|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
oasisdude77
Star Player
Joined: 02 Oct 2007
Posts: 2737
|
 Posted: Sat Feb 01, 2020 11:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ribeye wrote: | | SGV-Laker fan wrote: | | loslakersss wrote: | | h2omike wrote: | | loslakersss wrote: | | Who do you think is included in a package for Mookie? I don't want to see Joc go. |
ESPN says Dustin May, Verdugo, other young prospects. |
I say do it. |
me too, only untouchables are buhler, belly, maybe max muncy. |
I'm not trying to be contrary here, but it sounds like he would be just a one year rental; therefore a big gamble. To give up, at least, four players, at least two of which are solid prospects, sounds like too much. |
Yeah totally understand the hesitation, but guess it all boils down to who would be going. If you’re moving guys to that can’t find consistent playing time here, I’d say go for it.
With the logjam we always seem to have in the OF, our I’m ok with giving up Joc or Verdugo (or both). With smith and Cartaya in the wings, will Ruiz really get a chance?
I don’t, however, want to see May as involved. Hope Gonsolin isn’t either, but out of May and Gonsolin, I’d choose May. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
jonnybravo
Retired Number
Joined: 21 Sep 2007
Posts: 30710
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 01, 2020 12:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| oasisdude77 wrote: | | ribeye wrote: | | SGV-Laker fan wrote: | | loslakersss wrote: | | h2omike wrote: | | loslakersss wrote: | | Who do you think is included in a package for Mookie? I don't want to see Joc go. |
ESPN says Dustin May, Verdugo, other young prospects. |
I say do it. |
me too, only untouchables are buhler, belly, maybe max muncy. |
I'm not trying to be contrary here, but it sounds like he would be just a one year rental; therefore a big gamble. To give up, at least, four players, at least two of which are solid prospects, sounds like too much. |
Yeah totally understand the hesitation, but guess it all boils down to who would be going. If you’re moving guys to that can’t find consistent playing time here, I’d say go for it.
With the logjam we always seem to have in the OF, our I’m ok with giving up Joc or Verdugo (or both). With smith and Cartaya in the wings, will Ruiz really get a chance?
I don’t, however, want to see May as involved. Hope Gonsolin isn’t either, but out of May and Gonsolin, I’d choose May. |
Hope somehow we can retain Joc. He's been nails in the playoffs (one of our few that have consistently shown up at the plate).
_________________
KOBE |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LongBeachPoly
Franchise Player
Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 16162
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 01, 2020 1:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
PCreight
✔
@PCreighton1
Per sources: sticking point in #RedSox #Dodgers deal for Mookie Betts right now is how much of David Price’s deal (3/$96m) LA will absorb
Boston wants LA to take all of it. Dodgers haggling, trying to get Boston to pay a part.
They believe two sides will get it worked out.
624
8:51 PM - Jan 31, 2020 |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jonnybravo
Retired Number
Joined: 21 Sep 2007
Posts: 30710
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 01, 2020 1:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LongBeachPoly wrote: | | Quote: |
PCreight
✔
@PCreighton1
Per sources: sticking point in #RedSox #Dodgers deal for Mookie Betts right now is how much of David Price’s deal (3/$96m) LA will absorb
Boston wants LA to take all of it. Dodgers haggling, trying to get Boston to pay a part.
They believe two sides will get it worked out.
624
8:51 PM - Jan 31, 2020 |
|
This is really happening isn't it?
_________________
KOBE |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ChickenStu
Retired Number
Joined: 25 Apr 2015
Posts: 31925
Location: Anaheim, CA
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 01, 2020 1:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| They won't get both Verdugo and May, as rib suggested. That's simply way too much for a rental. I think Verdugo probably gets traded here, but I'd be stunned if May were involved. And if we're taking on significant salary with Price as well, it may not even be that much more we're giving up besides Verdugo, and maybe we'll even get to shed some salary like Pollock or Jansen or something. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nickuku
Star Player
Joined: 09 Jul 2010
Posts: 7844
Location: Orange County
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 01, 2020 1:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I rather Joc go than Verdugo. I'm like Joc's biggest fan but Verdugo is the all around better player and a much better decision financially.
_________________
Don't let perfect be the enemy of good |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ChickenStu
Retired Number
Joined: 25 Apr 2015
Posts: 31925
Location: Anaheim, CA
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 01, 2020 1:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| nickuku wrote: | | I rather Joc go than Verdugo. I'm like Joc's biggest fan but Verdugo is the all around better player and a much better decision financially. |
Well of course, but Boston needs to get something of legit value here, even if Betts is a rental. Joc is a masher against right-handed pitching, but he's useless against lefties (making him a strong-side platoon starter) and he's a rental himself. Something big is going to have to go out, at least one big piece. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LonzoLegend2
Starting Rotation
Joined: 05 Aug 2017
Posts: 680
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 01, 2020 6:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Those Beantown bastards who cheated us in 2018 are going at it again. If they wants us to absorb ALL of that Price salary then Pollock has gotta go out.
Verdugo/Joc
May
Pollock
For
Betts
Price
_________________
MAMBA OUT
1978-2020 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ChickenStu
Retired Number
Joined: 25 Apr 2015
Posts: 31925
Location: Anaheim, CA
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 01, 2020 9:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LonzoLegend2 wrote: | Those Beantown bastards who cheated us in 2018 are going at it again. If they wants us to absorb ALL of that Price salary then Pollock has gotta go out.
Verdugo/Joc
May
Pollock
For
Betts
Price |
More than that in terms of salary, I would argue. If we take Betts and all of Price's contract, we're assuming almost $60MM in payroll there. If a couple of prospects and, say, Pollock go out, we'd still be taking in more than $45MM. I can't see us doing that. So more salary would have to go out for sure, or perhaps we're trying to re-route Price to a third team. And I don't see how Boston gets away with not paying some of Price's contract. The only question is, how much? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ribeye
Franchise Player
Joined: 10 Nov 2001
Posts: 12632
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 02, 2020 9:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
| LonzoLegend2 wrote: | Those Beantown bastards who cheated us in 2018 are going at it again. If they wants us to absorb ALL of that Price salary then Pollock has gotta go out.
Verdugo/Joc
May
Pollock
For
Betts
Price |
That is a Bill Walton H-O-R-R-I-B-L-E deal (aka fleecing). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ribeye
Franchise Player
Joined: 10 Nov 2001
Posts: 12632
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ChickenStu
Retired Number
Joined: 25 Apr 2015
Posts: 31925
Location: Anaheim, CA
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 02, 2020 11:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
Peter Gammons
@pgammo
·
1m
Three different NL folks today predicted Betts-to-L.A. is "inevitable." Consensus deal:Alex Verdugo, Inf Jeter Downs, pitcher, maybe A prospect. Think P is LH Caleb Ferguson, 95 MPH FB/CB guy, 113-39 K-BB in 93.1 IP, eventual starter. Got brushed off Gray |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LongBeachPoly
Franchise Player
Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 16162
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 02, 2020 3:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ChickenStu wrote: | Peter Gammons
@pgammo
·
1m
Three different NL folks today predicted Betts-to-L.A. is "inevitable." Consensus deal:Alex Verdugo, Inf Jeter Downs, pitcher, maybe A prospect. Think P is LH Caleb Ferguson, 95 MPH FB/CB guy, 113-39 K-BB in 93.1 IP, eventual starter. Got brushed off Gray |
Way too much to pay for a 1 yr rental at $27M |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NMLaker
Starting Rotation
Joined: 15 Apr 2001
Posts: 524
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 02, 2020 6:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Why does it have to be a rental? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ExPatLkrFan
Star Player
Joined: 29 Jul 2004
Posts: 3986
Location: Mukdahan, Thailand
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 02, 2020 6:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LongBeachPoly wrote: | | ChickenStu wrote: | Peter Gammons
@pgammo
·
1m
Three different NL folks today predicted Betts-to-L.A. is "inevitable." Consensus deal:Alex Verdugo, Inf Jeter Downs, pitcher, maybe A prospect. Think P is LH Caleb Ferguson, 95 MPH FB/CB guy, 113-39 K-BB in 93.1 IP, eventual starter. Got brushed off Gray |
Way too much to pay for a 1 yr rental at $27M |
Not even. Ferguson is not even guaranteed to make the 25 man roster. I would also look at Verdugos health. 23 years old is mighty young to start having back issues. I like Alex. But if you have a chance at Betts I say you sell high. This is much less than I had imagined going out. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LongBeachPoly
Franchise Player
Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 16162
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 02, 2020 9:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| NMLaker wrote: | | Why does it have to be a rental? |
You are paying for his 1 year of service left on his contract. Once he hits free agency, he'll go to the highest bidder.
We don't have to trade for him to sign him as a free agent after next year. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ChickenStu
Retired Number
Joined: 25 Apr 2015
Posts: 31925
Location: Anaheim, CA
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 03, 2020 1:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| LongBeachPoly wrote: | | NMLaker wrote: | | Why does it have to be a rental? |
You are paying for his 1 year of service left on his contract. Once he hits free agency, he'll go to the highest bidder.
We don't have to trade for him to sign him as a free agent after next year. |
I agree with both of the above two posts. Yes, in terms of value, Betts is a player on a 1-year contract, and there's no other consideration to an acquiring team beyond that. But Verdugo cannot be considered a sure thing right now. It's been a LONG time since he first got injured, and he's still obviously not close to over it, because all they've said is that they "hope" he's ready for spring training. And while he certainly looks like a solid player, he's not Mookie Betts. And the Dodgers have a ton of depth in the outfield. You're going to have to give up at least one prime piece to get Betts, even as a rental. Whether that means a top prospect or a current player like Verdugo, that's what it's going to take. Verdugo, in fact, doesn't have the same value that a top prospect does. Close, but not quite. So I don't think Verdugo and Downs is out of the ballpark. But it just depends on if other pieces are involved, both outgoing and incoming. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Snipes
Star Player
Joined: 28 Feb 2005
Posts: 6040
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 03, 2020 1:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ChickenStu wrote: | | LongBeachPoly wrote: | | NMLaker wrote: | | Why does it have to be a rental? |
You are paying for his 1 year of service left on his contract. Once he hits free agency, he'll go to the highest bidder.
We don't have to trade for him to sign him as a free agent after next year. |
I agree with both of the above two posts. Yes, in terms of value, Betts is a player on a 1-year contract, and there's no other consideration to an acquiring team beyond that. But Verdugo cannot be considered a sure thing right now. It's been a LONG time since he first got injured, and he's still obviously not close to over it, because all they've said is that they "hope" he's ready for spring training. And while he certainly looks like a solid player, he's not Mookie Betts. And the Dodgers have a ton of depth in the outfield. You're going to have to give up at least one prime piece to get Betts, even as a rental. Whether that means a top prospect or a current player like Verdugo, that's what it's going to take. Verdugo, in fact, doesn't have the same value that a top prospect does. Close, but not quite. So I don't think Verdugo and Downs is out of the ballpark. But it just depends on if other pieces are involved, both outgoing and incoming. |
Are we confirmed doing this as a rental or are we going to do our best to sign him? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ChickenStu
Retired Number
Joined: 25 Apr 2015
Posts: 31925
Location: Anaheim, CA
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 03, 2020 2:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Snipes wrote: | | ChickenStu wrote: | | LongBeachPoly wrote: | | NMLaker wrote: | | Why does it have to be a rental? |
You are paying for his 1 year of service left on his contract. Once he hits free agency, he'll go to the highest bidder.
We don't have to trade for him to sign him as a free agent after next year. |
I agree with both of the above two posts. Yes, in terms of value, Betts is a player on a 1-year contract, and there's no other consideration to an acquiring team beyond that. But Verdugo cannot be considered a sure thing right now. It's been a LONG time since he first got injured, and he's still obviously not close to over it, because all they've said is that they "hope" he's ready for spring training. And while he certainly looks like a solid player, he's not Mookie Betts. And the Dodgers have a ton of depth in the outfield. You're going to have to give up at least one prime piece to get Betts, even as a rental. Whether that means a top prospect or a current player like Verdugo, that's what it's going to take. Verdugo, in fact, doesn't have the same value that a top prospect does. Close, but not quite. So I don't think Verdugo and Downs is out of the ballpark. But it just depends on if other pieces are involved, both outgoing and incoming. |
Are we confirmed doing this as a rental or are we going to do our best to sign him? |
Well even if you make every effort to re-sign him, you can't really consider that as extra value. It's not like he's going to sign an extension before next winter, not unless we offer something astronomical like 12 years and $400MM or something. This certainly isn't the NBA, where the incumbent team can at least offer more years, higher annual raises, Bird rights, etc. His contract value is for the 2020 season only. I mean, if he loves his Dodger experience and if we have true intentions of trying to keep him, maybe it gives us a very small edge on the other teams, all things being equal, but with free agents of this magnitude, they almost always sign with the highest bidder. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Snipes
Star Player
Joined: 28 Feb 2005
Posts: 6040
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 03, 2020 2:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ChickenStu wrote: | | Snipes wrote: | | ChickenStu wrote: | | LongBeachPoly wrote: | | NMLaker wrote: | | Why does it have to be a rental? |
You are paying for his 1 year of service left on his contract. Once he hits free agency, he'll go to the highest bidder.
We don't have to trade for him to sign him as a free agent after next year. |
I agree with both of the above two posts. Yes, in terms of value, Betts is a player on a 1-year contract, and there's no other consideration to an acquiring team beyond that. But Verdugo cannot be considered a sure thing right now. It's been a LONG time since he first got injured, and he's still obviously not close to over it, because all they've said is that they "hope" he's ready for spring training. And while he certainly looks like a solid player, he's not Mookie Betts. And the Dodgers have a ton of depth in the outfield. You're going to have to give up at least one prime piece to get Betts, even as a rental. Whether that means a top prospect or a current player like Verdugo, that's what it's going to take. Verdugo, in fact, doesn't have the same value that a top prospect does. Close, but not quite. So I don't think Verdugo and Downs is out of the ballpark. But it just depends on if other pieces are involved, both outgoing and incoming. |
Are we confirmed doing this as a rental or are we going to do our best to sign him? |
Well even if you make every effort to re-sign him, you can't really consider that as extra value. It's not like he's going to sign an extension before next winter, not unless we offer something astronomical like 12 years and $400MM or something. This certainly isn't the NBA, where the incumbent team can at least offer more years, higher annual raises, Bird rights, etc. His contract value is for the 2020 season only. I mean, if he loves his Dodger experience and if we have true intentions of trying to keep him, maybe it gives us a very small edge on the other teams, all things being equal, but with free agents of this magnitude, they almost always sign with the highest bidder. |
Only guy I hand that contract out to is Trout. Rough. I highly doubt we compete with other teams to keep Mookie - just not our style. But he is definitely worth trading for because he can surely put us over the top unless he has a huge let down year. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
loslakersss
Franchise Player
Joined: 31 Dec 2008
Posts: 11853
Location: LA
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 03, 2020 7:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Mookie is 27. So he will likely be 38 at the end of his big contract. I would guess that he stays elite/great until around 35 so I think he is worth whatever he gets paid. I do agree that I dont think the Dodgers are the ones to pay him but I'd love to be wrong. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
greenfrog
Retired Number
Joined: 02 Jan 2011
Posts: 36081
Location: 502 Bad Gateway
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 03, 2020 9:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Has he indicated he wants to come? The Ghost of Delino DeShields still haunts. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LongBeachPoly
Franchise Player
Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 16162
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 03, 2020 2:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ChickenStu wrote: | | Snipes wrote: | | ChickenStu wrote: | | LongBeachPoly wrote: | | NMLaker wrote: | | Why does it have to be a rental? |
You are paying for his 1 year of service left on his contract. Once he hits free agency, he'll go to the highest bidder.
We don't have to trade for him to sign him as a free agent after next year. |
I agree with both of the above two posts. Yes, in terms of value, Betts is a player on a 1-year contract, and there's no other consideration to an acquiring team beyond that. But Verdugo cannot be considered a sure thing right now. It's been a LONG time since he first got injured, and he's still obviously not close to over it, because all they've said is that they "hope" he's ready for spring training. And while he certainly looks like a solid player, he's not Mookie Betts. And the Dodgers have a ton of depth in the outfield. You're going to have to give up at least one prime piece to get Betts, even as a rental. Whether that means a top prospect or a current player like Verdugo, that's what it's going to take. Verdugo, in fact, doesn't have the same value that a top prospect does. Close, but not quite. So I don't think Verdugo and Downs is out of the ballpark. But it just depends on if other pieces are involved, both outgoing and incoming. |
Are we confirmed doing this as a rental or are we going to do our best to sign him? |
Well even if you make every effort to re-sign him, you can't really consider that as extra value. It's not like he's going to sign an extension before next winter, not unless we offer something astronomical like 12 years and $400MM or something. This certainly isn't the NBA, where the incumbent team can at least offer more years, higher annual raises, Bird rights, etc. His contract value is for the 2020 season only. I mean, if he loves his Dodger experience and if we have true intentions of trying to keep him, maybe it gives us a very small edge on the other teams, all things being equal, but with free agents of this magnitude, they almost always sign with the highest bidder. |
Another thing to keep in mind is that we will get draft pick compensation for him should he leave as a free agent next year. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ribeye
Franchise Player
Joined: 10 Nov 2001
Posts: 12632
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 03, 2020 3:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Shredder/Smedder
Buehler only the 10th best starting picture??? My bias might be showing, but he is higher on my list, maybe 5th or 6th. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ChickenStu
Retired Number
Joined: 25 Apr 2015
Posts: 31925
Location: Anaheim, CA
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 03, 2020 4:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LongBeachPoly wrote: | | ChickenStu wrote: | | Snipes wrote: | | ChickenStu wrote: | | LongBeachPoly wrote: | | NMLaker wrote: | | Why does it have to be a rental? |
You are paying for his 1 year of service left on his contract. Once he hits free agency, he'll go to the highest bidder.
We don't have to trade for him to sign him as a free agent after next year. |
I agree with both of the above two posts. Yes, in terms of value, Betts is a player on a 1-year contract, and there's no other consideration to an acquiring team beyond that. But Verdugo cannot be considered a sure thing right now. It's been a LONG time since he first got injured, and he's still obviously not close to over it, because all they've said is that they "hope" he's ready for spring training. And while he certainly looks like a solid player, he's not Mookie Betts. And the Dodgers have a ton of depth in the outfield. You're going to have to give up at least one prime piece to get Betts, even as a rental. Whether that means a top prospect or a current player like Verdugo, that's what it's going to take. Verdugo, in fact, doesn't have the same value that a top prospect does. Close, but not quite. So I don't think Verdugo and Downs is out of the ballpark. But it just depends on if other pieces are involved, both outgoing and incoming. |
Are we confirmed doing this as a rental or are we going to do our best to sign him? |
Well even if you make every effort to re-sign him, you can't really consider that as extra value. It's not like he's going to sign an extension before next winter, not unless we offer something astronomical like 12 years and $400MM or something. This certainly isn't the NBA, where the incumbent team can at least offer more years, higher annual raises, Bird rights, etc. His contract value is for the 2020 season only. I mean, if he loves his Dodger experience and if we have true intentions of trying to keep him, maybe it gives us a very small edge on the other teams, all things being equal, but with free agents of this magnitude, they almost always sign with the highest bidder. |
Another thing to keep in mind is that we will get draft pick compensation for him should he leave as a free agent next year. |
That's actually a very good point, and one I hadn't considered. Yes, so let's just say the deal ends up being Verdugo and Jeter Downs. There's a decent chance that the Dodgers recoup the value of one of those players with the value of the compensatory pick they'd get for losing Betts. Of course, Boston can say the same thing, that they will get that pick if they just hold onto him, but they seem to be hellbent on getting under the luxury tax threshold, not to mention that they may really like Verdugo or whomever they end up getting. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
