Jump to content
NBC Sports EDGE Forums

Mookie Betts 2021 Outlook


fawkes_mulder
 Share

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, brockpapersizer said:

I mean he is a perfectionist, that's a good attitude to have. Wouldn't you want someone striving to do better. Might not be killing it for your fantasy team but a half season 2.2 war is very good. Free agent war is estimated to be 1/10 million. Anyone who thinks Mookie Betts has been bad this season (including him) is laughably and objectively wrong.


apologist! 😜

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
11 hours ago, brockpapersizer said:

Hey quoted from a month ago today for some reason.  I mean you are on record on saying the Dodgers ruined everything when the traded for Betts, and then they proceded to win a championship. So like,  ok. 🤪

I hate to break it to you but the Dodgers farm is up there with the best of them right now. Nobody wins it all every year, but the Dodgers don't project to be rebuilding any time soon.  Last 3 champions have all had mega contracts.  All that matters is winning the ship, and they did it already. They may or may not win it all this year, but they're going to  be very good this year and next year and the year after. ...

I'm talking about clogging up a roster spot with a useless body.  The next Albert Pujols.  Blocking that young super duper farmhand.

And again LA would have won this past season without Betts so still don't see your point that he somehow magically was the one and only one that lead you to the promised land therefore it is okay if he sucks for the majority of the decade ahead.

In other words getting Betts did not = winning last year and that without him you never would have won.  Helped?  Yes, sure.  But he wasn't your magic bullet.  The Dodgers were/are a good team. They aren't dependent on one guy as THE guy and paying that one guy like they are was a a big big mistake from my pov.

OT:  BTW I'm liking the third string player after Verdugo and Downs you guys sent over in the deal already.  Conner Wong.  Just called up cause of the vet back-up catcher's injury; he already seems to have moved into being Eovaldi's personal catcher.  Looks solid behind the plate and Eovaldi loves him.  Nice hit off of Ohtani last night too.  I remember you saying at the time you kind of liked the guy too.

Edited by The Big Bat Theory
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, The Big Bat Theory said:

I'm talking about clogging up a roster spot with a useless body.  The next Albert Pujols.  Blocking that young super duper farmhand.

And again LA would have won this past asterisk season without Betts so still don't see your point that he somehow magically was the one and only one that lead you to the promised land therefore it is okay if he sucks for the majority of the decade ahead.

In other words getting Betts did not = winning last year and that without him you never would have won.  Helped?  Yes.  But he wasn't your magic bullet.  The Dodgers were/are a good team. They aren't dependent on one guy and paying that one guy like they are was a a big big mistake.

BTW I'm liking the third string player after Verdugo and Downs you guys sent over in the deal already.  Conner Wong.  Just called up cause of the vet back-up catcher's injury; he already seems to have moved into being Eovaldi's personal catcher.

You typed all those words to pretend you can say “they would have won last year anyway” as a statement of fact? You wanna say likely? Sure. But not one of us can state we know how that season and playoffs plays out if they don’t acquire Mookie. 
And which super duper farmhand was didnt play because he was blocked by Pujols? And which one is Mookie blocking? This is another reeeeeaaach and creating scenarios in your head that you seem to think are facts.  
If a prospect is great, they’ll get there. See: Mookie. Who was blocked by Pedroia. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Backdoor Slider said:

You typed all those words to pretend you can say “they would have won last year anyway” as a statement of fact? You wanna say likely? Sure. But not one of us can state we know how that season and playoffs plays out if they don’t acquire Mookie. 
And which super duper farmhand was didnt play because he was blocked by Pujols? And which one is Mookie blocking? This is another reeeeeaaach and creating scenarios in your head that you seem to think are facts.  
If a prospect is great, they’ll get there. See: Mookie. Who was blocked by Pedroia. 

One, Mookie was not some great prospect.  He basically shot out of nowhere and seized the moment when he got his chance.  Everyone was surprised by him.  He was a prospect that surprised everyone once he hit the majors.  So no, Pedroia wasn't blocking him per se.  His basically average play in the minors had been blocking him.

Two, if the the Angels didn't have a solution at 1B in house they could have traded for a better 1B but obviously nobody would take on that stupid contract so their hands were tied.  Walsh FINALLY forced their hands but who knows what would have happened earlier. 

Three, yes I think it is pretty much a statement of fact that the Dodgers would have won last year even without Mookie.  I get that you don't want what might have been taken as fact but in this case I do take it as a fact personally.  I can't imagine how they could lose last year even without Betts in other words.

If people cite projections based on sabermetrics as "facts" to what will happen for a player on this forum ... and do they ever here.  Then I think I can use hindsight and what actually happened to do the same.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe a lot of owners are over reacting. Manage his cold bat like any other

player on your roster. Pick up a hot free agent and keep on trucking. His bat

isn't dead, just on vacation, watch and see, he will return to form in the 2nd half.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, The Big Bat Theory said:

One, Mookie was not some great prospect.  He basically shot out of nowhere and seized the moment when he got his chance.  Everyone was surprised by him.  He was a prospect that surprised everyone once he hit the majors.  So no, Pedroia wasn't blocking him per se.  His basically average play in the minors had been blocking him.

Two, if the the Angels didn't have a solution at 1B in house they could have traded for a better 1B but obviously nobody would take on that stupid contract so their hands were tied.  Walsh FINALLY forced their hands but who knows what would have happened earlier. 

Three, yes I think it is pretty much a statement of fact that the Dodgers would have won last year even without Mookie.  I get that you don't want what might have been taken as fact but in this case I do take it as a fact personally.  I can't imagine how they could lose last year even without Betts in other words.

If people cite projections based on sabermetrics as "facts" to what will happen for a player on this forum ... and do they ever here.  Then I think I can use hindsight and what actually happened to do the same.

Mookie was the number 14 overall prospect in baseball and the Red Sox number 1 prospect lol. So do you not pay attention to your own team’s prospects, or are you making stuff up again? https://www.mlb.com/news/mookie-betts-leads-bostons-updated-top-20-list/c-85946126
I mean, I can’t keep having a conversation with someone who refuses facts and argues in bad faith.

It’s clear this isn’t about Mookie Outlook to you, but it’s about your bitterness as a Red Sox fan, and hoping your team is proven right. So with that, I’ll bow out. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Betts is the 69th highest scorer in a Yahoo OBP Points league I'm in (Verdugo is 91).  Mookie's not having an ideal year but he's far from being a terrible player right now.  "Useless body" is a ridiculous term to be throwing out there at this point. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Topgun said:

I believe a lot of owners are over reacting. Manage his cold bat like any other

player on your roster. Pick up a hot free agent and keep on trucking. His bat

isn't dead, just on vacation, watch and see, he will return to form in the 2nd half.

FWIW, his career splits show his July is usually strong, and his August & Sep/Oct are his best months (OPS/wRC+). .288 1st half hitter, .308 2nd half hitter.

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mookie scored 2 of the runs (and had 1 RBI) in the Game 6 that they won by a score of 3-1 to clinch the series.  On what planet is it a “fact” that they win it without him?  
 

Yes he’s been disappointing compared to his projections this year but I’m not giving up yet.  He’s still produced serviceable fantasy numbers and we know the upside is there.  Whole lot of baseball to be played- he’s still set and forget for me.  If it costs me, so be it.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, The Big Bat Theory said:

One, Mookie was not some great prospect.  He basically shot out of nowhere and seized the moment when he got his chance.  Everyone was surprised by him.  He was a prospect that surprised everyone once he hit the majors.  So no, Pedroia wasn't blocking him per se.  His basically average play in the minors had been blocking him.

Two, if the the Angels didn't have a solution at 1B in house they could have traded for a better 1B but obviously nobody would take on that stupid contract so their hands were tied.  Walsh FINALLY forced their hands but who knows what would have happened earlier. 

Three, yes I think it is pretty much a statement of fact that the Dodgers would have won last year even without Mookie.  I get that you don't want what might have been taken as fact but in this case I do take it as a fact personally.  I can't imagine how they could lose last year even without Betts in other words.

If people cite projections based on sabermetrics as "facts" to what will happen for a player on this forum ... and do they ever here.  Then I think I can use hindsight and what actually happened to do the same.

Saying the Dodgers would have won a championship as a matter of fact without Mookie last year is wrong. Not sure why you're upset at sabremetrics, but not surprising. Even if we're talking about what happened in the game without use of analytics, Dodgers won game 6 against the Rays in a 3-1 game scoring 2 runs.  Is that non sabremetric enough? I'm not sure you even believe this because again you said "The Dodgers ruined everything" when they traded for Betts. Weird words to say for a team who was very obviously winning a championship so matter of factly.  Hope I ruin anything that bad in my life.

Mookie wasn't a great draft prospect, but in the last year or so before he debuted there was quite a lot of hype. His minor league numbers were off the chart in terms of hit tool and discipline. Check the thread out.  I tried to get him in all my dynasty leagues and he was their number 1 prospect.

Angels have the most valuable player in the world right now to go  along with Trout and they aren't making the playoffs and had a losing record when Trout was healthy. Even next year when Pujols contract is  off the books, I'm not sure they make the playoffs let alone win it all.   The Pujols contract was very bad, but not as bad as how good the Trout contract was.  Pujols didin't prevent the Angels from winning a championship (I mean they only made the playoffs once). The Angels being a failure of an organization to develop any other talent or sign just about any other good deal (besides Ohtani) was the main reason. If the Angels would have won one championship early on, no reasonable person would say his contract was a failure. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

1 hour ago, Backdoor Slider said:

FWIW, his career splits show his July is usually strong, and his August & Sep/Oct are his best months (OPS/wRC+). .288 1st half hitter, .308 2nd half hitter.

 

👆

1 hour ago, mehtavg2000 said:

Yes he’s been disappointing compared to his projections this year but I’m not giving up yet.  

 

👆

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Backdoor Slider said:

Mookie was the number 14 overall prospect in baseball and the Red Sox number 1 prospect lol. So do you not pay attention to your own team’s prospects, or are you making stuff up again? https://www.mlb.com/news/mookie-betts-leads-bostons-updated-top-20-list/c-85946126
I mean, I can’t keep having a conversation with someone who refuses facts and argues in bad faith.

It’s clear this isn’t about Mookie Outlook to you, but it’s about your bitterness as a Red Sox fan, and hoping your team is proven right. So with that, I’ll bow out. 

Mookie only cracked the preseason Baseball America top 100 once, in 2014 at #75... He cracked preseason MLB top 100 list once in 2014 at #62... He never cracked preseason Baseball Prospectus Top 100.

You are talking about a mid season article just prior to a call up, even in the link you posted it says to start the year he was ranked #7 in the org and #62 in the league... Your own article proves exactly what he said, he wasn't highly ranked and popped suddenly and that's why he got called up, not because he was blocked.

I mean jeez read your own link before you trash the guy 😂

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, The Big Bat Theory said:

One, Mookie was not some great prospect.  He basically shot out of nowhere and seized the moment when he got his chance.  Everyone was surprised by him.  He was a prospect that surprised everyone once he hit the majors.  So no, Pedroia wasn't blocking him per se.  His basically average play in the minors had been blocking him.

 


Mookie only cracked the preseason Baseball America top 100 once, in 2014 at #75... He cracked preseason MLB top 100 list once in 2014 at #62... He never cracked preseason Baseball Prospectus Top 100.

23 minutes ago, StevieStats said:

You are talking about a mid season article just prior to a call up, even in the link you posted it says to start the year he was ranked #7 in the org and #62 in the league... Your own article proves exactly what he said, he wasn't highly ranked and popped suddenly and that's why he got called up, not because he was blocked.

I mean jeez read your own link before you trash the guy 😂

Everything I bolded is false. At least read what he said and quote for accuracy before you try to change the discussion, other Boston fan 😂

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, StevieStats said:

Mookie only cracked the preseason Baseball America top 100 once, in 2014 at #75... He cracked preseason MLB top 100 list once in 2014 at #62... He never cracked preseason Baseball Prospectus Top 100.

You are talking about a mid season article just prior to a call up, even in the link you posted it says to start the year he was ranked #7 in the org and #62 in the league... Your own article proves exactly what he said, he wasn't highly ranked and popped suddenly and that's why he got called up, not because he was blocked.

I mean jeez read your own link before you trash the guy 😂

Shooting up  from 62 to 14 in a few months is a good jump, but nobody in the top 100 is an obscure prospect who could  be classified as "popped up out of nowhere" and "surprised everyone".  But I guess that's subejective. Juan Soto surprised a bunch of people his rookie year, nobody expected him to be that good, but he was quite an elite prospect to have in dynasty leagues before he debuted despite not ever being a top 5-10 prospect on many if any lists before midseason of his debut year.

When  Mookie was drafted he wasn't much of a prospect, but by the end of 2013 he was a very exciting prospect, including on this message board.  Big shout out to @FouLLineand @BigPapi44 for some great  discussion on him in 2013/2014.  The thread has 25-26 pages before he ever got called up. Maybe that's out of nowhere to some people I guess, but we were excited and we're just dudes on a message board. I think he was dinged on some publications because of his size. Jose Altuve was already good, but not an MVP candidate and was clearly an exception rather than a rule on short guys at the time.

Don't really know how we got Mookie's prospect status to be honest, but I remember getting him in multiple leagues before he ever debuted (even in shallow prospect leagues) because I was very excited about him.

I think if you're a top 100 guy you're a very good prospect. There are thousands of prospects.  I'd say someone like Degrom is someone who came out of nowhere.  Jose Ramirez sure, obviously others too. But I think top 100 firmly puts you on the map for potential, but sure he obviously exceeded those expectations.  Just a guess, but a very good number of superstars were not top 10 prospects.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What has me most worried about Betts from a strictly fantasy standpoint is that he is not one of those guys that goes on those monster runs.  Whereas some guys have the ability to go crazy and get their numbers where they need to be Mookie is basically the model of consistency even if that consistency is mediocrity.  In his great seasons he was pretty much great from start to finish month to month.  In a very brief look at his month to month production over the last 5 years nothing really stood out as overly exceptional just very consistent great numbers (not including 2017).  Not saying he can't get his numbers up some this year but I've kind of come to the conclusion that I am not going to be getting my 4th overall pick value from Mr. Betts this year.  Hell I would be happy if he gave me top 50 production from here on out since in my league he's sitting on the fringe of 100 right now.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/7/2021 at 5:53 AM, The Big Bat Theory said:

One, Mookie was not some great prospect.  He basically shot out of nowhere and seized the moment when he got his chance.  Everyone was surprised by him.  He was a prospect that surprised everyone once he hit the majors.  So no, Pedroia wasn't blocking him per se.  His basically average play in the minors had been blocking him.

Two, if the the Angels didn't have a solution at 1B in house they could have traded for a better 1B but obviously nobody would take on that stupid contract so their hands were tied.  Walsh FINALLY forced their hands but who knows what would have happened earlier. 

Three, yes I think it is pretty much a statement of fact that the Dodgers would have won last year even without Mookie.  I get that you don't want what might have been taken as fact but in this case I do take it as a fact personally.  I can't imagine how they could lose last year even without Betts in other words.

If people cite projections based on sabermetrics as "facts" to what will happen for a player on this forum ... and do they ever here.  Then I think I can use hindsight and what actually happened to do the same.

Ah, the Rusney Castillo love still burns strong. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I always viewed Betts as a max effort player. What I mean is that he doesn't have easy power. He can't just run into homers. His max exit velocity has been trending down for years and he never had huge raw power to begin with. 

His wheels will naturally decline with age. His plate discipline will remain steady. He's basically McCutchen 2.0. Probably will run a .800 to .850 OPS for the next couple years. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, dod959 said:

I always viewed Betts as a max effort player. What I mean is that he doesn't have easy power. He can't just run into homers. His max exit velocity has been trending down for years and he never had huge raw power to begin with. 

His wheels will naturally decline with age. His plate discipline will remain steady. He's basically McCutchen 2.0. Probably will run a .800 to .850 OPS for the next couple years. 

That’s not a bad comparison. I might even go Timmy Lincecum. Once the quick twitch/elite flexibility went with a little age it sort of caused a fast downhill regression. 
 

That being said - premature to get too crazy yet. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
On 7/7/2021 at 6:53 AM, The Big Bat Theory said:

One, Mookie was not some great prospect.  He basically shot out of nowhere and seized the moment when he got his chance.  Everyone was surprised by him.  He was a prospect that surprised everyone once he hit the majors.  So no, Pedroia wasn't blocking him per se.  His basically average play in the minors had been blocking him.

A: .296/.418/.477
A+: .341/.414/.551
AA: .355/.443/.551
AAA: .335/.417/.503

While walking more than K'ing at every level besides AAA. Some basically average MILB triple slashes if I've ever seen em lmao.

Edited by KrunK
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, dod959 said:

I always viewed Betts as a max effort player. What I mean is that he doesn't have easy power. He can't just run into homers. His max exit velocity has been trending down for years and he never had huge raw power to begin with. 

His wheels will naturally decline with age. His plate discipline will remain steady. He's basically McCutchen 2.0. Probably will run a .800 to .850 OPS for the next couple years. 

I don’t remember if it was a sportswriter or a RW poster, but someone deemed him “mini-Cutch” while he was still a prospect, which prompted me to add him. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
34 minutes ago, KrunK said:

A: .296/.418/.477
A+: 341/414/551
AA: .355/.443/.551
AAA: .335/.417/.503

While walking more than K'ing at every level besides AAA. Some basically average MILB triple slashes if I've ever seen em lmao.

Lol I mean this is pretty disingenuous, you post the levels not the years and left off A- too... 

He played 1 game his first year, at R ball.

He hit 267/352/307 at A- ball his second season.

His third season split between A and A+ he hit well, 314/417/506 and that's what allowed him to crack Top 100 at BA for the first time, but not at Baseball Prospectus... So it took his 3rd year after getting drafted to produce at A level ball and get somewhat on some prospect radars.

Then his AA and AAA numbers were both in 2014 before he got called up to the MLB -- this is the year he really popped, against good competition, and started getting hype mid year, and as Brock mentioned this forum picked him up in the minors league forum with a few guys championing him... Also with noting from a fan perspective Boston was completely obsessed with Bogaerts as the blue chip super hyped for multiple years prospect and he was ranked #2 in all of baseball so that's where the media and fan focus was.

But at no point was he blocked by Pedroia and it took his 3rd season after getting drafted at A ball to start producing, nothing held him back unorganically other than his own development after getting drafted 5th round out of high school.

As soon as he played well he got promoted, he wasn't blocked or held back.

None of this has anything to do with his 2021 outlook either... His A ball numbers would be welcomed though 😂

 

Edited by StevieStats
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Didn't Pedoria block Betts after the call up though. I seem to remember Betts doing an awful lot of sitting on the bench in the beginning (like part of the summer months). Or didn't Betts come up as a second basemen?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Without looking it up, because I still don't know why we're here,  I''d say  Pedroia is the reason he moved to OF. Pedroia was early in a pretty decent contract and was a former MVP.  I think that qualifies as blocking him positionally. He hit  so well that they found a place for him in the OF.  That's how I remember this. 

Edited by brockpapersizer
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...