OT: Betts, Price to Dodgers

WestCoastBearsFan

Well-known member
Joined:
Dec 25, 2017
Posts:
17,093
Liked Posts:
11,482
My favorite teams
  1. Los Angeles Lakers
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Los Angeles Kings
  1. Clemson Tigers
“Only” half...half of the 90 something million remaining...so Boston freed up around 45 mil or so in salary over the next few years from a mediocre starting pitcher...that’s got value in the trade for Boston to rid themselves of it. And they wouldn’t of been able to get rid of any of prices contract without including betts in the deal.
Very true. But half of Price’s contract is almost identical to the deal we had on the books last year with Rich Hill in terms of money per year, it’s not like it’s going hamper us going forward. Plus Price is theoretically an upgrade. Boston was just in a no win situation. I think they got the best of what they could have gotten.
 

WestCoastBearsFan

Well-known member
Joined:
Dec 25, 2017
Posts:
17,093
Liked Posts:
11,482
My favorite teams
  1. Los Angeles Lakers
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Los Angeles Kings
  1. Clemson Tigers
Another thing about Price: his numbers should go down by virtue of the fact that he’s no longer playing in a park designed for tee ball, by itself.
 

knoxville7

I have the stride of a gazelle
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '22
Joined:
Jul 12, 2013
Posts:
20,214
Liked Posts:
14,137
Location:
The sewers
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Tennessee Volunteers
Very true. But half of Price’s contract is almost identical to the deal we had on the books last year with Rich Hill in terms of money per year, it’s not like it’s going hamper us going forward. Plus Price is theoretically an upgrade. Boston was just in a no win situation. I think they got the best of what they could have gotten.

Right...we agree. My response was to someone saying that Boston didn’t get shit for betts, so the cubs won’t get shit for Bryant and thus, they should keep him. Then I pointed out to the guy why the two situations are not the same. The cubs will get more for Bryant than the Sox just got for betts. Or, they just won’t trade Bryant I suspect
 

WestCoastBearsFan

Well-known member
Joined:
Dec 25, 2017
Posts:
17,093
Liked Posts:
11,482
My favorite teams
  1. Los Angeles Lakers
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Los Angeles Kings
  1. Clemson Tigers
Right...we agree. My response was to someone saying that Boston didn’t get shit for betts, so the cubs won’t get shit for Bryant and thus, they should keep him. Then I pointed out to the guy why the two situations are not the same. The cubs will get more for Bryant than the Sox just got for betts. Or, they just won’t trade Bryant I suspect
Not trading Bryant wouldn’t be wise. Get something for him while you can.
 

CubsFaninMN

Active member
Joined:
Jan 8, 2018
Posts:
581
Liked Posts:
118
There is another player who hasn't yet been named, according to Ken Rosenthal, to go from LAD to LAA in the Pederson trade, FYI. Speculated to be a pitcher, likely one who has yet to break the majors.

-Doug
 

anotheridiot

Well-known member
Joined:
Jul 15, 2016
Posts:
5,935
Liked Posts:
791
“Only” half...half of the 90 something million remaining...so Boston freed up around 45 mil or so in salary over the next few years from a mediocre starting pitcher...that’s got value in the trade for Boston to rid themselves of it. And they wouldn’t of been able to get rid of any of prices contract without including betts in the deal.

Sounds like Jayson Heyward
 

CSF77

Well-known member
Joined:
Apr 16, 2013
Posts:
18,651
Liked Posts:
2,843
Location:
San Diego
Pretty much figured the team to take Price would win. SDP are looking at a longer window and Betts has said that he will hit the market.

So LAD are playing for a 1 year window here.
 

Discus fish salesman

Well-known member
Joined:
Mar 31, 2018
Posts:
15,839
Liked Posts:
20,540
Pretty much figured the team to take Price would win. SDP are looking at a longer window and Betts has said that he will hit the market.

So LAD are playing for a 1 year window here.
A 1 year window at what? Having Betts under his current contract?
 

CSF77

Well-known member
Joined:
Apr 16, 2013
Posts:
18,651
Liked Posts:
2,843
Location:
San Diego
A 1 year window at what? Having Betts under his current contract?

Selling Joc Maeda, Vitt and taking on Price for 1 year of Betts.

Yes this was a 1 year window deal. If they fall short of the ring then this will be a bust deal. Even Price at a discount is adding a pitcher past his prime. IE Lester but for years past his prime.

But win the ring and it becomes a excellent trade.

It is simple as that. Playing for a 1 year window.
 

CSF77

Well-known member
Joined:
Apr 16, 2013
Posts:
18,651
Liked Posts:
2,843
Location:
San Diego
But all I can say is Theo lacks the balls to do something like this. It is a huge gamble but that is what it takes some times. Just like the Yanks taking on Cole's deal. Huge gamble.

So that is what I believe. Theo lacks intestinal fortitude.
 

anotheridiot

Well-known member
Joined:
Jul 15, 2016
Posts:
5,935
Liked Posts:
791
But all I can say is Theo lacks the balls to do something like this. It is a huge gamble but that is what it takes some times. Just like the Yanks taking on Cole's deal. Huge gamble.

So that is what I believe. Theo lacks intestinal fortitude.
No, maybe Theo is standing ground thinking I built this team to win multiple titles, let me get a manager that will do things with some sense of urgency. Maybe he wants to be the guy that did not have to make that move.

This is a Kwahi trade to Toronto, win a title and its worth it I guess, just like people keep trying to tell me it was worth giving up Gleybor to get Chapman as a rental. I say you have the guy like Gleybor and you have a shot at winning 17, 18 maybe 19.
Its where you want to settle.
 

CSF77

Well-known member
Joined:
Apr 16, 2013
Posts:
18,651
Liked Posts:
2,843
Location:
San Diego
No, maybe Theo is standing ground thinking I built this team to win multiple titles, let me get a manager that will do things with some sense of urgency. Maybe he wants to be the guy that did not have to make that move.

This is a Kwahi trade to Toronto, win a title and its worth it I guess, just like people keep trying to tell me it was worth giving up Gleybor to get Chapman as a rental. I say you have the guy like Gleybor and you have a shot at winning 17, 18 maybe 19.
Its where you want to settle.


Trades will be judged by the result.

Sutcliffe's deal. Great. He made a mark as a Cub and was worth losing Joe Carter's career.

Palmero's trade was a bust. Wild thing is a far better TV personality that he was a pitcher. Palmero is tainted but we are talking about a 40 HR bat every year. So ya there is no way that deal looked good in hindsight.

2016 ended with a series win. That paid for losing a talent like that.

Q has been a #4 quality pitcher sense the trade. Giving up 2 top 100 prospects that have become MLB players vs busts was a over payment.

I believe Theo knows this now and is gun shy. Making a deal with a farm player that has 0 impact on your team is a easy choice because it helps you now. But he is feeling the after math where by not making that deal he would have a cheap TOR in hand that he needs and a corner OF that he needs. He already had them and paid them for a result that he could have had doing nothing. IE going home with no ring.
 

CSF77

Well-known member
Joined:
Apr 16, 2013
Posts:
18,651
Liked Posts:
2,843
Location:
San Diego
But what I believe his plan is to let Amaya develop. If Contreras extends then he will flip him. If Contreras wants to test F/A then Theo will wait until Amaya is MLB ready and then sell.

Each player will go through this same scenerio. He is looking to make deals like he did with Rizzo and Hendricks. Under market value. So I just don't see him paying market for any of his players.
 

anotheridiot

Well-known member
Joined:
Jul 15, 2016
Posts:
5,935
Liked Posts:
791
I dont think Gleybor was just a farm hand. He had all kinds of teams after him in the international draft, including the yankees for a guy that teams knew did not need 5 years of development thru the systems.
 

CSF77

Well-known member
Joined:
Apr 16, 2013
Posts:
18,651
Liked Posts:
2,843
Location:
San Diego
I dont think Gleybor was just a farm hand. He had all kinds of teams after him in the international draft, including the yankees for a guy that teams knew did not need 5 years of development thru the systems.


Like I said. It is easy to trade a prospect. He is not helping you win now. That trade resulted in a ring. That was the goal of the trade and it was met.

Trading for Q was to get them over the hump and to add a ToR for a few years. Neither happened as a result. This the trade fell short of the expectation.

Like I said every trade will be judged by the result. Sure Torres was a high impact talent. But that was the market price that year and Theo paid it and it resulted in a ring.

Everything else is personal issues.
 

Discus fish salesman

Well-known member
Joined:
Mar 31, 2018
Posts:
15,839
Liked Posts:
20,540
Selling Joc Maeda, Vitt and taking on Price for 1 year of Betts.

Yes this was a 1 year window deal. If they fall short of the ring then this will be a bust deal. Even Price at a discount is adding a pitcher past his prime. IE Lester but for years past his prime.

But win the ring and it becomes a excellent trade.

It is simple as that. Playing for a 1 year window.
It's not really a gamble and doesn't leave the Dodgers with a 1 year window. The MLB roster is loaded and so are their minor leagues. Odds are they try to resign Betts anyway and have a fairly good chance if they really want to keep him. Their championship window isn't suddenly gone if Betts leaves though
 

CSF77

Well-known member
Joined:
Apr 16, 2013
Posts:
18,651
Liked Posts:
2,843
Location:
San Diego
It's not really a gamble and doesn't leave the Dodgers with a 1 year window

I said Cole and the Yanks was a gamble. You invest that much into a player that had a poor track record before the Astros and betting on that same result is a heavy gamble.

The Dodgers are giving up a lot of talent to afford Betts and 1/2 of Price.

So if they don't win what they are guaranteed is Price at a discount rate and he is not the same guy that he was. But they gave up Joc Pederson and Verdigo. I see Price and Maeda as a wash myself.

i see the question as are they good enough before the deal? Some could argue yes. Nat's lost talent. NYY are the only real challenge going in right now.
 

CSF77

Well-known member
Joined:
Apr 16, 2013
Posts:
18,651
Liked Posts:
2,843
Location:
San Diego
8:27PM: “Some involved [in the trade] are now suggesting it’s not a certainty,” MLB Network’s Jon Heyman tweets, as the holdup continues to center around the Red Sox, Twins, and Graterol’s condition. Boston is reportedly trying to “reconfigure” its end of the deal with the Twins, “meaning more than Graterol” would head from Minnesota to Fenway Park.
 

CSF77

Well-known member
Joined:
Apr 16, 2013
Posts:
18,651
Liked Posts:
2,843
Location:
San Diego
Twins Pull Out Of Mookie Betts Trade
By George Miller | February 8, 2020 at 2:13pm CDT

The Twins no longer plan to complete their portion of the proposed three-team trade that would send Mookie Betts to the Dodgers, according to La Velle E. Neal III of the Star Tribune. As part of the trade, the Twins were expected to send right-hander Brusdar Graterol to the Red Sox, receiving Kenta Maeda in return. However, after the Red Sox balked at Graterol’s medical reports, they requested another prospect from the Twins.
It now seems that the Twins will hang on to Graterol after further discussions with the Red Sox were unproductive. This, of course, produces a ripple effect that will likely have far-reaching consequences. The Dodgers and Red Sox, for their part, could still try to complete the trade themselves or rope in a new third team to facilitate the mega-deal, but for the time being, the prospect of a Betts trade appears to have taken a hit.
In its entirety, the trade would have sent Betts and David Price to the Dodgers, while Alex Verdugo and Graterol would wind up in Boston with Maeda joining the Twins.
 

Top