Devers : No talks after season begins (Speier report)

What should the Red Sox do with Devers?


  • Total voters
    415

rodderick

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 24, 2009
10,317
Belo Horizonte - Brazil
Devers had the 22nd highest bWAR in MLB last year. I hope that he’d settle for something less than the richest MLB contract of all time.
Yeah, I love Devers but I think people in Boston are overrating him to an extent, especially as a hitter. If anything close to 400 million is what it costs to keep him, I'd be more than fine letting him go. A lot of his value is tied to being a third baseman, if he can't play the position five years into his contract you're already not getting your money's worth at that price.
 

NJ_Sox_Fan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 2, 2006
9,268
NJ
Devers contract should be somewhere around Riley’s extension. I don’t see why they would pay &100M+ more than that. Pretty similar players/numbers. Riley had 38 homers, and .877 OPS in 2022. Devers had 38 homers and .890 OPS in 2021. Riley is a year younger. Devers has a few more years of a track record.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
65,683
Devers contract should be somewhere around Riley’s extension. I don’t see why they would pay &100M+ more than that. Pretty similar players/numbers. Riley had 38 homers, and .877 OPS in 2022. Devers had 38 homers and .890 OPS in 2021. Riley is a year younger. Devers has a few more years of a track record.
Riley signed his deal with more than 3 years left until FA (after 2025), Devers is 1 year away now, that’s the big difference.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
17,921
Maine
Riley signed his deal with more than 3 years left until FA (after 2025), Devers is 1 year away now, that’s the big difference.
If you figure a typical arb progression for those three years, call it $10M, $16M, $22M (I'm aware that that's not what Riley will actually be paid for those seasons), the remainder of his deal is roughly 7/164. If we look at it that way, seems like a comparable offer to Devers today, buying out his last arb-year, would probably be something like 8/200. Which is, if rumored offers are true, where the Sox seem to be or at least were at the start of the off-season. Safe to say at this point that won't get it done.
 

NJ_Sox_Fan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 2, 2006
9,268
NJ
If the Correa for 13/350 to SF reports are true, just offer something similar for Devers. $27M per.
 

OCD SS

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Devers has always been tantalizing because of his age and exhibited skill, where you could hope for some breakout MVP caliber seasons that would be coming as he entered his prime. At this point, given his actual career path, I’d be very hesitant to throw around the numbers we’re talking about for someone with a less well rounded skill set.
 

mikcou

Member
SoSH Member
May 13, 2007
743
Boston
If you figure a typical arb progression for those three years, call it $10M, $16M, $22M (I'm aware that that's not what Riley will actually be paid for those seasons), the remainder of his deal is roughly 7/164. If we look at it that way, seems like a comparable offer to Devers today, buying out his last arb-year, would probably be something like 8/200. Which is, if rumored offers are true, where the Sox seem to be or at least were at the start of the off-season. Safe to say at this point that won't get it done.
Those would be incredibly high for arbitration. Judge settled for $20M in year 3. Devers got $5 and $11M in his first two years and wont hit $20 in his third. There's almost no way Riley would approach $50M over the three years. A realistic estimate is more along what Devers will likely get or $35-$40M total (Devers expected to be right around $35M, likely less, hed need to pop close to 20M to get there). In theory arbitration should reflect moves in the free agency market, but they really havent - they've been stuck awarding the same contracts for 10+ years.

Also why would a comparable offer be fewer years? Devers is the same age and has more leverage not less. I think that is a fair comparable - theyve been pretty similar players since the beginning of 2021 - I personally would take Devers over Riley because Devers talent has always suggested there is more to his game than what he's shown, but they're pretty close on the field products right now. Using Riley as a comparable probably gets you to an offer of something like a 10/$300M+ market deal; 10 year 25M a year is $250M; plus assume he took at least a 20% discount to get it done half way through his third season. Prior to this offseason, starting at something like 10/270 (5-10% discount to market for the FA years, plus a $18M estimate for the last arb year) with some willingness to move a bit was probably a good position. I dont think thats close to getting it done now - think you probably need to start at 10/300 (to be fair this is pretty close to inflation adjusted) and be willing to move on another year or two at lower pay to close it out.

$200M was never getting it done unless that was offered back before 2020 or 2021.

At this point, they are here from decisions entirely of their own making and many of them done under Bloom (some obviously were not). They were never going to retain all three of Betts, Bogaerts, and Devers for their 15 year careers, but not retaining any of them is unacceptable. This is a close your nose and get it done situation. The alternative is continuing to push the team into irrelevance both from a competitive and business perspective.

I say that as someone who watched 140-150 games a year back in the some pretty bad years, but last year's team was gross and was the first time I didnt watch 75% of the games and not only did I not do 75%; I didnt do 50% and I'm definitely not alone here. Next years team looks just as gross; cant imagine what 2024 would look like with Story as its headliner.
 

MetSox1

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2007
681
I watched him go a month without making contact on a fastball in 2021 and put up a .515 OPS this past August as the team collapsed. When he's on a hot streak, he looks unstoppable, but he's prone to terrible, terrible slumps that bring his overall OPS+ down to a 130-140. That's a good hitter, but not elite.
Just to be clear, you don't think David Ortiz was an elite hitter?

EDIT: I say this because, besides the fact that Papi was a career OPS+ 141, he obviously had the same droughts and streaks Devers has had. Devers will also likely spend time in the back half of his career DH'ing. Papi also peaked 04-07, in his age 28-31 seasons. Devers is 25 while hitting for an OPS+ of 140. BR has his similar players at his age at:


  1. Eric Chavez (967.0)
  2. Ryan Zimmerman (950.8)
  3. Bob Horner (948.3)
  4. David Wright (936.0)
  5. Scott Rolen (934.1)
  6. Evan Longoria (923.8)
  7. Troy Glaus (919.9)
  8. Harlond Clift (919.5)
  9. Nolan Arenado (917.7)
  10. Ron Santo (915.2) *

Generally I'd rate this list as fringe HOF. May not be a top 10 payer in the game, but its better than "good".
 
Last edited:

Max Power

thai good. you like shirt?
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
6,531
Boston, MA
Just to be clear, you don't think David Ortiz was an elite hitter?

EDIT: I say this because, besides the fact that Papi was a career OPS+ 141, he obviously had the same droughts and streaks Devers has had. Devers will also likely spend time in the back half of his career DH'ing. Papi also peaked 04-07, in his age 28-31 seasons. Devers is 25 while hitting for an OPS+ of 140. BR has his similar players at his age at:


  1. Eric Chavez (967.0)
  2. Ryan Zimmerman (950.8)
  3. Bob Horner (948.3)
  4. David Wright (936.0)
  5. Scott Rolen (934.1)
  6. Evan Longoria (923.8)
  7. Troy Glaus (919.9)
  8. Harlond Clift (919.5)
  9. Nolan Arenado (917.7)
  10. Ron Santo (915.2) *

Generally I'd rate this list as fringe HOF. May not be a top 10 payer in the game, but its better than "good".
You said it yourself, David Ortiz's career OPS, which includes his so-so Twins years and his entire 30s, is the same as Devers' best season. I consider an elite hitter one who regularly puts up an OPS+ better than 150 and is in MVP discussions. Papi was that guy in his prime. Devers has not shown that consistent ability yet. He's young and may take a step forward, or he's just a guy who peaked early and this is who he is.
 

rodderick

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 24, 2009
10,317
Belo Horizonte - Brazil
Just to be clear, you don't think David Ortiz was an elite hitter?

EDIT: I say this because, besides the fact that Papi was a career OPS+ 141, he obviously had the same droughts and streaks Devers has had. Devers will also likely spend time in the back half of his career DH'ing. Papi also peaked 04-07, in his age 28-31 seasons. Devers is 25 while hitting for an OPS+ of 140. BR has his similar players at his age at:


  1. Eric Chavez (967.0)
  2. Ryan Zimmerman (950.8)
  3. Bob Horner (948.3)
  4. David Wright (936.0)
  5. Scott Rolen (934.1)
  6. Evan Longoria (923.8)
  7. Troy Glaus (919.9)
  8. Harlond Clift (919.5)
  9. Nolan Arenado (917.7)
  10. Ron Santo (915.2) *

Generally I'd rate this list as fringe HOF. May not be a top 10 payer in the game, but its better than "good".
David Ortiz had 11 seasons of an 140 OPS+ or higher in his career and his Red Sox only OPS+ is 148, which Devers has never reached. Ortiz failed to reach 140 OPS+ in only three seasons with the Sox, from '08 to '10 and if you take his combined hitting in that period it amounts to a .854 OPS (120 OPS+), while Devers is a career .854 OPS hitter (124 OPS+), though he's at 132 OPS+ since 2019, which might be the fairer way to evaluate it. In any case, I believe we can agree there's a chance Devers grows into a David Ortiz level hitter, but he's not really there yet. That BR list of similar players at Devers' age also includes a lot of guys who are/were far better defenders than he is.
 

MetSox1

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2007
681
You said it yourself, David Ortiz's career OPS, which includes his so-so Twins years and his entire 30s, is the same as Devers' best season. I consider an elite hitter one who regularly puts up an OPS+ better than 150 and is in MVP discussions. Papi was that guy in his prime. Devers has not shown that consistent ability yet. He's young and may take a step forward, or he's just a guy who peaked early and this is who he is.
He is 25 and and his OPS+ *your stat) in his first four full seasons was:

Age 21: 94
Age 22: 132
Age 24: 134
Age 25: 141

He did a 107 in the covid year, but I think its generally wise to take most players records from that year with a grain of salt...

And your argument is, that as he moves to his age 27-31 seasons, he may not improve.

Good luck signnig anyone guy.


Just for fun, I randomly picked 10 guys to see their top OPS before turning 26.
David Ortiz: 111
Nolan Arenado: 129
Freddie Freeman: 147
Jim Thome: 167
Paul Goldschmidt: 160
Jose Altuve: 135
Jose Ramirez: 151
Trea Turner: 101
Carlos Correa: 155
Xander: 135

And those are the top seasons for each of those guys, with none of them seeming to match the consistency and build up that Devers has to date. And I'd consider all of those guys, besides Xander, "better than good". Exactly none of them (alright, probably Thome) have consistently hit the mark you are asking Devers to. And looking back ,any smart GM would have locked any of these guys up going into their age 26 season.

You're making the argument for signing Rafe, not against.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
17,921
Maine
Those would be incredibly high for arbitration. Judge settled for $20M in year 3. Devers got $5 and $11M in his first two years and wont hit $20 in his third. There's almost no way Riley would approach $50M over the three years. A realistic estimate is more along what Devers will likely get or $35-$40M total (Devers expected to be right around $35M, likely less, hed need to pop close to 20M to get there). In theory arbitration should reflect moves in the free agency market, but they really havent - they've been stuck awarding the same contracts for 10+ years.

Also why would a comparable offer be fewer years? Devers is the same age and has more leverage not less. I think that is a fair comparable - theyve been pretty similar players since the beginning of 2021 - I personally would take Devers over Riley because Devers talent has always suggested there is more to his game than what he's shown, but they're pretty close on the field products right now. Using Riley as a comparable probably gets you to an offer of something like a 10/$300M+ market deal; 10 year 25M a year is $250M; plus assume he took at least a 20% discount to get it done half way through his third season. Prior to this offseason, starting at something like 10/270 (5-10% discount to market for the FA years, plus a $18M estimate for the last arb year) with some willingness to move a bit was probably a good position. I dont think thats close to getting it done now - think you probably need to start at 10/300 (to be fair this is pretty close to inflation adjusted) and be willing to move on another year or two at lower pay to close it out.

$200M was never getting it done unless that was offered back before 2020 or 2021.

At this point, they are here from decisions entirely of their own making and many of them done under Bloom (some obviously were not). They were never going to retain all three of Betts, Bogaerts, and Devers for their 15 year careers, but not retaining any of them is unacceptable. This is a close your nose and get it done situation. The alternative is continuing to push the team into irrelevance both from a competitive and business perspective.

I say that as someone who watched 140-150 games a year back in the some pretty bad years, but last year's team was gross and was the first time I didnt watch 75% of the games and not only did I not do 75%; I didnt do 50% and I'm definitely not alone here. Next years team looks just as gross; cant imagine what 2024 would look like with Story as its headliner.
Riley was a super-2 so he got four years of arbitration, the first of which was $4M. That's why I was high on the estimates...his third year likely would have matched Devers' third, and then he'd get another. All I was trying to do was factor in the buying out of those years to determine what the free agent years were truly worth. Riley's AAV of 21.2M is not indicative of his true market value. It reflects a discount for buying out his cheaper years. So I'm estimating his free agent market value at 7/165ish or closer to 23.5M. Call it 24 if we want to call my arb estimates too high. A Devers deal now would be buying out just one year of arbitration rather than three, hence only making it an 8 year offer to make it directly comparable to Riley's deal (7 years of free agency + arb years). Regardless if it's 8 or 10 years, any $25M AAV offer would put the Sox right in the Riley ballpark. And that seemed reasonable a month ago. Now, not so much.
 

mikcou

Member
SoSH Member
May 13, 2007
743
Boston
Riley was a super-2 so he got four years of arbitration, the first of which was $4M. That's why I was high on the estimates...his third year likely would have matched Devers' third, and then he'd get another. All I was trying to do was factor in the buying out of those years to determine what the free agent years were truly worth. Riley's AAV of 21.2M is not indicative of his true market value. It reflects a discount for buying out his cheaper years. So I'm estimating his free agent market value at 7/165ish or closer to 23.5M. Call it 24 if we want to call my arb estimates too high. A Devers deal now would be buying out just one year of arbitration rather than three, hence only making it an 8 year offer to make it directly comparable to Riley's deal (7 years of free agency + arb years). Regardless if it's 8 or 10 years, any $25M AAV offer would put the Sox right in the Riley ballpark. And that seemed reasonable a month ago. Now, not so much.
I got your math and its probably meaningless because the market has continued to increase, but I dont think a signing three years from free agency is comparable with one that is one even after taking out the arbitration estimates. The guy with three years is going to take more of a discount above and beyond the realistic estiamte of arbitration awards - the team gets those three years no matter what, there is no reason for them to extend early unless they are getting a discount beyond that. That discount is greater at three years out than one year out. People can debate what exactly the discounts should be, but its definitely not zero and it definitely goes down as you get closer to free agency.

Edit: I think the Braves likely pegged Riley as a close to a $30M a year guy as a free agent, but were able to get 20%+ off for the risk of giving him the money three years early.
 

Max Power

thai good. you like shirt?
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
6,531
Boston, MA
He is 25 and and his OPS+ *your stat) in his first four full seasons was:

Age 21: 94
Age 22: 132
Age 24: 134
Age 25: 141

He did a 107 in the covid year, but I think its generally wise to take most players records from that year with a grain of salt...

And your argument is, that as he moves to his age 27-31 seasons, he may not improve.

Good luck signnig anyone guy.


Just for fun, I randomly picked 10 guys to see their top OPS before turning 26.
David Ortiz: 111
Nolan Arenado: 129
Freddie Freeman: 147
Jim Thome: 167
Paul Goldschmidt: 160
Jose Altuve: 135
Jose Ramirez: 151
Trea Turner: 101
Carlos Correa: 155
Xander: 135

And those are the top seasons for each of those guys, with none of them seeming to match the consistency and build up that Devers has to date. And I'd consider all of those guys, besides Xander, "better than good". Exactly none of them (alright, probably Thome) have consistently hit the mark you are asking Devers to. And looking back ,any smart GM would have locked any of these guys up going into their age 26 season.

You're making the argument for signing Rafe, not against.
So any smart GM would look at a list of players who were good into their 30s and decide to lock them up at 26? No way! Why can't we get a smart GM like that?

The question is whether you're confident in Raffy improving or maintaining over the next 13 years to commit hundreds of millions of dollars to him. He may well be Freddie Freeman or David Ortiz moving forward, but he could be Eric Chavez or Bob Horner. His performance to date doesn't suggest one way or the other.
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
82,336
Oregon
It's probably just me, but I'm just so tired of this process ... not just with Devers, but with seemingly every star player at the end of a contract in recent vintage. @John Marzano Olympic Hero is right ... ownership is rolling in dough, they should act accordingly and spend on such players.
 

snowmanny

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
14,384
Right. There is zero reason this should go to spring training, let alone into the season. Either they want him at the price or they don’t.
 

Beomoose

Member
SoSH Member
May 28, 2006
20,514
Exiled
Will be interesting to see if that changes if he gets injured, or if the Sox make a Godfather offer.
Well the second of those isn't happening. They didn't do it before, during or after what turned out to be Betts' or Xs' last seasons with the organization, it's reasonably clear the "offer he can't refuse" is not a part of their current repertoire. They're either going to grind to a number with him before the season, or they'll be the fourth-place bidders next year.

Ok...Raffy hits 50 blasts by the ASB and maybe Henry tells Bloom to go Ham.
 

soxhop411

news aggravator
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
43,110
Will be interesting to see if that changes if he gets injured, or if the Sox make a Godfather offer.
Or is just a negotiation tactic like with Bogaerts and judge (or with any athlete)

boras said that they would not negotiate during the season.
turns out that was not the case
View: https://twitter.com/PeteAbe/status/1525981774270062594?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1525981774270062594%7Ctwgr%5E4d85779724bdc74bba0cd018a3ad69c70e096e04%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fd-26312481701796153906.ampproject.net%2F2211302304002%2Fframe.html



of course thats not a guarantee he does resign.


Most of the time its the player that wont actively participate in the negotiations but have it go thru their agent during the season
 
Last edited:

Big Papi's Mango Salsa

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2022
234
Right. There is zero reason this should go to spring training, let alone into the season. Either they want him at the price or they don’t.
But that is not the plan Bloom is executing. It’s to hold everyone because they’re still “in the hunt for the last wild card” near the end of July. Then not to bother spending money on stars because you’d rather have the financial flexibility to give the money to use last year to give $10m to a guy coming off TJS whom generally missed half a season even before that (Paxton), to take on $9.5m and spend a combined $5m on Kevin Plawecki and Hansel Robles.

Or in the case of this year, spend $8.75m on another middle relief pitcher (Martin); $2m on a second (Rodriguez), and what I’m sure will be like $10m on Corey Kluber or similar. How can you not see this is so much better than spending that money on a 26 year old middle of the order stud whom is a career average 123 wRC+. I know I’d rather have the financial flexibility to go get those guys.

Since it’s clear Bloom won’t pay anything approaching market value for elite talent, I just hope he trades Devers before letting him walk for nothing.
 

BornToRun

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 4, 2011
16,115
I’m almost out of final straws.
They won’t “lose” me if they fail to extend Raffy but my level of give a damn about the team will definitely take a hit. It’s hard to maintain interest when you know all of your favorite players are just rentals until they get too expensive. I feel like an A’s fan.
 

Lose Remerswaal

Experiencing Furry Panic
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Well the second of those isn't happening. They didn't do it before, during or after what turned out to be Betts' or Xs' last seasons with the organization, it's reasonably clear the "offer he can't refuse" is not a part of their current repertoire. They're either going to grind to a number with him before the season, or they'll be the fourth-place bidders next year.

Ok...Raffy hits 50 blasts by the ASB and maybe Henry tells Bloom to go Ham.
If ratings are down 30% and butts in seats down a similar amount, minds might change
 

Pat Spillane

lurker
Feb 12, 2021
31
If ratings are down 30% and butts in seats down a similar amount, minds might change

This is inevitable if we continue trending this way.Out with bloom and in with another Dombo and we then overspend to put butts back on seats and end up with Albatross contracts and Bloom the second back in.


Hope Bloom has an actual plan to bring us bacck to the top table. I think most of us are ok with down years to rebuild but with Bloom we are not seeing a plan other than bargain basement shopping
 

Yaz4Ever

stumps for Trump
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2004
10,623
MA-CA-RI-AZ-NC
Will be interesting to see if that changes if he gets injured, or if the Sox make a Godfather offer.
The time to make the offer is now. I don't blame him for wanting to stay focused during the season, especially after the gamble Judge made last year and saw pay off handsomely. An injury would quickly derail such dreams, but a young athlete like him is more likely looking toward the promise of riches than the possibility of diminished returns. We, likewise, shouldn't be rooting for an injury to lower his price (I know that's not remotely what you meant).

Right. There is zero reason this should go to spring training, let alone into the season. Either they want him at the price or they don’t.
I NEVER thought I'd type the following, but here goes - sign him to a 14 year, $450M deal before Christmas (gulp) or see if Steve Cohen or Dave Dombroski or anyone else will continue to back up the Brinks truck filled with prospects for us. I would think that the Correa deal removes the Mets from the equation, but who knows what Cohen is thinking this year. It's going to be nice to be a Mets fan this year.
 

Yaz4Ever

stumps for Trump
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2004
10,623
MA-CA-RI-AZ-NC
If ratings are down 30% and butts in seats down a similar amount, minds might change
Sadly, there are an almost limitless number of people like me who rarely get back to New England and will still buy tickets this summer (tentative plans to go). I have a number of friends here in North Carolina who say they'd love to visit Fenway and this might be there chance. Ownership really isn't going to feel the pinch of lost ticket sales, imho. People who couldn't afford to go before will scoop up any discounts even to see a flailing team play in the shrine known as Fenway. Heck, most of them don't even like the Sox, they just want to see Fenway once in their lifetime and will happily make the pilgrimage.
 

Big Papi's Mango Salsa

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2022
234
While I get your point, does the evidence really support that?

All I mean is, people said that when they didn't sign guys after Manny Ramirez (prior ownership group), and then we had the Crawford and Gonzalez deals. People said that after the Punto Trade and subsequent off-season, and then we had the Hanley Ramirez and Sandoval deals. People said that after those failures rolled off the books, and then you had Price, JD Martinez and the Chris Sale extension. So at least the anecdotal evidence shows they're willing to sign them - IF the current front office pushes them for it.

Speier said in essence the same thing on the KLaw podcast. Basically that FSG will give the big deals if the front office / baseball ops outlines why it's a good move. They did it for Epstein, Cherington (or Lucchino if you prefer to say as such) and Dombrowski. If Bloom had come to them and said "Xander Bogaerts is how I want to allocated $27m for the next 11 years", he'd be here and not in San Diego. When Story came in at a discount (ie far below what Seager, Semien, Bryant, Correra's AAV, etc got), they did it for Bloom too. They then held those people accountable.

At least that is what Speier intoned, and I believe him. If someone doesn't believe Speier is a credible source, that is their choice. I think he's the most reliable in town.

Will Bloom ask to spend whatever it takes to sign Devers or "budget" that in his $Luxury Tax Threshold "allowance"? I think all signs with Bloom point toward "no." If Devers tears his ACL in spring training, I think we're a lot more likely to sign him (he'd be at a discount) than it is we extend him before camp starts.
 
Last edited:

Lose Remerswaal

Experiencing Furry Panic
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Sadly, there are an almost limitless number of people like me who rarely get back to New England and will still buy tickets this summer (tentative plans to go). I have a number of friends here in North Carolina who say they'd love to visit Fenway and this might be there chance. Ownership really isn't going to feel the pinch of lost ticket sales, imho. People who couldn't afford to go before will scoop up any discounts even to see a flailing team play in the shrine known as Fenway. Heck, most of them don't even like the Sox, they just want to see Fenway once in their lifetime and will happily make the pilgrimage.
You’re a Sure Thing.


The Sox will always sell tickets to the once a year gang. It is the season ticket non-renewals and the 10 game pack cancellations and the locals who get tix to 5-6 games/year who stop doing so that will hurt the team‘s pockets.

And the season ticket holders who skip games and don’t spend $45 each on food and beer. And the TV ratings drops.
 

jbupstate

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 1, 2022
133
New York, USA
Bloom should be on the phone with Devers this morning using Correa's new number as a start to to launch a new offer in the 10/315 range.
I would hope the Sox are at 10/300m for Devers now. That is an overpay but there is potential for an elite bat even if the defense is projected to be average at best. Add another 10% for 12/330 due to Devers leverage. If that doesn’t do it move him asap.

I like Devers but it’s going to turn bad after 6 years. I don’t care if the system is consistently producing MLB players in two or three years.

I just don’t think people remember how the Hanley, Panda, Price contracts combined with contracts to players injured Sale, Eovaldi, AGon can really impact the budget. You can kick the can down the road but at a certain point you can’t but depth.

If the Punto trade never happens the Sox would have been in this predicament years ago.
 

Jack Rabbit Slim

Member
SoSH Member
May 19, 2010
1,259
While I get your point, does the evidence really support that?

All I mean is, people said that when they didn't sign guys after Manny Ramirez (prior ownership group), and then we had the Crawford and Gonzalez deals. People said that after the Punto Trade and subsequent off-season, and then we had the Hanley Ramirez and Sandoval deals. People said that after those failures rolled off the books, and then you had Price, JD Martinez and the Chris Sale extension. So at least the anecdotal evidence shows they're willing to sign them - IF the current front office pushes them for it.

Speier said in essence the same thing on the KLaw podcast. Basically that FSG will give the big deals if the front office / baseball ops outlines why it's a good move. They did it for Epstein, Cherington (or Lucchino if you prefer to say as such) and Dombrowski. If Bloom had come to them and said "Xander Bogaerts is how I want to allocated $27m for the next 11 years", he'd be here and not in San Diego. When Story came in at a discount (ie far below what Seager, Semien, Bryant, Correra's AAV, etc got), they did it for Bloom too. They then held those people accountable.

At least that is what Speier intoned, and I believe him. If someone doesn't believe Speier is a credible source, that is their choice. I think he's the most reliable in town.

Will Bloom ask to spend whatever it takes to sign Devers or "budget" that in his $Luxury Tax Threshold "allowance"? I think all signs with Bloom point toward "no." If Devers tears his ACL in spring training, I think we're a lot more likely to sign him (he'd be at a discount) than it is we extend him before camp starts.
You seem to be yearning for a new FO that will pitch the owners on signing those big deals again, but look at the list you made:

Crawford (bottom of the barrel terrible)
Gonzalez (meh to bad)
Hanley (bad)
Sandoval (in competition with Crawford)
Price (WS aside, bad)
JD (good)
Sale (terrible so far)

Why are we trying to get back to that?
 

NJ_Sox_Fan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 2, 2006
9,268
NJ
Almost zero long term deals work out. Ever. Arod. Pujols. Vlad Sr. Etc. And all these guys were significantly better than Devers.

I am not saying don’t sign him, but just because the Mets are handing out a billion dollars doesn’t mean that is the correct path to follow.

Honestly, I’m not even sure 10/300 is wise and also at the same time I am not sure that would get it done. I’d say offer that and if he declines just move on.

There are very few players I’d say to sign at all costs, and while I love Raffy, I just don’t think he’s one of those type players.
 

BeantownIdaho

lurker
Dec 5, 2005
328
Nampa, Idaho
Almost zero long term deals work out. Ever. Arod. Pujols. Vlad Sr. Etc. And all these guys were significantly better than Devers.

I am not saying don’t sign him, but just because the Mets are handing out a billion dollars doesn’t mean that is the correct path to follow.

Honestly, I’m not even sure 10/300 is wise and also at the same time I am not sure that would get it done. I’d say offer that and if he declines just move on.

There are very few players I’d say to sign at all costs, and while I love Raffy, I just don’t think he’s one of those type players.
Exactly....If they do extend him at least he will be age 36 at the end which I can still see as a useful DH/1b type.... instead of a 41 year old SS. Giants may be desperate here...Harrison , Lucianao, Matos...
 

CarolinaBeerGuy

Don't know him from Adam
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Mar 14, 2006
7,868
Kernersville, NC
Almost zero long term deals work out. Ever. Arod. Pujols. Vlad Sr. Etc. And all these guys were significantly better than Devers.

I am not saying don’t sign him, but just because the Mets are handing out a billion dollars doesn’t mean that is the correct path to follow.

Honestly, I’m not even sure 10/300 is wise and also at the same time I am not sure that would get it done. I’d say offer that and if he declines just move on.

There are very few players I’d say to sign at all costs, and while I love Raffy, I just don’t think he’s one of those type players.
Vlad Sr.? I think most teams would have been fine with this production on a 5 year / $70 million contract.

https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/g/guerrvl01.shtml#2005-2009-sum:batting_standard
 

ehaz

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 30, 2007
4,278
2019 (age 22): 6.7 fWAR
2021 (age 24): 4.2 fWAR
2022 (age 25): 4.9 fWAR

If he’s a 4 to 6 WAR player during the first five or six years of the deal, something around 11/$315M is worth it.

Devers would only be 31 going into year 6, so I think that’s about as safe an assumption as you’re going to get for any 10-year player deal barring major injury or just rapid decline.

If he moves to DH after that, the deal isn’t a value anymore but should the bat age well it’s not going to kill you.

If Chaim‘s farm system can’t build a contender around Devers within the first 5 or so years the Sox failed anyways. So at least let us watch Raffy hit bombs.
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
35,827
AZ
Almost zero long term deals work out. Ever. Arod. Pujols. Vlad Sr. Etc. And all these guys were significantly better than Devers.

I am not saying don’t sign him, but just because the Mets are handing out a billion dollars doesn’t mean that is the correct path to follow.

Honestly, I’m not even sure 10/300 is wise and also at the same time I am not sure that would get it done. I’d say offer that and if he declines just move on.

There are very few players I’d say to sign at all costs, and while I love Raffy, I just don’t think he’s one of those type players.
This is true. But you need runs (or to prevent them) to win baseball games and they have to come from somewhere.

Whether or not you accept the WAR construct, it doesn't really matter. Call a player's value "widgets" or whatever. He's the simple fact. You have 9 positions to get those runs (widgets). You need a certain number to get to 88 wins. More if you want to win a championship. Let's say you need 43 WAR. (Or 100 widgets -- whatever.) You can't possibly go 9 for 9 on value guys that give them to you under the market price. You need those guys. You can't win without them. You need to find widgets for less than market price. That's really freaking hard. Finding 3 guys like that is brilliant. Finding 9 is impossible.

So, you need a base. You have to buy yourself a chunk of widgets to get you going and you need them at one position. 9 WAR playing 1 position and taking up one spot in the batting order is better than 3 WAR playing 3 positions and taking up 3 spots in the batting order.

This team needs wins (above replacement). Raffy gives them 5, or better. And from all accounts we could get them for about $27 million this year. That gives us something to build on. Let Chaim do what he does to get the rest. We can figure out 2030 when it comes. Right now, our decks are pretty clear in 2030.
 

EvilEmpire

paying for his sins
Staff member
Dope
Apr 9, 2007
16,324
Washington
There is a ton of time before the season starts to negotiate with and sign Devers. And of course there have been enough big deals completed already to have a clear understanding of the current market.

If Boston wants him back, there is no reason not to get it done before the season starts.

I don't blame Devers at all for not wanting to deal with this and get asked "will you or won't you" at every media availability event once the season starts if an extension isn't completed.

It seems like there are a few fans around here that are put off by his stance. I don't think it is a big deal at all.
 

Murderer's Crow

Dragon Wangler 216
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
21,631
Garden City
There is a ton of time before the season starts to negotiate with and sign Devers. And of course there have been enough big deals completed already to have a clear understanding of the current market.

If Boston wants him back, there is no reason not to get it done before the season starts.

I don't blame Devers at all for not wanting to deal with this and get asked "will you or won't you" at every media availability event once the season starts if an extension isn't completed.

It seems like there are a few fans around here that are put off by his stance. I don't think it is a big deal at all.
Agree. I also think Devers is the right age and production level to give a 10 year agreement to before the season. This is the price of premium talent. This feels like the 2020 housing market right now. High prices with a lot of buyers flush with cash and even more waiting to spend money if opportunities present themselves. Sox can keep waiting for premium talent at good prices but the FA market doesn't look like it's going to help them out here. Or they can keep signing older players to short deals, cross their fingers on their prospects, and watch Devers play for the Twins or something.
 

walt in maryland

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
165
The bolded is the risk. Fewer fans are watching than in years prior. It's been well documented that younger fans (under 30) are far less apt to both attend and watch live games. Younger fans are also far more likely to root for specific players than teams.

Sports exists in a very crowded entertainment space, so ignoring fan sentiment is probably not wise. Needless to say, you don't let fan sentiment dictate personnel decisions. But if you're going to make unpopular moves -- and we sure know the Sox have done that a few times in recent years -- then you really should (a) be able to clearly communicate your plans, and (b) win, a lot, and as quickly as possible.
I think you overstate the risk. If the Red Sox contend, the fans will be there
 

walt in maryland

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
165
Agree. I also think Devers is the right age and production level to give a 10 year agreement to before the season. This is the price of premium talent. This feels like the 2020 housing market right now. High prices with a lot of buyers flush with cash and even more waiting to spend money if opportunities present themselves. Sox can keep waiting for premium talent at good prices but the FA market doesn't look like it's going to help them out here. Or they can keep signing older players to short deals, cross their fingers on their prospects, and watch Devers play for the Twins or something.
I agree, but there's a baseball argument to be made that giving 10 years to Devers is too risky. If the Sox believe that, trade him before the season for the best package you can get and move on.
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
82,336
Oregon
Agree. I also think Devers is the right age and production level to give a 10 year agreement to before the season. This is the price of premium talent. This feels like the 2020 housing market right now. High prices with a lot of buyers flush with cash and even more waiting to spend money if opportunities present themselves. Sox can keep waiting for premium talent at good prices but the FA market doesn't look like it's going to help them out here. Or they can keep signing older players to short deals, cross their fingers on their prospects, and watch Devers play for the Twins or something.
Devers feels like the linchpin moment for this management group. I still think they trade him
 

Big Papi's Mango Salsa

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2022
234
You seem to be yearning for a new FO that will pitch the owners on signing those big deals again, but look at the list you made:

Crawford (bottom of the barrel terrible)
Gonzalez (meh to bad)
Hanley (bad)
Sandoval (in competition with Crawford)
Price (WS aside, bad)
JD (good)
Sale (terrible so far)

Why are we trying to get back to that?
Fair, and a couple of reasons:
1 - Each of the GMs that inked those deals had won a(t least one world series), so I trust them more. What can I say. I'm a sucker for a World Series title giving some cachet.

2- Because I think there is a large difference between betting on a 26 year old whom has shown an ability to produce in Boston as opposed to Crawford (29), Gonzalez (29), Ramirez (31), Sandoval (28), Price (30), JD Martinez (30) whom hadn't.

2a - Sale, started to show signs of breaking down in 2018 when he missed 5 (or 6) turns through the rotation and was then pretty awful in the playoffs. He was going to be 30 when the extension started and doesn't have a body type or delivery that one would bank on. That said, I liked the Price singing (not the Sale extension) so call those a "wash", if you will.

3 - Because I think you need core pieces, the only one we have is Trevor Story and I'd like Devers to be a second. To my point above, I think you need top of the roster talent to win a world series. Sure, the Royals managed without any in 2014. But the Rays / As model has gotten beat in the playoffs before raising a flag each time. To reiterate, though it happened once (KC) I think it's almost impossible to win a World Series without high end roster talent, and the only one we have right now that is even a moderately safe bet to play a full season effectively is Trevor Story.

4 - This in conjecture, but I don't think Boston is seen in a positive light at all right now by young MLB players or the industry in general, and I'd like to change that.
 

walt in maryland

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
165
They won’t “lose” me if they fail to extend Raffy but my level of give a damn about the team will definitely take a hit. It’s hard to maintain interest when you know all of your favorite players are just rentals until they get too expensive. I feel like an A’s fan.
Well, that settles it. Now they HAVE to sign Raffy, whatever the cost. :)