Red Sox/MLB 2020 Hot Stove VI - Fenway Sports Group now worth $6.6 BILLiON

Status
Not open for further replies.

Gator Mike

Registered User
Feb 28, 2002
11,407
9,618
Woburn, MA
Visit site
Yeah, how dare a player want to make what other similar players are getting.
Huh?

Haven't the reports been that the Red Sox would love to sign Mookie to a deal, but he's determined to go to free agency?

I mean, that's clearly his right. He's got the right to do whatever he feels is best for him.

But the same thing applies to the Red Sox. They've got to do what's best for the franchise. If they're not going to contend in 2020 (...and they're not...) then they can't take the risk that they'll lose him for nothing next winter.
 

Smitty93

Registered User
Dec 6, 2012
8,196
9,361
Yeah, how dare a player want to make what other similar players are getting.

We don't know the numbers he's looking for, but we all assume that if he were offered $1 less than Trout's deal, he would take it right now. I'm not sure that's the case. I think there's been reading between the lines by some that he just isn't interested in staying in Boston, unless it's a ridiculous overpay.

Now, from a capability standpoint, there's no one in the league who should be able to actually outbid you for someone, not even the Yankees.

Here's the thing with Betts, he's probably worth whatever you paid him, even an overpay, from an analytics perspective.

Let's say you pay him $355 million over 10 years. The expected $ value for 1 WAR is $8 million. That increases every year, but holding it static, he'd need to average 4.4 WAR per season, something he's exceeded in each of the five "full" MLB seasons he's played. He's averaged 7 WAR per year, so even if he could do that for just the next 6 years, and fell off a cliff after that, you'd break even. That's the secret with the true cream of the crop MLBers. It takes a lot for them to not be worth these massive contracts.

I mean, look at Pedroia, for instance. Assuming he doesn't play another game, he won't have even played 500 regular season games over the life of his contract. He's still had 12.4 WAR valued at $98.3 million, so it's barely an overpay at the actual $110 million you're paying him.
 

CDJ

Registered User
Nov 20, 2006
54,045
42,660
Hell baby
Idc that trout is off to what is possibly the greatest start to a career of anybody ever- if it was up to me I’d offer Mookie the biggest contract in baseball


I’m not sure if Mookie wants to stay here. I hope he does. Money should not be an issue when it comes to him
 

Mr Cartmenez

Registered User
May 15, 2009
5,019
1,747
Mannheim
I don't want to trade Betts as stated numerous times, but if he's not willing to sign an extension / give us a discount (which is his right), then it basically forces our hand. Would you feel better if they kept him and lose him next year for next to nothing? If they trade him, it does not mean that he can't come back next year, so we wouldn't really only lose one year if his prime in a year in which we are not true contenders.

It's almost scary how perfectly the Dodgers match up as a trade partner. They have the prospects and we have the impact player (MVP type in his prime). Players like that almost never hit the market. So even if they are not willing to give Mookie a record breaking deal, they'd still have him for one season and would be the favorites to win the world series, especially if they also get Price.

A trade is going to be difficult, because even if Mookie is only a rental, pretty great prospects have been traded at the deadline for those kind of players before...with less term (only half a season) and less impact. Look at what Chapman returned and you can imagine what Bloom is going to demand. Question is if LA is willing to pay the price.


A framework deal could be looking like this:

Betts and Price for Pederson (salary dump), May or Ruiz, Gonsolin and Verdugo
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->