(
)
The Red Sox and Dodgers orchestrated the most sensational August trade in baseball history, an orgy of superstars and mega-salaries in which two flagship franchises defined their current identities with all the subtlety of an MMA fight.
The recalibrating Red Sox and go-for-it Dodgers opened themselves to both instant and long-term analysis off of this nine-player blockbuster inspired by cable TV money. Boston signed Josh Beckett, Carl Crawford and Adrian Gonzalez to their current outsized deals, in large part, to feed the beast of NESN while the Dodgers accepted those contracts in near total because of a cable deal expected to be finalized this winter that could make the Yankees’ YES arrangement look like something the bunny-eared antenna dragged in.
But in the winner-loser here and now, it is hard to ignore that the biggest loser was not even directly involved in the trade finalized yesterday. The biggest loser is the New York Mets.
Because the Mets could not get even enough health and production from Jason Bay and/or Johan Santana to make the kind of financial reset trade the Red Sox just did by unloading Beckett and Crawford, in particular.
Consider the Dodgers are in such a frenzy to produce the most star-doused spectacular in Hollywood, they put in a waiver claim on Cliff Lee earlier this month, though the 33-year-old lefty was 2-6 with a 3.78 ERA and had three years at $87.5 million left on his contract after this season. In other words, at that time, the Dodgers did not need a current star like Gonzalez attached to the deal to absorb someone like Lee.
And they did accept the 32-year-old Beckett, who is 5-11 with a 5.23 ERA and is owed $31.5 million after this campaign.
So if Santana just could have pitched healthy and somewhat near his first-half work, then the fact the 33-year-old lefty has $31 million due him between his 2013 salary and a 2014 buyout probably would not have deterred the money-is-no-object Dodgers.
Which is the other area in which the Mets — and their fans — are losers here. Six months ago, the Mets and Dodgers were lumped in as big-city financial disasters; the Mets because of their owners’ relationship with Bernie Madoff and the Dodgers because of their miserly owner, Frank McCourt. But in late March, the Dodgers were sold for more than any other sports franchise ever, $2.15 billion, to the Guggenheim group. At that time an NL personnel chief told me, “Watch, they want to and will become Yankees West.”
And they have. The new ownership gave Andre Ethier a five-year, $85 million extension. They signed a Cuban they had not scouted in person, Yasiel Puig, to a $42 million contract. And since late July, in trades, they have added Hanley Ramirez, Shane Victorino, Joe Blanton, Brandon League, Randy Choate and now Gonzalez, Crawford, Beckett and Nick Punto. The price tag for all of that, as Bill Shaikin of the Los Angeles Times reported, is $432 million — or $12 million more than McCourt bought the team for in 2004.
Now, the sense within the industry is the Dodgers have gone fiscally insane. In baseball history, just one player (Alex Rodriguez to the Yankees) had ever been traded with more than $100 million left on his contract. That was before Los Angeles obtained two (Crawford and Gonzalez).
One competing NL executive said he was overjoyed Los Angeles has gone so all-in — giving up what few good prospects it has and clogging its payroll for years — because it will mean a day of reckoning in the near future. In general, the current playbook in the majors is if you agree to take on a ton of salary, then you don’t give up big prospects. But the Dodgers added three dubious Red Sox contracts plus Punto (total $262.5 million after this year), yet still surrendered their two best pitching prospects, Allen Webster and Rubby De La Rosa, along with James Loney, Jerry Sands and Ivan De Jesus.
There also is a chance this is the time-bomb deal of all-time bomb deals: Gonzalez has been steadily losing power. Crawford just underwent Tommy John surgery and is no sure thing to be ready at the start of next season, plus, in Boston, he re-affirmed his reputation for not liking big markets. And Beckett was a negative force within the Red Sox clubhouse who had been trending horribly on the mound.
The Dodgers, though, are hoping a switch in leagues and away from negative scenery will elevate this trio the way it has Ramirez. But mainly this is about philosophy.
While the Mets are locked into Bay and Santana for another year and also another $90 million-ish payroll, the Dodgers have decided to go for it now. To energize a fan base. To make sure the Angels have no chance to be the glamour team of Southern California. The looming record cable deal has impelled the Dodgers to assemble a roster that cuts straight to the soul of L.A. — it’s about Nielsens, baby.
This all-out approach by a recent financial pauper is going to make what has been a hard sell for the Wilpons — to convince their audience that their family controlling the team long into the future is best for the franchise — all but impossible now.
Because the Mets cannot even sell the financial flexibility just gained by the Red Sox, who turned their back on their AL East turf war with the Yankees and the constant hunger to feed NESN. A third straight playoff-less year, the epic collapse of last September and the horrible mojo surrounding the franchise — particularly the clubhouse loathing of Bobby Valentine — moved an AL executive to tell me recently, “Boston has to do something to change the subject.”
The Red Sox did. They acted decisively, knowing Gonzalez’s inclusion meant they also could ship out Beckett and Crawford.
The Mets were indecisive last July with Jose Reyes — going for a playoff pipe dream and to seduce fans that never came to Citi Field. The Dodgers, playing Luis Cruz at third, needed an upgrade at that position as badly as they do first base. So why exactly couldn’t the Mets have been bold with David Wright, as long as they could attach a bad contract or two with it to gain a total financial reset along with prospects? Are the Mets so positive they will re-sign Wright that they can keep letting opportunities to set themselves up for the future float away?
Instead, it is the Red Sox who have refortified their system and, unlike the Mets, now have the money and the will to spend in the immediate future. They could decide to trade Jacoby Ellsbury or rebuild around him. They could be in play now for any team looking to escape its own long-term problem. For example, would the arm-needy Twins ever consider dealing Joe Mauer, long an object of Red Sox desire? Boston essentially found a mechanism to start over again.
The Mets? They seem stuck in the same horror movie one year after another. Except worse now. For they not only have to deal with the Yankees in New York, but the Yankees of the West Coast in Los Angeles and the National League.