MLB Notebook: Red Sox, Betts can't get on same page; Rookie camp upcoming and more

Do the Red Sox have a Mookie Betts problem?

It’s not an unreasonable question to ask, based on the last 10 months.

Last spring, the Sox and Betts had a contentious negotiating session centered around Betts’ 2017 salary. At the time, Betts wasn’t yet arbitration eligible and thus, had little leverage.

With the sides at an impasse, the Red Sox renewed Betts, a rarity for the franchise. (The process essentially means that Betts didn’t agree with the salary and it was imposed on him by the club). Under the circumstances, the Sox were fairly generous in assigning a $950,000 salary, since that figure was the second-highest ever awarded for a player with similar service time.

Further, Betts maintained that there were no hard feelings stemming from the talks. But when the Sox took the opportunity to broach a multi-year deal – for five years and nine figures – to Betts, that, too, was rejected out of hand.

Then, on Friday, Betts was the lone player of the ten remaining arbitration-eligible Red Sox players the club failed to sign before arbitration numbers were exchanged. Both sides had agreed earlier in the process that if they failed to reach agreement, they would then cease talks and let the case be determined by an arbitrator in February.

If that holds, Betts will be just the second player to go to arbitration with the Sox since Rolando Arrojo back in 2002. Reliever Fernando Abad took the Sox to arbitration last spring, with the team prevailing.

Again, an industry source insisted that the talks were not contentious, and that the inability to reach an agreed-upon figure prior to Friday’s deadline is neither worrisome nor terribly unexpected.

In other words -- it’s not personal; it’s business.

But from the Red Sox’ standpoint, is it GOOD business? As Ian Browne of MLB.com asked Friday on Twitter:  Is it a concern long term that the Red Sox have been unable to agree to a contract with Mookie Betts two straight years before a deadline?

The answer, it would seem, is: Yes.

In a talented core, Betts is undeniably the team’s most valuable commodity. In each of the last two seasons, he’s received strong MVP support, finishing second in 2016 balloting and sixth last year. Last season, widely viewed as a step backward from his breakout season of 2016, Betts still managed to lead the Red Sox in virtually every significant category:  stolen bases, doubles, extra bases, homers, RBIs, runs scored, slugging percentage and others.

He’s also clearly the Red Sox’ best baserunner, and at least by some defensive metrics, the best outfield defender in either league.

Is this the kind of player the Red Sox want to risk alienating?

To be fair, there’s no public evidence that Betts is, in fact, antagonized. He, too, may simply feel as though this is part of the game’s business side, with no personal animus resulting from the last two standoffs.

But at the very least, the Sox would seem to have missed some opportunities here. The Sox may not have had any realistic expectations to extend Xander Bogaerts or Jackie Bradley Jr., since each is represented by Scott Boras, who has, historically, advised against his clients exchanging arbitration rights (and beyond, some free agency seasons) for long-term security.

Betts, however, is not represented by Boras. And, frankly, Bogaerts and Bradley aren’t as valuable as Betts, who could be the franchise’s cornerstone for years to come.  Betts will play the entire 2018 regular season as a 25-year-old, which suggests he’s yet to reach his prime. His ceiling would seem almost limitless.

And yet, he’s now two years away from qualifying for free agency, and he hasn’t demonstrated any inclination that he’s interested in remaining in Boston when that time arrives.

Red Sox president of operations Dave Dombrowski made an interesting comment at the GM Meetings in November by noting that the Red Sox, in assessing the current free agent market, would need to budget resources to retain some of their own players inching closer to the market themselves.

But the Sox have to date struck out on attempting to secure their most singular talent and there’s nothing to suggest that pattern is going to change anytime soon.

******************

Beginning Monday, the Red Sox will hold their (mostly) annual Rookie Development Program in the Boston area. (On occasion, they forgo holding the camp, feeling that, after several seasons in which prospects regularly matriculate from the minors to Fenway, the pipeline is temporarily stalled).

The idea, which began about a decade ago, was to bring in a group of prospects nearing major league readiness and allow them to experience various aspects of the city, from media exposure to working in the community.

The idea is get them acclimated, so that when they do arrive in the big leagues, they’ll have had at least some introduction to the environment.

It’s always instructive to see which players are selected, since the list often reveals whom the Sox believe to be potential call-ups in the near future.

This year, the group consists of: infielders Michael Chavis, Josh Ockimey, Chad De La Guerra and Esteban Quiroz; and pitchers Jalen Beeks; Williams Jerez; Bobby Poyner, Ty Buttrey, Justin Haley and Mike Shawaryn.

Of those, it would seem that Chavis, Beeks and perhaps Poyner could conceivably make their major league debuts in 2018. All three took part in the Arizona Fall League last fall.

Chavis was drafted as a shortstop and subsequently moved to third base. He got some work at first in the AFL. He had a breakout season last year, leading all Red Sox minor leaguers with 31 homers, 94 RBIO and a .563 slugging percentage between High A Salem and Double A Portland. If Rafael Devers or Mitch Moreland experienced a brief injury, Chavis could certainly be called upon to help fill in at either infield position even though he’s yet to play above Double A. Remember: the Sox double-jumped Andrew Benintendi from Portland in 2016 and called on Devers despite only a few weeks of experience at Triple A.

Beeks spent more than half of last season at Pawtucket, and given the lack of starting depth in the organization, could be someone the Sox turn to in the event of injuries or underperformance in their rotation.  With Henry Owens gone and the likelihood that both Brian Johnson and Roenis Elias are viewed as potential bullpen pieces, there’s an opening for Beeks. Then again, some believe his stuff plays up in relief work and he himself could be a bullpen option, especially given that Robby Scott is the only lefty reliever on their roster with any major league experience to speak of.

Finally, there’s Poyner, who impressed scouts in Arizona with his bulldog mentality and feel for pitching. Like Beeks, Poyner is a lefty and could be utilized either as a matchup lefty, or, initially, as a low-leverage, middle relief option.

**************

The inherent dangers of granting long-term contracts to players well into their 30’s is on full display this winter in the form of Jacoby Ellsbury.

The Yankees would dearly love to add another starting pitcher (Yu Darvish?) to their roster, but can’t do so and still remain under the luxury tax threshold of $197 million.

One major obstacle in their accounting is the presence of Ellsbury, who is just a little more than halfway through his seven-year, $153 million deal with New York. Ellsbury has three more guaranteed years at just over $21 million per season, plus a team option for $21 million in 2021 that carries with it a $5 million buyout.

That means that Ellsbury is due a minimum of $69 million. Unsurprisingly, the Yankees are having little success in trying to deal him. They’re willing to eat a sizeable amount of the remaining salary, according to Jon Heyman of FanRag Sports, but even then, interest is virtually non-existent.

The case could be made that Ellsbury is now the Yanks’ fifth-best outfield option behind Giancarlo Stanton, Aaron Judge, Brett Gardner and Aaron Hicks. Moreover, Clint Frazier, obtained from Cleveland for Andrew Miller, could well pass Ellsbury on the depth chart by spring training. Last year, Ellsbury posted a 97 OPS+ -- in other words, slightly below league average – and, of course, durability remains an issue for him.

Long-term deals for older players are full of risks, but for those like Ellsbury, who rely on speed and athleticism, that’s especially true.