BOS offered Bogaerts 1/30 additional not to opt out (Heyman report)

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
11,920
This is an excellent post, jon. The part that’s hard for fans is that it’s coming with both Xander and Devers at the same time, and only a couple years after the Mookie situation. And yes, some people are still upset at the Lester thing, which my understanding was Lucchino-driven.

Personally, I don’t want Bloom signing anybody to 12-year/$400M deals, no matter how much I love the players. But the flip side is that you are essentially running your Jeter, Bernie and Posada out of town. I actually wonder if they move Xander at the deadline instead of losing him for nothing. It seems hard to believe but … it was hard to believe with Mookie as well. And Bloom got a pretty good return.
Bogaerts feels more like Robbie Cano. (Or what JA said, oops).
 

54thMA

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 15, 2012
10,154
Westwood MA
They signed Story to a 6 year deal to play 2nd base.

If they can't resign Bogaerts, then Story moves to SS for the next 5 years. Yorke is a higher ranked prospect at 2nd base than Downs, but Downs is projected as closer to MLB ready.

Yorke is projected for 2025, Downs could play 2nd in the meantime for a couple of years, or maybe they resign Kike, put him at second and Jimenez steps in at CF in 2023.

Mayer is in waiting to play shortstop.

I'm more concerned with Devers at 3rd, no highly ranked prospects for that position in the minors.

It's highly unlikely they are resigning both Devers and Bogaerts, so if I had to choose, I'd take Devers.

If they are miles apart at the trade deadline, do they move Bogaerts?

Needless to say, this is going to be interesting to watch unfold.
 

soxhop411

news aggravator
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
46,274
Judging by what this FO did with Betts, everyone should tend to believe this report Heyman or not. Everyone is too focused on where it came from and not the substance of it. You think it's BS because you don't want to believe they would offer Bogaerts such an unbelievably low deal. Bogaerts himself on the record confirmed that the two sides were way off a couple of weeks ago. It doesn't take much to put 2 and 2 together.
Come on.... Being far apart on offers does not equal or mean it was an insulting offer...


I could want a $400M dollar salary and my employer count counter with $300M..

and again, the only person who has reported it being an "insulting offer" is Heyman,
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
30,482
Judging by what this FO did with Betts, everyone should tend to believe this report Heyman or not. Everyone is too focused on where it came from and not the substance of it. You think it's BS because you don't want to believe they would offer Bogaerts such an unbelievably low deal. Bogaerts himself on the record confirmed that the two sides were way off a couple of weeks ago. It doesn't take much to put 2 and 2 together.
I'll just note that the way Heyman wrote gives me some pause. He wrote: "who has an opt-out after the season on the deal that pays him $20 million annually through 2024, received an offer from Boston to simply add one year to the three he has his left on his deal. Sources suggest it was for about $30 million in that extra year, bringing his potential total to about $90 million."

First of all, it starts with a typo - while sure X has at least three years left if he opts-in, the article says that it is through 2024 when it through 2025.

Second, Heyman said that BOS's offer "simply add one year". But X's contract has a vesting option for 2026. I'm not sure I know how to "simply" add one year to a contract with a vesting option. Did BOS offer to make the last year fully guaranteed and make it $30M (i.e., go from 3/$60M + $20M vesting option to 4/$90M guaranteed)? Of maybe BOS offered to insert a $30M guaranteed year and make the 5th year a vesting option (i.e., go from 3/$60M + $20M vesting option to 4/$90M + $30M vesting option)?

Or maybe real numbers weren't thrown around and the discussions were conceptual?

I'll also note one of the main points of having an agent is that players don't have to get involved in the details of negotiations. I mean Boras should have a good idea of what X is looking for and in a lot of situations, agents won't even tell players until the discussions get into that ballpark. Maybe X is the kind of person who wants to know everything that is being discussed, but it's a great benefit to most players not to have to think about this on a regular basis.

At any rate, it will be interesting to see where the parties go from here.
 

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
55,298
deep inside Guido territory
Come on.... Being far apart on offers does not equal or mean it was an insulting offer...


I could want a $400M dollar salary and my employer count counter with $300M..

and again, the only person who has reported it being an "insulting offer" is Heyman,
You may think that, but only one person's feeling on it matters and that's the person on the receiving end.
 

Kliq

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 31, 2013
22,667
The Story signing really signified the end for Bogaerts in Boston over the long term. With Mayer on the way in a year or two; it seems unrealistic to have both middle infield spots tied up to long term, big money deals. Unless Bogaerts is moving to the outfield; the sensible path now would seem to be have Story play second this season; move him to SS next year if you want until Mayer is ready, and then move Story (or Mayer) to another infield spot. That isn't even factoring in other prospects like Downs or Yorke.
 

BravesField

New Member
Oct 27, 2021
252
I'm unsure of the rules of a qualifying offer, but, if Xander should remain with the Sox for the entire season, and opts out after the world series, can the Sox tag him with a qualifying offer?
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
70,713
I'm unsure of the rules of a qualifying offer, but, if Xander should remain with the Sox for the entire season, and opts out after the world series, can the Sox tag him with a qualifying offer?
It’s currently unclear if there will still be a QO system this winter:

“Under the terms of the 2022-26 Collective Bargaining Agreement, if MLB and the MLB Players Association agree to the implementation of an International Draft by July 25, 2022, the qualifying offer system will be eliminated starting with the 2022-23 offseason.”
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
20,673
Maine
I'm unsure of the rules of a qualifying offer, but, if Xander should remain with the Sox for the entire season, and opts out after the world series, can the Sox tag him with a qualifying offer?
It's still up in the air whether such a thing will exist come winter. One of the agreements in the new CBA is that the owners and players have until sometime in July to agree to an international draft system. If they do, the compensation for free agents (qualifying offer compensation) goes away. If there is no international draft, the comp picks remain.
 

Ale Xander

Hamilton
SoSH Member
Oct 31, 2013
72,428
I wouldn't be surprised at all if they traded Xander in July for 2B/RF/C/P, and move Story to SS, especially if Downs and/or Yorke show promise May/June.

Edit: Thanks for the insight, SL. I guess I can keep my username for a few months longer.
 
Last edited:

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
70,713
I wouldn't be surprised at all if they traded Xander in July for 2B/RF/C/P, and move Story to SS, especially if Downs and/or Yorke show promise May/June.
Yorke is in high A and just turned 20 two weeks ago, he is not playing for the Red Sox this year.
 

Dduncan6er

New Member
Apr 16, 2020
335
Springfield, MA
I'm thinking of an extend and trade, with his permission. That was you get more for him, too, than a mere rental.
What incentive would Xander have to sign an extension when he can just wait 2-3 more months to hit the open market? I don't think he'd care about helping the Sox get more for him in that situation.
 

Salem's Lot

Andy Moog! Andy God Damn Moog!
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
14,461
Gallows Hill
I'm thinking of an extend and trade, with his permission. That was you get more for him, too, than a mere rental.
That would make sense for neither side. Xander wants to get to unrestricted free agency, and have potentially 30 teams bidding for him. He’s not giving that up when he’s 2 months away from it.

And if the club was going to trade him, they would want to send him to the club that offered the best return, and not limiting themselves to the places that the player would be willing to go.

Unless he gets hurt, or has a terrible season, he’s going to opt out and go to the place that offers him the most money, and a guarantee that he’s their shortstop going forward.

Chaim Bloom (if these reports are true) doesn’t seem to want to be committed to Bogaerts as his shortstop for $30 million after 2026. He’s willing to guarantee his $20 million vesting option for 2026, plus add $10 million, but that appears to be as far as he will go.
 

Sad Sam Jones

Member
SoSH Member
May 5, 2017
2,494
You even left out the part where they would have to work out a deal with another organization that values Bogaerts so highly that they'd want to both trade away talent to get him and make the sort of contract offer to him in a 24-48 hour window that he can't turn down.
 

sezwho

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
1,950
Isle of Plum
Yorke is in high A and just turned 20 two weeks ago, he is not playing for the Red Sox this year.
Casas could well be up (and ideally mashing) by summer. If that happens, I wonder if its totally decoupled or if it would inform the choices Bloom makes for X and D if one assumes they end up moving down the defensive value chart to over next couple years.
 

Toe Nash

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 28, 2005
5,590
02130
How does the offer look if you don't think Xander is a SS going forward? 4/$90 doesn't seem so egregious for a 3B.
I would think it's pretty silly because there is no way he's going to take it.

I am fine with letting Xander walk, he's a great player but has weaknesses in his game, turns 30 in October, and you might have a better player at his position already on the team for a pretty reasonable price not to mention some of the better middle-infield prospects in baseball in the minors.

Not so sure I agree with making an offer that he's 99.9% sure to reject and that risks pissing him off and causing a whole big thing (versus not offering anything and saying we'll discuss at the end of the year), but they know his personality better than I do. Hopefully he is professional enough to be a good teammate and professional for this year. From his quotes it seems like he's fine.
 

curly2

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 8, 2003
4,887
A couple of people here have mentioned Downs as a contributor. Not trying to derail the thread too much, but the guys on SoxProspects are VERY bearish on Downs right now. They're not completely writing him off, but they say he may never be able to hit major-league pitching.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
20,673
Maine
A couple of people here have mentioned Downs as a contributor. Not trying to derail the thread too much, but the guys on SoxProspects are VERY bearish on Downs right now. They're not completely writing him off, but they say he may never be able to hit major-league pitching.
So far his AAA slash line over 435 PA is .190/.272/.336/.608. Not hard to see why scouts would be down on his ability to hit big league pitching.
 

grimshaw

Member
SoSH Member
May 16, 2007
4,220
Portland
That and the 15 k's in 27 at bats so far. This was after an encouraging AFL appearance, so it's kind of a let down to this point.
 

curly2

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 8, 2003
4,887
So far his AAA slash line over 435 PA is .190/.272/.336/.608. Not hard to see why scouts would be down on his ability to hit big league pitching.
They're not only basing on this year's and last year's performance, but their own in-person looks at him in Spring Training.
 

scottyno

late Bloomer
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2008
11,304
Really? Machado got 10/300 (or if you consider he was 4 years younger than Bogaerts when he got the deal, call it 6/180). Rendon got 7/245 (same age as Bogaerts when signed). Bogaerts may be slightly behind both of those guys as a 3B, but he's not that far behind them. 4/90 is Story AAV at a shorter length. That just doesn't sit right given they just gave Story his deal and they're the same age. At least make it the same length as Story's deal.
Machado was in the conversation for 2nd best player in baseball when he signed that contract and Rendon was coming off of 4 huge years in a row and a year where he finished 3rd in MVP. Bogaerts really isn't that close to their caliber in terms of consistency or peak potential, he's pretty far behind.
 

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
11,920
The fact that the Rendon deal looks pretty terrible and the Machado one just ok should give everyone pause, too, no? I like Boagerts, he’s a really good player but it seems pretty likely that the Sox got his best years. To give him an increasing amount of money as he declines, especially when we have potential in house replacements, doesn’t seem like a really great idea.
 

OCD SS

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
I think it goes to how ‘opt outs are good for the team’: if the club has the discipline to walk away from buying up more decline years on the back end of a contract, they’re essentially getting rid of the player a year early.

I like X at 2B on his current deal. If the team can’t come to an agreement with Devers, then he can take over the hot corner. But he’s not the first choice at either position on the left side of the infield, and it’s hard to justify paying the premium of market rate for a SS when he shouldn’t stay there… that said an increase on shorter years is something the team can probably afford.
 

plucy

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 2, 2006
426
a rock and a hard place
The AAV of the alleged 4/90 seems reasonable if the intent is to move X off SS after this season.

Jose Ramirez, same age as X, extended for a team friendly 7/141, with a full NTC, a slightly better hitter (career wOBA .363 v .348 for X) at the position (3B) where X may be headed.

Marcus Semien (.329 wOBA), two years older, received a generous 7/175 at 2B, but he had been a better defender at SS.

The issue would be the years. Maybe 7/160-165?
 

mikcou

Member
SoSH Member
May 13, 2007
919
Boston
The fact that the Rendon deal looks pretty terrible and the Machado one just ok should give everyone pause, too, no? I like Boagerts, he’s a really good player but it seems pretty likely that the Sox got his best years. To give him an increasing amount of money as he declines, especially when we have potential in house replacements, doesn’t seem like a really great idea.
I dont think its particularly likely that X is getting into the $250 to $300M range of those deals, but there is a massive chasm between those deals and the reported offer.

Something around what Marcus Semien got seems a reasonable estimate of what Xander might get on the free agent market (it would be shocking to me if he got less than Story signed for), which basically puts the offer at 50-60% of market. It isnt unreasonable to ask for a bit of a discount one year in advance, but that is an offer that was made (if it was in fact made) with the knowledge that it had no chance of being accepted.

I've generally assumed after they signed Story that Xander would not be coming back for 2023 - it is reasonable of the team to not put a high value on him, but I struggle to see the reasoning behind making such an offer - he wasnt going to take it and is low enough that it could be viewed as insulting. For what its worth, if Heyman's reporting is coming from Boras, itd be shocking if that offer was not made. He has no reason to give specifics that are wrong and risks burning some credibility for minimal or no gain.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
20,673
Maine
Would either side consider adding $30M to the existing contract, thus making it 3/$90?
Would cover the years until Mayer is ready and give X a chance at hitting the market at 33, but with $30M more guaranteed.
The Sox might go for that. Don't see Bogaerts doing it. He's opting out now to get the proverbial last big deal. If he was okay with hitting free agency at 33, he just wouldn't opt-out. I don't think an extra $30M makes a difference to him, even if it would increase his salary into the elite echelon of SS with Lindor and Seager and Correa.
 

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
11,920
Ultimately, yeah, Bogaerts should get a Semien type deal, but I don’t think the Sox should be the team to give it to him. So I guess I can see both sides here- for a player to maximize his earnings, which is totally their right, it may require going to a situation that may not be ideal, to a team that may be more desperate.

As to why the Sox made that offer, I suspect that they don’t really have much interest in reworking a deal on a player who hasn’t officially opted out yet? Perhaps it’s not a precedent they want to set yet? Or, they don’t really want to extend him, but we’re asked to begin something to the player by Boras?
 

YTF

Member
SoSH Member
If the 4/90 part is true, they should be insulted at that offer and I don't blame them for not countering that. That is a Jon Lester-esque type of lowball.
FWIW...I'm guessing Bogaerts was pleased with the last contract that he signed. A contract that afforded him an opt out at the end of this season. An opt out that he has publicly stated that he will take advantage of. If he indeed is opting out, does it matter what the Sox have recently offered? If they want him back, we'll see what they are willing to pony up against whatever other offers are made.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
30,482
but I struggle to see the reasoning behind making such an offer - he wasnt going to take it and is low enough that it could be viewed as insulting. For what its worth, if Heyman's reporting is coming from Boras, itd be shocking if that offer was not made. He has no reason to give specifics that are wrong and risks burning some credibility for minimal or no gain.
What does Boras have to lose by mischaracterizing the offer or spinning it to make it seem worse than it actually was? As long as he represents players, the teams will have to deal with him.

And I doubt Chaim is going to get into a pissing war with Boras over an offer made this early in the process.

And no matter how or why Chaim communicated "adding one year at $30M" onto X's contract, I'm sure no one expects this to be the last offer BOS makes.
 

Minneapolis Millers

Wants you to please think of the Twins fans!
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
4,753
Twin Cities
I think they can try 2 types of deals that might have some appeal to X:
1. A Correa deal. High AAV, short length, opt out(s).
2. Story’s deal, with a sweetener to help demonstrate that this is still “X’s team.” Something like 1 or 2 player option years at amounts determined by playing time/health. And throw in some incentive money if he finishes top 3 in MVP, wins a SS, a GG, etc.

He could turn down either, but at least these get into the ballpark. An offer to tack on one year at $30M is and should be DOA.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
20,673
Maine
What does Boras have to lose by mischaracterizing the offer or spinning it to make it seem worse than it actually was? As long as he represents players, the teams will have to deal with him.

And I doubt Chaim is going to get into a pissing war with Boras over an offer made this early in the process.

And no matter how or why Chaim communicated "adding one year at $30M" onto X's contract, I'm sure no one expects this to be the last offer BOS makes.
I don't think he has much of anything to lose for the reasons you state. And I can see where he might see a benefit to "leaking" that his player is insulted (whether it's true or not) as a way to apply pressure through the media. Especially in a market like Boston where sports radio hosts and listeners are rabid and eager to jump on any perceived controversy with both feet.

Like someone said earlier though, it's unlikely Bloom is going to change tack because of what callers on Felger and Mazz, or columnists like Shank, or posters on SoSH might say about him.
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
34,367
I don't think he has much of anything to lose for the reasons you state. And I can see where he might see a benefit to "leaking" that his player is insulted (whether it's true or not) as a way to apply pressure through the media. Especially in a market like Boston where sports radio hosts and listeners are rabid and eager to jump on any perceived controversy with both feet.

Like someone said earlier though, it's unlikely Bloom is going to change tack because of what callers on Felger and Mazz, or columnists like Shank, or posters on SoSH might say about him.
FWIW, Mazz on the radio today talked about doubting Boras was presenting all the details on this offer.
 

mikcou

Member
SoSH Member
May 13, 2007
919
Boston
What does Boras have to lose by mischaracterizing the offer or spinning it to make it seem worse than it actually was? As long as he represents players, the teams will have to deal with him.

And I doubt Chaim is going to get into a pissing war with Boras over an offer made this early in the process.

And no matter how or why Chaim communicated "adding one year at $30M" onto X's contract, I'm sure no one expects this to be the last offer BOS makes.
I dont see any gain to making numbers up so the downside might be limited, but theres no real pay off. I'm inclined to believe the report if it is Boras - it may have been an initial offer that has since been revised, but it seems really unlikely to me that he just made up the numbers. This isnt slightly low (its really really low) so mischaracterizing it somewhat is somewhat irrelevant.

There is risk ot going really low even in an opening offer - its that the counterparty just discards you. It happened with Lester and it may happen here, although I suspect they're relatively indifferent as to whether he comes back or not, which is pretty defensible with the other infield options on the roster.
 

Jerry’s Curl

New Member
Feb 6, 2018
2,518
Florida
Judging by what this FO did with Betts, everyone should tend to believe this report Heyman or not. Everyone is too focused on where it came from and not the substance of it. You think it's BS because you don't want to believe they would offer Bogaerts such an unbelievably low deal. Bogaerts himself on the record confirmed that the two sides were way off a couple of weeks ago. It doesn't take much to put 2 and 2 together.
This is my fear with both X and Devers. The Sox offer is so low from what they are looking for that they jump right into free agency. The first team that offers a big contract and they are gone. Whereas if they can find closer ground, they might wait for the Sox final offer before looking elsewhere.
 

pokey_reese

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 25, 2008
16,247
Boston, MA
I don't really buy the 'the offer was so low that it wasn't worth countering' bit, either. It's a negotiation between professionals, if you want something, it's worth countering because that's how the parameters are set. If X and Boras don't feel like even engaging in the discussion about what he wants in order to sign an extension, that's fine, but that his choice to go to free agency. If the Sox are offering 4/90 and he would accept 6/190, then the easy thing to do would be to tell them that and say that if they don't meet it he is going to test the waters. Not doing so isn't a reflection of what the Sox are, or are not, willing to pay, but the reality that X knows he can make more by waiting to negotiate until he can leverage multiple bidders on the open market. He is correct. Similarly, the Sox should not be offering him FA money while he is still under exclusive contract with them.

If he wants to stay, I'm sure that the Sox will offer him enough money to make it worthwhile to do so. If he wants to get the most money, I suspect that someone else will be willing to offer more, but that's not what's on the docket right now, so I'm not going to lose any sleep over it. He can take the risk right now because he doesn't have to exercise the opt-out yet, so even if he turns this offer down and gets hurt next week, his floor is still the rest of the contract, so I totally understand why he wouldn't be willing to take an extension. Still doesn't mean that the Sox are handling this incorrectly, or are being the bad guys here.
 

scottyno

late Bloomer
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2008
11,304
This is my fear with both X and Devers. The Sox offer is so low from what they are looking for that they jump right into free agency. The first team that offers a big contract and they are gone. Whereas if they can find closer ground, they might wait for the Sox final offer before looking elsewhere.
So they're going to go to free agency because they want big contracts but not let one of the biggest payroll teams bid on them? Yeah that makes no sense, if they get to free agency and the Sox outbid everyone else there's a huge chance that they'll re-sign.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
30,233
This is my fear with both X and Devers. The Sox offer is so low from what they are looking for that they jump right into free agency. The first team that offers a big contract and they are gone. Whereas if they can find closer ground, they might wait for the Sox final offer before looking elsewhere.
You can't "find closer ground" when you fly away from the table.
Heyman's headline could easily have been "bogaerts refuses to negotiate. Sox insulted and guessing.".
 

walt in maryland

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
223
Woodbine, MD
That’s true for me as well.

i think reactions are amplified by the larger concern, lessened somewhat by Story, of a RaysNorth operation.

If we aren’t going to resign the drafted and developed stars (didn’t say homegrown!) then it’s potentially going to take time for the longer tail of farm led teams to mature.

We’ve got Devers and X for more than this year, which may offer the bridge to Casas/Yorke-Mayer/etc., or maybe Bloom feels the better way to invest going forward is pitching, but it’s hard not to read the tea leaves and see both X and D walking.

That said, I can imagine Bloom finding a way to spend the $60m annual tied up in their theoretical future contracts on better win/$ investments.

Personally, I hope Bloom identifies a better inflection point to sign younger players to long term deals…this seems like a good thing forMLB overall.
Exactly. I happen to think Bloom knows what he's doing, and this will work out for the franchise in the end.
 

Ganthem

a ray of sunshine
SoSH Member
Apr 7, 2022
914
Has their been any other source corroborating this info other then Heyman and the Post or are we still taking unsubstantiated claims and treating them like gospel?
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
70,713
Has their been any other source corroborating this info other then Heyman and the Post or are we still taking unsubstantiated claims and treating them like gospel?
I don't know where people get this idea that other baseball reporters like Passan or Olney or Rosenthal are completely reliable, everyone gets fed info from agents and teams, Heyman is just more obvious about it.

To answer your question, no one else has reported this directly but both Olney and Alex Speier believe it enough to have written or commented about it.

View: https://twitter.com/Buster_ESPN/status/1514985410455216134


View: https://twitter.com/alexspeier/status/1514973779935510531
 

Ganthem

a ray of sunshine
SoSH Member
Apr 7, 2022
914
It is less about the source and more about the numbers. It is good that Olney and Speier find it credible, but if it was just Oleny or just Speiers reporting this, I would still wonder why this page was exploding. I also don't understand why this matters. It is not hard to imagine that Bloom is lukewarm on a thirty year old shortstop who is very bad on defense and has been for a number of years.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
20,673
Maine
It is less about the source and more about the numbers. It is good that Olney and Speier find it credible, but if it was just Oleny or just Speiers reporting this, I would still wonder why this page was exploding. I also don't understand why this matters. It is not hard to imagine that Bloom is lukewarm on a thirty year old shortstop who is very bad on defense and has been for a number of years.
I think you're correct about Bloom especially as he's not emotionally attached the way Ben Cherington would have been as the guy who initially brought him up or even Dave Dombrowski as the guy who gave him his current contract. Bloom can assess the situation objectively in a way we fans can't.

But for a player like Bogaerts, it wouldn't be unreasonable to think that ownership, who should have some emotional attachment to a player they signed as a teenager and have watched come up through their system and blossom into a star over the course of a decade+. And it would make all kinds of sense if they would direct Bloom to act with their emotional attachment in mind. Basically, if they want to pay Bogie what he's asking, they will regardless of what the objective analysis might be.

That said, it's probably too early for them to be involved at all. Bogaerts is under contract for four more years until that day in November when he exercises the opt-out. There's no urgency on their part to insert themselves yet. So for the time being, it's the logical and objective approach. Which apparently allows for Boras to employ the histrionic "he's insulted" approach to rile the media.
 

Ganthem

a ray of sunshine
SoSH Member
Apr 7, 2022
914
I think you're correct about Bloom especially as he's not emotionally attached the way Ben Cherington would have been as the guy who initially brought him up or even Dave Dombrowski as the guy who gave him his current contract. Bloom can assess the situation objectively in a way we fans can't.

But for a player like Bogaerts, it wouldn't be unreasonable to think that ownership, who should have some emotional attachment to a player they signed as a teenager and have watched come up through their system and blossom into a star over the course of a decade+. And it would make all kinds of sense if they would direct Bloom to act with their emotional attachment in mind. Basically, if they want to pay Bogie what he's asking, they will regardless of what the objective analysis might be.

That said, it's probably too early for them to be involved at all. Bogaerts is under contract for four more years until that day in November when he exercises the opt-out. There's no urgency on their part to insert themselves yet. So for the time being, it's the logical and objective approach. Which apparently allows for Boras to employ the histrionic "he's insulted" approach to rile the media.
I kind of wonder if Ownership is taking a more hands off approach at this point. If we go through the FO heads since the Ownership has taken over, we can probably identify a few moves that were more ownership directed. Since Theo left the Sox have gone through a fest or famine roller coaster and perhaps ownership wants to see what Bloom can do on his own without their interference. I am not sure if the point I am trying to make is clear, but I feel that Ownership's attachments might not come into play here. That being said you are right. Ownership is probably the wild card here.