Is this offer good enough to part with Bellinger?

[Erik]

5x5 with OBP and net steals, 10 owners rostering players from 16 MLB teams (some AL, some NL) plus a few other players not on those teams in the mix, works out to about the equivalent of a 17-team mixed.

This year my team is very good in hitting, is terrible in pitching, and has been in 4th most of the year. The 1st place team is way ahead and it looks like he will win for the 3rd year in a row.

Our keeper system is different from the norm. You can keep up to 7 guys, and there are no long-term contracts. To keep a player, you give him a 50% raise over the previous year. A $4 player becomes $6, a $5 player becomes $8, etc.

I have Bellinger, who will be $8 next year. The first-place owner, who has been led to his titles by studs at similarly bargain values, has made an offer for him:

Betts $28 next year
Chavis $4 next year
Wheeler $6 next year

For

Bellinger $8 next year
Pinder $4 next year
and a throw-in

My hesitation is a) his lead is big enough (19 points over second, 31.5 points over me) that likely the best that would happen this year for me is 2nd or 3rd and b) I really don't want to stack his team for next year any further.

Do you agree, or is this a must-sell-high-on-Bellinger situation?

[Hornsby]

5x5 with OBP and net steals, 10 owners rostering players from 16 MLB teams (some AL, some NL) plus a few other players not on those teams in the mix, works out to about the equivalent of a 17-team mixed.

This year my team is very good in hitting, is terrible in pitching, and has been in 4th most of the year. The 1st place team is way ahead and it looks like he will win for the 3rd year in a row.

Our keeper system is different from the norm. You can keep up to 7 guys, and there are no long-term contracts. To keep a player, you give him a 50% raise over the previous year. A $4 player becomes $6, a $5 player becomes $8, etc.

I have Bellinger, who will be $8 next year. The first-place owner, who has been led to his titles by studs at similarly bargain values, has made an offer for him:

Betts $28 next year
Chavis $4 next year
Wheeler $6 next year

For

Bellinger $8 next year
Pinder $4 next year
and a throw-in

My hesitation is a) his lead is big enough (19 points over second, 31.5 points over me) that likely the best that would happen this year for me is 2nd or 3rd and b) I really don't want to stack his team for next year any further.

Do you agree, or is this a must-sell-high-on-Bellinger situation?

That's not high enough, IMO...Betts will be 44 under that scenario, and Bellinger will be 12...Chavis is somewhat fungible with the current outbreak of power in MLB, and Wheeler is just too damn erratic.

[DMT]

Pass.

[Ken]

Outside of the last two months Betts >> Bellinger. So in a vacuum that seems fair. Your added pieces you are getting are much better than Pinder which starts to make up for the contract difference. I’d be looking for a slightly higher return due to the contact disparity with the two stars in this trade but honestly it’s pretty close. Not a hard pass, this is within negotiation range. I think those who disagree are underselling Betts.

[Judge Jude]

I don't do AL, but in my Jurassic Era league if you stock up a 3-time champ (and we've never had one in 36 years) for a 4-peat, you're not going to win friends or influence people among other rivals.

doesn't mean I'd never do it - but consider your league dynamics. could this deal come back to bite you next summer when you are looking for a deal to raise a pennant flag?

[Ken]

Weird when taking Mookie Betts away from a rival is considered “stocking them up”.

You guys keep overreacting to two months and I’ll take the last two years of data and some bonuses to go with it and let’s see who ends up ahead!

[The Feral Slasher]

Weird when taking Mookie Betts away from a rival is considered “stocking them up”.

You guys keep overreacting to two months and I’ll take the last two years of data and some bonuses to go with it and let’s see who ends up ahead!

Salaries seem pretty important. Betts will be 28 then 42. Bellinger will be 8 then 12 then 18 then 27 then 42. So aside from the other pieces there are three really cheap years of bellinger that are a big advantage. Chavis long term performance is important to the deal.

[DMT]

Weird when taking Mookie Betts away from a rival is considered “stocking them up”.

You guys keep overreacting to two months and I’ll take the last two years of data and some bonuses to go with it and let’s see who ends up ahead!

It is when replacing him with Bellinger, who is a top-5 player at this point, for three extra years.

[Sour Masher]

Weird when taking Mookie Betts away from a rival is considered “stocking them up”.

You guys keep overreacting to two months and I’ll take the last two years of data and some bonuses to go with it and let’s see who ends up ahead!

1. Yes, Bellinger will regress, at least some, this year.
2. Betts is likely to be better ROS than Bellinger.
3. The team trading Betts for Bellinger, we are told, are a lock to win this year.
4. Bellinger is a fantastic keeper at 12.
5. Giving a team that will 3peat this year a cheap Bellinger for the next few years is what people are talking about with this deal. The ROS comparison seems to not matter much for the first place team, as it seems he will win if the deal happens or not.
6. I know some people make moves to just make the money, but if my decision is to trade a player that gives me great value the next few years for a chance to be in the money instead of for a chance at a title, I wouldn't make the deal, even though, I agree, it is a solid offer, IF this deal hurt the first place team giving Betts et al enough for the OP to overtake him. That does not seem to be the case, so the only way I do this deal is if he adds enough that I had a chance to beat him.

[Erik]

Thanks guys. I turned it down.