Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Kpet1010

Is Mookie Betts a real option for the Sox with payroll history??

Recommended Posts

13 minutes ago, fathom said:

Not if he wants 12/420

I don’t see how he’s a realistic signing even if he wants $300 million.  😐 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Depends on a lot of things obviously, but the Sox could sign him for $35 million per year and still have a league-average payroll next year (assuming options are declined on EE, Gonzalez, etc. and arb raises are normal). 
 

If (big if) TWO of Kopech/Cease/Lopez have great years (let’s say 3+ fWAR) and the position players perform as expected, it’s somewhat likely that RF will be the only major need, in which case I absolutely can see them allocating all their resources towards one player.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Jose Abreu said:

Depends on a lot of things obviously, but the Sox could sign him for $35 million per year and still have a league-average payroll next year (assuming options are declined on EE, Gonzalez, etc. and arb raises are normal). 
 

If (big if) TWO of Kopech/Cease/Lopez have great years (let’s say 3+ fWAR) and the position players perform as expected, it’s somewhat likely that RF will be the only major need, in which case I absolutely can see them allocating all their resources towards one player.

More likely to go to someone already on the roster who isn't signed long-term (Moncada) than someone outside.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, soxfan2014 said:

More likely to go to someone already on the roster who isn't signed long-term (Moncada) than someone outside.

Likely true. I’d love a Moncada extension + Pederson signing, for example.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Jose Abreu said:

Likely true. I’d love a Moncada extension + Pederson signing, for example.

That would be fine with me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think he is. This offseason was unprecedented in terms of signing players and spending, and next offseason could be the next tier. 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, NCsoxfan said:

Adolfo, Rutherford, and Dunning for Betts. Who says no? Not a big return but decent B prospects for a rental.

I'm against training away Dunning with so many other question marks around the pitching staff.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, NCsoxfan said:

Adolfo, Rutherford, and Dunning for Betts. Who says no? Not a big return but decent B prospects for a rental.

The Red Sox

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, NCsoxfan said:

Adolfo, Rutherford, and Dunning for Betts. Who says no? Not a big return but decent B prospects for a rental.

I do. Don't give away any assets for a rental player that doesn't put you over the top, especially when all three assets have suppressed value due to injuries or poor performance. Regardless, the Red Sox would laugh at that package. Look at the Machado trade to LA for a rough estimate of where to start, and that was for only 2 months. It isn't worth it for our Sox to go down this road.

Edited by CWSpalehoseCWS
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, CWSpalehoseCWS said:

I do. Don't give away any assets for a rental player that doesn't put you over the top, especially when all three assets have suppressed value due to injuries or poor performance. Regardless, the Red Sox would laugh at that package. Look at the Machado trade to LA for a rough estimate of where to start, and that was for only 2 months. It isn't worth it for our Sox to go down this road.

I agree they’d say no but that’s the kind of package I’d entertain- none of the top prospects. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, fathom said:

Not if he wants 12/420

Tin foil hat theory: Mookie countered with those figures because he's dead set on testing FA. He threw out some Trout figures that if Boston agreed to pay him that, he'd be fine with staying. Asking for Trout money is ambitious, but I'd wager he doesn't quite crack that. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Sleepy Harold said:

Tin foil hat theory: Mookie countered with those figures because he's dead set on testing FA. He threw out some Trout figures that if Boston agreed to pay him that, he'd be fine with staying. Asking for Trout money is ambitious, but I'd wager he doesn't quite crack that. 

He will at least get Machado money so why agree to a contract now? No reason at all. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, NCsoxfan said:

He will at least get Machado money so why agree to a contract now? No reason at all. 

Yeah exactly. I'd guess that's his contract floor at worst, barring injury or what have you. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, NCsoxfan said:

I agree they’d say no but that’s the kind of package I’d entertain- none of the top prospects. 

According to the latest Future Sox article isn't Dunning still regarded as our #2 pitching prospect ? I'd call that a top prospect.

Edited by CaliSoxFanViaSWside

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not that we’re trading for Betts, but any package would partially be offset by a supplemental draft pick if Mookie were to leave.  That would have to be packaged into a potential price.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Chicago White Sox said:

Not that we’re trading for Betts, but any package would partially be offset by a supplemental draft pick if Mookie were to leave.  That would have to be packaged into a potential price.

Which makes sense that the Red Sox would trade him now, right?  He has more value now.  If they wait until the trade deadline to deal him, no supplemental pick is attached to Betts going into free agency?

Edited by Moan4Yoan
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

12/420 is a no from me. However, that is negotiations - if they are making that number publicly it's just to set the bar high. 

My absolute ceiling would be 11/ 350. And at that I would want there to be creativity. Like I wouldn't mind a year where he gets paid $60mm, and then the following year is like $10mm. Off the top of my head I feel like they do this in football a ton. I understand there's a salary cap there, so its a bit different & don't know if there are union rules against it. But why not get creative to where you're spending a bunch in years with payroll flexibility, and then maybe less during a peak run, and then restructuring it to a bunch when you're likely in a rebuild, etc. etc. etc. I'm not sure how it would all look, but someone smarter in the FO should be able to figure out something. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, BrianAnderson said:

12/420 is a no from me. However, that is negotiations - if they are making that number publicly it's just to set the bar high. 

My absolute ceiling would be 11/ 350. And at that I would want there to be creativity. Like I wouldn't mind a year where he gets paid $60mm, and then the following year is like $10mm. Off the top of my head I feel like they do this in football a ton. I understand there's a salary cap there, so its a bit different & don't know if there are union rules against it. But why not get creative to where you're spending a bunch in years with payroll flexibility, and then maybe less during a peak run, and then restructuring it to a bunch when you're likely in a rebuild, etc. etc. etc. I'm not sure how it would all look, but someone smarter in the FO should be able to figure out something. 

The luxury tax CAP goes by AAV anyway so it doesn't matter if he is paid significantly more one year and then significantly little the next.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First things first, the White Sox aren’t trading for Betts.

Second - the Sox will certainly be one of a handful of teams that will be interested in Mookie next winter. I don’t think he’ll get $420M, but could see 10/$350M type deal. I do think the Sox are and will remain a long shot to actually sign him, but we should be in a better position than at least like 75% of clubs. That’s a start. If things go mostly according to plan this season, but Mazara is the dude he’s always been, RF could legitimately be the only hole to hole to fill with an approximately $100M payroll after arb. The money will be there on an AAV basis. It’s the years that obviously will concern Jerry.

I wouldn’t necessarily bet on the Sox signing him, but I think they’ll be a real bidder and a finalist for Betts. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think they'll be one of the final bidders personally. If Jerry is signing anyone to a $300+, long-term deal, it will be someone already in house like Moncada. Dude is loyal (sometimes to a fault).

Edited by soxfan2014
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×