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.
2020 Vision: Position Players
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Oct 15, 2019 14:53:12 GMT -5
Asking bc I saw some comments that suggest the Sox are looking to get under 208 so they may trade Mookie. We don't actually believe that to be true, right? So many different elements will go into that choice. Like who the GM is, what Martinez does, how good is the trade market, will Betts turn down a huge offer, etc. If he doesn't sign an extension I 100% believe they look into trading him and it's 50-50 at this moment that he gets traded.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Oct 15, 2019 14:59:03 GMT -5
Asking bc I saw some comments that suggest the Sox are looking to get under 208 so they may trade Mookie. We don't actually believe that to be true, right? For myself, I can’t wrap my brain around the idea that ownership would trade a legit shot at another championship in 2020 to reset the cap in 2020. It makes zero sense. Between $60M and $100M are coming off the books depending on whether JDM opts out and Pedey’s status. The Sox are already below the top cap. With some $$ league minimum talent like Chavis, Chatham, Dalbec, Houck etc. coming up, the Sox could also slide under the 2nd cap. So financial penalties for fielding this team could be minimal; and should be acceptable if the team can compete in October. Mookie and JBJ are under control for another year, allowing the Sox to again field a premier outfield defense while guys like Duran and Wilson prepare for the jump. It was the starting pitching that lost 2019. Repeat: it was the Starting Pitching that lost 2019, and we are told by the Sox we can reasonably expect bounce back years from Sale, Price, Eovaldi. We have seen that, even overused, Relief Pitching is good to very good and should be better and deeper in 2020. This team already has a top offense. It is also still young and largely homegrown. Throwing away the potential for another WS to reset the cap this year (a noble goal under different circumstances) makes, as I stated above, zero sense. IMO Better to wait until November 2021 after an exciting post-season and, perhaps, Mookie and JBJ are regrettably gone and the next wave of prospects like Duran, Wilson, Chatham, Feltman, Mata are getting their MLB feet under them. Has any player walked away from money to help a team like everyone keeps thinking Pedey will do?
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Oct 15, 2019 15:05:13 GMT -5
Not sure specifically to help the team, but other players have walked away and forfeited the money. Gil Meche, Ryan Dempster, I'm sure there have been a few others.
Part of the problem, though, is that it's not 100% clear whether Pedroia is still trying to play, and retiring while still trying to play complicates things. Dempster and Meche didn't want to play anymore.
|
|
gerry
Veteran
Enter your message here...
Posts: 1,667
|
Post by gerry on Oct 15, 2019 15:08:25 GMT -5
Answer: yes. The team would not be asking Pedey to walk away from money. In a retirement settlement, the same $$$, and maybe more to reflect inflation, would be distributed over a longer period of years. Good for Pedey, good for the Sox cap expectations, and good to have Pedey around for a long time, think Pesky. Conversely, any effort by the Sox to foolishly try to stiff Pedey would cost them dearly on many levels. They are far more generous than stupid. They will honor their contract in some manner, hopefully as a retirement plan which allows the Sox to maintain a contending team.
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Oct 15, 2019 15:16:18 GMT -5
Asking bc I saw some comments that suggest the Sox are looking to get under 208 so they may trade Mookie. We don't actually believe that to be true, right? So many different elements will go into that choice. Like who the GM is, what Martinez does, how good is the trade market, will Betts turn down a huge offer, etc. If he doesn't sign an extension I 100% believe they look into trading him and it's 50-50 at this moment that he gets traded. To be clear, I was asking if we believed they might trade Mookie BECAUSE they want to get under 208. I just don't believe that to be true. They aren't entirely independent concepts but I don't (personally) believe that the goal/mandate is the motivation for trading Mookie. Maybe I'm just inferring my own beliefs here but you trade Mookie because: 1. You think he has no interest in staying 2. You don't think he's worth what he's asking for in his next contract While I don't have 100% confidence in the current state of Sox Ownership/Mgmt, I'm struggling to think they are so ridiculously dumb as to trade Betts as a cost cutting measure. There are many reasons for their "goal not mandate" statement (and spinning is at/near the top of the list) but an entirely plausible one would also be "How much sense does it make to be over 208M if Mookie isn't part of the long-term equation?"
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Oct 15, 2019 15:18:56 GMT -5
There isn't a clause that allows him to retire and still get paid if a doctor deems he can't play anymore because of an injury that happened while playing?
If he retires it's only because he can no longer play due to an injury caused while playing. Frankly he deserves that money and shouldn't have to act like he wants to play to collect it if his knee is 100% done and he has no chance of coming back.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Oct 15, 2019 15:27:23 GMT -5
I wish they could just hire him as a $12M coach or something.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Oct 15, 2019 15:37:57 GMT -5
Answer: yes. The team would not be asking Pedey to walk away from money. In a retirement settlement, the same $$$, and maybe more to reflect inflation, would be distributed over a longer period of years. Good for Pedey, good for the Sox cap expectations, and good to have Pedey around for a long time, think Pesky. Conversely, any effort by the Sox to foolishly try to stiff Pedey would cost them dearly on many levels. They are far more generous than stupid. They will honor their contract in some manner, hopefully as a retirement plan which allows the Sox to maintain a contending team. I wouldn't count on this. Pedroia hasn't even decided to give up and retire let alone redistribute the money in the way you suggest. Until this is a real possibility, I wouldn't count on the Sox having $14 million removed from their payroll although it would certainly make it easier to get under the cap. Honestly the more likely scenario is that JD Martinez opts out and the Sox trade away one of their outfielders, either JBJ or Betts with it more likely to be Betts if Martinez remains, but if JD Martinez leaves, which is what I think will happen, the Sox will most likely tender JBJ and trade him and try to find a corner OF on the bargain bin and move Mookie to CF which will weaken the outfield defense but potentially save a good chunk of money. I mean the Sox are around 238 million I think, will see about $20 million in arbitration increases and $17 million extra in Sale's new contract kicking in and have to lose at least 50 million, so I'm guessing JD's approximate 20 million, Porcello's 20 million, JBJ's 8 million, $14 million from Sandoval, and about $14 million from the 1b combo of Moreland/Pearce and another $10 million from Holt, Nunez and Leon. That is about 189 million with about 17 million to fill in a lot of holes, like DH, outfielder, 2b, 1b, starting pitcher, starting pitching depth and relief depth if they lose JDM & JBJ.
|
|
gerry
Veteran
Enter your message here...
Posts: 1,667
|
Post by gerry on Oct 15, 2019 15:48:52 GMT -5
I wish they could just hire him as a $12M coach or something. How about something like 15 years at $2M?? This would take him to about age 50, leaving him financially strong. He is already set for life. His medical is paid for. His kids likely are his priorities and kids are expensive, and that kind of annual income would also put them through top colleges, while Pedey remains actively engaged with the Sox like Papi and Tek, has his 15 retired, even as he gets increasingly involved with his alma mater and other areas of interest. In sum, he gets his money, cares for his fam, and lives a full, enriching life without ever worrying about $$ or his place in the game. Nice.
|
|
|
Post by orion09 on Oct 15, 2019 18:11:33 GMT -5
For contracts with deferred $$, the AAV is calculated only over the “playing” years of the contract. So a $100M/5Y deal with $30M deferred would still be a 5 year deal ($20M AAV) for luxury tax purposes.
If Pedroia “retired,” and the Sox immediately gave him a coaching contract with the same $$ but spread out over more years, I think the league would see that as an attempt to manipulate the rules.
He’s owed the money unless he genuinely retires, and genuinely doesn’t want to get paid anymore.
|
|
|
Post by soxcentral on Oct 16, 2019 8:22:17 GMT -5
From Bleacher Report discussing potential trade packages for Mookie, if contract talks do break down. Not sure if they're realistic packages, but I like the OF/P focus. bleacherreport.com/articles/2857873-top-trade-packages-landing-spots-for-mookie-bettsSan DiegoHunter Renfroe - OF Luis Patino - P (#30 MLB Prospect) Xavier Edwards - IF (#72 MLB Prospect) NY MetsSteven Matz - P Brandon Nimmo - OF Thomas Szapucki - P (AA) CincinnatiJesse Winker - OF Nick Lodolo - P (#56 MLB Prospect) Tony Santillian - P (AA) LA DodgersJoc Pederson - OF Dustin May - P (#32 MLB Prospect) Dennis Santana - P (AAA) AtlantaIan Anderson - P (#31 MLB Prospect) Ender Inciante - OF PhiladelphiaZach Eflin - P Alec Bohm - 1B/3B (#34 MLB Prospect) Francisco Morales - P (A)
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Oct 16, 2019 16:50:59 GMT -5
So many different elements will go into that choice. Like who the GM is, what Martinez does, how good is the trade market, will Betts turn down a huge offer, etc. If he doesn't sign an extension I 100% believe they look into trading him and it's 50-50 at this moment that he gets traded. To be clear, I was asking if we believed they might trade Mookie BECAUSE they want to get under 208. I just don't believe that to be true. They aren't entirely independent concepts but I don't (personally) believe that the goal/mandate is the motivation for trading Mookie. Maybe I'm just inferring my own beliefs here but you trade Mookie because: 1. You think he has no interest in staying 2. You don't think he's worth what he's asking for in his next contract While I don't have 100% confidence in the current state of Sox Ownership/Mgmt, I'm struggling to think they are so ridiculously dumb as to trade Betts as a cost cutting measure. There are many reasons for their "goal not mandate" statement (and spinning is at/near the top of the list) but an entirely plausible one would also be "How much sense does it make to be over 208M if Mookie isn't part of the long-term equation?" Our ownership really cares about the narratives. Like I 100% agree that's why you trade Betts, yet ownership would never dare say that. So they have created a narrative where it's like they have to trade him because we have to reset. I don't think it has anything to really do with getting below the tax line. Sure they would prefer to, but the cost of going even 40 million over is rather small. They just want an excuse if they do move Betts that makes them look like they aren't being cheap not paying our best player in decades. Not that I would blame Henry, ten year plus long contracts are crazy risky for any player no matter how good they are. All depends what you get for Betts and what your goal is right? I could see a path to going for it. It doesn't seem likely though. The difference in long-term outlook that Henry talked about between him and DD sure seems to be going for year in and year out, versus regrouping to go big again down the road.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Oct 16, 2019 18:20:11 GMT -5
Yeah, he’s cut his K rate way down and boosted his power some. I think it’s fairly “real.” Lol...having him instead of Nunez is like a 4-win swing. Wow, I knew he had a good season but that .572 slugging is wild to see. The problem is he's been a really good hitter as a part timer for three years now, to where I don't really see him getting less than Holt. Same...he may be a part-timer, and I don’t think he’s good for more than 400 PA, but man, has he ever become a *hitter*. The OBP is nothing to sneeze at, either. Like you, i expect he’ll command roughly what Holt will: 2/$10M+. It’s unlikely he has more years like this one (doubt he’s a true-talent 1HR/20 PA guy, though the ball...idk), but i imagine he puts up 1-2 WAR in his half seasons. Lol, remember him coming up with Brandon Wood?
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Oct 16, 2019 18:51:30 GMT -5
From Bleacher Report discussing potential trade packages for Mookie, if contract talks do break down. Not sure if they're realistic packages, but I like the OF/P focus. bleacherreport.com/articles/2857873-top-trade-packages-landing-spots-for-mookie-bettsSan DiegoHunter Renfroe - OF Luis Patino - P (#30 MLB Prospect) Xavier Edwards - IF (#72 MLB Prospect) NY MetsSteven Matz - P Brandon Nimmo - OF Thomas Szapucki - P (AA) CincinnatiJesse Winker - OF Nick Lodolo - P (#56 MLB Prospect) Tony Santillian - P (AA) LA DodgersJoc Pederson - OF Dustin May - P (#32 MLB Prospect) Dennis Santana - P (AAA) AtlantaIan Anderson - P (#31 MLB Prospect) Ender Inciante - OF PhiladelphiaZach Eflin - P Alec Bohm - 1B/3B (#34 MLB Prospect) Francisco Morales - P (A) The SD package there is actually fairly reasonable, in that it’s a FV overpay (with a COF in Renfroe who could man RF in Fenway), which is what the Sox need. I’m not big on Pedersen, because he’s really only a platoon OF, but I like May a lot. If it were May/Verdugo or May/Julio Urías, it would be very hard to pass up. As FTHW noted previously, a “good” trade (a sensible one that could happen) hurts some for both sides to make. The only ones there that I see really fitting that criterion are the SD and CIN packages (LAD is borderline because May is a highly-rated guy who has MLB experience, but the other two are fungible). I get why they’re trying to include OF, but I think that’s unnecessary. If they got a viable MLB-ready SP, they could always just sign a FA OF. OTOH, a package like Cincy’s (I still like Santillan even if he had a down year) that includes Winker...where do they put him? He probably can’t play RF (weak arm), which puts them in a bit of a pickle (Benintendi isn’t playing RF either). I’d rather they ask for Tyler Stephenson. IMO, if the Sox are trading Mookie, they’re basically announcing that they’re giving up on 2020. As such, the only return they should be looking for is minor league talent. They’d be sort of tanking, so getting MLBers back doesn’t make a lot of sense unless they, too, can be flipped (or they have 4+ control years). And if they DO trade Mookie, I hope like hell they get high-upside talent like May or Patiño back that’s relatively close to MLB. They **try like hell** to re-sign Mookie next winter, a la NYY-Chapman.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Oct 16, 2019 19:28:32 GMT -5
Akiyama, for those unfamiliar. If he could be gotten at a cost savings (say, a 3/$15M deal), I think the Sox could and probably should sign him and trade JBJ. He’s a FA, not someone being posted, so it’d be a straightforward signing. Outstanding defensive CF with excellent OB skills and bat control. Sort of an Ichiro lite, with a smidge more power but not as much arm or speed (he’s still fast tho). Not a good base stealer, but I haven’t heard anything bad about other aspects of baserunning. Given his age and lack of power, he might sign relatively cheaply, so definitely worth exploring. www.cubsinsider.com/2019/10/10/cubs-should-take-long-look-at-japanese-cf-shogo-akiyama/He would be a solid low-cost replacement. But given his age (going to be 32) and declining numbers this past year, 3 years might be too long. It's rumored he has a 23/5 deal to stay in Japan, so it will be interesting to see if he's willing to give up more total dollars to compete in MLB. If they went this route I would anticipate they non-tender JBJ as i can't imagine a team would trade for him given his salary, as glove-first aging players coming off 1.4 fWAR seasons don't typically get paid. One thing about JBJ: his defense is, I think, substantially less likely to decline if he loses some speed (he’s already not that fast), because he depends on routes and first-step for his caliber of play (along with a terrific arm). He’s not a burner. I think he’d still have some value in trade, simply because he does get on base, he’s a good baserunner, and he provides gold-glove defense. On a one-year flier, I think there are several teams that would take that risk on a $10M deal. He projects to provide only in the $5M range for excess value, but that’s *something*, especially for a team with a hole. I seriously doubt they non-tender him.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Oct 16, 2019 19:39:56 GMT -5
Asking bc I saw some comments that suggest the Sox are looking to get under 208 so they may trade Mookie. We don't actually believe that to be true, right? For myself, I can’t wrap my brain around the idea that ownership would trade a legit shot at another championship in 2020 to reset the cap in 2020. It makes zero sense. Between $60M and $100M are coming off the books depending on whether JDM opts out and Pedey’s status. The Sox are already below the top cap. With some $$ league minimum talent like Chavis, Chatham, Dalbec, Houck etc. coming up, the Sox could also slide under the 2nd cap. So financial penalties for fielding this team could be minimal; and should be acceptable if the team can compete in October. Mookie and JBJ are under control for another year, allowing the Sox to again field a premier outfield defense while guys like Duran and Wilson prepare for the jump. It was the starting pitching that lost 2019. Repeat: it was the Starting Pitching that lost 2019, and we are told by the Sox we can reasonably expect bounce back years from Sale, Price, Eovaldi. We have seen that, even overused, Relief Pitching is good to very good and should be better and deeper in 2020. This team already has a top offense. It is also still young and largely homegrown. Throwing away the potential for another WS to reset the cap this year (a noble goal under different circumstances) makes, as I stated above, zero sense. IMO Better to wait until November 2020 after an exciting post-season and, perhaps, Mookie and JBJ are regrettably gone and the next wave of prospects like Duran, Wilson, Chatham, Feltman, Mata are getting their MLB feet under them. Edit: I know someone is going to take granular issue with elements of this post, as keeping JBJ to maintain one of the best OF in baseball, or the value of certain prospects. All variables aside, gutting a WS capable team to reset now, while raising tocket prices, is a silly thing to do. You'll want to check out the arb estimates on this thread. The team is either very close to, or above the first threshold if Pedroia stays on the books. If he were to come off, that gives them perhaps $20 million to work with below that figure. In all likelihood they'll be over that with no trades off the current roster, maybe an acquisition or two, and the amount they'll owe the riders on the AAA shuttle. There's a long way to go before the roster is all ironed out, of course. But that's the current baseline.
|
|
|
Post by soxcentral on Oct 16, 2019 20:19:47 GMT -5
The SD package there is actually fairly reasonable, in that it’s a FV overpay (with a COF in Renfroe who could man RF in Fenway), which is what the Sox need. I’m not big on Pedersen, because he’s really only a platoon OF, but I like May a lot. If it were May/Verdugo or May/Julio Urías, it would be very hard to pass up. As FTHW noted previously, a “good” trade (a sensible one that could happen) hurts some for both sides to make. The only ones there that I see really fitting that criterion are the SD and CIN packages (LAD is borderline because May is a highly-rated guy who has MLB experience, but the other two are fungible). I get why they’re trying to include OF, but I think that’s unnecessary. If they got a viable MLB-ready SP, they could always just sign a FA OF. OTOH, a package like Cincy’s (I still like Santillan even if he had a down year) that includes Winker...where do they put him? He probably can’t play RF (weak arm), which puts them in a bit of a pickle (Benintendi isn’t playing RF either). I’d rather they ask for Tyler Stephenson. IMO, if the Sox are trading Mookie, they’re basically announcing that they’re giving up on 2020. As such, the only return they should be looking for is minor league talent. They’d be sort of tanking, so getting MLBers back doesn’t make a lot of sense unless they, too, can be flipped (or they have 4+ control years). And if they DO trade Mookie, I hope like hell they get high-upside talent like May or Patiño back that’s relatively close to MLB. They **try like hell** to re-sign Mookie next winter, a la NYY-Chapman. Telson, I'm not sure what you think of Anderson and Inciante but that Atlanta package was the one that jumped out to me. A #5 cost-controlled starter ready to plug in and a long-term JBJ replacement, which would allow you to trade JBJ for more pitching (depth starter/reliever/prospect). Sign a decent RF and (assuming JD stays) that's still a competitive team if you're pitching is healthy. And more importantly, if those moves keep you under the cap you can make a much bigger offer to Mookie next offseason because the cap is no longer part of the thought process. It's essentially a "We can offer you X right now, but next offseason we can offer you X+Y once we've fixed our tax situation" and if Mookie truly wants to stay but demands top dollar I feel like its still a good bet he'd return.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Oct 16, 2019 21:00:14 GMT -5
The SD package there is actually fairly reasonable, in that it’s a FV overpay (with a COF in Renfroe who could man RF in Fenway), which is what the Sox need. I’m not big on Pedersen, because he’s really only a platoon OF, but I like May a lot. If it were May/Verdugo or May/Julio Urías, it would be very hard to pass up. As FTHW noted previously, a “good” trade (a sensible one that could happen) hurts some for both sides to make. The only ones there that I see really fitting that criterion are the SD and CIN packages (LAD is borderline because May is a highly-rated guy who has MLB experience, but the other two are fungible). I get why they’re trying to include OF, but I think that’s unnecessary. If they got a viable MLB-ready SP, they could always just sign a FA OF. OTOH, a package like Cincy’s (I still like Santillan even if he had a down year) that includes Winker...where do they put him? He probably can’t play RF (weak arm), which puts them in a bit of a pickle (Benintendi isn’t playing RF either). I’d rather they ask for Tyler Stephenson. IMO, if the Sox are trading Mookie, they’re basically announcing that they’re giving up on 2020. As such, the only return they should be looking for is minor league talent. They’d be sort of tanking, so getting MLBers back doesn’t make a lot of sense unless they, too, can be flipped (or they have 4+ control years). And if they DO trade Mookie, I hope like hell they get high-upside talent like May or Patiño back that’s relatively close to MLB. They **try like hell** to re-sign Mookie next winter, a la NYY-Chapman. Telson, I'm not sure what you think of Anderson and Inciante but that Atlanta package was the one that jumped out to me. A #5 cost-controlled starter ready to plug in and a long-term JBJ replacement, which would allow you to trade JBJ for more pitching (depth starter/reliever/prospect). Sign a decent RF and (assuming JD stays) that's still a competitive team if you're pitching is healthy. And more importantly, if those moves keep you under the cap you can make a much bigger offer to Mookie next offseason because the cap is no longer part of the thought process. It's essentially a "We can offer you X right now, but next offseason we can offer you X+Y once we've fixed our tax situation" and if Mookie truly wants to stay but demands top dollar I feel like its still a good bet he'd return. Yeah, I actually thought about that after I posted. I like Inciarte as a JBJ replacement. And I like Anderson, although not as much as May or Patiño. I probably dismissed it too quickly as a 2-player deal, because it’s probably a fairly sensible one. My main concern is that I really think the Sox need to get more long-term upside back if they’re going to go through trading Mookie and all that entails. Anderson is more a high-likelihood 3/4 than May or Patiño, who both have TOR upside. And while Inciarte is a solid CF, he had significant injury issues last year, and he’s basically a passable starter, not a “good” one. Anderson isn’t MLB-ready (he might be mid-season), so if I’m the Sox I’d need to get back another pitcher who could step right in. Even so, they’d be hard-pressed to make up the 7 WAR they’ll lose from Mookie. Getting 7 wins from one guy is like having two 4.5-win players. I really think they need to go all upside and rebuild the farm if they move Mookie. He provides SO much value over an average player, I think contention, while possible, is a huge longshot in his absence. I’d prefer they get a 20-40 range guy, a back-100, and a couple low-level lottery tickets with no MLB players coming back. Don’t get me wrong...they might *have* to move him (or risk getting just the draft pick), and I doubt it gets much better than the SD or Cincy deals, but I’d prefer they go as low-cost, high-upside as possible and then re-sign him next winter, when the prospects they got back and their own cohort in AA/AAA have a year more experience, and they can potentially cut more fat with low-cost replacements, and ideally sign one high-end FA. It sucks that they can’t go after Cole. He is a rare talent. Same for Rendon. Both of those guys are difference-makers. Rendon’s played 2b, too...imagine moving him back there, what the offense would be like. And pairing Cole with Sale...wow.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Oct 16, 2019 21:29:09 GMT -5
It sucks that they can’t go after Cole. He is a rare talent. Same for Rendon. Both of those guys are difference-makers. Rendon’s played 2b, too...imagine moving him back there, what the offense would be like. And pairing Cole with Sale...wow. The thing is, it looks great, until less than halfway through their megadeals and then we're in even worse shape than we are now. I'm all for unlimited spending if it's for 1 year deals. I mean look what Cabrera and Fielder did and are still doing to Detroit. (if you can't remember how much the Red Sox have wasted in the last 10 years)
|
|
|
Post by soxcentral on Oct 17, 2019 4:58:28 GMT -5
Yeah, I actually thought about that after I posted. I like Inciarte as a JBJ replacement. And I like Anderson, although not as much as May or Patiño. I probably dismissed it too quickly as a 2-player deal, because it’s probably a fairly sensible one. My main concern is that I really think the Sox need to get more long-term upside back if they’re going to go through trading Mookie and all that entails. Anderson is more a high-likelihood 3/4 than May or Patiño, who both have TOR upside. And while Inciarte is a solid CF, he had significant injury issues last year, and he’s basically a passable starter, not a “good” one. Anderson isn’t MLB-ready (he might be mid-season), so if I’m the Sox I’d need to get back another pitcher who could step right in. Even so, they’d be hard-pressed to make up the 7 WAR they’ll lose from Mookie. Getting 7 wins from one guy is like having two 4.5-win players. I really think they need to go all upside and rebuild the farm if they move Mookie. He provides SO much value over an average player, I think contention, while possible, is a huge longshot in his absence. I’d prefer they get a 20-40 range guy, a back-100, and a couple low-level lottery tickets with no MLB players coming back. Don’t get me wrong...they might *have* to move him (or risk getting just the draft pick), and I doubt it gets much better than the SD or Cincy deals, but I’d prefer they go as low-cost, high-upside as possible and then re-sign him next winter, when the prospects they got back and their own cohort in AA/AAA have a year more experience, and they can potentially cut more fat with low-cost replacements, and ideally sign one high-end FA. It sucks that they can’t go after Cole. He is a rare talent. Same for Rendon. Both of those guys are difference-makers. Rendon’s played 2b, too...imagine moving him back there, what the offense would be like. And pairing Cole with Sale...wow. Good stuff, Telson. Honestly I didn't know a ton about either player and was projecting maybe a bit too much optimism. I'm still hopeful of an extension which would put all this to rest. Your idea of going all upside is interesting, and likely right, but for the team would be quite risky to execute. Could be a PR nightmare for the ages if no headliner returns and the prospects, as they sometimes do, never amount to much.
|
|
|
Post by dmaineah on Oct 17, 2019 6:14:21 GMT -5
From Bleacher Report discussing potential trade packages for Mookie, if contract talks do break down. Not sure if they're realistic packages, but I like the OF/P focus. bleacherreport.com/articles/2857873-top-trade-packages-landing-spots-for-mookie-bettsSan DiegoHunter Renfroe - OF Luis Patino - P (#30 MLB Prospect) Xavier Edwards - IF (#72 MLB Prospect) NY MetsSteven Matz - P Brandon Nimmo - OF Thomas Szapucki - P (AA) CincinnatiJesse Winker - OF Nick Lodolo - P (#56 MLB Prospect) Tony Santillian - P (AA) LA DodgersJoc Pederson - OF Dustin May - P (#32 MLB Prospect) Dennis Santana - P (AAA) AtlantaIan Anderson - P (#31 MLB Prospect) Ender Inciante - OF PhiladelphiaZach Eflin - P Alec Bohm - 1B/3B (#34 MLB Prospect) Francisco Morales - P (A) No way Mookie gets traded before the deadline unless Atlanta offers up Pache, Waters & Anderson straight up for Mookie. I don’t like any of these potential trade packages for Mookie & certainly not before the season starts.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Oct 17, 2019 12:15:16 GMT -5
From Bleacher Report discussing potential trade packages for Mookie, if contract talks do break down. Not sure if they're realistic packages, but I like the OF/P focus. bleacherreport.com/articles/2857873-top-trade-packages-landing-spots-for-mookie-bettsSan DiegoHunter Renfroe - OF Luis Patino - P (#30 MLB Prospect) Xavier Edwards - IF (#72 MLB Prospect) NY MetsSteven Matz - P Brandon Nimmo - OF Thomas Szapucki - P (AA) CincinnatiJesse Winker - OF Nick Lodolo - P (#56 MLB Prospect) Tony Santillian - P (AA) LA DodgersJoc Pederson - OF Dustin May - P (#32 MLB Prospect) Dennis Santana - P (AAA) AtlantaIan Anderson - P (#31 MLB Prospect) Ender Inciante - OF PhiladelphiaZach Eflin - P Alec Bohm - 1B/3B (#34 MLB Prospect) Francisco Morales - P (A) No way Mookie gets traded before the deadline unless Atlanta offers up Pache, Waters & Anderson straight up for Mookie. I don’t like any of these potential trade packages for Mookie & certainly not before the season starts. I have to ask how you come to this conclusion? You see Betts worth a lot more than Sale? We got Sale for three years for about what Betts will make in one year. Your package includes three of the top 31 prospects in Baseball per MLB.com and the Braves top three guys rated #11, #23, and #31.
|
|
|
Post by dmaineah on Oct 17, 2019 12:29:40 GMT -5
That's right, if someone wants Mookie this off season.
|
|
|
Post by wcsoxfan on Oct 17, 2019 19:53:48 GMT -5
He would be a solid low-cost replacement. But given his age (going to be 32) and declining numbers this past year, 3 years might be too long. It's rumored he has a 23/5 deal to stay in Japan, so it will be interesting to see if he's willing to give up more total dollars to compete in MLB. If they went this route I would anticipate they non-tender JBJ as i can't imagine a team would trade for him given his salary, as glove-first aging players coming off 1.4 fWAR seasons don't typically get paid. One thing about JBJ: his defense is, I think, substantially less likely to decline if he loses some speed (he’s already not that fast), because he depends on routes and first-step for his caliber of play (along with a terrific arm). He’s not a burner. I think he’d still have some value in trade, simply because he does get on base, he’s a good baserunner, and he provides gold-glove defense. On a one-year flier, I think there are several teams that would take that risk on a $10M deal. He projects to provide only in the $5M range for excess value, but that’s *something*, especially for a team with a hole. I seriously doubt they non-tender him. That's a fine theory about how JBJ will age because he doesn't rely on speed, but playing the devil's advocate you can use that point to say that because he already doesn't have speed, if he gets any slower then he won't be able to play CF anyone, at which point he's either a bench player or out of MLB altogether (let's not forget the cliff Andruw Jones fell from). The 2 closest OFers to JBJ in fWAR are Kevin Pillar and Leury Garcia (although they do rely more on speed). Could you imagine a team paying 10mil/1yr for them.... Maybe if they're desperate, but probably not. Maybe JBJ gets a team to offer him around that, it wouldn't surprise me, but that would mean no other team with available funds perceives he has excess value or they would offer more. If the Red Sox tender him a contact or not, it wouldn't surprise me either way as he's close to his market value, but they aren't getting more than a flyer and a bag of chips if they try to trade him. Unless you really think there's a team out there looking to give him 15mil/1yr or more
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Oct 18, 2019 13:23:39 GMT -5
It sucks that they can’t go after Cole. He is a rare talent. Same for Rendon. Both of those guys are difference-makers. Rendon’s played 2b, too...imagine moving him back there, what the offense would be like. And pairing Cole with Sale...wow. The thing is, it looks great, until less than halfway through their megadeals and then we're in even worse shape than we are now. I'm all for unlimited spending if it's for 1 year deals. I mean look what Cabrera and Fielder did and are still doing to Detroit. (if you can't remember how much the Red Sox have wasted in the last 10 years) Of course; I think ideally a deal for guys their age is no more than 5-6 years. The market won’t bear that...MVP caliber guys get a 2+ year premium. So, I agree...but that’s all wrapped up in why I think it sucks. I really would love to see either in a Sox uni, just not at those prices. I’d rather have Mookie than either.
|
|
|