Register now to remove this ad

Page 3 of 44 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 650

Thread: What would a Betts extension be?

  1. #31
    Deity moonslav59's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Sugar Land, Texas
    Posts
    80,047
    Quote Originally Posted by Kimmi View Post
    I get the sentiment for wanting to keep Mookie regardless of the cost. The first half of the contract will be great. Mookie might even end up being worth the contract overall because of his great play during the first part of the contract.

    But when those albatross years hit...
    Ages 33-37 are not always albatrosses.

    Barring injuries, I think Betts will have decent to good years those years, but I admit it's a huge gamble.

  2. #32
    Deity Kimmi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    26,666
    Quote Originally Posted by Nick View Post
    Big part of appeal about Betts is his athleticism to go along with his baseball skills.

    I seriously doubt in 7 years, he'll be making the same type of running catches nor running the bases with abandonment as he's doing now. His power will certainly decline. He is NOT going to repeat last year's performance year after year.

    I would agree Betts is worth $35M per year if he repeats last year's numbers for next ten years. I just don't think he can do it.
    Players typically peak at about 27 years of age. They are already past peak at the age of 30. A 10 year contract that takes a player to age 37 is just insane.

    It's very possible that 2018 is Mookie's career year. I'm not saying he won't continue to be an MVP candidate for several more years, but he may not hit 10.4 WAR again.

  3. #33
    Deity Kimmi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    26,666
    Quote Originally Posted by notin View Post
    1. To delay free agency and control the player for an additional year or two.
    2. The way arb deals are going, buying them out seems to make a lot of financial sense...
    I will ask again, how are the Red Sox benefiting from the contract proposal Jacko gave?

    In that proposal, the Sox will be paying Mookie more in his final 2 arb years than they would going year by year. Additionally, they are still giving him a free agent contract of $35 mil a year for 10 years. Is that supposed to be a bargain?

    If they're going to offer that, why not just wait until he's a free agent and offer him the 10 yr/ $350 mil contract then?

  4. #34
    Deity Kimmi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    26,666
    Quote Originally Posted by Northern Star View Post
    Kimmi and dgalehouse are the voices of reason here. There's a point at which it gets stupid - and irresponsible - to hand out the kind of longterm commitment and amount of money that jacko is suggesting. I think we've hit a dangerous plateau with contracts going over $300mil for 7 or 10 years. Like Kimmi said, the team is taking on all of the risk, and getting value in terms of production for maybe half of it if they are lucky.

    Knowing how likely it is for players to decline into their middle/late thirties, it's insanity to lock them up for that long. I'd rather trade Betts for what we can get in his last pre-FA year than break the bank and shackle the franchise to such a ridiculous degree. No one player is bigger than the team. Ever.
    1. I think it's the first time DGalehouse and I have agreed on anything.
    2. The Sox would be crazy to offer that deal and Mookie would be stupid not to accept.
    3. Trading Betts next offseason is really not a bad idea.
    4. The money saved from not signing Mookie to the mega contract could be put to very good use elsewhere.

  5. #35
    Deity Kimmi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    26,666
    Quote Originally Posted by moonslav59 View Post
    Ages 33-37 are not always albatrosses.

    Barring injuries, I think Betts will have decent to good years those years, but I admit it's a huge gamble.
    No, they aren't always albatrosses. Mookie could be one of the exceptions to the rule.

  6. #36
    Deity moonslav59's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Sugar Land, Texas
    Posts
    80,047
    Quote Originally Posted by Kimmi View Post
    No, they aren't always albatrosses. Mookie could be one of the exceptions to the rule.
    Many of the worst long term deals on record involved players signed until age 40 or beyond.

    While 37 is well beyond prime, many great players do pretty well in years 33-37, or at least do very well for many of those years.

  7. #37
    Deity moonslav59's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Sugar Land, Texas
    Posts
    80,047
    I'd like to have Betts from ages 38-40 as well- not at $35M, of course, but I think he'll still be a plus player those ages.

    I'd think about offering him an extension right now of $400M/15. The extra money helps Betts: the extra years brings down the AVV.

  8. #38
    All-Star
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    1,150
    My offer would be 8 years for 255 million. If the answer is "no" then I wait till the end of arbitration, and make one more sensible offer. If the answer is "no" then we sign one or two top free agents with all that cash and continue our success story without him. (Mookie is terrific in many ways but I doubt his durability--could be wrong about it, but I can't see him power hitting or DH-ing in old age as in Ted Williams and David Ortiz)
    Last edited by fxkatt; 12-30-2018 at 08:57 PM.

  9. #39
    Some fans have a rotisserie league outlook. They want to prove they can beat you while spending the same as you do. This is commendable. But MLB is not like that. It is not fantasy, it is reality. It is big business. When the top players become free agents , there are only a handful of teams that are in the running for them. If you are not one of them , you will have a tough time getting to the top and staying there. That's just how it is.

  10. #40
    Deity moonslav59's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Sugar Land, Texas
    Posts
    80,047
    Quote Originally Posted by dgalehouse View Post
    Some fans have a rotisserie league outlook. They want to prove they can beat you while spending the same as you do. This is commendable. But MLB is not like that. It is not fantasy, it is reality. It is big business. When the top players become free agents , there are only a handful of teams that are in the running for them. If you are not one of them , you will have a tough time getting to the top and staying there. That's just how it is.
    True, but that doesn't mean we spend freely every single year.

    Right now, we have Beni, Devers and ERod as key players on the cheap. How many do the Yanks and Dodgers have?

  11. #41
    All-Star
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    1,150
    Quote Originally Posted by dgalehouse View Post
    Some fans have a rotisserie league outlook. They want to prove they can beat you while spending the same as you do. This is commendable. But MLB is not like that. It is not fantasy, it is reality. It is big business. When the top players become free agents , there are only a handful of teams that are in the running for them. If you are not one of them , you will have a tough time getting to the top and staying there. That's just how it is.
    Well, I'm not into Rotisserie. What I'm thinking is that Harper and Machado, like so many many big free agent sluggers before them, are most certainly going to be overpaid--and overpaying is always a disadvantage even to NY, LA, and Boston. We just did this stupid thing 4-5 years ago and got almost nothing but headaches in return for our lavish bucks. The examples are almost as long as the number of long, stupendously expensive, contracts.

  12. #42
    Quote Originally Posted by fxkatt View Post
    Well, I'm not into Rotisserie. What I'm thinking is that Harper and Machado, like so many many big free agent sluggers before them, are most certainly going to be overpaid--and overpaying is always a disadvantage even to NY, LA, and Boston. We just did this stupid thing 4-5 years ago and got almost nothing but headaches in return for our lavish bucks. The examples are almost as long as the number of long, stupendously expensive, contracts.
    You're right. We always remember the mistakes. There is certainly a need for caution. But how many championships have the small time , moneyball types won ?

  13. #43
    Deity moonslav59's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Sugar Land, Texas
    Posts
    80,047
    Quote Originally Posted by dgalehouse View Post
    You're right. We always remember the mistakes. There is certainly a need for caution. But how many championships have the small time , moneyball types won ?
    Most use a combination of big signings and "moneyball" moves.

  14. #44
    Deity Kimmi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    26,666
    Quote Originally Posted by moonslav59 View Post
    I'd like to have Betts from ages 38-40 as well- not at $35M, of course, but I think he'll still be a plus player those ages.

    I'd think about offering him an extension right now of $400M/15. The extra money helps Betts: the extra years brings down the AVV.
    You have gone off the deep end Moon.

  15. #45
    Deity Kimmi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    26,666
    Quote Originally Posted by fxkatt View Post
    My offer would be 8 years for 255 million. If the answer is "no" then I wait till the end of arbitration, and make one more sensible offer. If the answer is "no" then we sign one or two top free agents with all that cash and continue our success story without him. (Mookie is terrific in many ways but I doubt his durability--could be wrong about it, but I can't see him power hitting or DH-ing in old age as in Ted Williams and David Ortiz)
    Mookie is terrific, but he alone is not going to make or break the team. Make him a reasonable offer, and if he declines, then you have to let him walk.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •