Red Sox Trade Betts + Price To The Dodgers

[nickagneta]

I also like Mookie, but don't LOVE him as a player.

He’s the second best player in baseball, is elite offensively and defensively, steals bases, can hit anywhere in the lineup, is a great teammate and citizen, is durable, and has won a title.

By that standard, there’s never been a player on the Red Sox that you’ve loved.

I guess this is like the equivalent of Billy King sending multiple future first-round picks to Boston for aging PP34 and KG but probably worse based on reactions lol.

Actually, no. It's nothing like that. Not even close.

It would be the equivalent of trading Larry Bird in 1983.

[Roy H.]

I also like Mookie, but don't LOVE him as a player.

He’s the second best player in baseball, is elite offensively and defensively, steals bases, can hit anywhere in the lineup, is a great teammate and citizen, is durable, and has won a title.

By that standard, there’s never been a player on the Red Sox that you’ve loved.

I guess this is like the equivalent of Billy King sending multiple future first-round picks to Boston for aging PP34 and KG but probably worse based on reactions lol.

Actually, no. It's nothing like that. Not even close.

It would be the equivalent of trading Larry Bird in 1983.

For Derek Harper and two late firsts.

[jambr380]

I also like Mookie, but don't LOVE him as a player.

He’s the second best player in baseball, is elite offensively and defensively, steals bases, can hit anywhere in the lineup, is a great teammate and citizen, is durable, and has won a title.

By that standard, there’s never been a player on the Red Sox that you’ve loved.

Oh, he's an awesome player, but I definitely don't believe he is the 2nd best player in baseball. I think you're just being emotional with your last statement (and I don't hold it against you) - obviously there have been plenty of Sox players that I've loved and it's not always based on overall talent.

I've said many times that I would have liked to keep him here, but I understand where management is coming from and they have continued to produce championship-level teams. If Mookie and/or the Red Sox didn't trend downward last season, I believe they would tried harder to keep him. They made some poor decisions after winning the World Series 16 months ago and they are paying for it. It's a bummer, but baseball is so much different than basketball in terms of player impact (super-duper  at the Bird comparisons) that I'm willing to see where we go from here.

[Alec14]

I also like Mookie, but don't LOVE him as a player.

He’s the second best player in baseball, is elite offensively and defensively, steals bases, can hit anywhere in the lineup, is a great teammate and citizen, is durable, and has won a title.

By that standard, there’s never been a player on the Red Sox that you’ve loved.

Oh, he's an awesome player, but I definitely don't believe he is the 2nd best player in baseball. I think you're just being emotional with your last statement (and I don't hold it against you) - obviously there have been plenty of Sox players that I've loved and it's not always based on overall talent.

I've said many times that I would have liked to keep him here, but I understand where management is coming from and they have continued to produce championship-level teams. If Mookie and/or the Red Sox didn't trend downward last season, I believe they would tried harder to keep him. They made some poor decisions after winning the World Series 16 months ago and they are paying for it. It's a bummer, but baseball is so much different than basketball in terms of player impact (super-duper  at the Bird comparisons) that I'm willing to see where we go from here.

He's pretty much universally considered the second best position player in baseball after Trout.

https://www.mlb.com/news/top-100-mlb-players-for-2019-c303970816

[Fafnir]

Mookie has been the second best player over the past 5 years to Trout. He's had two 10 WAR years and 3 6 WAR years. He won the MVP one of those years and was second in the other year. He's never had a sub 6 WAR year.

Go look at the active WAR leaders everyone above him has a ton more years or is barely above him except for Trout. Goldschmidt, Donaldson have 3 more years and only 1 more WAR. Meanwhile Trout has 3 years and 30 more! Basically Mookie would have to repeat his MVP level years for the next 3 years to match Trout, Trout is nuts.....
https://www.baseball-reference.com/leaders/WAR_bat_active.shtml

You can feel he's on the decline at age 26 and will fall off that second best production pace. But he's been the second best player in baseball for 5 consistently awesome years.

[slamtheking]

Not giving Jon Lester a deal just to save money looked ridiculously bad just a year or two after doing it. And, of course, what did they do after? They signed pitchers to long term, very expensive contracts that didn't turn out to be as good as Lester over that time period.

This non-signing/trade of Betts will make the non-signing of Lester look pathetic in no time whatsoever and do you know what will happen in a year or two? They will sign an inferior player to a long term, very expensive contract and that player will play worse over time than Mookie Betts.

Count on it!!!

The Sox ownership and management screwed the pooch on this one and no amount of horse manure that John Henry shovels and throws at my feet is going to make me feel differently or make me spend my time or money following the Sox for the next couple years, at the very least.

It's too bad all those season ticket holders can't get out of those tickets. Maybe a year or three with less than a million paid tickets might make John Henry not think of us fans as brainless sheep that just hand over our money and say thank you, no matter how poorly they treat us.

as a Brewer fan, all I can say is good luck Sox fans.  Sox gave away the type of player every other team that's serious about winning would have resigned if at all possible.   welcome to the world of middling teams that spend a lesser amount of money hoping to catch lightning in a bottle to make a wildcard spot.  The money in that contract is staggering and would be a huge albatross if he gets injured or drops off in production quickly but if affordability is the issue, the team should have cut ties with a lot of other underperformers and hung on to Mookie.

side note: hope Holt has a better year than most of our typical FA signings that have an immediate first-year drop-off to half their productivity.

[bellerephon]

Not giving Jon Lester a deal just to save money looked ridiculously bad just a year or two after doing it. And, of course, what did they do after? They signed pitchers to long term, very expensive contracts that didn't turn out to be as good as Lester over that time period.

This non-signing/trade of Betts will make the non-signing of Lester look pathetic in no time whatsoever and do you know what will happen in a year or two? They will sign an inferior player to a long term, very expensive contract and that player will play worse over time than Mookie Betts.

Count on it!!!

The Sox ownership and management screwed the pooch on this one and no amount of horse manure that John Henry shovels and throws at my feet is going to make me feel differently or make me spend my time or money following the Sox for the next couple years, at the very least.

It's too bad all those season ticket holders can't get out of those tickets. Maybe a year or three with less than a million paid tickets might make John Henry not think of us fans as brainless sheep that just hand over our money and say thank you, no matter how poorly they treat us.

as a Brewer fan, all I can say is good luck Sox fans.  Sox gave away the type of player every other team that's serious about winning would have resigned if at all possible.   welcome to the world of middling teams that spend a lesser amount of money hoping to catch lightning in a bottle to make a wildcard spot.  The money in that contract is staggering and would be a huge albatross if he gets injured or drops off in production quickly but if affordability is the issue, the team should have cut ties with a lot of other underperformers and hung on to Mookie.

side note: hope Holt has a better year than most of our typical FA signings that have an immediate first-year drop-off to half their productivity.

I am not a fan of trading a player like Betts and agree there is a significant chance that the Sox regret it, but to say they are now going to be a middling team that won’t spend money is absurd. Once the clock on the repeater tax has been reset they will go big again and spend lots of money. BTW, trading Betts was not only about tax issues, they have legitimate concerns about being able to resign him and did not want to lose him in free agency.

[Fafnir]

The idea that only by trading Mookie could you reset the tax is a heck of a  .

Maybe Mookie would have been more happy to stay with the Red Sox if they hadn't spent nearly a year leaking that they were going to trade him to avoid paying him.

Again, EVEN before Mookie was moved they were hoping that their best hitter would opt out of a one year option. AKA they had no intention of trying to win this year. It's the process, but instead of picks and talent they're getting payroll relief by trading their best player.

I just keep making the analogy in my head that this is the equivalent of the C's making a title run this year, giving Gordon a rich new contract and trading Tatum in 2022 after a down year to dump Hayward.