Register now to remove this ad

Page 17 of 21 FirstFirst ... 71516171819 ... LastLast
Results 241 to 255 of 314

Thread: Why was Mookie traded, exactly?

  1. #241
    Deity Bellhorn04's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Halifax
    Posts
    27,702
    Quote Originally Posted by notin View Post
    Well, according to a few articles about him in the minors, there was a feeling around the league of "Why is this guy still here?"

    But his chances died with the hiring of Dombrowski, who was never a fan, and reportedly left Castillo's pre-signing tryout commenting he was, direct quote here, "a fourth outfielder at best."

    He never got a fulll chance, but i don't think you will ever find a single person who pities him for it. A lot of people will never get a chance to play in MLB, but he is the only one paid $72 million to not play in MLB...
    His .761 OPS in the minors is not much to get excited about. I don't know much about his fielding. But it looks like DD was right about him being a 4th outfielder.
    Championships since purchase by John Henry group: Red Sox 4 Yankees 1

    Theme song of 2020 Red Sox: "Tanks for the Memories"

  2. #242
    Deity
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    19,264
    Quote Originally Posted by Bellhorn04 View Post
    His .761 OPS in the minors is not much to get excited about. I don't know much about his fielding. But it looks like DD was right about him being a 4th outfielder.
    He might very well have been a 4th outfielder in MLB, but a 4th outfielder is still a major leaguer...

  3. #243
    TalkSox Godhead mvp 78's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    37,792
    Quote Originally Posted by notin View Post
    He might very well have been a 4th outfielder in MLB, but a 4th outfielder is still a major leaguer...
    A 4th OFer on a large contract that is not great in a luxury cap era.
    Quote Originally Posted by Kimmi View Post
    <<< Most normal poster on Talksox

  4. #244
    Deity
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    19,264
    Quote Originally Posted by mvp 78 View Post
    A 4th OFer on a large contract that is not great in a luxury cap era.
    And that is why he is where here is...

  5. #245
    Deity Kimmi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    23,658
    Quote Originally Posted by Bellhorn04 View Post
    DD gave up an incredible number of bodies, no question.

    It still remains to have a final accounting of the actual future baseball value he gave up.
    Yes, it will take years before we know that. The overall value might amount to relatively little. However, we are feeling the impact of it right now.

  6. #246
    Legend
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Springfield, VA
    Posts
    7,236
    Back to the OP and the question asked in the thread title. Mookie was traded because his salary was going to be--and now in fact is--prohibitively expensive for a Sox team with an already high payroll and weak pitching. He was/is unaffordable if the goal was/is to produce a winning team capable of a 5th WS in the John Henry era.

  7. #247
    Deity Kimmi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    23,658
    Quote Originally Posted by notin View Post
    Ben can be responsible for signing Castillo, but the decisions that lead to keeping him in AAA seem to be a bit further reaching...
    Yes, that's all I was talking about, the signing part.

  8. #248
    Deity Kimmi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    23,658
    Quote Originally Posted by mvp 78 View Post
    It'll be interesting to see if he signs next year or just retires.
    I think he'll sign somewhere. Maybe a one year contract to try to prove himself.

    Maybe the Sox will re-sign him.

  9. #249
    Quote Originally Posted by Kimmi View Post
    I think he'll sign somewhere. Maybe a one year contract to try to prove himself.

    Maybe the Sox will re-sign him.
    I was surprised he didnt opt out after last year..yeah I know it was several million dollars but he had already made more than he could ever spend & if he opted out it wouldve shown that he had the fire to be a major leaguer.

  10. #250
    Deity Kimmi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    23,658
    Quote Originally Posted by Donnie Sadler was short View Post
    I was surprised he didnt opt out after last year..yeah I know it was several million dollars but he had already made more than he could ever spend & if he opted out it wouldve shown that he had the fire to be a major leaguer.
    Tough call. I can understand the desire to be a major leaguer. OTOH, that's an awful lot of guaranteed money to pass up.

  11. #251
    Deity Bellhorn04's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Halifax
    Posts
    27,702
    Quote Originally Posted by Maxbialystock View Post
    Back to the OP and the question asked in the thread title. Mookie was traded because his salary was going to be--and now in fact is--prohibitively expensive for a Sox team with an already high payroll and weak pitching. He was/is unaffordable if the goal was/is to produce a winning team capable of a 5th WS in the John Henry era.
    I disagree. I think it was the length and consequent risk of the contract that did it.
    Championships since purchase by John Henry group: Red Sox 4 Yankees 1

    Theme song of 2020 Red Sox: "Tanks for the Memories"

  12. #252
    Quote Originally Posted by Bellhorn04 View Post
    I disagree. I think it was the length and consequent risk of the contract that did it.
    I'm not discounting this possibility, but if this is true, it does not bode well for Red Sox fans because it means that ownership is suddenly abstaining from the market for superstars. Mookie never established the market for length and risk -- nor did the Dodgers -- MLB owners did that on their own, bidding against themselves for the likes of ARod, Miggie, Stanton, Harper, Machado, Trout, Cole etc. ad infinitum.

    There's been talk on the forum lately that the Sox won't or shouldn't spend big again on free agents until Boston is back in contention and targets one or two pieces that can boost the club to the next level. What then? If the going rates for stars in their prime are 10-year contracts, will the Sox balk instead and allow rivals to nab all the best talent?

    This is where the adage comes in the form of a question... we know all big market franchises can afford to stay competitive if they so chose, but can Boston afford the price of mediocrity?

  13. #253
    Deity Kimmi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    23,658
    Quote Originally Posted by 5GoldGloves:OF,75 View Post
    I'm not discounting this possibility, but if this is true, it does not bode well for Red Sox fans because it means that ownership is suddenly abstaining from the market for superstars. Mookie never established the market for length and risk -- nor did the Dodgers -- MLB owners did that on their own, bidding against themselves for the likes of ARod, Miggie, Stanton, Harper, Machado, Trout, Cole etc. ad infinitum.

    There's been talk on the forum lately that the Sox won't or shouldn't spend big again on free agents until Boston is back in contention and targets one or two pieces that can boost the club to the next level. What then? If the going rates for stars in their prime are 10-year contracts, will the Sox balk instead and allow rivals to nab all the best talent?

    This is where the adage comes in the form of a question... we know all big market franchises can afford to stay competitive if they so chose, but can Boston afford the price of mediocrity?
    1. If the going rate for stars in their prime is 10 years, the Sox should pass.

    2. Henry will spend money. It doesn't have to be, nor should it be, a large amount for a monster contract. Not having a superstar on our team does not mean the team will be mediocre. A well balanced team that is above average to strong at every position will give you a better chance than a team with a superstar at one position and below average at several other positions.

  14. #254
    Deity
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    19,264
    Quote Originally Posted by Donnie Sadler was short View Post
    I was surprised he didnt opt out after last year..yeah I know it was several million dollars but he had already made more than he could ever spend & if he opted out it wouldve shown that he had the fire to be a major leaguer.
    Maybe money was more important to him than being major leaguer. If all he wanted was to play baseball, he was still doing that in Pawtucket...

  15. #255
    Deity Bellhorn04's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Halifax
    Posts
    27,702
    Quote Originally Posted by 5GoldGloves:OF,75 View Post
    I'm not discounting this possibility, but if this is true, it does not bode well for Red Sox fans because it means that ownership is suddenly abstaining from the market for superstars. Mookie never established the market for length and risk -- nor did the Dodgers -- MLB owners did that on their own, bidding against themselves for the likes of ARod, Miggie, Stanton, Harper, Machado, Trout, Cole etc. ad infinitum.

    There's been talk on the forum lately that the Sox won't or shouldn't spend big again on free agents until Boston is back in contention and targets one or two pieces that can boost the club to the next level. What then? If the going rates for stars in their prime are 10-year contracts, will the Sox balk instead and allow rivals to nab all the best talent?

    This is where the adage comes in the form of a question... we know all big market franchises can afford to stay competitive if they so chose, but can Boston afford the price of mediocrity?
    All I can really say is I'm confident that as long as Henry & Werner own the team, we will have one of the highest payrolls and we will not have mediocrity as a goal.
    Championships since purchase by John Henry group: Red Sox 4 Yankees 1

    Theme song of 2020 Red Sox: "Tanks for the Memories"

Posting Permissions

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