Mookie Betts 2020 FA Watch

Cokes311

lurker
Apr 10, 2008
84
Witch City
If we believe he declined 10/300, and we know that Trout got an AAV of ~35.5 mil, what do we reasonably believe

a) would have been a big enough extension offer last winter for Mookie to take it?
b) the market price will be for him in November?
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
28,773
Hingham, MA
I don't watch enough baseball, especially other teams, to know how good Christian Yelich is compared to Mookie Betts. Here's what I do know:

- Yelich is about 1 year older, heading into his age 28 season vs. Mookie's age 27 season
- Yelich has a career OPS+ of 137 (to Mookie's 134)
- Both players are outfielders
- Both players won an MVP in 2018

Yelich is reportedly on the verge of a 9 year, $215M deal ($23.9M AAV). I have no idea how much more value Mookie provides defensively than Yelich, but it is easy to see based on this why the Sox would balk at 12 years and $400M. Is Mookie really worth $10M+ more annually than Yelich based on defense?

IMO, the Mookie trade didn't come down to the luxury tax or anything like that. It came down to the Sox valuing the player significantly less than the player and his agent.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
58,020
Yelich is still three years away from free agency, so he is taking less now to lock in the big contract early.
 

DeadlySplitter

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 20, 2015
25,941
we offered Mookie 8/200 around the same timeframe on his FA clock, he almost took it reportedly, mother told/reminded him he's been going for biggest payday and think it over.

it sucks getting under market value on your superstar comes down to the personality of the player, but that's the CBA we're living in right now.
 

JBJ_HOF

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 5, 2014
447
we offered Mookie 8/200 around the same timeframe on his FA clock, he almost took it reportedly, mother told/reminded him he's been going for biggest payday and think it over. it sucks getting under market value on your superstar comes down to the personality of the player, but that's the CBA we're living in right now.
The Betts' mother thing happened after the 5/100 offer.
 
Jul 5, 2018
430
I don't watch enough baseball, especially other teams, to know how good Christian Yelich is compared to Mookie Betts. Here's what I do know:

- Yelich is about 1 year older, heading into his age 28 season vs. Mookie's age 27 season
- Yelich has a career OPS+ of 137 (to Mookie's 134)
- Both players are outfielders
- Both players won an MVP in 2018

Yelich is reportedly on the verge of a 9 year, $215M deal ($23.9M AAV). I have no idea how much more value Mookie provides defensively than Yelich, but it is easy to see based on this why the Sox would balk at 12 years and $400M. Is Mookie really worth $10M+ more annually than Yelich based on defense?

IMO, the Mookie trade didn't come down to the luxury tax or anything like that. It came down to the Sox valuing the player significantly less than the player and his agent.
I don't watch enough baseball, especially other teams, to know how good Christian Yelich is compared to Mookie Betts. Here's what I do know:

- Yelich is about 1 year older, heading into his age 28 season vs. Mookie's age 27 season
- Yelich has a career OPS+ of 137 (to Mookie's 134)
- Both players are outfielders
- Both players won an MVP in 2018

Yelich is reportedly on the verge of a 9 year, $215M deal ($23.9M AAV). I have no idea how much more value Mookie provides defensively than Yelich, but it is easy to see based on this why the Sox would balk at 12 years and $400M. Is Mookie really worth $10M+ more annually than Yelich based on defense?

IMO, the Mookie trade didn't come down to the luxury tax or anything like that. It came down to the Sox valuing the player significantly less than the player and his agent.
Mookie and his agent don't necessarily believe he is worth 12/420. I believe their counter offer was only a message that they intend to test the market. When he does hit the market, his asking price will be irrelvant.
 

Sampo Gida

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 7, 2010
5,044
Mookie had 1 year worthy of 420 million IMO. That was 2018, a truly great offensive year. Not that he wasn't a very good offensive player in other years, just not to the level I would commit to that money. Defensively he is great, but we know that can and will decline over a 10 -12 year period

How he does in LA will play huge in what he gets offered as a FA I think. A great season dispels doubts about how much Fenway and 100 PA a year against Orioles pitching played into his numbers, not to mention whatever went on in 2018 in terms of stolen signs. I doubt he breaks 400 million but 350 seems reasonable . A rough year and he might be happy to take 8/200, and might very well land back in Boston.

Its kind of sad that young fans cant expect to see a player of Betts stature play his entire career for their team, but thats how it works today. The good thing is one can follow your favorite player no matter where he ends up. Its not like 40-50 years ago where your fav player ending up on the WC for a NL team was like being sent to Siberia, never to be seem again except maybe a couple of games a year on a national broadcast.
 

Yaz4Ever

stumps for Trump
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
I asked this on Facebook earlier, but figured I'd ask here as well. If MLB suspends the whole season and we re-sign Mookie, will he (technically) have a chance to play his entire career with the Sox? Just trying to find positives in the suspension of games and the loss of Mookie.
 

richgedman'sghost

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
May 13, 2006
1,642
ct
I asked this on Facebook earlier, but figured I'd ask here as well. If MLB suspends the whole season and we re-sign Mookie, will he (technically) have a chance to play his entire career with the Sox? Just trying to find positives in the suspension of games and the loss of Mookie.
If the whole season is suspended or called off, I think Mookie's and everyone else contact is tolled meaning he would still have to play one more year before free agency. How did the NHL handle such things after the 2004 lockout? I mean if the season never occurs then Mookie still has to play one more year right,?
 

NomarsFool

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 21, 2001
5,452
I wouldn't think that is how it would work. My assumption is that this year if there is no season, the players still get paid. So, they would have fulfilled their 2020 season obligations and contract.
 

JimD

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 29, 2001
8,033
I wonder if Mookie is having second thoughts right now about turning down Boston's $300 million offer. Even in a best-case scenario, this pandemic is going to wreak economic havoc that could take years to recover from - I can't imagine that professional sports will be spared. I would not be shocked if teams are gun-shy in the immediate future about offering mega-contracts like what he is looking for.
 

The Needler

lurker
Dec 7, 2016
1,802
I wouldn't think that is how it would work. My assumption is that this year if there is no season, the players still get paid. So, they would have fulfilled their 2020 season obligations and contract.
It’s unlikely the entire season will be canceled, but if it was, there’s no way teams would be paying $150 million in payroll without any gate or TV revenues. Most of them don’t have even have that kind of money to light on fire.

Anyway, MLB uniform contracts explicitly give the Commissioner the right to suspend player contracts in the event of a national emergency.
 

Yaz4Ever

stumps for Trump
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
It’s unlikely the entire season will be canceled, but if it was, there’s no way teams would be paying $150 million in payroll without any gate or TV revenues. Most of them don’t have even have that kind of money to light on fire.

Anyway, MLB uniform contracts explicitly give the Commissioner the right to suspend player contracts in the event of a national emergency.
A co-worker is friendly with a member of the Mariners ... he told my friend about the suspension of play before it was on the news ... he also said that they wouldn't be getting paid. I can't imagine that the PA would allow that to happen, but I don't know. Don't teams have insurance for player salaries if they're unable to play? If so, are those policies only for injury and not something like this?
 

The Needler

lurker
Dec 7, 2016
1,802
A co-worker is friendly with a member of the Mariners ... he told my friend about the suspension of play before it was on the news ... he also said that they wouldn't be getting paid. I can't imagine that the PA would allow that to happen, but I don't know. Don't teams have insurance for player salaries if they're unable to play? If so, are those policies only for injury and not something like this?
Everything’s insurable, at a cost. But I can’t imagine why a team would incur that cost when their contracts (agreed to by the MLBPA) specifically absolve them from having to pay out under these circumstances.
 

shaggydog2000

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Apr 5, 2007
8,916
A co-worker is friendly with a member of the Mariners ... he told my friend about the suspension of play before it was on the news ... he also said that they wouldn't be getting paid. I can't imagine that the PA would allow that to happen, but I don't know. Don't teams have insurance for player salaries if they're unable to play? If so, are those policies only for injury and not something like this?
They don't get paid during spring training, right? So until the season actually starts, no checks are getting cut.
 

santadevil

wears depends
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
5,609
Saskatchestan
The only players I would even be remotely concerned about are the guys just on the verge of making it, or guys with very little service time
The large majority of the players should be able to float through an entire year without being paid
 

DeadlySplitter

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 20, 2015
25,941
Or, if they cancel the season, he never plays a game for the Dodgers and we resign Mookie next year, right?
I can't see MLB letting service clocks advance on a cancelled season. how would the Dodgers be OK with this?

assuming that service time is frozen, Mookie would be 29 when he becomes a FA in November 2021 instead of 28. that could depress the market alone.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
15,424
Maine
I can't see MLB letting service clocks advance on a cancelled season. how would the Dodgers be OK with this?

assuming that service time is frozen, Mookie would be 29 when he becomes a FA in November 2021 instead of 28. that could depress the market alone.
That they're now talking about July as the earliest start date and the possibility of all games being played in empty stadiums through the end of the season is likely to suppress the entire market. I imagine few teams are prepared to go through the entire season with zero tickets or concessions sold without consequences in how they operate moving forward.
 

Bernie Carbohydrate

writes the Semi-Fin
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 2, 2001
3,321
South Carolina via Dorchestah
That they're now talking about July as the earliest start date and the possibility of all games being played in empty stadiums through the end of the season is likely to suppress the entire market. I imagine few teams are prepared to go through the entire season with zero tickets or concessions sold without consequences in how they operate moving forward.
Sir, let me introduce you to the Miami Marlins.
 

luckysox

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 21, 2009
7,895
S.E. Pennsylvania
Wired in or not, you have to think guys in Mookie's position got absolutely screwed by the timing of this pandemic and shutdown. I'd love to be inside of Mookie's head for a spell during this time, especially if (I think when) baseball starts up again, only to be derailed quickly by players and/or other field personnel testing positive.
 

donutogre

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
2,585
Philadelphia
Wired in or not, you have to think guys in Mookie's position got absolutely screwed by the timing of this pandemic and shutdown. I'd love to be inside of Mookie's head for a spell during this time, especially if (I think when) baseball starts up again, only to be derailed quickly by players and/or other field personnel testing positive.
Truth. We always talk about the security of signing an extension vs. "betting on yourself" and taking it all the way to free agency. Through no fault of his own, Mookie may have completely blown it here. I imagine that things will get back to semi-normalcy in 2021 and there will be a big bidding war for Mookie still, but it's not hard to imagine that he just won't be able to get the same kind of deal he would have gotten if he became a free agent this winter, or even what the Sox would have offered as an extension.
 

Average Game James

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Apr 28, 2016
2,735
Truth. We always talk about the security of signing an extension vs. "betting on yourself" and taking it all the way to free agency. Through no fault of his own, Mookie may have completely blown it here. I imagine that things will get back to semi-normalcy in 2021 and there will be a big bidding war for Mookie still, but it's not hard to imagine that he just won't be able to get the same kind of deal he would have gotten if he became a free agent this winter, or even what the Sox would have offered as an extension.
Completely blown it is probably a bit strong. He will make $47 million over 2019-20 and if he gets $200-250 million in a long-term deal then he’s making what he would have under the reported offers he turned down. Also have to figure any long-term deal he signs involves an opt-out that allows him to retest the market should MLB revenues recover.
 

allmanbro

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
284
Portland, Maine
Peter Gammons predicts Mookie will be "lucky" to get 250 million in free agency.

Not sure this helps the Sox chances, as revenue, etc will be down across the board for all teams, but free agency should be quite interesting next offseason.
I've wondered if the Red Sox will be less impacted than other teams by the economic fallout here because
1) Their payroll had always had more to do with the soft cap than with revenue
2) They were planning to have a down year in revenue anyway (not by this much of course, but their expected and actual revenues this year will likely be closer than they would have been if they were all in)

Being a big market team that was kind of punting this year anyway might leave them in better position to go after a guy like Mookie next winter than other teams.
 
Jul 5, 2018
430
Truth. We always talk about the security of signing an extension vs. "betting on yourself" and taking it all the way to free agency. Through no fault of his own, Mookie may have completely blown it here. I imagine that things will get back to semi-normalcy in 2021 and there will be a big bidding war for Mookie still, but it's not hard to imagine that he just won't be able to get the same kind of deal he would have gotten if he became a free agent this winter, or even what the Sox would have offered as an extension.
Failing to anticipate a pandemic wiping out a season is not blowing it. Mookie has already made tens of millions of dollars so I don't feel too sorry for him. The lower level players that have maybe a 2-3 year window of playing in MLB will be more affected.
 

dano7594

lurker
Jul 15, 2005
94
If that is the case, lucky to get $250 million, I wonder if Mookie does a one year deal in hopes of a bigger pay day in 2021. He has never been afraid of betting on himself and going year to year.
 
Jul 5, 2018
430
If that is the case, lucky to get $250 million, I wonder if Mookie does a one year deal in hopes of a bigger pay day in 2021. He has never been afraid of betting on himself and going year to year.
At least the Dodgers and Red Sox will be bidding for Mookie. It will come down to how long they believe the economic effect on team revenue will last. If They believe things will be back to normal by 2022, there shouldn't be too much of a discount from what he would have received without the pandemic.
 

donutogre

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
2,585
Philadelphia
Failing to anticipate a pandemic wiping out a season is not blowing it. Mookie has already made tens of millions of dollars so I don't feel too sorry for him. The lower level players that have maybe a 2-3 year window of playing in MLB will be more affected.
Yeah, completely blowing it isn't fair, and there's no way he could have predicted this. I just wonder if he's kicking himself. I def don't feel bad for him, though.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
15,424
Maine
Yeah, completely blowing it isn't fair, and there's no way he could have predicted this. I just wonder if he's kicking himself. I def don't feel bad for him, though.
This isn't Nomar turning down a 4/$60M extension then making a total of ~$34M the rest of his career, but it could wind up with the Red Sox last offer being more than Mookie ends up getting this winter. It's the risk you take choosing to maximize value over taking long term security. Can't blame Mookie for doing it, but can't really feel bad if it doesn't work out in his favor either, regardless of the reason why.
 

JimD

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 29, 2001
8,033
We are in completely uncharted territory in terms of the sport's economics and overall economy in general, and the owners are not even close to being on the same page with the Player's Association on any matter of importance, never mind a new CBA for 2022 and beyond. I don't see any 10-year contracts being handed out until there is more certainty on the sport's future.
 

uncannymanny

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 12, 2007
8,369
Failing to anticipate a pandemic wiping out a season is not blowing it. Mookie has already made tens of millions of dollars so I don't feel too sorry for him. The lower level players that have maybe a 2-3 year window of playing in MLB will be more affected.
The pandemic is an unanticipated event, unlike an injury in kind, but in effect. It's not the thing that happened that's "blown it" but the choice and result. It would be hard to "anticipate" and injury as a 27 year old too.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
14,784
There were stories that MLB wouldn't allow the Sox to get a luxury tax reset for this year if there's no season. If so, when Mookie becomes a free agent after 2020, the Red Sox wouldn't be able to pursue him without going over the luxury tax, which has been the big barrier all along.

https://www.thescore.com/mlb/news/1968235
"Major League Baseball's luxury tax threshold won't be reset if the 2020 season is canceled, a spokesperson for the players' association told Alex Speier of the Boston Globe.

"There is no reset - everything will be frozen and restart as if 2021 was 2020 for (competitive balance tax) purposes," the spokesperson said.

This will be the case only if the season is canceled outright. MLB suspended Opening Day indefinitely earlier this month due to the coronavirus pandemic, and it's not known when play will resume.

Three teams - the Boston Red Sox, New York Yankees, and Chicago Cubs - paid into the tax in 2019. The Red Sox attempted to reset their number this winter by shedding salary, most notably through trading Mookie Betts and David Price to the Los Angeles Dodgers last month.
While teams won't pay into the tax if the shutdown continues, players who were active in the majors in 2019 will still gain a year of service time should 2020 be canceled."
 
Jul 5, 2018
430
If that is the case, lucky to get $250 million, I wonder if Mookie does a one year deal in hopes of a bigger pay day in 2021. He has never been afraid of betting on himself and going year to year.
This isn't Nomar turning down a 4/$60M extension then making a total of ~$34M the rest of his career, but it could wind up with the Red Sox last offer being more than Mookie ends up getting this winter. It's the risk you take choosing to maximize value over taking long term security. Can't blame Mookie for doing it, but can't really feel bad if it doesn't work out in his favor either, regardless of the reason why.
Nomar was conning off of a 6.1 WAR season when he received the offer and at the time, A-Rod and Jeter were making $20Mish. I'm sure you remember them as being the Big Three for shortstops at the time. Injuries and his defensive skills going south in 2004, tanked his free agency for 2005.

Nomar, given his history injuries, should have snagged the 4/60, but it's reasonable for him to have thought he would continue playing well.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
15,424
Maine
How did MLB deal with the 1918 Flu Pandemic? Seriously wondering... not implying anything...
They didn't deal with it in any real sense. The season went on despite players falling ill, including Babe Ruth. They did play a shortened season (126 games) but that was more due to the ongoing war efforts than the flu. They finished the World Series on September 11, the only time the Series has ever been entirely contested before October. In fact, an outbreak in Boston was partly attributed to the final game of the Series and the ensuing celebrations.

It was a different time. Players were a dime a dozen (to the owners). If one got sick, or was drafted, or volunteered for the war, they'd just grab somebody else.
 

Sandy Leon Trotsky

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2007
3,684
They didn't deal with it in any real sense. The season went on despite players falling ill, including Babe Ruth. They did play a shortened season (126 games) but that was more due to the ongoing war efforts than the flu. They finished the World Series on September 11, the only time the Series has ever been entirely contested before October. In fact, an outbreak in Boston was partly attributed to the final game of the Series and the ensuing celebrations.

It was a different time. Players were a dime a dozen (to the owners). If one got sick, or was drafted, or volunteered for the war, they'd just grab somebody else.
Thanks. Yes.
 

JimD

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 29, 2001
8,033
There were stories that MLB wouldn't allow the Sox to get a luxury tax reset for this year if there's no season. If so, when Mookie becomes a free agent after 2020, the Red Sox wouldn't be able to pursue him without going over the luxury tax, which has been the big barrier all along.
They may be very well able to resign Mookie at a lower salary in the new baseball economy and still stay below the $210 million threshold.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
14,784
They may be very well able to resign Mookie at a lower salary in the new baseball economy and still stay below the $210 million threshold.
Yes that's a good point. Maybe Mookie's best deal will come in much lower, and thus be affordable to Boston. Of course, if he's coming in that low, a LOT of teams will be in on him at that price probably.
 
Jul 5, 2018
430
They may be very well able to resign Mookie at a lower salary in the new baseball economy and still stay below the $210 million threshold.
What is the new baseball economy and how long will it last? If owners believe it will take five to ten years to get back to where MLB was in 2019, Mookie could very well be looking at $200M.
 

DeadlySplitter

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 20, 2015
25,941
there needs to be some type of season for our luxury tax to reset before considering Mookie at all, I'd think.

I wonder how much he regrets not taking 10/300 from us, assuming that's a true report?
 
Jul 5, 2018
430
there needs to be some type of season for our luxury tax to reset before considering Mookie at all, I'd think.

I wonder how much he regrets not taking 10/300 from us, assuming that's a true report?
Logically, he shouldn't regret it at all. He would have been leaving at least $50M on the table compared to what he would have received when he hit the market in 2021. It was the right decision and he can't kick himself for not anticipating a pandemic. I could have converted my 401K into gold at the end of last year, but I didn't anticipate a pandemic, either.