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.
The Big Bad Mookie Betts Thread
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Sept 3, 2014 15:21:33 GMT -5
I've been advocating considering Mookie at 3rd for a long time, or making him a super sub, and now the Castillo signing has complicated matters further. Given all considerations though, the OF is getting crowded. I don't like us trading Nava as we need the LH bat and we don't want to sell low potentially on Craig. We can't count on squat from Victorino but it's not like we can trade him either. It's a quandry. It's not like we are going to move Castillo. So what would be the best solution given all the variables?
Believe it or not I think I would consider selling high on Holt. That guy has a lot of value suddenly, being able to play so many positions well at a cheap price. Lots of teams can't afford proper depth and he would be huge to them. And Mookie could then fill some of Holt's roll. Including at 3rd and the OF.
We need Cespedes badly. We can't trade Castillo realistically or Victorino and we aren't going to bail on Craig given his recent results. Nava and Holt are badly needed LH bats. In all honesty, it is not clean. Are we going to trade Cespedes, only to clean up the situation if he has unrealistic salary extention demands? To me it's the following steps:
1) Talk to Cespedes and tell him take this deal to extend or they are moving on. Make it a solid deal but if he doesn't bite move on. Trade him. Put Craig in LF. 2) Assuming Cespedes takes the deal, shop Holt for solid value in a position of need. 3) If that doesn't work, shop Nava. *** Mookie has gotta play. Castillo unfortunately has gotta play unless he proves he can't cut it, which may well be the case. And Craig has gotta play until he proves he isn't going to produce. This is a mess for 2015. An even worse situation potentially than this year but we need to play it out IMO.
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Sept 3, 2014 15:24:03 GMT -5
If it comes down to Holt or Mookie, i'd take Mookie in a heartbeat.
|
|
|
Post by chavopepe2 on Sept 3, 2014 15:32:56 GMT -5
Am I the only one who wants to trade Betts? I mean, I don't get why people are so against trading him. We know he's really good but that shouldn't stop you from trading him. The thing is, Mookie is clearly not nearly as good in Center field as he is in 2nd base, and he would lose a lot of value in Center Field, and even more in Left or Right Field. Also considering that we already have Craig, Castillo, Cespedes, Victorino, and Nava, with Bradley there if he can figure it out, I don't see a place for him in the outfield. These factors make me think that he would be much more valuable to us in a trade than on the field, provided we get good value of course (I'm definitely not for trading him for something that isn't worth it), and if we don't get good value, we definitely don't have to trade him, but I would be thrilled if we traded him for good value. Also I think that acquiring Craig, Cespedes and Castillo is a clear statement he won't play outfield for us. I see people proposing Castillo/Betts/Cespedes or some variation of that all the time, but that leaves Allen Craig, who is clearly a starter quality player on the bench, and Shane Victorino, who should be an elite bench player as the 5th outfielder, and it knocks Nava, our only lefty outfielder, off the roster. It really doesn't make any sense unless we trade one of those guys, and I don't see us trading any of these guys really Castillo-You don't sign a guy for 72 million to trade him, also we would have to subsidize a lot to get any value for him, because the other teams clearly didn't think he was worth 72 million or they would've bid that. Cespedes-He only has one year left, so you wouldn't get a ton of value, or anything that would help you more in 2015 than Cespedes would, also they've shown that they want to re-sign him. Craig-Trading a guy who was a .306/.358/.492 guy his whole career before this year, and this year put up .228/.287/.341 is all kinds of dumb Victorino-Would be selling low just like Craig, people seem to forget he was a 5.8 WAR player in 2013. Now we know you can't count on him to play, but the other teams know that too, so he wouldn't get much of value and he could be extremely valuable off the bench to us. Nava-Destroys righties and would be a key late game righty batter for us, and could start many games against righties for us. Also would be selling low, and with how righty heavy this team is, I don't see us trading away another lefty to give Mookie space on the bench This is the primary point of disagreement. I don't think it is a good idea to go into next season counting on Allen Craig to be a starter or Victorino to be much of anything. I like the idea of Betts-Castillo-Cespedes in the outfield a lot better than counting on Allen Craig to bounce back (which is far from a sure thing) or Victorino staying healthy, and certainly not both. I believe Betts is an elite offensive prospect. Sure, if you can get Stanton for him you do that. The problem is the likelihood of someone becoming available that it is worth trading Betts for is very low. More likely, if you force a Betts trade it would be for someone like Cole Hamels, which IMO is a terrible idea.
|
|
|
Post by soxfan1615 on Sept 3, 2014 15:39:46 GMT -5
Am I the only one who wants to trade Betts? I mean, I don't get why people are so against trading him. We know he's really good but that shouldn't stop you from trading him. The thing is, Mookie is clearly not nearly as good in Center field as he is in 2nd base, and he would lose a lot of value in Center Field, and even more in Left or Right Field. Also considering that we already have Craig, Castillo, Cespedes, Victorino, and Nava, with Bradley there if he can figure it out, I don't see a place for him in the outfield. These factors make me think that he would be much more valuable to us in a trade than on the field, provided we get good value of course (I'm definitely not for trading him for something that isn't worth it), and if we don't get good value, we definitely don't have to trade him, but I would be thrilled if we traded him for good value. Also I think that acquiring Craig, Cespedes and Castillo is a clear statement he won't play outfield for us. I see people proposing Castillo/Betts/Cespedes or some variation of that all the time, but that leaves Allen Craig, who is clearly a starter quality player on the bench, and Shane Victorino, who should be an elite bench player as the 5th outfielder, and it knocks Nava, our only lefty outfielder, off the roster. It really doesn't make any sense unless we trade one of those guys, and I don't see us trading any of these guys really Castillo-You don't sign a guy for 72 million to trade him, also we would have to subsidize a lot to get any value for him, because the other teams clearly didn't think he was worth 72 million or they would've bid that. Cespedes-He only has one year left, so you wouldn't get a ton of value, or anything that would help you more in 2015 than Cespedes would, also they've shown that they want to re-sign him. Craig-Trading a guy who was a .306/.358/.492 guy his whole career before this year, and this year put up .228/.287/.341 is all kinds of dumb Victorino-Would be selling low just like Craig, people seem to forget he was a 5.8 WAR player in 2013. Now we know you can't count on him to play, but the other teams know that too, so he wouldn't get much of value and he could be extremely valuable off the bench to us. Nava-Destroys righties and would be a key late game righty batter for us, and could start many games against righties for us. Also would be selling low, and with how righty heavy this team is, I don't see us trading away another lefty to give Mookie space on the bench This is the primary point of disagreement. I don't think it is a good idea to go into next season counting on Allen Craig to be a starter or Victorino to be much of anything. I like the idea of Betts-Castillo-Cespedes in the outfield a lot better than counting on Allen Craig to bounce back (which is far from a sure thing) or Victorino staying healthy, and certainly not both. I believe Betts is an elite offensive prospect. Sure, if you can get Stanton for him you do that. The problem is the likelihood of someone becoming available that it is worth trading Betts for is very low. More likely, if you force a Betts trade it would be for someone like Cole Hamels, which IMO is a terrible idea. I'm not saying I want to force a trade for him, in fact, i said I didn't want to in the post. Also, I said I wanted to keep Victorino in a bench role because he would most likely not stay healthy. If he stays healthy, we have a fantastic bench player who can play a lot more than a regular bench player, and we could even start him and bump Castillo to the bench or whatever, if he doesn't, bench players don't play enough to cause a significant problem if he gets hurt. Bring up JBJ or Alex Hassan, and you don't take a huge hit at all. I think Craig bouncing back is pretty much a sure thing though, when do 30 year old players just fall off a cliff without having a wrist injury? They do, however, have down years all the time, so I don't get why everyone is so unsure if Craig will bounce back.
|
|
|
Post by soxfan1615 on Sept 3, 2014 15:46:49 GMT -5
Also, the Red Sox will not force a trade for him either, they will trade him for what they think is fair value if they trade him, but most people here will probably have unrealistic expectations for Mookie and hate the trade(that's new)
|
|
|
Post by klostrophobic on Sept 3, 2014 16:39:13 GMT -5
133 wRC+ with a .295 BABIP. This guy could be the best hitter on the team next year. I find it hard to believe you can get equal value back for him. How much is a 5 win player making the league minimum worth? His trade value should be as high, if not higher than Giancarlo Stanton's.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Sept 3, 2014 16:40:38 GMT -5
I've been advocating considering Mookie at 3rd for a long time, or making him a super sub, and now the Castillo signing has complicated matters further. Given all considerations though, the OF is getting crowded. I don't like us trading Nava as we need the LH bat and we don't want to sell low potentially on Craig. We can't count on squat from Victorino but it's not like we can trade him either. It's a quandry. It's not like we are going to move Castillo. So what would be the best solution given all the variables? Believe it or not I think I would consider selling high on Holt. That guy has a lot of value suddenly, being able to play so many positions well at a cheap price. Lots of teams can't afford proper depth and he would be huge to them. And Mookie could then fill some of Holt's roll. Including at 3rd and the OF. We need Cespedes badly. We can't trade Castillo realistically or Victorino and we aren't going to bail on Craig given his recent results. Nava and Holt are badly needed LH bats. In all honesty, it is not clean. Are we going to trade Cespedes, only to clean up the situation if he has unrealistic salary extention demands? To me it's the following steps: 1) Talk to Cespedes and tell him take this deal to extend or they are moving on. Make it a solid deal but if he doesn't bite move on. Trade him. Put Craig in LF. 2) Assuming Cespedes takes the deal, shop Holt for solid value in a position of need. 3) If that doesn't work, shop Nava. *** Mookie has gotta play. Castillo unfortunately has gotta play unless he proves he can't cut it, which may well be the case. And Craig has gotta play until he proves he isn't going to produce. This is a mess for 2015. An even worse situation potentially than this year but we need to play it out IMO. Betts' situation has almost no overlap with Holt's situation. You could in theory have Betts take over Holt's super-sub role, but that would entail forcing your best prospect to learn two defensive positions (3B and SS) that he's never played/hasn't played in years. That seems like a bad idea.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,830
|
Post by nomar on Sept 3, 2014 16:43:08 GMT -5
133 wRC+ with a .295 BABIP. This guy could be the best hitter on the team next year. I find it hard to believe you can get equal value back for him. How much is a 5 win player making the league minimum worth? His trade value should be as high, if not higher than Giancarlo Stanton's. He's not a 5 win player at this moment though, nor will he be over the winter. He could easily be that a year from now though, which is why nobody wants to see him traded. Look at Anthony Rendon at this time last year. Rendon definitely had good trade value, but a year later, his value in trade would be comparable to Stanton.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Sept 3, 2014 16:47:27 GMT -5
Also, the Red Sox will not force a trade for him either, they will trade him for what they think is fair value if they trade him, but most people here will probably have unrealistic expectations for Mookie and hate the trade(that's new) You're begging the question though-- what do you think is "fair value" for Betts? I, like klostrophobic, think there's only a handful of players in the league who are of comparable value to Mookie (a subject that is discussed in some detail in this thread in the trade proposal subforum). If that's the case, and none of those players were available, I'm happy to keep him rather than trade him. That's true even if it entails holding him down in the minors or playing him in a part-time role for some/most of 2015.
|
|
|
Post by klostrophobic on Sept 3, 2014 16:48:43 GMT -5
If you project his current 107 PA season over a full season he's a 4+ win player right now. He's easily a five-win player next year; he's fast, he walks, he doesn't strike out, he hits ropes everywhere, he could easily be an above-average CF. It's all there. If I'm making a list of 10 most valuable assets in baseball, Betts is on there pretty handily.
I legit don't think I would trade him for Stanton straight up given the hugely divergent salary demands.
|
|
|
Post by soxfan1615 on Sept 3, 2014 16:52:56 GMT -5
If you project his current 107 PA season over a full season he's a 4+ win player right now. He's easily a five-win player next year; he's fast, he walks, he doesn't strike out, he hits ropes everywhere, he could easily be an above-average CF. It's all there. If I'm making a list of 10 most valuable assets in baseball, Betts is on there pretty handily. I legit don't think I would trade him for Stanton straight up given the hugely divergent salary demands. No, hes not easily a 5 win player for next year, and no, Betts is not a top 10 asset in baseball. Prospect love is out of control
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,830
|
Post by nomar on Sept 3, 2014 17:03:03 GMT -5
If you project his current 107 PA season over a full season he's a 4+ win player right now. He's easily a five-win player next year; he's fast, he walks, he doesn't strike out, he hits ropes everywhere, he could easily be an above-average CF. It's all there. If I'm making a list of 10 most valuable assets in baseball, Betts is on there pretty handily. I legit don't think I would trade him for Stanton straight up given the hugely divergent salary demands. I think he will be a 5 WAR type player too, but his sample size isn't big enough for everyone to agree on him being that across the league. But if he is as good as he should be, then he'd certainly be in the conversation for top 10 in value in the majors. I'll try to keep this type of talk to a minimum outside of trade threads, but I would rather have Mookie than Machado. That probably isn't the view of most GMs at this point.
|
|
|
Post by gregblossersbelly on Sept 3, 2014 17:20:59 GMT -5
A second baseman with above-average athletic ability and good hands should have no problem at 3b. Most of the plays are with your hands. He's good at that. Some are made with your feet. He's good at that. Shifts make players move around a lot. Which shouldn't be a problem with him. I've seen him throw from the of. The routine throw from 3b to 1b won't be a prob, the dp to 2nd won't be a problem. How many plays does a 3b make deep behind the bag where it's all arm. When there's nobody on base. Once a month??
|
|
radiohix
Veteran
'At the end of the day, we bang. We bang. We're going to swing.' Alex Verdugo
Posts: 6,345
|
Post by radiohix on Sept 3, 2014 17:37:08 GMT -5
The question I keep asking my self: Why it's a given that Castillo's the starting CFer next year and Mookie has to prove that he can play in the majors? I mean, because the scouts liked what they saw from him hitting against some japanese and nicaraguan pitchers in some international tournaments and taking BPs againts a soft tossing college pitcher? Because they gave him a big contract (relative to cuban players of course)? They scouted Crawford for a whole year and they gave him a huge contract and we know how it ended! Castillo has to prove that he has the job because Mookie, when given consistent playing time, is proving it! Right here, right now!
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Sept 3, 2014 17:43:37 GMT -5
The more I think about it, the question of where Mookie plays in 2015 is incredibly short-sighted. Forget next year, trading Betts is a decision that potentially effects the Red Sox for the next five to ten years. There's plenty of places for him to play in 2016 and beyond and an extra year in AAA won't hurt him. Would it have made sense to have traded Youkilis back in '05 because he had to wait a year in Pawtucket for Kevin Millar leave?
|
|
|
Post by theburn on Sept 3, 2014 19:20:38 GMT -5
The more I think about it, the question of where Mookie plays in 2015 is incredibly short-sighted. Forget next year, trading Betts is a decision that potentially effects the Red Sox for the next five to ten years. There's plenty of places for him to play in 2016 and beyond and an extra year in AAA won't hurt him. Would it have made sense to have traded Youkilis back in '05 because he had to wait a year in Pawtucket for Kevin Millar leave? If we got equal or better value, yes.
|
|
|
Post by cardsox on Sept 3, 2014 19:31:52 GMT -5
My question is how bad would he have to be at 3b to NOT be extremely valuable? When you look at the putrid production we have gotten there for 2 years, he will no doubt blow that out of the water. I can't imagine a player described as superior at 2b can't be passable at 3b when paired with his offensive prowess. Put him at 3b and solve multiple issues... leadoff,3b, crowded of.
|
|
|
Post by awall on Sept 3, 2014 20:03:07 GMT -5
I would move Pedroia over Betts at this stage of their careers. Maybe they will figure out a way to pitch to him that exposes a weakness in his swing, but so far he looks like a guy you can't get rid of when you take cost into account.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Sept 3, 2014 20:18:52 GMT -5
The more I think about it, the question of where Mookie plays in 2015 is incredibly short-sighted. Forget next year, trading Betts is a decision that potentially effects the Red Sox for the next five to ten years. There's plenty of places for him to play in 2016 and beyond and an extra year in AAA won't hurt him. Would it have made sense to have traded Youkilis back in '05 because he had to wait a year in Pawtucket for Kevin Millar leave? If we got equal or better value, yes. If value is wins per dollar, then trading up from a player like Betts is next to impossible.
|
|
|
Post by dominicansoxfan on Sept 3, 2014 20:28:19 GMT -5
Does anyone remember the 2011 Draft last signing day and the Red Sox were trying to get a deal done with Golson and when he eventually said he wasn't going to sign, the Red Sox decided to come up to Mookie Betts asking price?
|
|
|
Post by klostrophobic on Sept 3, 2014 21:23:51 GMT -5
If you project his current 107 PA season over a full season he's a 4+ win player right now. He's easily a five-win player next year; he's fast, he walks, he doesn't strike out, he hits ropes everywhere, he could easily be an above-average CF. It's all there. If I'm making a list of 10 most valuable assets in baseball, Betts is on there pretty handily. I legit don't think I would trade him for Stanton straight up given the hugely divergent salary demands. No, hes not easily a 5 win player for next year, and no, Betts is not a top 10 asset in baseball. Prospect love is out of control I don't even view him as a prospect as he's not going back to AAA at this point. This dude is so clearly legit.
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Sept 3, 2014 21:28:21 GMT -5
I don't understand why other teams throw Mookie anything inside. He cleans out pitches on the inside corner of the plate about as well as anyone in baseball. They should be Middlebrooksing him with low and outside pitches all the freaking time.
I can't see Mookie as a top 10 value in baseball yet, as he is still relatively unproven but I'm with the Klost guy overall. He's probably a 5 win player.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,830
|
Post by nomar on Sept 4, 2014 14:29:12 GMT -5
I don't understand why other teams throw Mookie anything inside. He cleans out pitches on the inside corner of the plate about as well as anyone in baseball. They should be Middlebrooksing him with low and outside pitches all the freaking time. I can't see Mookie as a top 10 value in baseball yet, as he is still relatively unproven but I'm with the Klost guy overall. He's probably a 5 win player. Hard to "Middlebrooks" a guy who makes as much contact as Mookie does. His spray chart indicates that while his power is to the pull side, he's certainly not shying away from going with the outside pitch and shooting it the other way. That shows me that Mookie is just an impressively smart hitter, especially for his age. He has a good feel for when it's time to turn on and smack an inside pitch, but doesn't get pull happy or greedy for the long ball. He walks a lot, and obviously his contact rate is superb. For a guy his size making as much contact as he does, he really racks up the XBHs too. He's just a stud. Also I completely agree that worrying so much about his position next year is completely short sighted. He isn't going anywhere until 2020 at the earliest. His bat will play anywhere. And considering Castillo, Craig, or Victorino as locks for anything is pretty ambitious.
|
|
|
Post by dcsoxfan on Sept 4, 2014 15:29:32 GMT -5
If you project his current 107 PA season over a full season he's a 4+ win player right now. He's easily a five-win player next year; he's fast, he walks, he doesn't strike out, he hits ropes everywhere, he could easily be an above-average CF. It's all there. If I'm making a list of 10 most valuable assets in baseball, Betts is on there pretty handily. I legit don't think I would trade him for Stanton straight up given the hugely divergent salary demands. No, hes not easily a 5 win player for next year, and no, Betts is not a top 10 asset in baseball. Prospect love is out of control It's not about prospect love; it's about looking long-term vs. looking short-term. The luxury tax kicks in at $189 million. The average cost for one WAR via free agency is $6 million. A team needs about 35 WAR to reasonably compete for a wild card and about 45 WAR to reasonably compete for a division title. The 2013 Red Sox had over 50 WAR. Six years of control over an impact player (and Betts has very good chance to be one) for way below the market rate is an incredibly valuable commodity -- and it's awfully hard to build a contending team without at least a couple of these. At the moment, the Red Sox don't have any cost controlled impact players (although Betts, Bogaerts and Swihart could very easily become such players). Given that, I don't think the Red Sox should consider trading any of these players, unless a similar player (Betts for Gregory Polanco for instance) is coming back as the return.
|
|
jimoh
Veteran
Posts: 3,984
|
Post by jimoh on Sept 4, 2014 15:38:21 GMT -5
I don't understand why other teams throw Mookie anything inside. He cleans out pitches on the inside corner of the plate about as well as anyone in baseball. They should be Middlebrooksing him with low and outside pitches all the freaking time. I can't see Mookie as a top 10 value in baseball yet, as he is still relatively unproven but I'm with the Klost guy overall. He's probably a 5 win player. Hard to "Middlebrooks" a guy who makes as much contact as Mookie does. His spray chart indicates that while his power is to the pull side, he's certainly not shying away from going with the outside pitch and shooting it the other way. That shows me that Mookie is just an impressively smart hitter, especially for his age. He has a good feel for when it's time to turn on and smack an inside pitch, but doesn't get pull happy or greedy for the long ball. He walks a lot, and obviously his contact rate is superb. For a guy his size making as much contact as he does, he really racks up the XBHs too. He's just a stud….. Couldn't an even more confident version of this analysis have been made of Xander at the end of May? Or even last October? Long-term of course things looks great, but if Xander can hit as he has for three months, Mookie in 2015 could wind up anywhere on the zero to hero spectrum.
|
|
|