Betts to Dodgers

[HOFHurt35]

28 minutes ago, Moan4Yoan said:

False.  Better options than Mazara were acquired after the move was made — Ozuna, Castellanos, and now Joc.

Hindsight is 2020.

 

 

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

52 minutes ago, bmags said:

If I'm a Boston fan I'm annoyed they are doing this, but let's be real.

Would you rather be the crash-boom red sox of the 2010s or the Dodgers of the 2010s?

Considering the resources, I'll take the Red sox approach of going for the jugular, as they have shown the ability to rebuild quickly. If the white sox were the red sox, last year would have been competitive because they could have spent stupidly  without concern for long-term tie-ups. It's only the repeater taxes that kill them eventually.

Red Sox ownership would have been 100% fine paying the repeater tax for years.

[Squirmin' for Yermin]

37 minutes ago, Moan4Yoan said:

False.  Better options than Mazara were acquired after the move was made — Ozuna, Castellanos, and now Joc.

1. Ozuna was a bad fit.

2. That Castellanos contract is horrendoes

3.  we couldn't wait months and months in the hopes the Dodgers would trade Betts and make Joc expendable.. Clearly Joc wasn't avaialble at this cost prior..

[SoxBlanco]

39 minutes ago, Moan4Yoan said:

False.  Better options than Mazara were acquired after the move was made — Ozuna, Castellanos, and now Joc.

2020 is not an all-in year for the Sox. If it was, perhaps we would have gone bigger for RF.  But instead, we picked up a stopgap option with a really high ceiling. Hahn even said we don't have the long term answer there.  Maybe Mazara becomes that, but if not, we try to upgrade next year through free agency, trade, or our own prospects.

The Mazara deal was fine for where the Sox are at right now.

[Moan4Yoan]

35 minutes ago, ptatc said:

Again, you missing the point of posts. He isn't saying that there weren't better options. He was saying that if the Sox waited until today to acquire a player would would have been complaining the whole time that they don't have one yet. In your post, Castellanos and Ozuna aren't available today so they don't count.

I complained about the Mazara trade when it actually occurred and cited examples of better targets that could have been acquired instead, specifically Ozuna, Castellanos, and Joc.  Many people said the same thing at the time.

Try again.

[Moan4Yoan]

21 minutes ago, Quin said:

Considering you were mad the Six didn't spend "enough" money...I'm going with Cali.

They could have spent more money on RF for sure but the overall spending was fine.  A much better offseason than completely wasting $40+ million like last year.  Like night and day different.

[Moan4Yoan]

35 minutes ago, BackDoorBreach said:

You are actually missing the point of posts.  You quoted him earlier as to why he was bringing up Mazara when the guy HE quoted was comparing Joc and Mazara.

He's also saying there were MUCH better, proven, players available after we signed Mazara.  Which their were.  

Also playing basement GM, the Dodgers surely circled back to the Sox  about Joc.  Whether we had anything to give up for him right now the Dodgers would want and the Sox would feel comfortable giving up is really the question.  You don't not get Joc Pederson because Nomar Mazara is your RF though.  He's 3x more valuable. 

Excellent post.  He keeps trying to put words in my mouth and he is wrong every damn time.  And I prove him wrong every damn time when I respond.  Thanks for noticing.

Edited February 5, 2020 by Moan4Yoan

[EloyJenkins]

34 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

Have the Soxtalk people been watching the same Twins team for the past three decades as I have been? I honestly don't think they have, because this Twins envy is comical and this projection of the Twins always maximizing talent is a joke. 

Last season nearly every FA acquisition they made had career years. Is that a coincidence...very well could be. Let's hope it was a mirage that isn't sustainable this season and they come crashing down. I just feel with Donaldson and Maeda moves...they are the clear best in the division until another teams proves so. Sox have the talent...but it needs to click. I am hopeful it will. 2021 is looking much more realistic though after the eternal optimism everyone had a few weeks ago before they made smart moves for their short window. 

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

1 minute ago, EloyJenkins said:

Last season nearly every FA acquisition they made had career years. Is that a coincidence...very well could be. Let's hope it was a mirage that isn't sustainable this season and they come crashing down. I just feel with Donaldson and Maeda moves...they are the clear best in the division until another teams proves so. Sox have the talent...but it needs to click. I am hopeful it will. 2021 is looking much more realistic though after the eternal optimism everyone had a few weeks ago before they made smart moves for their short window. 

It's one season! Things went their way, it is bound to happen sometimes.

I agree the Twins are the best team in the division as of today. I greatly disagree that the Twins in general have a history of maximizing talent - it's just not true. The twins have won nothing.

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

41 minutes ago, Moan4Yoan said:

False.  Better options than Mazara were acquired after the move was made — Ozuna, Castellanos, and now Joc.

And you think the contract Castellanos signed would've been beneficial to the White Sox ? He has opt outs after 2020 and 2021 and if he doesn't opt out that means he didn't perform up to his own expectations and they get stuck with him for 4 years and $64M.

The Sox have Mazara for a year and can be non tendered if he doesn't perform . Then they can go after someone else.or trade him if he shows he can improve.

Ozuna signed for 1 year $18 . How does that benefit the Sox any more than Mazara does?  Castellanos and Ozuna signed   "prove it" contracts which is what Mazara is getting paid for, to prove he is better than everyone thinks , only for a lot less money. Is 2020 so important that Castellanos or Ozuna would be the key piece in some much better team this year? The Sox are still about the future not 2020.

Cry all you want about Joc , Ozuna and Castellanos. Everything depends on how the young core and pitching perform and the Sox were not in a position to add the perceived quality of 1 year players like Joc, Ozuna and Castellanos.

They will all (maybe not Castellanos if he gets hurt or under performs) be available next year when all the youngsters have another year to get better and the Sox are more able to evaluate their needs.

Better player does not equal a better fit. Just wait a year and see how Mazara does along with the rest of the Sox and you can start your crusade for the wonderful talents of Castellanos, Ozuna and Joc and even Springer or Betts.Saving money for 2021 seems to be more important to the Sox right now .

[Moan4Yoan]

Quite simply, the Sox had money to spend, all three players are better performers than Mazara, and each player came with a different price range, so take your pick.

[EloyJenkins]

22 minutes ago, SoxBlanco said:

2020 is not an all-in year for the Sox. If it was, perhaps we would have gone bigger for RF.  But instead, we picked up a stopgap option with a really high ceiling. Hahn even said we don't have the long term answer there.  Maybe Mazara becomes that, but if not, we try to upgrade next year through free agency, trade, or our own prospects.

The Mazara deal was fine for where the Sox are at right now.

Here is the field...Outfield: Mookie Betts, George Springer, Yoenis Cespedes, Michael Brantley, Joc Pederson, Jackie Bradley Jr., Jay Bruce

Betts is most likely gone. Is Springer worth the Astros Scandal risk? I say yes, but other than that...pickings are slim. JBJ could slide to RF potentially, but is he an upgrade over Mazara? Pederson is an option, but otherwise the class is just meh. 

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

1 minute ago, EloyJenkins said:

Here is the field...Outfield: Mookie Betts, George Springer, Yoenis Cespedes, Michael Brantley, Joc Pederson, Jackie Bradley Jr., Jay Bruce

Betts is most likely gone. Is Springer worth the Astros Scandal risk? I say yes, but other than that...pickings are slim. JBJ could slide to RF potentially, but is he an upgrade over Mazara? Pederson is an option, but otherwise the class is just meh. 

You forgot Ozuna plus Castellanos can opt out.

[pcq]

42 minutes ago, cjgalloway said:

1. Ozuna was a bad fit.

2. That Castellanos contract is horrendoes

3.  we couldn't wait months and months in the hopes the Dodgers would trade Betts and make Joc expendable.. Clearly Joc wasn't avaialble at this cost prior..

I know he is a whiner but there is nothing wrong with taking a chance on Mazara. I would call it an educated risk.

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

12 minutes ago, CaliSoxFanViaSWside said:

You forgot Ozuna plus Castellanos can opt out.

Ozuna is signed for 1 year, and Castellanos can opt out. If he's good enough to be a good sign for the White Sox, he will opt out.

[BackDoorBreach]

19 minutes ago, EloyJenkins said:

Here is the field...Outfield: Mookie Betts, George Springer, Yoenis Cespedes, Michael Brantley, Joc Pederson, Jackie Bradley Jr., Jay Bruce

Betts is most likely gone. Is Springer worth the Astros Scandal risk? I say yes, but other than that...pickings are slim. JBJ could slide to RF potentially, but is he an upgrade over Mazara? Pederson is an option, but otherwise the class is just meh. 

This is a big reason I hated the trade in the first place.  The only RF option that was attainable and made sense for 2021 was Joc.  We weren't going to be the only team pushing for him either.  So we miss on Joc and we still have a black hole in RF for 2021, for several straight years, when impact bats were available this year.

Betts is obviously not happening, Springer probably gets an extension or he's going to cost 100+ million for a guy in his 30's, Brantley will be like 50 years old, so that only left Joc as a true upgrade.

Obviously now Ozuna will be available next year and I'll bet Castellanos continues to raise his value and opts out, so we could have 3 better options since this has shaken out.  Better odds now then at the time of the trade, which gives me a lot more relief then before Ozuna and Castellanos got deals nobody expected.

Edited February 5, 2020 by BackDoorBreach

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

The White Sox made the right move by kicking the RF can down the street for another year. Of all the players acquired this off-season, I have a sneaky feeling that the Mazara haters will likely look bad by the end of the year. If they don't look bad, then the Sox bought another year for OF prospects to develop, while still having options on the FA market. 

I have no issues with the Mazara deal; I didn't at the time, and I still don't.

Nearly every rebuild has a come-from-nowhere story of a player developing to a talent level that he was unable to reach before. Mazara may be that piece for the White Sox.

Edited February 5, 2020 by Look at Ray Ray Run

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

59 minutes ago, EloyJenkins said:

Was it a reaction. Yep. Overreaction...debatable. Massive. NO. that is just an attack to get likes.

The Dodgers got much better last night. (Sox may have to face them in the WS the next few years still...and Sox lost out on the best "potential" FA and perfect fit for the team)

The Twins got better (They always find a way to maximize a guy like Maeda) - But I like that they lost a long-term piece. 

I simply said it wasn't a great night...Compound that with the fact that nearly everyone on this board liked the fit of Joc, but that doesn't mean the Sox still can't get better either with a Holt or similar type and a nice trade this summer. Enjoy your likes though. 

The hindsight about Pederson is ridiculous. How many of you armchair GM's wrote  " Hey if Betts get traded to LA, Pederson should be available again for less than the Dodgers wanted for him earlier. " 

Maybe the Sox were actually thinking ahead to how the Betts situation played out and didn't want to trade for Joc because well 1st off it's for one year and that's no good and 2. If Bummer was the price it  would've been a stupid trade. 3. If the Dodgers did trade for Betts then the Sox overpaid for Joc.

Once the Dodgers knew they were getting Betts they had to act very quickly to trade Pederson for cap reasons and perhaps the Angels anticipated the Dodgers getting Betts and inquired about Pederson and offered the best deal or the one that could at least be completed quickest. Those moves had to be made simultaneously,

 

[BackDoorBreach]

Also I will also vehemently disagree the Sox aren't going for it this year or are not "all in".  You don't sign EE and make some of these other moves if they didn't plan internally to be in contention.  Did they blow their wad? No.  But it's goofy to think they did not  invision themselves making a big push.  I think that has been derailed a bit now from what the Twins have done.

TLDR the Sox had a fantastic offseason but came up pretty short in 2 key spots imo.  2021 was always going to be the real test anyways.  We will see.

 

[Dick Allen]

MLBTR has a poll on the Betts trade. How anyone could give the Red Sox anything but an F for salary dumping an in their prime MVP with the revenue they generate, and not give the Dodgers an A for acquiring that type of player is beyond me. 

[Moan4Yoan]

8 minutes ago, CaliSoxFanViaSWside said:

The hindsight about Pederson is ridiculous. How many of you armchair GM's wrote  " Hey if Betts get traded to LA, Pederson should be available again for less than the Dodgers wanted for him earlier. " 

Maybe the Sox were actually thinking ahead to how the Betts situation played out and didn't want to trade for Joc because well 1st off it's for one year and that's no good and 2. If Bummer was the price it  would've been a stupid trade. 3. If the Dodgers did trade for Betts then the Sox overpaid for Joc.

Once the Dodgers knew they were getting Betts they had to act very quickly to trade Pederson for cap reasons and perhaps the Angels anticipated the Dodgers getting Betts and inquired about Pederson and offered the best deal or the one that could at least be completed quickest. Those moves had to be made simultaneously,

 

Hindsight about Joc?

The Dodgers were rumored to be willing to trade Joc before they even showed interest in Betts.  Acquiring Betts just made it even more likely that they would trade him.

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

6 minutes ago, Dick Allen said:

MLBTR has a poll on the Betts trade. How anyone could give the Red Sox anything but an F for salary dumping an in their prime MVP with the revenue they generate, and not give the Dodgers an A for acquiring that type of player is beyond me. 

Dick, there are a ton of fans who are rationalizing this by saying "The Red Sox couldn't sign Mookie." It's a joke.

I've heard fans float the idea that maybe Betts told the Sox he wouldn't sign with them - complete BS, because there's no chance Mookie would give up leverage like that. 

Fact is, Mookie told them what he wanted in FA and they scoffed at it and decided they didn't want to pay him what he was worth.

People are defending it by saying they would have lost him for nothing; completely excusing the fact that there's NO EXCUSE for them not offering Mookie the most money. 

It's honestly amazing; the ownership PR spin for the last month has clearly worked on some because, in their mind, Mookie was leaving and there was nothing the Red Sox could do about it. We know that's a joke.

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

1 hour ago, Moan4Yoan said:

False.  Better options than Mazara were acquired after the move was made — Ozuna, Castellanos, and now Joc.

False. Better players based on track record yes. Better options no , based on team fit, window of contention, salary and now because of the contracts they signed they are available next year which is when a good RF might be more useful .

[Moan4Yoan]

5 minutes ago, CaliSoxFanViaSWside said:

False. Better players based on track record yes. Better options no , based on team fit, window of contention, salary and now because of the contracts they signed they are available next year which is when a good RF might be more useful .

I disagree.  My view is fact-based.  Your view is opinion-based.

Better players based on track record is based on facts.  Completely objective.

Better options based on team fit, window of contention, and salary is based on your own opinion.  Completely subjective.

Edited February 5, 2020 by Moan4Yoan

[hi8is]

4 hours ago, ptatc said:

You arent reading it correctly. He isn't saying mazara doesn't have faults, he's saying Pederson does and people are far over valuing him for this trade. 

This.