2020 MLB Thread

[Nik]

Well might as well start this off with a nutty trade:

To Dodgers: Mookie Betts, David Price
To Twins: Kenta Maeda
To Red Sox: Alex Verdugo, Brusdar Graterol

So, to cap it off, an incredibly profitable team in a huge market traded one of the best players in the world because they didn't want to pay the luxury tax and be slightly less profitable. What a scam the owners are pulling these days.

[Dappleganger]

I can't explain the impetus for this move from Boston's perspective.

[Nik]

To top it off, the Dodgers are apparently only paying 1/2 of Price's salary and to make room for Betts in the outfield traded Joc Pederson to the Angels.

The Dodgers might be real good.

[bustaheims]

I can't explain the impetus for this move from Boston's perspective.

Nope. I get moving Price - he wasn't providing value for money - but Betts is a perennial MVP candidate. You pay that kind of guy and keep him around. Verdugo is a good young outfielder, and will cover a good portion of what Betts brought, but, he's not enough of a return to justify moving out your best player.

[Nik]

I mean, if you're looking for a baseball reason beyond saving money on the tax, you won't find one.

[digdug]

this is mostly speculation.

feel free to poke holes in my theory...

but  Maybe Mookie Betts  won't be that good a hitter
if he doesn't know what pitch is coming ahead of time?

[bustaheims]

I mean, if you're looking for a baseball reason beyond saving money on the tax, you won't find one.

Nope. Luxury tax seems to be working as a soft cap. Teams don't want to be stuck over the line for any length of time.

[pmrules]

this is mostly speculation.

feel free to poke holes in my theory...

but  Maybe Mookie Betts  won't be that good a hitter
if he doesn't know what pitch is coming ahead of time?

This line of thinking is exactly where my mind went ...

[Nik]

this is mostly speculation.

feel free to poke holes in my theory...

but  Maybe Mookie Betts  won't be that good a hitter
if he doesn't know what pitch is coming ahead of time?

That doesn't really add up for a number of reasons. I don't think there are any serious suggestions that the Red Sox have been stealing signs for Betts' entire career and his minor league numbers are terrific so...

[bustaheims]

this is mostly speculation.

feel free to poke holes in my theory...

but  Maybe Mookie Betts  won't be that good a hitter
if he doesn't know what pitch is coming ahead of time?

If that were true, you'd probably see a more significant difference between his home and road splits - especially once you factor in the advantages that Fenway provides power hitting righties and plunking balls off the Green Monster.

[Nik]

If that were true, you'd probably see a more significant difference between his home and road splits - especially once you factor in the advantages that Fenway provides power hitting righties and plunking balls off the Green Monster.

Betts is a weird case in that he hits more HR away from Fenway but much fewer doubles.

Either way, WAR corrects for park factors so his "value" is pretty static regardless.

[Andy]

I mean, if you're looking for a baseball reason beyond saving money on the tax, you won't find one.

Well it's not like Betts is controllable for a bunch of years. He'll be an FA next year and has made it known that he fully intends to test free agency. Boston is getting back a very good young OF who has many years of control in Verdugo alone. So it's not just the tax they're worried about; they might lose Betts if he decides to sign elsewhere or have to dole out 400 million plus to retain him, which they still can do next year anyway. I don't love this for Boston but I'm not sure it's nearly as silly as some are making it out to be. 

[Nik]

Well it's not like Betts is controllable for a bunch of years. He'll be an FA next year and has made it known that he fully intends to test free agency. Boston is getting back a very good young OF who has many years of control in Verdugo alone. So it's not just the tax they're worried about; they might lose Betts if he decides to sign elsewhere or have to dole out 400 million plus to retain him, which they still can do next year anyway. I don't love this for Boston but I'm not sure it's nearly as silly as some are making it out to be.

I'm not sure that the Red Sox not wanting to pay market rates for their best player makes it much better from a baseball perspective. This doesn't make them a better baseball team this season and there's not much of a chance that they will be for the duration of Verdugo's controllable years vs. retaining Betts.

Discussing it from a ...ugh, assets management point of view I'd be careful about repeating anything about a Red Sox player and what he "made known" when local Boston media is notorious for just parroting whatever negative stuff ownership wants to spread about players once it suits their purpose.

[Highlander]

I like it purely from a selfish standpoint, it now makes Boston a weaker team which is better for our beloved Blue Jays.  I feel the same way about the Red Sox as I do about Les Canadians.

[Nik]

The Washington Nationals, a team principally owned by a man worth 5.3 billion dollars, is slashing the pay of some of his minor league players from 400 a week to 300. Others he's letting go entirely.

Said owner could afford to pay 500 minor leaguers 400 dollars a week for 413 years and still be a billionaire.