So you are looking for the downside here?
Also Devers had his career best year in 2021, so I don't know how his price was lower then.
Red Sox extend Devers—11 years, $332 million
- Thread starter RedOctober3829
- Start date
Also Devers had his career best year in 2021, so I don't know how his price was lower then.
This better not impact LFC signing Jude Bellingham this transfer window....wait, wrong thread.
Glad this got done!
Glad this got done!
Heyman says it does not include a no-trade
View: https://twitter.com/JonHeyman/status/1610762575775469583
View: https://twitter.com/JonHeyman/status/1610762575775469583
Like when the Patriots locked up one of Hightower, Collins and Jones; they went to three super bowls and won two, they picked correctly, we'll see how this plays out.
Well, Mookie is by far the best overall player of the three, but each player's situations were different. For THIS offseason, I said all along that if given the choice between signing X or Raffy to a long term deal, it was Raffy in a landslide. Glad the Sox felt the same way.
This is HUGE.
$30m a year could easily look like a bargain in a few years. And only through age 38. This is a big, big win.
Accepting this is a no-brainer for Devers, was just a question of how much he wanted to tighten the screws on Chaim/ownership given the current situation and fan discontent.
The value of a “possible” extra 50-75M to him (absolute best case scenario) after 2023 is really not that much when you have 330M already coming your way. He would have FAR more to lose than to gain by playing it out at 1/17.5M once the Red Sox went to this level.
It could go terribly, but so can any deal. The value seems about right and I’m so happy that we get to root for Raffy long term. It’s a good day to be a Sox fan
Well! Seems like the front office re-evaluated what future markets were going to be like, given this off-season, and acted accordingly. It just took a couple months for the computers to finish calculating. 
Haven't been a fan of such long deals, but with Raffy at least he'll be in his late 30s, not his early 40s. Hoping his hitting still takes a step forward, as I think part of his value now is that he's young enough still to have a good shot to improve even beyond his performance so far.
Anyway analysis aside, really enjoy the guy and will be glad to have him around. Envisioning his veteran presence as the DH on the 2033 WS-winning Red Sox — hopefully one of many titles for him with us!
Haven't been a fan of such long deals, but with Raffy at least he'll be in his late 30s, not his early 40s. Hoping his hitting still takes a step forward, as I think part of his value now is that he's young enough still to have a good shot to improve even beyond his performance so far.Anyway analysis aside, really enjoy the guy and will be glad to have him around. Envisioning his veteran presence as the DH on the 2033 WS-winning Red Sox — hopefully one of many titles for him with us!
I mean, this doesn't exactly fill a hole, just prevents a huge one from being created, so I guess there's still a lot we can complain about!
Age is such a big factor in these mega-contracts. With Raffy being only 26 you are looking at 7 of the 11 years carrying him through his age 33 season which is pretty good in my book, and even better if he can age in anything approaching an Ortizian fashion. Adrian Beltre is another comp and similar kind of hitter, who was quite good through age 39.
The mistakes in previous versions of this situation were made long before the player's free agency was actually here, so I am glad they did not repeat the mistakes all the way through again (in this case it would have been playing footsie around the trade deadline, not making a move, then losing him to NYY or whoever next offseason).
The inflation element helps as well, and having this $ and player locked into the salary plans for many years out is, imo, much more beneficial to future team planning than having the money theoretically freed up but without the player and needing to find somewhere to spend it. The FA market is only going to keep spiking so it isn't going to get easier to outspend other teams for big-time players.
Edit: As for on field stuff, I am very excited he will be wearing a RS uniform as we enter a post-shift world.
The mistakes in previous versions of this situation were made long before the player's free agency was actually here, so I am glad they did not repeat the mistakes all the way through again (in this case it would have been playing footsie around the trade deadline, not making a move, then losing him to NYY or whoever next offseason).
The inflation element helps as well, and having this $ and player locked into the salary plans for many years out is, imo, much more beneficial to future team planning than having the money theoretically freed up but without the player and needing to find somewhere to spend it. The FA market is only going to keep spiking so it isn't going to get easier to outspend other teams for big-time players.
Edit: As for on field stuff, I am very excited he will be wearing a RS uniform as we enter a post-shift world.
Last edited:
So for tax purposes how does the signing bonus work? Seems a bit like a loophole that you can pay a guy $37.5 million in a year and only have $17.5 count against the tax cap.
Hard not to like this a lot. The years on these things always scare me, but the contract wrapping up when he’s 37 is a big plus. I also think there was some franchise credibility on the line, with fans and corporate sponsors. They couldn’t let him and X get away, and I think chose the right one. And yeah, as mentioned by others, the ‘24 infield could really be something.
I don't think the extension begins until after next year.... so 17.5 in 2023 then an 11 year extension taking him to age 38.
Well, until his 10/5 rights kick in in ~5 years.
This is a good deal. Basically paying retail, but nothing crazy. Middle of the order bats are hard to come by; it's good to have one under team control for the next 12 seasons.
And what's the backup plan when half the starting rotation gets injured?
His body type. Will he be able to stay off the empanadas? (I read that's what ruined Tigger Cabrera)
Basically, I am happy/relieved about this. I worried that he'd somehow try to reconcile with X after Machado leaves the Pads.
Devers will turn 38 on October 24th of the last year of this contract. Hopefully he'll be playing on that birthday.
It doesn’t matter. The signing bonus will be paid out however they agree on, and then the yearly cash amounts. But for purpose of I forget if it’s $17.5 this year (his arb contract) and then 11/332 or if it is 12/349.5
Cabrera's deal would have been fine if it only went into his mid to mid late 30s, the problem was they gave him an extra extension later that took him to age 40 for no reason
Well this is practically everything. Right now the CBA allows teams to pay too little for top players who are productive in their pre-arb and arb years, and forces them to pay too much for guys post arb, if they are top producers. The single most valuable asset, still quite rare, are top producers who develop so early that when you are forced to pay them what they are worth, it will be for future performance, not past performance. This is why the Mariners throw money at Julio Rodriguez and the Braves locked up their guys. You can't find many top players who you can sign at top dollar for future performance. The Sox had two of them, Mookie and Raffy, and they at least held on to one. Bogaerts too but they smartly bought up a chunk of his prime, just not all of it.
Looking at the largest free agent deals you have:
1. Judge, 30 when signed, largely paying for past performance
2. Harper, 27 when signed, good chunk of future performance
3. Seager, 27 when signed, future performance
4. Cole, 30 when signed, risky but pitchers age differently?
5. Alleged Correa Mets deal, he's 28, so not terrible
6. Machado, 27, fine
7. Trea Turner, 29, just signed, borderline
8. Bogaerts, 30
9. Rendon, 30 when signed, already a disaster
Then you have younger player extensions...
1. J Rod, signed entering age 22 season
2. Trout, signed for 12 years at age 28
3. Tatis, 14 years from age 22
4. Betts, 10 years from age 28
5. Franco, 10 years from age 21
6. Stanton, 13 years from age 26
7. Acuna, 8 years from age 22
8. Luis Robert, 6 years from rookie debut
And so on. That second group is all about buying future performance. The Devers deal looks a bit in between the FA deals and the early extensions, but you can call it similar to Tatis, if you want, by adding his arb money to the $331m and call it a 17 year deal.
Last edited:
Honestly, there’s probably some real value to lifting this weird dark cloud over the franchise. A lot of the pessimism was silly media-driven histrionics but the broader affect was quite real.
We’ve got a good, fun, positive-thinking group of players. I don’t know who wouldn’t want to come play with Raffy Devers, Masataka Yoshida, Trevor Story and Garrett Whitlock.
Hey, in today's market, to secure talent, you're not going to be able to avoid these type of contracts that look bad on the backend. The logic is you're buying championships now.
Excellent. But jokes aside, do we know if this is 11/332 or 12/349.5? AAV makes a bit of difference looking ahead.
He's not Venezuelan, and if he gets "ruined" to the tune of putting up a ~.935 OPS and ~43 WAR during the life of this contract, as Cabrera did between ages 27-37, he'll be a borderline Hall of Fame candidate.
I'm old enough to remember John Henry on here and on WEEI. He will never, ever admit it, but I absolutely believe that him getting strafed at the Winter Classic helped get this locked down.
This is a defensible deal and absolutely essential to making the 2023 Sox worth watching. For the first time in a long time: good job, Chaim.
This is a defensible deal and absolutely essential to making the 2023 Sox worth watching. For the first time in a long time: good job, Chaim.
Pleased and surprised by the signing. I prefer Devers to Xander on their current deals. At some point you have to pony up to keep good players. I'm not sure this was a Chaim move, it would seem to be an ownership level decision given the investment. See how the season plays out and reevaluate the GM at the end of the year.
It's 11/331, and it starts after the 1/17.5 arb deal signed yesterday. So in '23, his AAV will be 17.5m and from '24-'34, it will be a tic over 30m.
Glad to see the team do something to invest in the future. It must be nice to be set for life at such a young age.
I like this deal, but…
A. He probably won’t hit those numbers, but even if he did…
B. He’s still 10 WAR behind Cabrera at this age.
Still worth it, imo.
Carl Crawford likes this.
I’m just going to assume at least one opt out until shown otherwise. If there isn’t one, this was as close to a home run as the circumstances would allow.
I said Devers would be a borderline HOF candidate with that track record; Cabrera should finish just shy of 70 WAR, which is pretty much a lock for the Hall IMO.