See what I did there? Nevermind! The Mookie Betts rumors are so rampant that MLB may have to build another building to house all the rumors… there, I did it again. But seriously folks, what should we believe about the Mookie Betts rumors?
Well, believe this:
- Mookie Betts is one of the top 10 players in baseball.
- He’s way on the right side of 30.
- He’s a good guy.
- In the past, he has been up and down, but some of that is because of injury.
- The Dodgers would love to have him.
- But, if they don’t get him, they want to make sure the Padres pay dearly for him.
That’s the long and short of it. Mookie Betts would make the Dodgers better in 2020… much better. But at what cost? Therein lies the rub. No one is more adamant about trading the farm than me, and here’s the thing: As the Dodgers lineup stands right now, it’s the best in the NL… Hands Down! Andrew Friedman does not have to do anything! However, if he can make them better… and keep the Padres from getting better, he will.
Even with Mookie Betts, the Padres are not NL West contenders. The Dodgers front office knows that and if they can pick up Betts at the right price, they will. You can rest assured that Andrew will not make any dope-fiend moves. That’s a given.
Then there’s this guy. Take it with a grain of salt…
Did Betts cheat? Probably! Every play on the Red Sox did. It’s easy to condemn him for that, but when your manager brings in that culture, it’s probably impossible to resist. It’s easy to rationalize at the time. That’s why Cora is gone along with Beltran and Hinch. I am not justifying it – just stating how it happened.
So, while it might take a conversation or two, I think Mookie would be welcomed into the Dodger family. Shoot, who knows? He might be the key to finding out exactly what did or didn’t happen in the World Series. Or not…
At any rate, I do not think Andrew Friedman is willing to add Mookie Betts if he has to include Alex Verdugo, Gavin Lux, or Dustin May in the deal. If he were to take Price, the cost in prospects would come down dramatically and I don’t think the Red Sox want to do that. So, at this moment, there is a standoff. I could see AJ Preller making a dope-fiend move… he needs to win to save his job. I could also see Friedman making a deal, but it will have to be his deal.
Chaim Bloom knows Andrew well, and Andrew knows him just as well. One is not going to “outslick” the other. It’s a deal that has to make sense… for both sides. If it gets done, it will get done now because if it happens in the season and Betts does not resign, the Dodgers do not get draft-pick consideration. That’s important too, although if the Dodgers trade for Betts, they will likely try and sign him. You just never know all the dynamics (see Cole and Rendon).
The Irony…
The last shot in the video speaks volumes…
Discussion (40)
Disagree, not disagreeable
Then who do you think they want Mark
There would definitely be a decrease if he were traded to the NL since he’s unfamiliar with the pitchers.
… or he could hit better because hitters are not familiar with him.
I don’t want to trade Verdugo, but Betts is certainly an upgrade.
I simply cannot see Boston taking Verdugo without seeing that he is healthy. I would be shocked if he is in the deal.
Pre-Alex Cora Betts averaged 6.1 WAR per season. There would definitely be a decrease if he were traded to the NL since he’s unfamiliar with the pitchers.
Alex Verdugo’s WAR in his lone full season was 3.1.
Five season of Verdugo would be WAR of 15.5 whereas one NL season of Betts would be about 6. And Verdugo costs a fraction of Betts.
How would that be a good trade for the Dodgers?
It all comes down to whether the Dodgers think they have at least a reasonable chance to sign Betts long term. I think that they do, I don’t think he wants to go to LA for one year and then go somewhere else. I know that some do it, but I think that Betts would like to sign a long-term deal, and if the Dodgers are willing to make a strong offer, they can get him.
Speaking only for myself, I would like to see the Dodgers add a bona fide, exciting star. All we’ve got in the lineup is Bellinger, and we need a right-handed complement. And who knows but that Bellinger might go to his father’s Yankees in a couple of years.? You never know what might happen, and if you have a chance to add a great player, you must do if at all feasible. This would make next season much more exciting. The Dodgers do not have a lot of exciting players in the lineup, besides Bellinger. Maybe Lux will turn into one, but he’s not there now. The Dodgers were pretty much shut down by Washington’s pitching in the playoffs, and by Boston the year before. We need an upgrade. As to what we give up, I son’t see many untouchables here, except for Buehler, Bellinger, and maybe Lux. Anyone else can be replaced from our farm system or a modest free agent pickup, or by moving somebody around. Turner is certainly a valuable player, but he is very injury prone now.
We do indeed need another top starter, and a closer.. Maybe we can get around the losses of Ryu and Hill from last year’s initial rotation, but it is a risk to have our current staff. If we can’t get either of those components, then Betts will at least strengthen our lineup to overcome some of that. I think it’s an imperative pickup unless we have no legitimate chance to sign him long-term, which I do not believe. Bidding the price up on the Padres would be a small consolation prize.
Fans have been screaming at AF and the Dodgers to do something the entire off-season. Some of the criticism has been totally unfair. With Rendon’s outspoken right-wing leanings he didn’t want to play for the Dodgers and wanted to be in Orange County. Strasburg wasn’t leaving the Nats. So, there was truly only one difference maker on the free-agent market. I don’t believe for a second that the Dodgers were in it to just bid up the price on Cole like some have suggested. They went after the one difference maker on the market, offered him $300 million dollars, and came up short. The Dodgers I’m sure went beyond their comfort zone, but not only was he the sole difference maker, Cole was the last marquee pitcher scheduled to hit the open market for a couple of years so they were all in.
~
Now some of us would have like to have seen Ryu come back for a few more years. The Dodgers offered him 4 years but not at the value of the Blue Jays offer. Hopefully, it works out for Ryu in Toronto. If Friedman is going to hang on to all of these prospects at some point he has to play them. So, even though I’m a fan of Ryu, I get they need to hand the ball over to Urias, May, Goose, and Gray at some point. Urias’ time is now. Possibly May too.
~
So, has all of this screaming at the Dodgers front-office pushed them into a deal they wouldn’t normally make? I understand why some don’t want to deal 5 years of Verdugo for 1 year of Betts. Although the Dodgers have done a good job of keeping around the guys they’ve wanted to keep other than Greinke. With very little money tied up in the future it is very likely they can keep Mookie in LA. Back to Verdugo. He had a 3.1 WAR last season in a injury shortened season. He was missed terribly in the playoffs when we watched Pollock go 0 for 13 with 11K’s. Alex’s numbers dropped after he was hurt too. So you have to imagine that he’s going to give the Dodgers at least a 4.0 WAR for each of those 5 year. Going by those numbers alone, 5 years of Verdugo isn’t worth 1 year of Betts, but an OF of Pederson, Bellinger, and Betts while adding Lux to the team would be dynamic and add a new excitement to the locker room. Just seeing a Mookie Betts walk through those doors would do a lot for team moral and quite frankly for a city mourning. The Red Sox aren’t just taking Verdugo though nor does it get them under the luxury tax penalty to only deal Betts. Although the Angels are rumored to be interested in Price to some degree. 3-way deal? Most likely something like Verdugo and Ruiz for Betts without Price included to get the deal done.
~
I guess I would prefer to try to add Price’s money and see what he has to offer if the Dodgers could unload Pollock in the deal, but they really don’t have a place for Price. Right now I see the rotation as Buehler, Kershaw, Urias, Wood and then Maeda, Stripling, May, Nelson, and Goose battling it out for the 5 spot. Although Maeda is in the pen for me. I don’t care what his contract says. Maeda or Stripling would most likely have to go in such a deal. Kenta’s contract might be attractive to Boston.
~
Laying all of that out, there has to be some tough negotiations going on. AF has kept this team in a position to be very good for a long time. We will find out why the Dodgers paid him the big bucks to stick around.
And Bums don’t forget about deGrom and Clevinger! And is Turner our new catcher?
Maybe AF will trade some on the major league roster for some prospects that Boston wants from other teams. Seems that Andrew is open to 3 or 4 team deals.
Once the dam breaks and the Dodgers have Betts will they stop there? Assuming Verdugo and maybe Peters left for Betts, the other trade possibilities are:
Arenado for Seager?
Lindor for Downs, Ruiz, Gonsolin, Taylor?
Lindor
Betts
Bellinger
Arenado
Muncy
Turner
Pederson/Pollock
Lux
Remember it’s just a 1 year rental with Betts so Boston cannot expect a boat load of prospects
I am still not in favor of Betts. I had a long talk with my son, who is a Dodger fan, and he wants Betts. I guess I would give up Gonsolin, Ruiz and maybe Downs. They will not want Stripling, Pederson or Pollack. I hope we keep Verdugo, Lux, May, Urias and Gray. Pollack and Pederson will have to be traded for prospects. They will not be worth much. Maybe you can keep Pollock as a 4th outfielder.
A real key to our chances of winning a WS will be how good Urias and May turn out to be. One of them has to get there this year. I think Urias will be a star but will it be this year? And I agree if we have a chance to get Betts we do it. Can’t rely on a top of the line starter even being available at the deadline much less what it would cost. Having Betts here for a year certainly won’t hurt our chances of signing him
Part 2 of MiLB letter to Rob Manfred.
2. Short Season Minor League Baseball
(New York-Penn League, Northwest League, and Pioneer League)
MiLB understands that MLB wants to reduce the total number of players each MLB team is required to have under contract but believes that the elimination of short season Minor League Baseball is not necessary for MLB to achieve this objective. MiLB’s negotiating position has been, and continues to be, that working cooperatively and creatively, MLB and MiLB can find a solution that allows for the continuation of short season baseball without requiring that every MLB team provides a full roster of players to a short season team.
MiLB does not accept as reasonable MLB’s position that it cannot agree to work with MiLB on creative solutions to preserve short season affiliated baseball because these leagues must be eliminated in whole to meet MLB’s “competitive balance” and “cost savings” objectives. It is MiLB’s view that these are insignificant factors, especially when compared with the drastic and negative social, cultural, and economic impacts that elimination of short season baseball will have in many smaller communities throughout the United States.
Insofar as there is a “competitive balance” problem confronting MLB, it is related to the staggering difference in payrolls among MLB teams and not whether teams are permitted to choose to continue to have short season affiliates. Moreover, there are other less damaging ways for MLB to regulate the total number of players each Major League club may have under contract and otherwise create a level playing field. For example, there exists significant divergence in the number of players signed, housed, and trained by MLB teams in Mexico, the Dominican Republic, and other locations outside the United States. In addition, MLB permits 10 Major League clubs the significant competitive advantage of playing a full season Minor League schedule at their Florida Spring Training complexes with the opportunity for those clubs to conduct MLB Player Rehab assignments on Minor League teams playing at those facilities.
With specific regard to cost savings, we understand that MLB has projected that the elimination of short season baseball would save each of the 30 MLB teams – all of which are valued at more than one billion dollars – approximately $300,000 to $400,000 in payroll costs per year, which, in the aggregate, translates to less than 1/10th of 1 percent of MLB’s revenues. These reduced employment related “savings” also represent significantly less than the cost to a Major League team of a minimum cost contract for a single Major League player and are also much less than the financial commitments undertaken by many of the potentially impacted communities to attract and provide facilities for Major League-affiliated teams. Surely the nominal prospective cost savings to MLB clubs is far outweighed by the devastating and far reaching impact that contraction of short season MiLB teams would have on their communities across the United States.
1 – While I agree that the Dodgers’ primary need is for another ace-type starting pitcher, if you can get one of the top 5 players in baseball you do it – Mookie will definitely make the team better.
2 – They can try to trade for another starting pitcher at the deadline if they need to.
3 – Verdugo will be a nice player but no one projects him to be another Mookie Betts (although our host thinks he will be another Tony Gwynn. This just seems unlikely to me.)
4 – It takes good stuff to get good stuff. You can’t buy a new BMW for $10,000 just because you don’t want to pay more. And you can’t get Mookie for Joc and Kike.
5 – Some here never want to trade any prospects for any players. Prospects are like capital – sometimes you keep them and sometimes you use them to get other players you want. The important thing is to know which ones to keep.
6 – Our host once said that he wouldn’t give up any of the Dodgers’ top 19 prospects – or was it 29. But as I have said before, many posters here are like the parents of the fictitious town of Lake Woebegon, where all of the children are above average. Not all Dodger prospects are going to have great MLB careers. In fact, most won’t. Even in the top 20, most won’t. When the Dodgers made the infamous Nick Punto trade with Boston, they gave up 2 of the top pitching prospects in the organization, and many complained. But what kind of careers did Rubby de la Rosa and Allen Webster have? (de la Rosa – 26 – 30, 4.49 ERA; Webster 8 – 6, 6.03.)
7 – To get a top 5 player, even for a year, you give up something good. How much? That’s what Friedman has to decide. You have to give him credit – he has only given up a few prospects that have had successful MLB careers thus far. I suspect that he will know which players that the Dodgers can afford to part with.
8 – Can you imagine an OF with Betts, Bellinger and whoever else (probably Petersen) that they put out there?
If they trade Verdugo, it doesn’t mean they can’t sign an outfielder, if needed, or make a trade … or re-sign Joc or Kiki. They could re-sign Mookie. The Dodgers have options.
Mark we may have the best lineup but we certainly don’t have the best pitching and you know what they say about playoff baseball! By the trade deadline a lot of questions will be answered about our pitching but I think we will need a top of the rotation guy to go along with Buehler. Rooting against the Mets, Cleveland and Tampa
San Diego may actually be out, according to a couple of writers who cover the Padres.
Citing sources within the organization, if the Dodgers are pursuing Betts, the Padres chances diminish greatly. The Dodgers are positioned to take on money, the Padres need the Red Sox to either take back a large contract, Will Myers, or Boston needs to throw money into the deal.
I’m guessing Verdugo’s back is okay. Doing a few dance steps the other day, he looked fine.
Ned Colletti and Pedro Moura said Thursday that Monday may be the day an announcement is made.
Both indicated they expect Betts to be a Dodger.
Do they know something? Or is it just a prediction based on an avalanche of rumors, inside sources and baseball insiders like Olney, Heyman etc.
There is some speculation that the announcement will not be made until then out of respect for Kobe Bryant. Colletti indicated that could indeed be the case.
My guess is a trade gets done and Verdugo may be part of the deal since the Dodgers have incredible depth in the outfield.
Will the trade expand?That could be possible. There is probably a player or two on the Boston roster that Friedman might have interest. If that does occur, that might mean moving of contracts to make things work.
There are a couple of reports that David Price could still be involved, but most indicate the Dodgers have absolutely no interest. But the Angels might if the Red Sox toss in money. But first they must move Betts.
Until it actually gets done, it’s just speculation. Maybe nothing happens.
Been there before.
REPOSTED:
Latest from Boston beat reporter:
LAD have the best current big leaguer in play (Verdugo), SD offering the best prospect (Campusano) as well as the most pieces but less financial relief due to Myers. LAD could also broaden talks to include Price, but that would diminish Sox return.
@bumsrap: he’ll be spine.
Man, I would love to hang on to Verdugo. No one really talks about him, but I think one of the reasons we struggled against the Nats was because we were missing his contact bat in the lineup. I wouldn’t trade a healthy Verdugo. The kid can hit.
Verdugo’s back will have its say in any trade.