|
Post by Rufus-T on Oct 21, 2020 18:15:52 GMT
I did not follow the off season that much, so I did not even know he left the Red Sox until 2020 season opened. I was shocked to hear, since he was the face of Red Sox as much as Big Papi used to be. Watching him during this postseason, it is even more apparent how great he is. How could Red Sox let him go? Was there some conflict with him and the team? I understand it at the time when they let Manny Ramirez go. This, I don't understand.
|
|
|
Post by screamingtreefrogs on Oct 21, 2020 18:34:15 GMT
small market team trying to compete with the big boys - i.e. the Yanks - couldn't afford him with some of their boneheaded decision making in the past
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Oct 21, 2020 18:40:25 GMT
It's inexplicable. There's just no way you don't pay top dollar for a talent like Betts.
|
|
|
Post by TheGoodMan19 on Oct 21, 2020 18:55:14 GMT
I always thought he just didn't like playing in Boston. He never came out and said so, but it seemed inevitable that he would walk when his contract was up. Every time talk of an extension came up, he said "I think I'd like to test the FA market"
Fuck him, may he see a never ending string of 7-10 splits
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Oct 21, 2020 19:01:50 GMT
I always thought he just didn't like playing in Boston. He never came out and said so, but it seemed inevitable that he would walk when his contract was up. Every time talk of an extension came up, he said "I think I'd like to test the FA market" This has been my conclusion as well, but that organization has been notorious for leaking stuff and throwing people under the bus when they leave town. They never really did that with Betts. I would've expected all of them, to a man, to come out and say, "We tried everything we could, he just didn't want to play here. It isn't our fault." The fact that they didn't makes me suspect it was typical Red Sox lowballing of the talent. They're always happy to throw money at bums from small markets, but never want to pay up for guys who have proven they can get it done in Boston. It's very strange.
|
|
|
Post by screamingtreefrogs on Oct 21, 2020 19:10:32 GMT
What's more upsetting to Boston and the 'Greater Boston Area'?
The departure of Betts or Brady?
|
|
|
Post by TheGoodMan19 on Oct 21, 2020 19:16:14 GMT
I always thought he just didn't like playing in Boston. He never came out and said so, but it seemed inevitable that he would walk when his contract was up. Every time talk of an extension came up, he said "I think I'd like to test the FA market" This has been my conclusion as well, but that organization has been notorious for leaking stuff and throwing people under the bus when they leave town. They never really did that with Betts. I would've expected all of them, to a man, to come out and say, "We tried everything we could, he just didn't want to play here. It isn't our fault." The fact that they didn't makes me suspect it was typical Red Sox lowballing of the talent. They're always happy to throw money at bums from small markets, but never want to pay up for guys who have proven they can get it done in Boston. It's very strange. It's possible. That's the thing with the Red Sox. They'll sell out every seat, sell a billion jerseys, get great TV ratings, with Mookie Betts in RF, Alex Verdugo in RF or My Aunt Margaret in RF. And my Auntie will be a lot cheaper. But you won't win a WS with her. Since the bar was raised in 2004, the Red Sox fans want nothing less than titles. Even before 2018, it seemed that Betts would never sign an extension. In the current times, you don't let a generational player walk. Whether it hamstrings an organization or not. See Cabrera, Miguel for example. I've seen rumors that Betts had experienced racial shitslinging in Fenway but who knows if that's true.
|
|
|
Post by tristramshandy on Oct 21, 2020 19:16:36 GMT
I did not follow the off season that much, so I did not even know he left the Red Sox until 2020 season opened. I was shocked to hear, since he was the face of Red Sox as much as Big Papi used to be. Watching him during this postseason, it is even more apparent how great he is. How could Red Sox let him go? Was there some conflict with him and the team? I understand it at the time when they let Manny Ramirez go. This, I don't understand. In no way am I trying to say Betts is on the same level as Ruth, but the note last night that Betts joined Ruth as the only players to walk and then steal two bases in a World Series game seemed to be done on purpose to drive the knife a little deeper into Red Sox fans. One of my groomsmen is a die hard Red Sox fans, and when the trade happened, he said he'd never forgive the Sox for that one. His son (10 years old) even became a Dodgers fan and my friend let him out of spite. It's a large/long contract, but some Dodgers fans will say its worth it if they can just get this one after being on the precipice for so long.
|
|
|
Post by sdm3 on Oct 21, 2020 19:17:54 GMT
What's more upsetting to Boston and the ' Greater Boston Area'? The departure of Betts or Brady? Interesting question. Brady was a 40+ year old QB who'd given the Patriots more success than most organizations see in a hundred years. Betts was a young superstar who'd helped to bring them one title - but could've given them so many more. I'd still give it to Brady, though. He helps to define the all-time success of the Patriots. Those fans had him for 20 years. The Red Sox won championships before Betts and they'll win them without him.
|
|
|
Post by tristramshandy on Oct 21, 2020 19:18:46 GMT
Don't know if that's why he would have left, but there is a 99% chance that that is true.
|
|
|
Post by screamingtreefrogs on Oct 21, 2020 19:18:59 GMT
What's more upsetting to Boston and the ' Greater Boston Area'? The departure of Betts or Brady? Interesting question. Brady was a 40+ year old QB who'd given the Patriots more success than most organizations see in a hundred years. Betts was a young superstar who'd helped to bring them one title - but could've given them so many more. I'd still give it to Brady, though. He helps to define the all-time success of the Patriots. Those fans had him for 20 years. The Red Sox won championships before Betts and they'll win them without him. That's what I'm here for - thought provoking questions.....
|
|
|
Post by tristramshandy on Oct 21, 2020 19:19:59 GMT
What's more upsetting to Boston and the ' Greater Boston Area'? The departure of Betts or Brady? Bill Simmons has more animosity towards Brady than Betts, although that Brady animosity feels like it could teeter at any moment to Belichick animosity.
|
|
|
Post by millar70 on Oct 21, 2020 19:24:23 GMT
I'm not part of the Red Sox front office, so I couldn't tell ya.
I just know the Sox have provided me with the pleasure of watching 4 championship teams in the last 16 years, so I ain't gonna bitch and moan about players who don't want to be there.
Not everyone gets it.
|
|
|
Post by TheGoodMan19 on Oct 21, 2020 19:27:51 GMT
I did not follow the off season that much, so I did not even know he left the Red Sox until 2020 season opened. I was shocked to hear, since he was the face of Red Sox as much as Big Papi used to be. Watching him during this postseason, it is even more apparent how great he is. How could Red Sox let him go? Was there some conflict with him and the team? I understand it at the time when they let Manny Ramirez go. This, I don't understand. In no way am I trying to say Betts is on the same level as Ruth, but the note last night that Betts joined Ruth as the only players to walk and then steal two bases in a World Series game seemed to be done on purpose to drive the knife a little deeper into Red Sox fans. One of my groomsmen is a die hard Red Sox fans, and when the trade happened, he said he'd never forgive the Sox for that one. His son (10 years old) even became a Dodgers fan and my friend let him out of spite. It's a large/long contract, but some Dodgers fans will say its worth it if they can just get this one after being on the precipice for so long. That's what the Tigers said when they extended Miguel Cabrera. That's what the Angels said when they singed Albert Pujols. Betts is a great, great player. But will he be worth $33,000,000 at age 39? Hell, at age 35? The Tigers are in a mess because of Cabrera's contract. And teams do not have unlimited budgets. The Red Sox have had two dismal season and will have at least one more to get under the luxury tax. The Yankees had one playoff game from 2013 to 2017 to get out from the tax. I loved Betts, but at that price, fuck him. Teams go on after stars retire, they go on after stars go to another team. The Cardinals were very wise to let Pujols walk.
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Oct 21, 2020 19:31:42 GMT
What's more upsetting to Boston and the ' Greater Boston Area'? The departure of Betts or Brady? Interesting question. Brady was a 40+ year old QB who'd given the Patriots more success than most organizations see in a hundred years. Betts was a young superstar who'd helped to bring them one title - but could've given them so many more. I'd still give it to Brady, though. He helps to define the all-time success of the Patriots. Those fans had him for 20 years. The Red Sox won championships before Betts and they'll win them without him. I agree with your assessment, it's probably Brady due to emotional attachment, compared to the logic of knowing Betts has more ahead of him than Brady at this point. Not knowing why Mookie had to go is no more or less frustrating than knowing Brady left because he was sick of Bill's shit. Ok they didn't want to overpay for a 43 year old QB, I get that. But it isn't like they're going to do anything amazing with that money anyway. Right now it's Brady, but if we watch the Dodgers win four more titles over the next ten years, it's going to be the Curse of Mookie as Yankee fans chant '2018' until the Sox win again in 2104.
|
|
|
Post by klawrencio79 on Oct 21, 2020 19:52:44 GMT
|
|
|
Post by tristramshandy on Oct 21, 2020 20:23:31 GMT
In no way am I trying to say Betts is on the same level as Ruth, but the note last night that Betts joined Ruth as the only players to walk and then steal two bases in a World Series game seemed to be done on purpose to drive the knife a little deeper into Red Sox fans. One of my groomsmen is a die hard Red Sox fans, and when the trade happened, he said he'd never forgive the Sox for that one. His son (10 years old) even became a Dodgers fan and my friend let him out of spite. It's a large/long contract, but some Dodgers fans will say its worth it if they can just get this one after being on the precipice for so long. That's what the Tigers said when they extended Miguel Cabrera. That's what the Angels said when they singed Albert Pujols.
The Tigers didn't win a World Series with Cabrera; the Angels didn't win a World Series with Pujols. If the Dodgers win a World Series with Betts, it's complete apples to oranges. Put it another way: would you pay Patrick Mahomes an exorbitant contract to get a Bills title? Or would you just like being the Bills and thinking about four Super Bowl losses forever? If you're a team that hasn't won jack squat in a long time/forever, that title is worth it - - I'm sure Cubs and White Sox fans can confirm that.
|
|
|
Post by TheGoodMan19 on Oct 21, 2020 20:42:53 GMT
That's what the Tigers said when they extended Miguel Cabrera. That's what the Angels said when they singed Albert Pujols.
The Tigers didn't win a World Series with Cabrera; the Angels didn't win a World Series with Pujols. If the Dodgers win a World Series with Betts, it's complete apples to oranges. Put it another way: would you pay Patrick Mahomes an exorbitant contract to get a Bills title? Or would you just like being the Bills and thinking about four Super Bowl losses forever? If you're a team that hasn't won jack squat in a long time/forever, that title is worth it - - I'm sure Cubs and White Sox fans can confirm that. Not to me. One title for 12 years of misery? Was the one WS title the Yankees got with A-Rod worth it? could the Red Sox have kept Betts if they hadn't wasted millions on David Price, Pablo Sandoval, Rusney Castillo? Paying Mahomes doesn't guarantee a Super bowl no more than Albert Pujols guaranteed a WS for the Angels. The opposite might be true. Look at the late 90's Yankees. A team wallpapered with pricey FA's, no. Biggest FA on the 1998 Yanks, Tino Martinez. They had a great farm, grafted useful, cheap additions and won four straight. When they decided to put out an all-star team, they didn't have the success they had earlier.
|
|
|
Post by sdm3 on Oct 21, 2020 20:46:32 GMT
The Tigers didn't win a World Series with Cabrera; the Angels didn't win a World Series with Pujols. If the Dodgers win a World Series with Betts, it's complete apples to oranges. Put it another way: would you pay Patrick Mahomes an exorbitant contract to get a Bills title? Or would you just like being the Bills and thinking about four Super Bowl losses forever? If you're a team that hasn't won jack squat in a long time/forever, that title is worth it - - I'm sure Cubs and White Sox fans can confirm that. Not to me. One title for 12 years of misery? Was the one WS title the Yankees got with A-Rod worth it? could the Red Sox have kept Betts if they hadn't wasted millions on David Price, Pablo Sandoval, Rusney Castillo? Paying Mahomes doesn't guarantee a Super bowl no more than Albert Pujols guaranteed a WS for the Angels. The opposite might be true. Look at the late 90's Yankees. A team wallpapered with pricey FA's, no. Biggest FA on the 1998 Yanks, Tino Martinez. They had a great farm, grafted useful, cheap additions and won four straight. When they decided to put out an all-star team, they didn't have the success they had earlier.
I think he's asking that if the Bills paid Mahomes that money and he did win a title for Buffalo, would that in retrospect make the deal worth it? For a team that had never won a title? I'd take it. You had decades of misery with that organization; what's 12 years of more if you got to enjoy a title in between?
|
|
|
Post by TheGoodMan19 on Oct 21, 2020 20:59:47 GMT
Not to me. One title for 12 years of misery? Was the one WS title the Yankees got with A-Rod worth it? could the Red Sox have kept Betts if they hadn't wasted millions on David Price, Pablo Sandoval, Rusney Castillo? Paying Mahomes doesn't guarantee a Super bowl no more than Albert Pujols guaranteed a WS for the Angels. The opposite might be true. Look at the late 90's Yankees. A team wallpapered with pricey FA's, no. Biggest FA on the 1998 Yanks, Tino Martinez. They had a great farm, grafted useful, cheap additions and won four straight. When they decided to put out an all-star team, they didn't have the success they had earlier.
I think he's asking that if the Bills paid Mahomes that money and he did win a title for Buffalo, would that in retrospect make the deal worth it? For a team that had never won a title? I'd take it. You had decades of misery with that organization; what's 12 years of more if you got to enjoy a title in between? To have one Super Bowl with Mahomes then watch him fall apart and keep getting humongous money and seeing better players leave because they can't fit them in under the salary cap, no. If the Bills never win it all in my lifetime, will I be okay with that, sure. My hockey team has never won a Cup. I lived with the Red Sox from the 70's until 2004.
Once again, no player is a guarantee of a title. Dan Marino, how many rings again? The Bills couldn't win a title with a HOF Qb who put up video game numbers.
|
|