RedSox want to package Betts, Price trade

[popo85]

Quote

 

ESPN’s Buster Olney reported on Sunday that the Boston Red Sox are seeking to package the former AL MVP with the contract of veteran pitcher David Price. The Red Sox are also said to be asking for a pair of frontline prospects.

Betts, 27, just agreed to a record one-year contract to remain in Boston but could still be on the move with the team looking to slash payroll. The 34-year-old Price, meanwhile, has three years and $96 million remaining on his deal.

 

https://larrybrownsports.com/baseball/red-sox-want-package-mookie-betts-david-price-trade/534187

[Stradling]

So they’d rather shed money than obtain quality prospects. 

[popo85]

1 minute ago, Stradling said:

So they’d rather shed money than obtain quality prospects. 

Do you think a package around Marsh and a few others can get it done?

[Stradling]

7 minutes ago, popo85 said:

Do you think a package around Marsh and a few others can get it done?

Yes but Arte wants nothing to do with those contracts.  Unless they take Upton it isn’t happening. 

[Blarg]

There is absolutely no value in Betts for the Angels. He is a one year rental when they definetely don't need another outfielder. Price is rediculously over priced so Boston would have to split the costs. I just don't see any reason to further beat this to death, pairing of the two is simply a waste of the Angels money and prospects. 

[Claude]

2 minutes ago, popo85 said:

Do you think a package around Marsh and a few others can get it done?

Arte is not going to increase the budget to accommodate the cost of Price. I think a deal could’ve been done before they signed Rendon. 

[floplag]

Wait so they want someone to take on the money AND give frontline prospects?
Id like to get paid for for doing nothing but thats not happening either. 

[eligrba]

Betts probably grew up a Yankee fan. 

[Taylor]

I'd Bett the Price is way too high for it to be viable for the Angels.

[Erstad Grit]

Hahaha I see the dodgers all over this. Screw the redsox. Price is way over paid and past his prime and Betts is gone on in a year. I guess if you did the trade now you'd get a draft pick for Betts. 

[ten ocho recon scout]

19 minutes ago, Taylor said:

I'd Bett the Price is way too high for it to be viable for the Angels.

Name a price for the bett.

[Taylor]

Just now, ten ocho recon scout said:

Name a price for the bett.

73 rondons.

[Second Base]

So they're looking for a team with the financial flexibility and stupidity to add 59 million in payroll this year, and 123 million over the next three years in return for one year of Mookie Betts.

[Docwaukee]

the Red Sox are delusional if they think they'll get someone to take on Price's contract and get front line prospects for 1yr of Betts.  

even if you don't have to give up much and take on the entire amount, that's still 59 mil in additional payroll for 2020.  Which would put the halos 2020 payroll around 240 mil and their CBT number at 250 mil.  

If we gave up Marsh and others even to save a few bucks I would lose my mind.  

[floplag]

42 minutes ago, Second Base said:

So they're looking for a team with the financial flexibility and stupidity to add 59 million in payroll this year, and 123 million over the next three years in return for one year of Mookie Betts.

and pay a couple frontline prospects please dont forget that

[nate]

There is absolutely no value in a trade for the Angels when it comes to these two.  Price looks completely done and Betts is a rental.

[floplag]

In before someone, possibly the dodgers, bails them out...

[Hubs]

I could see this for the Angels if a) it didn't include Adell, b) they Took Upton back in the deal.

The add would be 27+32 for 2020, minus 21 = 38. It would drop the Red Sox Payroll under the limit. It would put the Angels over the luxury tax at like $224.

It doesn't really make sense though, as the Red Sox would have a terrible defensive outfield, and would likely want to move Upton.

It makes more sense for the Dodgers.

[Vegas Halo Fan]

2 hours ago, Blarg said:

There is absolutely no value in Betts for the Angels. He is a one year rental when they definetely don't need another outfielder. Price is rediculously over priced so Boston would have to split the costs. I just don't see any reason to further beat this to death, pairing of the two is simply a waste of the Angels money and prospects. 

I would only consider it if Betts agreed to an extension as part of the deal. Even then it might not be worth it.

The Red Sox wouldn't take Justin Upton, because they are looking to shed payroll. The "prospects" they are talking about would be major league ready, but at or near league minimum in terms of salary.

IMO they are just trying to entice other teams to take David Price, and they are willing to sacrifice a year of Betts in order to get it done. They know that Price alone isn't tempting, especially at that salary. If they found a taker for the contract, they would get very little in return. This would essentially be two top prospects for one year of Betts, and an awful contract in the rotation.

The Dodgers have a history of taking on bad Boston contracts. Let them do it.

[gotbeer]

Does it include the video guy and buzzer?

[Vegas Halo Fan]

2 minutes ago, gotbeer said:

Does it include the video guy and buzzer?

Free garbage can and drumsticks.

[Blarg]

30 minutes ago, gotbeer said:

Does it include the video guy and buzzer?

Apple Watch.

[failos]

Does it include free fried chicken and beer?

[Angel Oracle]

51 minutes ago, Vegas Halo Fan said:

I would only consider it if Betts agreed to an extension as part of the deal. Even then it might not be worth it.

The Red Sox wouldn't take Justin Upton, because they are looking to shed payroll. The "prospects" they are talking about would be major league ready, but at or near league minimum in terms of salary.

IMO they are just trying to entice other teams to take David Price, and they are willing to sacrifice a year of Betts in order to get it done. They know that Price alone isn't tempting, especially at that salary. If they found a taker for the contract, they would get very little in return. This would essentially be two top prospects for one year of Betts, and an awful contract in the rotation.

The Dodgers have a history of taking on bad Boston contracts. Let them do it.

The Halos already have two huge contracts (Trout and Rendon), plus Adell and Marsh on the way.    Signing Betts long term here doesn't make any sense, and taking on a nearly finished Price makes no sense as well.    Hard pass   

[tdawg87]

5 minutes ago, Φαήλος said:

Does it include free fried chicken

Both players are black, so no. 

You racist.