Betts/Price to LA for Verdugo/Jeter Downs/TBA

Status
Not open for further replies.

GoDa

lurker
Sep 25, 2017
948
over/under on MLB career IP for Bruce Gatorade... 200?
oooooh! and we get a cheap fungible OF!

fantastic haul. joy and optimism will sweep over the Hub.

this is going to be one of the worst attended Sox seasons in a long time. I bet they don't win 81.
 

SouthernBoSox

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2005
11,068
It’s tough for me to not look at the Dodgers who just traded a talented/solid but not spectacular OF and Maeda for Mookie Betts and a subsidized David Price and not think they came out smelling like roses.

With subsiding Price I would have expected another player in this. I like the 2 the Red Sox got but I think a couple of more lower level prospect pieces seem appropriate.
 
Oct 8, 2015
155
i cant remember being this disappointed in the red sox or a sports team. not sure i'll be buying that extra innings package this year. folding the season before it starts.
 

Ed Hillel

Wants to be startin somethin
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2007
23,689
Here
over/under on MLB career IP for Bruce Gatorade... 200?
oooooh! and we get a cheap fungible OF!

fantastic haul. joy and optimism will sweep over the Hub.

this is going to be one of the worst attended Sox seasons in a long time. I bet they don't win 81.
Better they had won 85 and Mookie walks for a comp pick (or nothing, depending on punishment)?
 

Muppet

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 25, 2012
425
Drunk
I can't work out if I have to burn my Mookie jersey or not.
Absolutely burn it, if he wasn't so selfish we wouldn't be in this position.

On another topic I have a John Henry no: 12/420 jersey you might be interested in.
 

Jed Zeppelin

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2008
37,527
It’s tough for me to not look at the Dodgers who just traded a talented/solid but not spectacular OF and Maeda for Mookie Betts and a subsidized David Price and not think they came out smelling like roses.

With subsiding Price I would have expected another player in this. I like the 2 the Red Sox got but I think a couple of more lower level prospect pieces seem appropriate.
Shame the Dodgers didn't have Dombrowski running the show. Guy was great at throwing in solid low-level prospects as the 3rd and 4th pieces.
 

Ed Hillel

Wants to be startin somethin
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2007
23,689
Here
No, that would be 2014 when they signed Hanley and Panda, and then traded for Porcello and signed him to big money as well. The only saving grace of that entire offseason was signing Moncada.
Don’t forget the foreplay of the 2014 offseason - Signing Rusney Castillo to a 7-year deal.
 

JCizzle

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 11, 2006
10,792
i cant remember being this disappointed in the red sox or a sports team. not sure i'll be buying that extra innings package this year. folding the season before it starts.
I think Smiling Joe Hesketh has been making the point I agree with - ratings will tank and they'll make some sort of Pablo Sandoval signing overreaction to this fuck up.
 

mikeot

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2006
6,202
Contrary to some of the conventional wisdom on this board, I like this trade for the long haul. A few thoughts:

1. Mookie is not Yaz. Yaz did not rebuff consistent team efforts to sign him to a long-term contract. Mookie probably doesn't want to re-sign with the Red Sox, and the Red Sox couldn't and shouldn't afford his contract demands.
2. This isn't really about saving John Henry's money. This is about re-setting the Red Sox payroll to avoid long-term luxury tax and draft penalties that hamstring the team's future competitiveness.
3. Jettisoning Price has to be considered a positive. While he may be a great teammate, he's a distraction and a public-relations albatross in the Boston media market.
4. Two major league ready prospects with nearly a decade of control between them strike me as a decent haul for 1 year of an un-resign-able Mookie and a guy none of us should be sad to see go.
5. Payroll flexibility! Bloom just undid all of Dombrowski's subpar payroll management, and now has a much cleaner slate to work with going forward.
Once the tears and rage subside, this makes perfect sense.
 

GoDa

lurker
Sep 25, 2017
948
The same reaction when Kyrie and Horford walked out the door last summer.

The Celtics survived, so will the Sox.
Absolutely not the same reaction. People were packing Kyrie's bags and everyone knew Al was on the back 9. Not even close.
 

8slim

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 6, 2001
14,175
Unreal America
Everything else aside, this makes me incredibly sad. I loved watching Mookie Betts play baseball for the Sox. I would have enjoyed doing so for many more years.
 

moondog80

heart is two sizes two small
SoSH Member
Sep 20, 2005
5,429
I can’t believe Friedman was able to turn Kenya Maeda into Graterol. Does he have naked pictures of someone?
Maeda is stupidly cheap. 12.5 total the next 4 years. Graterol is cheap too but has 9.2 IP in the majors and There Is No Such Thing As a Pitching Prospect.
 

mauf

Anderson Cooper × Mr. Rogers
Staff member
Dope
Alternatively, if they only wanted to get under the tax, couldn't they have done that by just trading Price (and JBJ if that wasn't quite enough)?
It’s clear that the market for Price was worse than you and I thought. If CB could’ve found a team willing to eat half of Price’s contract without a sweetener, he would’ve done that deal separately and gotten a better haul for Mookie.
 

bosockboy

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
11,521
St. Louis, MO
It’s tough for me to not look at the Dodgers who just traded a talented/solid but not spectacular OF and Maeda for Mookie Betts and a subsidized David Price and not think they came out smelling like roses.

With subsiding Price I would have expected another player in this. I like the 2 the Red Sox got but I think a couple of more lower level prospect pieces seem appropriate.
Not the same trade but they moved Pederson to make room.
 

Jed Zeppelin

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2008
37,527
I think Smiling Joe Hesketh has been making the point I agree with - ratings will tank and they'll make some sort of Pablo Sandoval signing overreaction to this fuck up.
This is the thing—they have made these mistakes in the past when they thought they saw a good opportunity to acquire talent for just money. If Bloom can avoid the trap—and is empowered to avoid the trap in the first place—then maybe we'll be okay.
 

DeadlySplitter

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 20, 2015
20,752
I see the outside opinion is the Dodgers fleeced us, not surprised by this prevailing opinion.

But Price is a negative asset... Mookie is a near-lock for at least 5 WAR, but who knows beyond that... feels overall like a fair trade to me
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
40,454
Thinking this board underestimates Mookie's talent takes a dim view of the posters here.
 

In my lifetime

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 18, 2003
937
Connecticut
Talent-wise of course it is no contest. However, this is all about resetting the cap and the absolute fact that Betts was going to test the market unless blown away with a 12/400+ offer.

Price is clearly a negative asset for the next 3 years. I think it also shows that the days of a Punto-like trade with that kind of salary dump and return is no longer in the cards. Money, long term contracts and the cap matter.
 
Last edited:

Soxy

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Dec 1, 2008
5,334
Wildcard hopefuls?
This move isn't about this season. It's about the long term health of the ball club.

They're basically hitting the reset button after Dombrowski threw all of their money at the major league roster, while ignoring the farm system. You can only do that for so long before the bill comes due, the well is dry, and now you have a roster full of overpaid, underperforming vets, with no talent pipeline behind them, and you're screwed for a decade. That's the road they were headed down.

They gave Dombrowski too much leeway after winning the World Series, which was a mistake. But they're admitting that mistake. They've course corrected, sanity has taken hold, they've pulled the rug out, and now it's back to reality.

For the long term health of the Boston Red Sox, this is a good thing, not a bad thing.
 

BornToRun

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 4, 2011
13,023
Well goddamnit. I get it but I certainly don’t like it. Mookie should’ve been a Red Sock for life and I’m really bummed about losing Price too as he was one of my favorites. I’ll still be here come opening day but it’s hard not to be incredibly bummed right now.

Thanks for everything, Mookie and David.
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
28,716
AZ
It’s tough for me to not look at the Dodgers who just traded a talented/solid but not spectacular OF and Maeda for Mookie Betts and a subsidized David Price and not think they came out smelling like roses.

With subsiding Price I would have expected another player in this. I like the 2 the Red Sox got but I think a couple of more lower level prospect pieces seem appropriate.
You have to think about baseball like you do football. The dodgers got down to 190m in 2018, and so they can rent a year of Mookie and take on half of Price. Just like in football, it is cyclical. Some teams are up in the cap and some are down.
 

glennhoffmania

but still failing
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 25, 2005
8,399,712
NY
$27 million on Betts and $15.5(if it's half of the $31 that counts towards the CBT)for Price so its $42 million. But still a significant savings on the 2020 CBT count. Then also saving $15.5 in the next 2 years.
Ok. I thought you meant in total. Yeah it's like 75m total.
 

BaseballJones

goalpost mover
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
8,601
Everything else aside, this makes me incredibly sad. I loved watching Mookie Betts play baseball for the Sox. I would have enjoyed doing so for many more years.
You may still. Getting under the tax threshold was the only shot they had at signing Mookie long-term. And sadly, trading him now was the way to get under the threshold. This, ironically, probably gives them their best shot at having Mookie long-term. IF, that is, that's what they want to do. Maybe they have no interest in that. I dunno.
 

GoDa

lurker
Sep 25, 2017
948
I see the outside opinion is the Dodgers fleeced us, not surprised by this prevailing opinion.

But Price is a negative asset... Mookie is a near-lock for at least 5 WAR, but who knows beyond that... feels overall like a fair trade to me
Is there any doubt Mookie will put up an AS/MVP season, or of Price being the kind of guy that will pitch the season with a chip on his shoulder and be a top-10 NL starter?

Gatorballs probably hurts himself in ST and the other guy will end up half of some mediocre OF platoon.
 

Coachster

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 3, 2009
5,684
New Hampshire
So gang, we’re going to have to spend some of that found cash for a starter ASAP. Unless you relish the idea of Hector Velazquez every five days.
 

OurF'ingCity

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Apr 22, 2016
4,129
New York City
This is just not accurate, at all. No amount of "foresight with contract and salary management" would have convinced Mookie Betts to sign an extension instead of hitting free agency. And no amount of "foresight with contract and salary management" would make it a good idea to pin your hopes on being the high bidder next off-season.
How can you say this...we have no idea if Mookie would have accepted, say, 10/360, because the Sox never offered it, because they were dead-set on trading Mookie.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
40,454
The folks saying they should hold Betts and if in race in summer, just go for it, are ignoring the future. Which is kind of what got us here. It's a different path but eventually the piper will be paid.
 

8slim

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 6, 2001
14,175
Unreal America
You may still. Getting under the tax threshold was the only shot they had at signing Mookie long-term. And sadly, trading him now was the way to get under the threshold. This, ironically, probably gives them their best shot at having Mookie long-term. IF, that is, that's what they want to do. Maybe they have no interest in that. I dunno.
I’m not bothering to waste time considering that incredibly unlikely scenario. He’s gone.
 

HangingW/ScottCooper

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 10, 2006
1,989
Scituate, MA
So if the Dodgers are paying half of Price's contract ($32 mil a year) that's slightly different than the $31 mil a year of the AAV for the life of the contract.

Per Cots this should put the Sox just under $185 mil for the 40 man.
 

Bob Montgomerys Helmet Hat

has big, douchey shoulders
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
I see the outside opinion is the Dodgers fleeced us, not surprised by this prevailing opinion.

But Price is a negative asset... Mookie is a near-lock for at least 5 WAR, but who knows beyond that... feels overall like a fair trade to me
If the Dodgers don't win it all and then Mookie signs with Baltimore, will it still be a fleecing? <Rhetorical question>
 
Status
Not open for further replies.