Hey, Let's Talk The Mookie Trade!

[FisksFinger]

I don't have an answer to your question.

I can only go by their actions since they decided to move on from Mookie and that decision plus what has ensued - they haven't really been in on any elite free agents or trade targets. That tells me they are content to just be relevant and that they aren't one of the big market teams. To be clear, that may be a really smart decision for the owners and their bottom line - I bet they have a very good handle on how their economics look for a given season win total and they probably just have to be in the mix to max their revenues. I just don't have to get too worked up about the direction of the club because they aren't giving me any reason to really care.

The bolded is well said and sums up where I'm at after decades of being a die hard fan. The one thing to add though is it's not just about spending money, it's about acquiring exciting players. Since 2018, there hasn't been much of the acquiring exciting players going on here, which in combination with multiple last place finishes make the team not worth spending as much time on as before. If some of the kids in the farm system turn out to be those exciting players, great but momentum (and interest) has waned for the last few years and I suspect it will take a couple of seasons of exciting players/higher than last finishes to get a lot of fans back.

 

[Sandy Leon Trotsky]

The bolded is well said and sums up where I'm at after decades of being a die hard fan. The one thing to add though is it's not just about spending money, it's about acquiring exciting players. Since 2018, there hasn't been much of the acquiring exciting players going on here, which in combination with multiple last place finishes make the team not worth spending as much time on as before. If some of the kids in the farm system turn out to be those exciting players, great but momentum (and interest) has waned for the last few years and I suspect it will take a couple of seasons of exciting players/higher than last finishes to get a lot of fans back.

I don't know how good or bad either Rafaela or Duran will end up being going forward... but both those two guys are pretty exciting actually to watch play. I'll add that watching Casas at the plate after he got over the hump was great watching too. When Story is healthy, he's incredible to watch in the field. There's some excitement in store for '24! Maybe not wins, but some fun players actually

 

[NextBigThing8184]

The bolded is well said and sums up where I'm at after decades of being a die hard fan. The one thing to add though is it's not just about spending money, it's about acquiring exciting players. Since 2018, there hasn't been much of the acquiring exciting players going on here, which in combination with multiple last place finishes make the team not worth spending as much time on as before. If some of the kids in the farm system turn out to be those exciting players, great but momentum (and interest) has waned for the last few years and I suspect it will take a couple of seasons of exciting players/higher than last finishes to get a lot of fans back.

Exciting players really only matter if they’re good players on a good team. Perhaps my perspective is skewed since I tune in 150 times a year regardless, but other than Pedro, I can’t think of a single modern era Red Sox player that would “get a lot of fans back” if they’re on a last place and awful team. You might sell a few extra tickets so people can say “I got to see Ortiz/Manny/Mookie whomever” but bad teams with one star player still usually struggle to sell out and draw tv ratings

and if the player is exciting enough to draw ratings, adding them to the Sox roster is likely going to get them out of last place and make them competitive enough where the fans would come back even if that player was boring but similarly talented.

I also don’t know what “exciting” means to most people. JBJ’s defense was exciting, but I can’t imagine that would draw fans in any meaningful way. Duran’s speed is exciting, as was Ellsbury’s, but again, not meaningful enough to draw fans back.

so if by “exciting” you mean towards the top end of the talent spectrum, mega star veterans or phenom youngsters, yes getting exciting players will get fans back. But that’s a lot more to do with the winning that will come with those players rather than the player himself.

winning is the only consistent tired and true way of drawing fans. And you can win with boring players just the same as exciting ones. There’s a small handful of guys (Ohtani being the obvious one) that will actually draw ratings on an otherwise mediocre/bad team. And other than YY (who plays every 5 days) or Ohtani, I just don’t see who those guys would be. Blake Snell isn’t going to bring fans back unless the Sox become a competitor

 

[BigSoxFan]

Exciting players really only matter if they’re good players on a good team. Perhaps my perspective is skewed since I tune in 150 times a year regardless, but other than Pedro, I can’t think of a single modern era Red Sox player that would “get a lot of fans back” if they’re on a last place and awful team. You might sell a few extra tickets so people can say “I got to see Ortiz/Manny/Mookie whomever” but bad teams with one star player still usually struggle to sell out and draw tv ratings

and if the player is exciting enough to draw ratings, adding them to the Sox roster is likely going to get them out of last place and make them competitive enough where the fans would come back even if that player was boring but similarly talented.

I also don’t know what “exciting” means to most people. JBJ’s defense was exciting, but I can’t imagine that would draw fans in any meaningful way. Duran’s speed is exciting, as was Ellsbury’s, but again, not meaningful enough to draw fans back.

so if by “exciting” you mean towards the top end of the talent spectrum, mega star veterans or phenom youngsters, yes getting exciting players will get fans back. But that’s a lot more to do with the winning that will come with those players rather than the player himself.

winning is the only consistent tired and true way of drawing fans. And you can win with boring players just the same as exciting ones. There’s a small handful of guys (Ohtani being the obvious one) that will actually draw ratings on an otherwise mediocre/bad team. And other than YY (who plays every 5 days) or Ohtani, I just don’t see who those guys would be. Blake Snell isn’t going to bring fans back unless the Sox become a competitor

The 2004 team is the perfect example of what we’re aspiring for - a team with loads of talent and multiple elite players in Pedro, Schilling, Manny, Papi, Nomar, etc. that also wins.

Speaking only for myself, I want superstars, as it enhances the viewing experience for me. They’ve won 4 titles in last 2 decades so my thirst for a title has been quenched for the foreseeable future.

The 2018 team was such a joy to watch because we got to see our very own stars get over the hump. It’s why seeing Tatum and Brown hoist a trophy would be so special as well, if they’re ever able to do so.

We all want different things from sports but, for me, it’s hard to experience prime Pedro, Manny, Papi, etc. where the stadium was just so electric and go to a collection of mediocre talent. I get we were all lucky to get to experience all that but some of the best moments in this franchise’s history were delivered because the front office went all out to land stars like Pedro, Schilling, and Manny. I’d like to see some of that mentality return even if it means we strike out on some.

 

[FisksFinger]

Exciting players really only matter if they’re good players on a good team. Perhaps my perspective is skewed since I tune in 150 times a year regardless, but other than Pedro, I can’t think of a single modern era Red Sox player that would “get a lot of fans back” if they’re on a last place and awful team. You might sell a few extra tickets so people can say “I got to see Ortiz/Manny/Mookie whomever” but bad teams with one star player still usually struggle to sell out and draw tv ratings

and if the player is exciting enough to draw ratings, adding them to the Sox roster is likely going to get them out of last place and make them competitive enough where the fans would come back even if that player was boring but similarly talented.

I also don’t know what “exciting” means to most people. JBJ’s defense was exciting, but I can’t imagine that would draw fans in any meaningful way. Duran’s speed is exciting, as was Ellsbury’s, but again, not meaningful enough to draw fans back.

so if by “exciting” you mean towards the top end of the talent spectrum, mega star veterans or phenom youngsters, yes getting exciting players will get fans back. But that’s a lot more to do with the winning that will come with those players rather than the player himself.

winning is the only consistent tired and true way of drawing fans. And you can win with boring players just the same as exciting ones. There’s a small handful of guys (Ohtani being the obvious one) that will actually draw ratings on an otherwise mediocre/bad team. And other than YY (who plays every 5 days) or Ohtani, I just don’t see who those guys would be. Blake Snell isn’t going to bring fans back unless the Sox become a competitor

Good points and let me clarify that when I say exciting, I meant to imply "good" and "exciting as a whole" (i.e. not just good at one thing like your JBJ and Duran examples). It's also worth pointing out that exciting isn't binary in my head, it's a spectrum and someone like JBJ was on the lower end while someone like Mookie was on the higher end due to being more well rounded.

And yeah totally with you that winning is what gets them sustainable and consistent fans. But I think there's a path that can go from where they are today (with very few exciting player/losing a lot) to the future (lots of exciting players/winning a lot) that has a step where they get more exciting players and win a little more.

I am curious what winning with boring players looks like to you, any examples?

 

[Sandy Leon Trotsky]

I am curious what winning with boring players looks like to you, any examples?

Isn't that the 2007 team?

Seriously there were some real fun players on that team to be honest- Manny, Papi of course. Rookie excitement from Pedroia, Ellsbury. Youk turning into a force. It's mostly just a joke about JD Drew.... who was a very good player that could put you to sleep. Maybe Mike Lowell also?

 

[donutogre]

Isn't that the 2007 team?

Seriously there were some real fun players on that team to be honest- Manny, Papi of course. Rookie excitement from Pedroia, Ellsbury. Youk turning into a force. It's mostly just a joke about JD Drew.... who was a very good player that could put you to sleep. Maybe Mike Lowell also?

People love to rag on the 2007 team (I know that's a bit of hyperbole, but it's also sort of true. Maybe more like discount the 2007 team). But I loved all the players you mentioned, plus Paps and Beckett were guys who opposing fans may have hated, but I had a real easy time rooting for. I loved that team!

 

[lexrageorge]

Let's not go back to the need to "win in more exciting fashion", as that statement was followed with the signing of one Carl Crawford (who helped with neither winning nor excitement).

 

[FisksFinger]

Isn't that the 2007 team?

Seriously there were some real fun players on that team to be honest- Manny, Papi of course. Rookie excitement from Pedroia, Ellsbury. Youk turning into a force. It's mostly just a joke about JD Drew.... who was a very good player that could put you to sleep. Maybe Mike Lowell also?

Ha, yeah shows how it's all relative then. I thought that team had lots of exciting players (Beckett, Manny, Ortiz, Paps and Pedroia as examples). But Lowell/Drew are good examples of boring.

 

[geoflin]

it's about acquiring exciting players

I understand what you're saying but how did that work out for the Angels the past 6 years? It takes more than exciting players.

 

[chrisfont9]

Ha, yeah shows how it's all relative then. I thought that team had lots of exciting players (Beckett, Manny, Ortiz, Paps and Pedroia as examples). But Lowell/Drew are good examples of boring.

Guessing I'm not the only one who thinks Duran is really exciting, at least offensively.

 

[FisksFinger]

I understand what you're saying but how did that work out for the Angels the past 6 years? It takes more than exciting players.

For sure it takes more than exciting players to win, but I could argue the Angels were more interesting to fans than the Red Sox the last two years thanks to having two exciting players.

 

[BigSoxFan]

I understand what you're saying but how did that work out for the Angels the past 6 years? It takes more than exciting players.

Yes, it does. It generally takes elite players to win a title. The Rangers got one in FA in Seager that the Red Sox with their current mentality never would have sniffed. The Astros clearly had several elite players on their title teams. The 2021 Braves had Acuna, Freeman, etc. 2020 Dodgers had some guy named Mookie - wish we could get guys like him. 2019 Nationals had Scherzer, Turner and a young Soto.

The “exciting” stuff is a bit of a red herring. I don’t care if someone has a Papi or Pedro personality if they’re hitting .220 or have a 5.50 ERA. This team needs better players and at least a couple more guys with a higher ceiling. Right now, we have 2 main avenues - developing the Mayer, Anthony, Teel group into the studs we need or trading, which is obviously quite difficult.

This ownership group appears to have a limited appetite for monster contracts so we now have even more pressure to develop from within. The good news is that Mayer, Teel, and Jordan all have the talent profile to be all-stars. The bad news is that they’re all very young and will take time to develop. For a fan base that has watched 4 mostly disappointing years, having that patience can be tough, especially since all of the recent success isn’t too far away.

 

[chrisfont9]

For sure it takes more than exciting players to win, but I could argue the Angels were more interesting to fans than the Red Sox the last two years thanks to having two exciting players.

Well their attendance fell off some the last two years, relatively speaking. They had a long run as the #2 team in the AL, then fell to fifth and sixth the last two years. The Sox, by comparison, have mostly been fourth in the AL, though they slipped to 5th this year, even though their actual attendance was up slightly. It's probably fairer to say that Shohei saved the Angels from falling into a popular abyss.

 

[Red(s)HawksFan]

For sure it takes more than exciting players to win, but I could argue the Angels were more interesting to fans than the Red Sox the last two years thanks to having two exciting players.

FWIW, the Red Sox out-drew the Angels in each of the last three seasons. Interestingly, the Angels out-drew the Sox for at least the seven years prior (only looked up 2013 forward). I'm sure most of that is due to the Angels having a larger stadium capacity overall, but that doesn't explain the recent dip. If they were "more interesting" because they had Trout and Ohtani while the Sox struggled, you'd think they'd have maintained their attendance edge.

 

[chrisfont9]

FWIW, the Red Sox out-drew the Angels in each of the last three seasons. Interestingly, the Angels out-drew the Sox for at least the seven years prior (only looked up 2013 forward). I'm sure most of that is due to the Angels having a larger stadium capacity overall, but that doesn't explain the recent dip. If they were "more interesting" because they had Trout and Ohtani while the Sox struggled, you'd think they'd have maintained their attendance edge.

Worth remembering that the Sox have been interesting/contenderish for at least half of each of the last two seasons and all of 2021. The collapses have been the thing everyone remembers, but unlike the Angels the Sox have played a pretty fair amount of competitive baseball.

 

[FisksFinger]

FWIW, the Red Sox out-drew the Angels in each of the last three seasons. Interestingly, the Angels out-drew the Sox for at least the seven years prior (only looked up 2013 forward). I'm sure most of that is due to the Angels having a larger stadium capacity overall, but that doesn't explain the recent dip. If they were "more interesting" because they had Trout and Ohtani while the Sox struggled, you'd think they'd have maintained their attendance edge.

Yeah maybe, or maybe Boston fans are just more into baseball than Anaheim fans are. It maybe worth considering merchandise sales, "buzz" (no clue how to measure that), tv games/viewers, etc...stuff that extends beyond people going to watch games.

 

[GPO Man]

FWIW, the Red Sox out-drew the Angels in each of the last three seasons. Interestingly, the Angels out-drew the Sox for at least the seven years prior (only looked up 2013 forward). I'm sure most of that is due to the Angels having a larger stadium capacity overall, but that doesn't explain the recent dip. If they were "more interesting" because they had Trout and Ohtani while the Sox struggled, you'd think they'd have maintained their attendance edge.

Fenway will always draw fans even with a bad team on the field. This is part of the problem. Henry is running a sports holding company. He bought the Red Sox to turn as much profit as possible. As long as fans support the product, he won’t spend big money.

 

[YTF]

Fenway will always draw fans even with a bad team on the field. This is part of the problem. Henry is running a sports holding company. He bought the Red Sox to turn as much profit as possible. As long as fans support the product, he won’t spend big money.

If you don't like the current spending by Henry and Co. fine, but can we please stop with these bullshit, blanket statements.

 

[Pollard's Spartan Beard]

Fenway will always draw fans even with a bad team on the field. This is part of the problem. Henry is running a sports holding company. He bought the Red Sox to turn as much profit as possible. As long as fans support the product, he won’t spend big money.

I don't usually post in the Sox forum, and stick to the Port Cellar, but this is the laziest take humanly possible. If you want to criticize last year's lack of spending, that's one thing. If you want to talk about how you wish they'd spent money differently, that's another discussion. But to allege that a franchise that has consistently had a top 5 payroll in the league over almost all of the last 20 years doesn't spend is wasting all of our time.

It doesn't take a lot of work to actually look back at team payrolls on a season by season basis. I like healthy criticism of the teams I root for, as it helps me have some perspective, but this isn't that.

Edited to add this snark: Unless, of course, you've only been a fan for one season. In which case I could understand your confusion.

 

[radsoxfan]

And I'm certainly not in the mood to trade Mayer / Teel / etc. just to get rid of a risky bad FA contract.

High payroll teams don't HAVE to trade top prospects (much less in their prime MVPs!") just because they ended up with a dud FA contract.

No reason to let this front office off the hook. THey have the money and can take some risks without a bad decision meaning they have to sell the farm or trade their best players.

 

[DavidTai]

High payroll teams don't HAVE to trade top prospects (much less in their prime MVPs!") just because they ended up with a dud FA contract.

No reason to let this front office off the hook. They have the money and can take some risks without a bad decision meaning they have to sell the farm or trade their best players.

They don't -now-. This was mostly a response to BSF wanting to bring up Betts again. Which included dumping Price's contract as part of it.

And purely, I think, I'm just -sick- of the notion that 'this front office can take risks' because my feeling boils down to that 2018 was a huge chunk of 'risks' all paying off, and then the bill came due, and people -did not- like paying the bills, a large chunk of which was because they had no prospective cheap talent coming out. In lots of ways, that 2018 team was basically the epitome of 'Fuck them prospects, fuck the luxury taxes, let's go for it now'.

I think in lots of ways, the ownership made one mistake back in 2017-2018, and that was letting Dombrowski build a -go-for-it-now approach to free agency instead of insisting Dombrowski take care of Betts/Devers/Xander first before going for the free agents.

So I really, I don't think I want to see a 'big free agent contract' being offered now, as much as I want to see something more like "Give Mayer and Teel those big contracts' and start with the Atlanta Braves approach. Get the young core locked in before bringing in the big FA contracts.

 

[cantor44]

They don't -now-. This was mostly a response to BSF wanting to bring up Betts again. Which included dumping Price's contract as part of it.

And purely, I think, I'm just -sick- of the notion that 'this front office can take risks' because my feeling boils down to that 2018 was a huge chunk of 'risks' all paying off, and then the bill came due, and people -did not- like paying the bills, a large chunk of which was because they had no prospective cheap talent coming out. In lots of ways, that 2018 team was basically the epitome of 'Fuck them prospects, fuck the luxury taxes, let's go for it now'.

Though would the rebuilding plan from 2019 to now have been hurt if the Sox signed a couple higher profile free agents, or overpaid a guy or two? I don't think it would preclude keeping your best homegrown players. DD did trade many prospects. Though ultimately most of those prospects didn't amount to much and wouldn't have been players to extend a la the Braves core.

I mean there HAS been a changed approach to free agents in the last few years. And surely the team is not course correcting from its broader past (a past the defenders of the current approach reference a good deal to give ownership a kind of permanent credibility), because they WERE signing big time free agents (and/or extending guys), and were winning WS. And yes, in fact when they accumulated a couple too many bad contracts a couple times, they were able to engineer at least a partial off load.

So ...something has changed. This all HAS corresponded to the expansion of the FSG. Coincidence? Maybe. I'm not saying that's the cause, only seeing a correlation, but maybe that's paranoid. Rather - let's hope it's about perceived windows, and building a young core and the time is not right to be aggressive. Though the right time keeps getting pushed a year for a couple years running now. And there's a chance maybe none of the current prospects will work, like all the dues DD gave away. And we'll just keep waiting. It all feels a bit farkakte!

 

[mikcou]

They don't -now-. This was mostly a response to BSF wanting to bring up Betts again. Which included dumping Price's contract as part of it.

And purely, I think, I'm just -sick- of the notion that 'this front office can take risks' because my feeling boils down to that 2018 was a huge chunk of 'risks' all paying off, and then the bill came due, and people -did not- like paying the bills, a large chunk of which was because they had no prospective cheap talent coming out. In lots of ways, that 2018 team was basically the epitome of 'Fuck them prospects, fuck the luxury taxes, let's go for it now'.

I think in lots of ways, the ownership made one mistake back in 2017-2018, and that was letting Dombrowski build a -go-for-it-now approach to free agency instead of insisting Dombrowski take care of Betts/Devers/Xander first before going for the free agents.

So I really, I don't think I want to see a 'big free agent contract' being offered now, as much as I want to see something more like "Give Mayer and Teel those big contracts' and start with the Atlanta Braves approach. Get the young core locked in before bringing in the big FA contracts.

You're missing the point. There was no reason that the Sox had to trade Mookie after 2019. They could have just paid him. They decided they didn't want to so they didnt; there wasnt some "oh we have Price, we cant pay Mookie or we'll go under" or we're hard capped and dont have the space due to the Price contract. They make $80-$100M of operating income a year, they could have dealt with some small pain in 2020 and 2021 to pay Mookie. That is 100% a priorities decision rather than anything else. Big market teams dont trade inner circle HOF talents in their prime over money so the fact they did is worthy of significant criticism.

If they go with the Braves approach, its going to be years before they're good again; the pitching just isnt there at the major league level and the minor league help, to the extent it even exists, is years away. Its also worth noting that the Braves are literally the only team who has been able to lock up so many players so early on, so you need a lot to work out and be willing to execute at the exact right time for that model to work.

 

[DavidTai]

You're missing the point. There was no reason that the Sox had to trade Mookie after 2019. They could have just paid him. They decided they didn't want to so they didnt; there wasnt some "oh we have Price, we cant pay Mookie or we'll go under" or we're hard capped and dont have the space due to the Price contract. They make $80-$100M of operating income a year, they could have dealt with some small pain in 2020 and 2021 to pay Mookie. That is 100% a priorities decision rather than anything else. Big market teams dont trade inner circle HOF talents in their prime over money so the fact they did is worthy of significant criticism.

Understood. Just failing to see why signing a big FA contract in this market would change anything about how the office operates that the Devers/Story signings didn't.

 

[Mike473]

You're missing the point. There was no reason that the Sox had to trade Mookie after 2019. They could have just paid him. They decided they didn't want to so they didnt; there wasnt some "oh we have Price, we cant pay Mookie or we'll go under" or we're hard capped and dont have the space due to the Price contract. They make $80-$100M of operating income a year, they could have dealt with some small pain in 2020 and 2021 to pay Mookie. That is 100% a priorities decision rather than anything else. Big market teams dont trade inner circle HOF talents in their prime over money so the fact they did is worthy of significant criticism.

If they go with the Braves approach, its going to be years before they're good again; the pitching just isnt there at the major league level and the minor league help, to the extent it even exists, is years away. Its also worth noting that the Braves are literally the only team who has been able to lock up so many players so early on, so you need a lot to work out and be willing to execute at the exact right time for that model to work.

If they traded one of the best players in Red Sox history in his prime just to get out of the Price contract, things with ownership are much worse than any of us think. I don't think that was the case.

They didn't think Betts was worth it, and found a way to get out of the Price contract as a bonus. They misread the situation and created a lot of mistrust with the fan base. Now, ownership has to find a way to bridge through a couple tough seasons until the farm system comes through. I think if this was 2 years from now, they would have been way more aggressive in YY sweepstakes. But, they are simply not breaking the bank on a team that is likely going nowhere in the next year or two.

 

[BigSoxFan]

If they traded one of the best players in Red Sox history in his prime just to get out of the Price contract, things with ownership are much worse than any of us think. I don't think that was the case.

They didn't think Betts was worth it, and found a way to get out of the Price contract as a bonus. They misread the situation and created a lot of mistrust with the fan base. Now, ownership has to find a way to bridge through a couple tough seasons until the farm system comes through. I think if this was 2 years from now, they would have been way more aggressive in YY sweepstakes. But, they are simply not breaking the bank on a team that is likely going nowhere in the next year or two.

Exactly. The Mookie decision wasn’t based on Price and I think it’s silly to draw a direct link between the two. They could have kept Mookie despite the Price mishap. The Sale contract extension clearly played a role here as well.

In the end, someone or multiple people in the front office probably didn’t think Mookie was worth it, for whatever reason. However, when you let a guy like that go out the door, you had better have some good contingency plans and we really haven’t outside of dreaming on a few 20-22 year-olds. For this organization’s sake, I certainly hope Mayer, Teel, and Anthony all turn out to be MLB players. Things look a lot differently, if they do. But the pitching issue remains. Have no idea how that gets resolved in the short term.

 

[chrisfont9]

Ugh, this feels about right. Underestimated the explosion in top-level salaries, then?

They knew what Betts was worth, they played a game around his impending free agency and it blew up spectacularly.

To folks who want them to spend aggressively now as a sign of competitiveness, I don't think it's crazy, sometimes you do that and a few other players get more interested, and momentum builds. But for a million reasons I can totally understand why they might think it's a poor risk, that winning the offseason gets them nowhere, and that they might be on the cusp of a new era of controllable draft talent that can work well with none of that "paying x years after he retired" stuff.

 

[DavidTai]

They knew what Betts was worth, they played a game around his impending free agency and it blew up spectacularly.

To folks who want them to spend aggressively now as a sign of competitiveness, I don't think it's crazy, sometimes you do that and a few other players get more interested, and momentum builds. But for a million reasons I can totally understand why they might think it's a poor risk, that winning the offseason gets them nowhere, and that they might be on the cusp of a new era of controllable draft talent that can work well with none of that "paying x years after he retired" stuff.

Kinda makes you wonder if they had held on a bit longer on trading him if the numbers might have changed.

 

[chrisfont9]

Kinda makes you wonder if they had held on a bit longer on trading him if the numbers might have changed.

During COVID? Hell yeah. That's part of the nightmare. He took less than his worth because the game was suddenly in a total financial panic, players included.

It takes a lot of luck to win four titles in 15 years. Ours ran out in year 17.

 

[Mike473]

Exactly. The Mookie decision wasn’t based on Price and I think it’s silly to draw a direct link between the two. They could have kept Mookie despite the Price mishap. The Sale contract extension clearly played a role here as well.

In the end, someone or multiple people in the front office probably didn’t think Mookie was worth it, for whatever reason. However, when you let a guy like that go out the door, you had better have some good contingency plans and we really haven’t outside of dreaming on a few 20-22 year-olds. For this organization’s sake, I certainly hope Mayer, Teel, and Anthony all turn out to be MLB players. Things look a lot differently, if they do. But the pitching issue remains. Have no idea how that gets resolved in the short term.

The kids do look pretty good. And, if it works out, this team could become quite a monster on the offensive side. At that point, I think they will become pretty aggressive and get some high end pitching to round things out and go on a run. I liked YY because of his age and I think he is an Ace. So, we could have watched him develop for a couple years while everything falls into place. Once he was gone, things changed for me anyway. I know it has been said here a million times, but making some good trade deadline moves could have really helped. Look at the second half of July in 2022. What were they thinking?

 

[cantor44]

They signed Price in free agency. That led to the trade of Mookie.

If you're going to relegislate the Betts trade as "how cheap ownership" start by acknowledging that maybe, maybe, signing top free agents have consequences. Like leading to not keeping Mookie.

What would have happened if they extended Mookie, and subsequently couldn't unload Price? (Though there may have been other creative ways to unload at least part of Price's remaining contract, but let's say there was not - it was either give up Mookie and Price, or keep them both; actually just writing that it seems a pretty damn absurd binary, but let's go with it). What would have happened? The team would have been crippled for years?

And I agree ... I'm not tired of the Mookie discussion, because it is still relevant. The organization is still dealing with the ramifications of not doing everything it could to keep arguably the greatest all-around homegrown player it has every produced (who also happens to be intelligent, a good guy, a good sport, good looking - ya know a real star - and Black American in an organization with a bad racist history, but other than that). Though we can go one step further back - extending Sale, idiotic even at the time. Extending Sale/Shipping out Mookie - two profound mistakes that are still haunting the organization.

Though truly - what happens if Mookie is extended at the dollars it would have taken at the time, and Price's contract stayed on the books? Would the team be better or worse off?

 

[radsoxfan]

Ugh, this feels about right. Underestimated the explosion in top-level salaries, then?

That’s maybe part of it, but I also think the front office only liked (but didn’t love) Mookie.

Of course he had his one ridiculous 2018 year, but I’m not sure they were sold on him long term. Maybe they were worried about his size, turning into McCutchen, who knows. Maybe Bloom pushed that narrative or just went along with it.

I think of you told them in 2019 that Mookie would produce 15 WAR in 2022/2023 combined, they would have paid up. They didn’t and it’s backfired spectacularly so far.

 

[simplicio]

They didn't think Betts was worth it given the team they could surround him with for the rest of his prime. And I agree fully. Running it back in 2019 (with Mookie!) left us 12 wins shy of a wild card on the highest payroll in baseball, they had nothing in the pipeline and the team was just getting worse and more expensive. Give Mookie an offer he can't refuse, keep Price and the team only gets worse from there cause now you can't even afford Bloom's $10m one year deals to fill the roster, plus you're losing more draft picks to the CBT penalties.

 

[radsoxfan]

What would have happened if they extended Mookie, and subsequently couldn't unload Price? (Though there may have been other creative ways to unload at least part of Price's remaining contract, but let's say there was not - it was either give up Mookie and Price, or keep them both; actually just writing that it seems a pretty damn absurd binary, but let's go with it). What would have happened? The team would have been crippled for years?

You can ALWAYS unload anyone. It just takes money. There is no salary cap.

Price was a net negative asset at the time. Trading him with Mookie meant we didn’t have to pay as much excess, but he still was always movable.

I’m sure it was a combination of factors; wanting to clear Price, being worried Mookie wouldn’t age well, hopeful we had replacements that could fill the void.

In the end, it was either a horrible evaluation of the situation OR ownership just doesn’t want to spend $ to contend. One or the other.

 

[radsoxfan]

They didn't think Betts was worth it given the team they could surround him with for the rest of his prime. And I agree fully. Running it back in 2019 (with Mookie!) left us 12 wins shy of a wild card on the highest payroll in baseball, they had nothing in the pipeline and the team was just getting worse and more expensive. Give Mookie an offer he can't refuse, keep Price and the team only gets worse from there cause now you can't even afford Bloom's $10m one year deals to fill the roster, plus you're losing more draft picks to the CBT penalties.

Disagree 100%.

If they believed in Mookie, signed him, then they couldn’t compete, he would still have plenty of value.

They were worried he would turn into a negative asset. Perhaps not an unreasonable concern, but it didn’t happen that way.

Like I said, if you gave the FO a Time Machine and told them Mookie would be a combined 15 WAR player in 2022/2023 they would have ponied up in a heartbeat.

They were not convinced and it backfired.

 

[snowmanny]

Disagree 100%.

If they believed in Mookie, signed him, then they couldn’t compete, he would still have plenty of value.

They were worried he would turn into a negative asset. Perhaps not an unreasonable concern, but it didn’t happen that way.

Like I said, if you gave the FO a Time Machine and told them Mookie would be a combined 15 WAR player in 2022/2023 they would have ponied up in a heartbeat.

They were not convinced and it backfired.

This sounds right to me. And if you win 5 little transactions but fuck up on the first-ballot HOFer then, overall, you fucked up.

 

[jbupstate]

The 2019 team was not trending up in talent. The pitching was a mess, very expensive and trending down. Minors were bare. Finances were stretched and penalties were looming.

And a ton of homegrown players (Betts, Xander, Ben10, JBJ, Devers) were soon due big raises in the near future. Betts wanted Trout money and could potentially leave for nothing.

That team was going nowhere and keeping it together wasn’t going solve the problem of sinking in the standings. The rest of the AL East was set up to get better.

The Sox with Betts right now are a last place team. No depth at SP and hoping for Sale to stay healthy. Add to that no Mayer and a lesser minor league system.

The Mets just paid $101m in a tax penalty and have the Braves and Phillies to contend with. The Dodgers have what they have because they have assets to move at any time.

The Sox have had absolutely horrendous injury luck the past two years. It not just the injuries but the timing/groupings of SP going down.

Bloom wasn’t the guy to get them over the top but he did somewhat stock the minors with position player that are on the verge of graduating to trade assets or the MLB roster. The system doesn’t have a pitching vein but Breslow has a history of building up pitching. That is a really great need.

Yamamoto was a great plan. Only $$$ for a potential Ace. It didn’t work out because Yamamoto had a different, equally great plan.

This team needs to focus on the most important difference maker in baseball today - developing pitching. To keep on the team or to make available in trade.

This version of the Sox requires patience. I think they are going to surprise because I believe the injury luck will change and Breslow can squeeze more quality outcomes from the pitching.

 

[Philip Jeff Frye]

The Sox with Betts right now are a last place team. No depth at SP and hoping for Sale to stay healthy. Add to that no Mayer and a lesser minor league system.

So basically, the Sox with Betts right now are what they have been each of the last two seasons. And if the team was as bad as you say it would be, maybe we still end up with Mayer (or someone else equally exciting) anyway.

At least we'd have Mookie. I'd rather see a bad team with a superstar than a bad news with no one.

 

[catomatic]

The 2019 team was not trending up in talent. The pitching was a mess, very expensive and trending down. Minors were bare. Finances were stretched and penalties were looming.

And a ton of homegrown players (Betts, Xander, Ben10, JBJ, Devers) were soon due big raises in the near future. Betts wanted Trout money and could potentially leave for nothing.

That team was going nowhere and keeping it together wasn’t going solve the problem of sinking in the standings. The rest of the AL East was set up to get better.

The Sox with Betts right now are a last place team. No depth at SP and hoping for Sale to stay healthy. Add to that no Mayer and a lesser minor league system.

The Mets just paid $101m in a tax penalty and have the Braves and Phillies to contend with. The Dodgers have what they have because they have assets to move at any time.

The Sox have had absolutely horrendous injury luck the past two years. It not just the injuries but the timing/groupings of SP going down.

Bloom wasn’t the guy to get them over the top but he did somewhat stock the minors with position player that are on the verge of graduating to trade assets or the MLB roster. The system doesn’t have a pitching vein but Breslow has a history of building up pitching. That is a really great need.

Yamamoto was a great plan. Only $$$ for a potential Ace. It didn’t work out because Yamamoto had a different, equally great plan.

This team needs to focus on the most important difference maker in baseball today - developing pitching. To keep on the team or to make available in trade.

This version of the Sox requires patience. I think they are going to surprise because I believe the injury luck will change and Breslow can squeeze more quality outcomes from the pitching.

They traded our Black Yaz.
A player the franchise badly needed on levels beyond the sine curve of their competitive window.
And, as some have said, I’d be willing to bet they regret having done so.

 

[tims4wins]

Personally I was ok with the Mookie trade, the same was I was ok with the Mac Jones pick. However, neither has worked out. It’s fine to admit that. I’m sure the FO would like a do-over.

The difference is that the Pats can take another draft shot 3 years later. The Sox may never get another Mookie.

 

[Midnight Ryder Jones]

The Sox with Betts right now are a last place team. No depth at SP and hoping for Sale to stay healthy. Add to that no Mayer and a lesser minor league system.

And they still have no depth at SP and are still hoping Sale can stay healthy. The difference is that the Sox would be much, much closer to contending again if they had Mookie in the organization right now instead of Marcelo Mayer. Mookie put up an 8 win season last year. It is far more likely that Marcelo Mayer puts up 0 WAR for his entire career than he ever puts up 8 in one season.

A good baseball team requires good baseball players, not the flexibility to potentially add good players.

 

[Sandy Leon Trotsky]

The 2019 team was not trending up in talent. The pitching was a mess, very expensive and trending down. Minors were bare. Finances were stretched and penalties were looming.

And a ton of homegrown players (Betts, Xander, Ben10, JBJ, Devers) were soon due big raises in the near future. Betts wanted Trout money and could potentially leave for nothing.

That team was going nowhere and keeping it together wasn’t going solve the problem of sinking in the standings. The rest of the AL East was set up to get better.

The Sox with Betts right now are a last place team. No depth at SP and hoping for Sale to stay healthy. Add to that no Mayer and a lesser minor league system.

The Mets just paid $101m in a tax penalty and have the Braves and Phillies to contend with. The Dodgers have what they have because they have assets to move at any time.

The Sox have had absolutely horrendous injury luck the past two years. It not just the injuries but the timing/groupings of SP going down.

Bloom wasn’t the guy to get them over the top but he did somewhat stock the minors with position player that are on the verge of graduating to trade assets or the MLB roster. The system doesn’t have a pitching vein but Breslow has a history of building up pitching. That is a really great need.

Yamamoto was a great plan. Only $$$ for a potential Ace. It didn’t work out because Yamamoto had a different, equally great plan.

This team needs to focus on the most important difference maker in baseball today - developing pitching. To keep on the team or to make available in trade.

This version of the Sox requires patience. I think they are going to surprise because I believe the injury luck will change and Breslow can squeeze more quality outcomes from the pitching.

I sadly agree with this, but it DOES have everything to do with Henry's money and he has a clear budget not to act like Cohen. Fair or not, it is what it is. And with that in mind, if the team kept on the Dombrowski arc it would have been beyond a disaster. Bloom was brought in to try and fix it (and I think we all agree here that THE BEST way to fix it would have been to completely tank, a la Houston Astros but it was decided that option wasn't for the taking). And as painful as it's been I think he put the team on the right long term track while getting lucky one year, and getting really unlucky two other years. 2020 I totally discount. Don't care about it. It should never even have been played. Mistakes were made along the way in the "compete by getting lucky/healthy". He should have acquired more upper level arms in his Benintendi, Betts, JBJ, etc... trades but even if he did, they were likely going to be wildcard types, not upper-talent types. The pitching talent is sadly far, far away and that's why they're stuck right now. I think it'd be a mistake to trade any of the top 3- and I'd even add Bleis to that group- unless they can get more than 2 years out of a trade. I think the best bet is to overpay for Montgomery, Imanaga or to figure out a way to pry Burnes away from Milwaukee by leveraging their financial strength and absorbing Yellich even if it's for one season but without losing those top 4 prospects. Then if you can't resign Burnes after '24 you shrug but you haven't lost your top farm talent and you might be able to use Sale's money to overpay to keep him
I still believe they're two starting pitchers away from being a 90 win team even if that's all they do.

 

[simplicio]

Disagree 100%.

If they believed in Mookie, signed him, then they couldn’t compete, he would still have plenty of value.

They were worried he would turn into a negative asset. Perhaps not an unreasonable concern, but it didn’t happen that way.

Like I said, if you gave the FO a Time Machine and told them Mookie would be a combined 15 WAR player in 2022/2023 they would have ponied up in a heartbeat.

They were not convinced and it backfired.

Wait, you think the team that scouted him, drafted him, watched him succeed at every level, watched him win an MVP and every other piece of available hardware projected him to not remain good in his prime? That's silly. Their decision was never about his 20s, it was about his 30s.

 

[radsoxfan]

Wait, you think the team that scouted him, drafted him, watched him succeed at every level, watched him win an MVP and every other piece of available hardware projected him to not remain good in his prime? That's silly. Their decision was never about his 20s, it was about his 30s.

What on earth does the fact they scouted him, drafted him, and watched him succeed have to do with anything?

I think they underestimated how good Mookie was, plain and simple. If they knew he was going to be an 8+ WAR MVP level guy at age 30 they would have been more aggressive. A similar sized previously elite guy like McCutchen was already into his decline by age 30 and they got spooked.

Unless Mookie falls off a cliff starting now (always possible I suppose) it was just a bad talent evaluation.

 

[Bread of Yaz]

Personally I was ok with the Mookie trade, the same was I was ok with the Mac Jones pick. However, neither has worked out. It’s fine to admit that. I’m sure the FO would like a do-over.

The difference is that the Pats can take another draft shot 3 years later. The Sox may never get another Mookie.

I'm firmly in the camp of those who believe the trade was an extremely poor organizational decision. But before him there were Nomar, Manny, Pedro, Ortiz, Lynn, Rice, Evans, Yaz, Tony C, Ted. There will be other Mookies in time.

 

[Sandy Leon Trotsky]

What on earth does the fact they scouted him, drafted him, and watched him succeed have to do with anything?

I think they underestimated how good Mookie was, plain and simple. If they knew he was going to be an 8+ WAR MVP level guy at age 30 they would have been more aggressive. A similar sized previously elite guy like McCutchen was already into his decline by age 30 and they got spooked.

Unless Mookie falls off a cliff starting now (always possible I suppose) it was just a bad talent evaluation.

Well you kinda hit on it. Mookie was going to FA and was very likely looking for something bigger than Trout got. Trout is now looking like it's going to be an overpay unless they figure out how to keep him healthy.... and if they DH him, then his value plummets incredibly. I don't think it was a terrible decision. I wish what they had done was NOT sign Sale, figure out a way to trade X and Devers and restocked the team with younger players coming in to their primes last season. Tough ask to say the least.

 

[Red(s)HawksFan]

What on earth does the fact they scouted him, drafted him, and watched him succeed have to do with anything?

I think they underestimated how good Mookie was, plain and simple. If they knew he was going to be an 8+ WAR MVP level guy at age 30 they would have been more aggressive. A similar sized previously elite guy like McCutchen was already into his decline by age 30 and they got spooked.

Unless Mookie falls off a cliff starting now (always possible I suppose) it was just a bad talent evaluation.

I think the point was that their hesitation with Betts had nothing to do with concerns about how he'd perform during his age 29 and 30 seasons. It was how he'd perform in his age 34, 35, 36 seasons and beyond.

 

[chawson]

The blindspot most people have on this topic, in my view, is that Mookie wanted to be in southern California — or at least a different kind of city — for non-baseball reasons, and it was and remains in neither party’s interests to say so.

 

[BigSoxFan]

I think the point was that their hesitation with Betts had nothing to do with concerns about how he'd perform during his age 29 and 30 seasons. It was how he'd perform in his age 34, 35, 36 seasons and beyond.

If he provides so much value in the first half of the contract, who cares? This is where I diverge from the mindset. Mookie making $30M and “earning” $15-20M or whatever for a few years isn’t going to sink a large market team. You know decline is coming but by the time it does, he’ll probably have banked 6-7 good-to-elite years.