Just wait a season. Dickerson is still a huge upgrade in RF. It doesn't take much to upgrade a -3.0 WAR. 

Edited September 30, 20196 yr by Jack Parkman

No. Mookie Betts doesn’t win us a World Series this year and ownership isn’t giving him a Trout like deal at any point.
 

So Jake Burger and Carson Fulmer would be the most I’d offer...your move Boston 

Not a chance in hell I would trade anything significant for one year of Mookie Betts. Just sign him next offseason if they want him that badly.

13 minutes ago, Jack Parkman said:

Just wait a season. Dickerson is still a huge upgrade in RF. It doesn't take much to upgrade a -3.0 WAR. 

No, absolutely not. Hate this logic. This is what this board did from 2007-2016, where we acted like merely plugging the leaks was akin to improvement. Going from -3 WAR to 0 WAR is no where near the improvement of going from 0 WAR to 3 WAR, and is not close to going from 3 WAR to 6 WAR. 

Depth is great, but it's not getting elite players. Get elite players!

19 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

Once Soto broke out, the Nationals genuinely were in a position where Harper wasn't necessary for them. Letting him go was the right move; their OF was fine without Harper and the money they didn't spend on Harper went to strengthen their pitching staff. They didn't pursue him because they literally shouldn't have pursued him.

This may very well be true but the question is how often when a player is intent on testing free agency and the incumbent team is also intent on keeping them do they lose them? THe nats did not really pursue, nor the orioles. 

The only one that sticks out to me is the Cards with Pujols.

3 minutes ago, bmags said:

No, absolutely not. Hate this logic. This is what this board did from 2007-2016, where we acted like merely plugging the leaks was akin to improvement. Going from -3 WAR to 0 WAR is no where near the improvement of going from 0 WAR to 3 WAR, and is not close to going from 3 WAR to 6 WAR. 

Depth is great, but it's not getting elite players. Get elite players!

He doesn't make us World Series contenders in 2020. Heck, we don't know if we are playoff contenders with a lot of our unknowns for next year. If he had 2 years of control, sure, I would be willing. But not for one season.

Maybe sniff around and see if any other teams are willing to deal their stars with a couple years of control left (re-boot for next year, shift resources, etc.) and see if they are attainable.

Edited September 30, 20196 yr by soxfan2014

19 minutes ago, South Sider said:

Mookie Betts is a generational talent and he will no doubt sign any deal that is in the 400s. He'd frankly be stupid not to. There's no need to "test FA" when the team that has control over you blows you away, which we saw by and large last offseason.

If you intend to do this, and the asking price isn't completely insane, this is an absolute no brainer. If you can construct it more like Harpers to disperse the money over more years, even better. 

The question then becomes, if the constraint that the Sox would absolutely sign him to an extension and Boston's asking price isn't crazy were met, what then becomes the offer we would give up? It's mental masturbation, but it is fun to talk about and dream about. 

I'd like to avoid dealing SP prospects as we need as many of those as we can, so what package of position players get the deal done? 

 

I like this post because it at least gets at the idea that mookie betts becoming available is genuinely shocking and taking advantage of that should be heavily considered.

That we have to consider the sox self-made restrictions to judge it a bad idea is an indictment on our ownership/management team.

As we had done last year, though an individually large contract, in terms of total salary there is no reason this team can't afford an exceptional contract. 

But yes, I'd say the ideal is to just sign him next offseason. But, what if the dodgers acquire him? I don't think he gets away.

Just now, bmags said:

No, absolutely not. Hate this logic. This is what this board did from 2007-2016, where we acted like merely plugging the leaks was akin to improvement. Going from -3 WAR to 0 WAR is no where near the improvement of going from 0 WAR to 3 WAR, and is not close to going from 3 WAR to 6 WAR. 

Depth is great, but it's not getting elite players. Get elite players!

The other thing we did during those years repeatedly was to attempt to acquire players to help now at the expense of our future, consistently. And no, I don't believe that either of them would have been nearly this good of players had they stayed with the White Sox, but seriously, 2 guys who we traded away that just play IF positions put up 11.2 fWAR in 2019 alone. We traded away a guy who, after a few years of work, turned into a top 5 MVP candidate in order to get a guy 1 year from free agency, and we told ourselves repeatedly that the guys we were giving up were no big deal. There's a lesson in that too.

1 minute ago, soxfan2014 said:

He doesn't make us World Series contenders in 2020. Heck, we don't know if we are playoff contenders with a lot of our unknowns for next year. If he had 2 years of control, sure, I would be willing. But not for one season.

Maybe sniff around and see if any other teams are willing to deal their stars with a couple years of control left (re-boot for next year, shift resources, etc.) and see if they are attainable.

He makes us better for a year, which is valuable, and it lets us negotiate his record-breaking deal the white sox should surely be willing to give in the offseason.

The idea that the sox may not be willing to go after betts as a free agent is geniunely ridiculous, and that should be the focus of why this would be considered a bad move!

1 minute ago, bmags said:

But yes, I'd say the ideal is to just sign him next offseason. But, what if the dodgers acquire him? I don't think he gets away.

If he's not going to take a discount to stay with the Dodgers, the Dodgers aren't going to overpay to keep him from hitting FA. They'll put a fair offer on the table and if he doesn't fit their needs, they'll walk away. 

It's not like they're sitting on a huge hole in their OF that they will be $400 million desperate to fill. 

1 minute ago, Balta1701 said:

The other thing we did during those years repeatedly was to attempt to acquire players to help now at the expense of our future, consistently. And no, I don't believe that either of them would have been nearly this good of players had they stayed with the White Sox, but seriously, 2 guys who we traded away that just play IF positions put up 11.2 fWAR in 2019 alone. We traded away a guy who, after a few years of work, turned into a top 5 MVP candidate in order to get a guy 1 year from free agency, and we told ourselves repeatedly that the guys we were giving up were no big deal. There's a lesson in that too.

You want to compare mookie betts to jeff samardjiza, todd frazier, melky cabrera, david robertson. 

1 minute ago, Balta1701 said:

If he's not going to take a discount to stay with the Dodgers, the Dodgers aren't going to overpay to keep him from hitting FA. They'll put a fair offer on the table and if he doesn't fit their needs, they'll walk away. 

It's not like they're sitting on a huge hole in their OF that they will be $400 million desperate to fill. 

They have not won a world series despite their efforts, I think they'd be willing to pay quite a bit for those few extra wins from a player like betts.

Giving up anything really significant for Mookie would be quite risky.  He'd most likely want to test FA, and I'm not sure the Sox could sign him even if he played on the south side for a season.

12 minutes ago, bmags said:

No, absolutely not. Hate this logic. This is what this board did from 2007-2016, where we acted like merely plugging the leaks was akin to improvement. Going from -3 WAR to 0 WAR is no where near the improvement of going from 0 WAR to 3 WAR, and is not close to going from 3 WAR to 6 WAR. 

Depth is great, but it's not getting elite players. Get elite players!

I want them to get Betts next winter, but they absolutely can't afford to trade anyone from their farm system right now. Dickerson is what we get in RF for 2020.

The only players I'd trade are those guys that look like they're teetering on never becoming anything, like Rutherford Gonzalez and Sheets. 

They're in a really delicate position currently. They have to plug their holes with only money. I'd be very careful trading anyone. 

Edited September 30, 20196 yr by Jack Parkman

I don't even know what Boston is going to be asking, but I am sure many teams could and would blow our offer apart.  Sox aren't trading Madrigal or Vaughn, and he is going to cost at minimum close to a top 50 prospect.

4 minutes ago, bmags said:

You want to compare mookie betts to jeff samardjiza, todd frazier, melky cabrera, david robertson. 

No, I want to compare Andrew Vaughn and Nick Madrigal to the guys we traded away. I want to compare Marcus Semien to Mookie Betts. 

1 minute ago, BackDoorBreach said:

I don't even know what Boston is going to be asking, but I am sure many teams could and would blow our offer apart.  Sox aren't trading Madrigal or Vaughn, and he is going to cost at minimum close to a top 50 prospect.

It would take one of them, at the very least. 

No.

The thought of even doing so is so stupid.  The Sox didn't rebuild to trade away an elite prospect or two for 1 year of an impending free agent.  

Let's not spend the off-season posting about how he is going to sign here. Someone will overpay.

1 minute ago, Jack Parkman said:

It would take one of them, at the very least. 

Which is why it doesn't make sense really to trade for him.  We aren't in the position in 2020 where he puts us over the top.  This team should be around 80 wins next year.  

Let the Braves give up a Drew Waters or something for him.

Just now, pcq said:

Let's not spend the off-season posting about how he is going to sign here. Someone will overpay.

If we skip on the elite pitching FAs this season (narrator: they should not have skipped on the elite pitching FAs but they did anyway), they could very well be in a position to make a run at this offer next offseason. 

I will not bore you with reasons why they won't. 

I feel like Mookie will be more valuable to another team.  What I mean is that another team will be willing to give up more to acquire him because of what difference he could make for them in a one year window. 

3 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

If we skip on the elite pitching FAs this season (narrator: they should not have skipped on the elite pitching FAs but they did anyway), they could very well be in a position to make a run at this offer next offseason. 

I will not bore you with reasons why they won't. 

Yes, you're correct. Betts is a pipedream. So is anyone decent on the FA market. 

If they continue to be cheap with FA, then Moncada and Gio are going to walk in 2023 and the Sox might have had one playoff appearance. 

8 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

No, I want to compare Andrew Vaughn and Nick Madrigal to the guys we traded away. I want to compare Marcus Semien to Mookie Betts. 

I would make the 2015 trade for samardjiza today for mookie betts single year even if you granted me the foresight of knowing what would happen to them. 

4 minutes ago, turnin' two said:

I feel like Mookie will be more valuable to another team.  What I mean is that another team will be willing to give up more to acquire him because of what difference he could make for them in a one year window. 

This is absolutely true but many of the contending teams, especially in NL, don't have wonderful farms so I do wonder what a package would even be.