 11:52:11 GMT -5
Not only has Mookie tied his career high in homers, but Verdugo is just 1 HR from tying HIS career high. Only problem is that Verdugo’s career high is 13. News flash. Sports reporter makes stupid remark. So do fans who have trouble criticizing their favorite team for making costly mistakes.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Aug 28, 2023 11:55:45 GMT -5
Oh yeah, Nomar! That's another one that has hardly lived in infamy the way the Mookie trade has. An obvious mitigating factor is that the Red Sox broke the curse that same season, but it nonetheless goes to show that it is just not unheard of for teams to trade away franchise players when it serves the long-term interests of the franchise.
As for the Soto comparison, they were trading away 2.5 seasons of Soto vs. 1 season of Mookie; of course it was a bigger return. And for that matter it is hardly a fait accompli that the Nationals will get more out of that haul then the Red Sox have gotten out of Verdugo/Downs/Wong; beyond Gore those prospects are kind of struggling.
Yeah, I think the fact that they broke the Curse — and that trade was key in doing it! — makes it very different. And Nomar was already in decline, as well. Trades that make you *better* tend not to get as scrutinized. But setting aside the question of whether keeping Mookie for the 2020 season would have made them "better" than 5-6 years of Verdugo + Wong, the criticisms clearly go beyond any question of on-field performance; there's this tone of moral umbrage about the trade. How else to explain MacDonough's statement that it will leave a "stain" that will never be washed out or whatever? And again, as far as I know you just never see this in comparable situations, like with the Nationals and Soto.
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Aug 28, 2023 12:03:15 GMT -5
Yeah, I think the fact that they broke the Curse — and that trade was key in doing it! — makes it very different. And Nomar was already in decline, as well. Trades that make you *better* tend not to get as scrutinized. But setting aside the question of whether keeping Mookie for the 2020 season would have made them "better" than 5-6 years of Verdugo + Wong, the criticisms clearly go beyond any question of on-field performance; there's this tone of moral umbrage about the trade. How else to explain MacDonough's statement that it will leave a "stain" that will never be washed out or whatever? And again, as far as I know you just never see this in comparable situations, like with the Nationals and Soto. Again, I don’t see the Soto situation as the same. How many MVPs has he won? Rings? GGs? Is he a fan favorite? He is a very good player — not even the best on his team — who got traded. And he was on a team going nowhere. They’d lost Harper, spent a fortune on a star who would never play again, etc. It is not a close comparison. I don’t know about stain on the franchise per se. I think the people responsible will never escape it, just as the Ruth trade has never faded. The whole “Curse of the Bambino” was a form of “stain.” Literal? No. But it lasted through generations. I think where we’ll never agree is the “comparable situation.” The Angels have never traded Trout. They kept Ohtani. No comps left. (Looking at career per 162 games, Soto is 5.7 bWAR, Trout is 9.3, and Mookie is 8.3… one of those is very good but not like others).
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Aug 28, 2023 12:07:17 GMT -5
Was letting Corey Seager leave "a stain that will never be erased" for the Dodgers? What about Harper and the Nats? Correa and the Astros? The Braves with Freddie Freeman and Dansby Swanson? It's a serious question, do the media outlets for those teams constantly harp on good players that signed elsewhere? The players you listed all left their respective teams via free agency rather than trade. I guess the fact that Mookie left via trade makes it much worse in the eyes of the masses?? They had to trade him because they weren't willing to pay him the 360 million plus that it would have required. They wanted him for a certain figure which was on the 300 - 320 range and they werent going to go higher. They set their limit. Knowing they'd have to go beyond it made sense to trade him than lose him for a pick, which is hard to argue. They knew he wasn't coming back on a hometown discount and they werent willing to go to the top of the market which 300 - 320 was never going to be. What is easy to argue is that the Sox should have been willing to go higher. That should be painfully obvious by now. The Sox drew the line 19 years ago and it cost them A-Rod, which was baffling given how close they were. But that worked out swimmingly because Manny was Manny, A-Rod was A-Rod, the actual future Nomar deal worked out, and they thankfully hung onto Lester. This time of not doing what it would take to get a deal done has hurt them. Oh, Verdugo and Wong are good for 1 year of Mookie, but I'm not at all convinced they wouldn't be a better team then, now, and later had Mookie stayed. Verdugo is a good player who'll probably never reach the ceiling of what his talent is and he'll be gone sooner than later and Wong is a useful placeholder until Teel is ready. Mookie is right on track for Cooperstown and I have no idea when we will next see the Sox develop or even acquire a 5 tool player like that with the 6th tool of plate discipline and 7th tool of a good head on his shoulders and excel at all 7 tools. Might not be in our lifetimes. He is a special player, and hes certainly a part of the reason the Dodgers won almost 2/3 of their games and was certainly a big reason the Sox did in 2018 as well. Definitely a guy you extend for and build your franchise around.
|
|
|
Post by patford on Aug 28, 2023 12:25:22 GMT -5
News flash. Sports reporter makes stupid remark. Except that he is actually speaking on behalf of a lot of people. So you are free to disagree, but you can’t say it doesn’t represent a widely held sentiment. Obviously the trade could have turned out better but it's obvious (to me and I'm sure others) Betts had zero interest in staying in Boston. And yes I saw his recent diplomatic remarks. The reporter is also assuming there were better offers. The center piece of the trade was supposed to be Downs. It turned out to most people's surprise that he is not at all a good player.
|
|
|
Post by patford on Aug 28, 2023 12:32:13 GMT -5
Except that he is actually speaking on behalf of a lot of people. So you are free to disagree, but you can’t say it doesn’t represent a widely held sentiment. No, it wasn't a sound statement. "The Red Sox shouldn't have traded Mookie Betts" is a reasonable and defensible statement that reflects a widely shared sentiment. "The Mookie Betts trade can't be defended" is stupid and false, because there is obviously a reasonable and defensible view that it was necessary for them to make the trade.
Does anyone say this about the Nationals trading Juan Soto? Was that a trade that "can't be defended"? The umbrage of the national media seems monomaniacally focused on the Red Sox trading Mookie for reasons that seem to go a little beyond reason. (Which I say as someone who is still pained by the fact that they let Mookie leave.)
The people who can't let it go are all of the mind there was any chance Betts was going to resign with the Sox. I am of the mind he wasn't going to. The fact is he said he wanted to test the market but shortly after he was traded to the Dodgers he signed a long term contract. As far as I am concerned that's a case closed. If some believe otherwise they may be right but I'm not buying it. BTW. I don't blame Betts at all for doing what he wanted to do. Most people would prefer LA to Boston (or any other MLB city).
|
|
|
Post by bluechip on Aug 28, 2023 13:05:16 GMT -5
Mookie was a generational talent and important to the Red Sox fan base. All other examples noted above are comparing apples and oranges. Bryce Harper wasn’t that to the Nationals? Freeman wasn’t that to the Braves?
|
|
|