Register now to remove this ad

Page 2 of 120 FirstFirst 12341252102 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 1787

Thread: Why was Mookie traded, exactly?

  1. #16
    Deity Kimmi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    26,666
    Also, as I mentioned in the other thread, that state of the farm is probably the most significant consideration, though not the only one, by far.

    Having a strong farm system opens up so much flexibility in payroll.

  2. #17
    Deity Kimmi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    26,666
    Quote Originally Posted by mvp 78 View Post
    Never.
    In all honesty, are you surprised that the Dodgers gave Mookie that extension during this pandemic and the financial uncertainty?

    I've posted before, if I were Mookie's mom, I would have told him to take the $300 million. Every time.

  3. #18
    TalkSox Ascended Master mvp 78's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    65,866
    Quote Originally Posted by Kimmi View Post
    In all honesty, are you surprised that the Dodgers gave Mookie that extension during this pandemic and the financial uncertainty?

    I've posted before, if I were Mookie's mom, I would have told him to take the $300 million. Every time.
    No, I'm not surprised.

    1. LA is desperate to get over the hump.
    2. LA is very "star" driven.
    3. LA has a huge tv contract.
    4. LA has lots of young guys on cheap contracts (for now).

    It was the perfect storm for Betts to sign a long term deal with the Dodgers. If the Dodgers had won the WS in the past few years, they would not have made this move.
    Quote Originally Posted by moonslav59 View Post
    ( I won't say the "C word.")

  4. #19
    Deity Kimmi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    26,666
    Quote Originally Posted by mvp 78 View Post
    No, I'm not surprised.

    1. LA is desperate to get over the hump.
    2. LA is very "star" driven.
    3. LA has a huge tv contract.
    4. LA has lots of young guys on cheap contracts (for now).

    It was the perfect storm for Betts to sign a long term deal with the Dodgers. If the Dodgers had won the WS in the past few years, they would not have made this move.
    If this were a 'normal' year, I could agree with all of that. I still think it would have been crazy, but I could understand the reasoning.

    Under these circumstances, I am mind blown. IMO, they could have signed Mookie for significantly less money. IMO, Mookie "Dodged" a bullet.

  5. #20
    TalkSox Ascended Master mvp 78's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    65,866
    Quote Originally Posted by Kimmi View Post
    If this were a 'normal' year, I could agree with all of that. I still think it would have been crazy, but I could understand the reasoning.

    Under these circumstances, I am mind blown. IMO, they could have signed Mookie for significantly less money. IMO, Mookie "Dodged" a bullet.
    I think "these circumstances" are overblown when talking about uber rich like baseball owners. I don't think the pandemic significantly altered their baseball budgets at all. I don't think there is going to be as much of a downturn in FA signings this offseason as people expect.
    Quote Originally Posted by moonslav59 View Post
    ( I won't say the "C word.")

  6. #21
    Deity Kimmi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    26,666
    Quote Originally Posted by mvp 78 View Post
    I think "these circumstances" are overblown when talking about uber rich like baseball owners. I don't think the pandemic significantly altered their baseball budgets at all. I don't think there is going to be as much of a downturn in FA signings this offseason as people expect.
    Of course the owners can afford it. But they were haggling over how many games to play this season and how much to pay their players.

    The Dodgers significantly outbid themselves, IMO.

  7. #22
    Deity Bellhorn04's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Halifax
    Posts
    46,964
    Quote Originally Posted by Kimmi View Post
    Also, as I mentioned in the other thread, that state of the farm is probably the most significant consideration, though not the only one, by far.

    Having a strong farm system opens up so much flexibility in payroll.
    Well, if Bloom does his job, we should have a relatively large amount of flexibility going forward, especially beginning in 2023.
    Championships since purchase by John Henry group: Red Sox 4 Yankees 1

    The Red Sox are 8-1 in their last 9 postseason games against the Yankees.

  8. #23
    TalkSox Ascended Master mvp 78's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    65,866
    Quote Originally Posted by Kimmi View Post
    Of course the owners can afford it. But they were haggling over how many games to play this season and how much to pay their players.

    The Dodgers significantly outbid themselves, IMO.
    The expectation is fans will be back next year and business will be back to normal. I don't think the Dodgers wanted to lose out on Betts this offseason just because they wanted to have a smaller loss this year.

    The push for fewer games and reduced pay was a negotiating ploy to fix spending for the next CBA. I think they started out with a bad position and never dug themselves out of it. I don't think owners like John Henry were leading that charge. They would have probably preferred more games for the tv ratings. I don't believe that every owner is in the same financial position and wants the same thing for their teams. They aren't some monolith voting block. Hard to compare the wants and needs of Pirates owners and Red Sox owners even though they both have really bad teams this year.
    Quote Originally Posted by moonslav59 View Post
    ( I won't say the "C word.")

  9. #24
    TalkSox Ascended Master mvp 78's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    65,866
    Quote Originally Posted by Bellhorn04 View Post
    Well, if Bloom does his job, we should have a relatively large amount of flexibility going forward, especially beginning in 2023.
    Needs to manage the tightrope of spending flexibility, growing a farm system and feeding the monster (aka competing).
    Quote Originally Posted by moonslav59 View Post
    ( I won't say the "C word.")

  10. #25
    Deity
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    41,306
    Quote Originally Posted by Bellhorn04 View Post
    In my opinion, there was only one valid reason for letting him go. They didn't want to pay him $350-400 million. I can live with that, because the risk of such a contract would have been astronomical.

    But the stuff about saving tax and creating flexibility doesn't cut it as legitimate reasons, for me.
    For all the good Henry has done for the sox, his desire to spend has been somewhat mercurial.

    When Cherington took over, he was not allowed to spend. He had to trade Marco Scutaro just so he could bring in Cody Ross. That's a small market maneuver. Then he was allowed to spend and he went nuts with a massive spress that worked out really well (meaning we won a WS) when he brought in Napoli, Dempster, Drew, Victorino and (especially) Uehara. And then he spent poorly again with Sandoval, Hanley and Rusney. And he was not allowed to spend again - remember "no long term contracts for pitchers" - so Lester and Lackey were dealt.

    Dombrowski was in the opposite camp. He was allowed to spend like mad, basically an open check book. He also lived up to his rep as a Farm Killer. And it worked for a while. But when it stopped, so did his ability to spend.

    And then Bloom was brought in and was allowed to spend on some second tier players like Perez and Peraza, but nothing else.

    It's like when the Sox win, Henry laments how much it costs to do so and dials back. But then realizes the losses are even worse when the Sox lose. And then he forgets all about this. Lather. Rinse. Repeat....

  11. #26
    Deity
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    41,306
    Quote Originally Posted by mvp 78 View Post
    I think "these circumstances" are overblown when talking about uber rich like baseball owners. I don't think the pandemic significantly altered their baseball budgets at all. I don't think there is going to be as much of a downturn in FA signings this offseason as people expect.
    You are forgetting the one thing all rich people have in common - the desire to not make other people rich...

  12. #27
    Deity Bellhorn04's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Halifax
    Posts
    46,964
    Quote Originally Posted by notin View Post
    For all the good Henry has done for the sox, his desire to spend has been somewhat mercurial.

    When Cherington took over, he was not allowed to spend. He had to trade Marco Scutaro just so he could bring in Cody Ross. That's a small market maneuver. Then he was allowed to spend and he went nuts with a massive spress that worked out really well (meaning we won a WS) when he brought in Napoli, Dempster, Drew, Victorino and (especially) Uehara. And then he spent poorly again with Sandoval, Hanley and Rusney. And he was not allowed to spend again - remember "no long term contracts for pitchers" - so Lester and Lackey were dealt.

    Dombrowski was in the opposite camp. He was allowed to spend like mad, basically an open check book. He also lived up to his rep as a Farm Killer. And it worked for a while. But when it stopped, so did his ability to spend.

    And then Bloom was brought in and was allowed to spend on some second tier players like Perez and Peraza, but nothing else.

    It's like when the Sox win, Henry laments how much it costs to do so and dials back. But then realizes the losses are even worse when the Sox lose. And then he forgets all about this. Lather. Rinse. Repeat....
    Yes, it's been a weird ride.

    Sure can't complain about the 4 rings though.
    Championships since purchase by John Henry group: Red Sox 4 Yankees 1

    The Red Sox are 8-1 in their last 9 postseason games against the Yankees.

  13. #28
    Deity
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    41,306
    Quote Originally Posted by Bellhorn04 View Post
    Yes, it's been a weird ride.

    Sure can't complain about the 4 rings though.
    I can't, but honestly, I thought this outcome was predictable when the Sox signed Price. I only liked that deal because of the opt out, and once he got injured, it seemed really unlikely that he would. But my main contention that I posted way back on the archives of this board, was that it made it more difficult to extend the players like Betts, whom I did name specifically...

  14. #29
    TalkSox Ascended Master mvp 78's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    65,866
    Quote Originally Posted by notin View Post
    You are forgetting the one thing all rich people have in common - the desire to not make other people rich...
    I think the contracts MLB has thrown around since ARod's mega deal show that to be false.
    Quote Originally Posted by moonslav59 View Post
    ( I won't say the "C word.")

  15. #30
    Deity Bellhorn04's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Halifax
    Posts
    46,964
    Quote Originally Posted by notin View Post
    I can't, but honestly, I thought this outcome was predictable when the Sox signed Price. I only liked that deal because of the opt out, and once he got injured, it seemed really unlikely that he would. But my main contention that I posted way back on the archives of this board, was that it made it more difficult to extend the players like Betts, whom I did name specifically...
    Well, the final 2 years of Price's deal fall in the first 2 years of Mookie's deal. So it was a hindrance, but not a huge obstacle IMHO.
    Championships since purchase by John Henry group: Red Sox 4 Yankees 1

    The Red Sox are 8-1 in their last 9 postseason games against the Yankees.

Posting Permissions

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