What are your best offers to Devers and Bogaerts?

[Pedroia's Itchy Nose]

There's been an awful lot of discussion about contract offers for Devers and Bogaerts over the last few years, and much of that is ongoing with X's opt out kicking in this offseason and Devers set to hit free agency after next season. These discussions are ongoing in various places on this board, but I'm making this thread for the simple purpose of taking the temperature on what each of your best offers to these two players would be if you were in Bloom's seat.

I'd like to keep the back and forth out of this thread and just leave it as a place for people to slap down their best and final offers.

If you were Bloom, what would your number be?

EDIT (11/3/22): I've tabulated the numbers offered up so far. As of this edit, we have 18 contract offers for Bogaerts at an average length of 5.78 years, an average total value of 158.83mm and an average AAV of 27.47mm. 8 of 18 responses indicated some sort of additional benefit in the form of opt outs, options, or performance bonuses that were not factored into these averages. The most common number of years offered was 6, with 7 coming in second place and 4/5 tied for third/fourth place. One poster indicated a preference for making no offer at all to Bogaerts, which was not factored into the above numbers but should be noted. For Devers, the average contract length was 9.36, average total value of 295.42mm, and average AAV of 31.56mm. 10 was by far the most common number of years offered, with a smattering of other offers ranging from 6 to 12 years.

The highest AAV suggested for Bogaerts was 33mm and for Devers was 37.5mm, while the lowest suggested for Bogaerts was 25 (suggested by four separate posters, not counting the offer of 0) and the lowest suggested for Devers was 30mm (suggested by 6 separate posters).

 

[BaseballJones]

Bogaerts: 6/162
Devers: 10/320

 

[grimshaw]

Bogaerts 5/160 and something like an extra mill for making the all-star team each season.

Devers 8/240 with an opt out after 3 seasons.

Both of these are based on what else is available.

 

[nvalvo]

Good topic!

Bogaerts I offer something like this: a 6/$150 deal with vesting options based on health for an additional year or even two. Something like: 600 games played within the first 5 seasons vests the seventh year and 550 games played within the years 4 through 7 inclusive vests the eighth year. Let's say the option years are $20m each. So the deal is between 6/$150 and 8/$190. As part of the negotiation, we reach a handshake understanding on future positional transitions.

Devers I would offer 10/$300.

 

[sezwho]

I agree, good topic! Put $ where mouth is so to speak. Only note is I believe in the fiscal health of the game over next decade at least and I think we’ll keep graduating prospects so don’t mind fronting some money.

X - Unless I’m getting one of the other top SSs on very favorable terms, 7/175 maybe even squeeze some vesting option to let him declare 200 if it’s critical to retain.
D - 10/320. I think the bat can help carry the back half, or at least soften the risk.

 

[Petagine in a Bottle]

X- 7/175, matches what Semien got.

Devers- 10/325, would really try to not give an opt out

 

[Ale Xander]

Bogaerts 5/165, opt-out after 2
Devers 10/375, opt-out after 6

 

[Minneapolis Millers]

X 6/$156m, player option for another year at $26m if 550 ABs in year 6. Some reasonable incentives.

Raffy 9/$270m w/opt out after year 3.

 

[BigJay]

Bogaerts - 4/105, won't get it done, but his power is gone and I'm not in the sentimental game.

Devers - 6/185 with options/incentives that could make it up to 8/250

 

[DennyDoyle'sBoil]

6/175

10/305

 

[buttons]

Bogarts 5/160
Devers 7/240
no opts out
maybe incentives

Bogarts means so much to this team for
several reasons to both players and fans
he would be my top priority.
Devers is not going anywhere in 2023
unless we trade him.

 

[Yaz4Ever]

Bogaerts 5/165, opt-out after 2
Devers 10/375, opt-out after 6

I think this is our winner. Devers’ camp is going to want at least $35M, imho, and most other guesses so far are in the 30-32 range. I hope I’m wrong, but I think these two offers get both locked down quickly and allows us to move forward.

 

[Buck Showalter]

X - $100M over 4 (I don't think he takes it --- but I'm also not going to cry about it because I think he's largely beyond his prime)

Devers - $300M over 10. Get it done...he's their best homegrown power hitter since Jim Rice and best hitter since Manny.

 

[teddywingman]

I'm actually more cautious with Devers. While Bogaerts seems to be as durable as a player can be, Devers--in his mid 20's is starting to play like he's old.

Bogaerts just played his best defense this year, while also banged up. Power was down, visibly, but across the league.

I want to see both of them signed, but why should I care.

 

[moondog80]

Friendly reminder that Rafael Devers has never finished in the top 10 of MVP voting, and won't this year either (probably). And MVP voting usually doesn't place much weight in defense. And 10/375 would be the second biggest contract of all time, and the highest AAV for anything approaching that length. For a guy who is not actually a free agent.

 

[dano7594]

Bogaerts: 6/162
Devers: 10/320

This is perfect. I would love this. No reason to read past this one.

My only question is this, could we get Xander for 6 years? Or will he be looking for more years for his last 'big" contract?

 

[Skiponzo]

Bogie: 6-$150. Maybe a games played incentive of some sort to get it to 7-$175 but I'd want to also be sure to have the "moving off short" conversation up front.

Devers: 10-$320 or 8-$280 take your pick.

 

[BaseballJones]

I'm actually more cautious with Devers. While Bogaerts seems to be as durable as a player can be, Devers--in his mid 20's is starting to play like he's old.

Bogaerts just played his best defense this year, while also banged up. Power was down, visibly, but across the league.

I want to see both of them signed, but why should I care.

All MLB

Home Runs
2021: 5944
2022: 5255

That's a drop of 11.6% from 2021.

Slugging
2021: .411
2022: .395

That's a drop of 3.89% from 2021.

Xander

Home Runs
2021: 23
2015: 15

That's a drop of 34.8% from 2021.

Slugging
2021: .493
2022: .456

That's a drop of 7.5% from 2021.

So in homers, Xander's drop-off was about 3x the rate of the drop-off in all MLB. And in slugging, Xander's drop-off was about 2x the rate of the drop-off in all MLB.

So yes, power was down across all MLB, but it was down for Xander by a LOT more.

 

[JM3]

X - 7/$177m
D - 12/$363m

No opt outs. Opt outs suck. They take away any chance of getting surplus value on a contract & only leave the downside. I'm willing to go more years to lower the AAV & avoid opt outs. If we're going to do an option, let's do a team option on Devers of 2/$60m for his 39 & 40 seasons so he can call it a 14/$423m contract.

The CBT threshold goes up a bit each year under the current CBA ($230m this year up to $244m in 2026) & I would expect growth at least that large in the future, so $30m in dead-ish money in 2034 will at least be a smaller % of the cap than it would be this year.

If we can't re-sign Devers, I would probably trade him before the season if there's a good enough offer out there. Letting that type of asset walk for nothing would be semi-catastrophic, & trading him at the deadline if they're contending would be yikes.

 

[ookami7m]

To everyone saying "no opt outs" in your posts without having significantly bigger years or AAV or total - why would either of them take your offer over a comparable one elsewhere when opt outs seem to be the biggest leverage piece in contracts now?

 

[JM3]

To everyone saying "no opt outs" in your posts without having significantly bigger years or AAV or total - why would either of them take your offer over a comparable one elsewhere when opt outs seem to be the biggest leverage piece in contracts now?

Because the player is comfortable making a ton of $$$ to spend the rest of their career somewhere they hopefully already know they are happy so they are comfortable having their buyout bought out by cash.

 

[snowmanny]

Jim Bowden in the Athletic speculated on Bogaerts 7/196 to the Mariners. I don’t think I’d go that high.

Probably would do 6/162.

I’d try to sign Devers first at 10/330.

 

[ookami7m]

Because the player is comfortable making a ton of $$$ to spend the rest of their career somewhere they hopefully already know they are happy so they are comfortable having their buyout bought out by cash.

I think most are severely underestimating how much a ton of $$$ would be to beat the value of an opt-out. Jose Ramirez type situations are rare.

 

[Sandy Leon Trotsky]

Obviously hard to predict... but it would have been nice had JDM opted out after '21. I know it's been beaten to death, but they can work if it's just the team lucks out when the player opts out after a great year, signs elsewhere and then tanks from then on. I could see that happening with Devers after 6 more years and X in 3. I'd be fine if there are opts outs for both players around that time frame but I imagine Devers will want it for 3 years and X for 2.

 

[JM3]

I think most are severely underestimating how much a ton of $$$ would be to beat the value of an opt-out. Jose Ramirez type situations are rare.

Most mega deals don't have opt outs...

Trout 12/$426.5m - no options, but full no trade
Harper 13/$330m - no options, but full no trade
Betts 12/$365m - no options
Lindor 10/$341m - no option, partial no trade clause for 5 years then full no trade
Tatis Jr. 14/$340m - no options, full no trade for 8 years then partial no trade
Seager 10/$325m - no options, 8 team no trade

Cole, Stanton & Machado all have opt outs from the $300m salary club.

 

[chrisfont9]

Bogaerts: 6/162
Devers: 10/320

I like the $32m AAV for Devers. For Bogaerts I think you'd have to go to $30m AAV, maybe 5 years with some options.

 

[jwbasham84]

Bogaerts: 6/162
Devers: 10/320

I like this with an opt out in year 3 or 4 for X
Dever opt out in year 6 or 7

If they want to gamble on themselves after we have received the benefit of most/all of their primes so be it. Maybe they continue to be great, but we have the chance to miss out on over paying them for the end of their useful career.

 

[P'tucket rhymes with...]

Bogaerts 5/165, opt-out after 2
Devers 10/375, opt-out after 6

This seems about right, but I'd want to push Devers' opt out up to year three or maybe four. If he wants to go shopping again at 30, I have no problem getting his next three or four years at 37.5 per before he moves on to greener pastures.

 

[trs]

Apropos of not much, but all these numbers flying about rustled up a figure from my memory -- 3 years 9 million total. Kirby Puckett. Anyway, I used to sit with my father's professor colleagues in their faculty lounge in the mornings before heading down the hill to elementary school, and for some reason I remember the talk one morning being about this astronomical new contract, 3 years and $9,000,000! No clue why that stuck in my 9 year old brain (well, maybe one clue), but I also remember one of my father's colleagues pointing out to be that the minimum wage was $68,000 (actually I remembered it at 69,500 for whatever reason, but thanks Google, and I wasn't too far off).

I know many of you here remember Nolan Ryan and others much earlier in terms of groundbreaking salaries and 33 years isn't that long ago, but I felt the urge to share.

More apropos, Xander already took a team-friendly deal, so any offers of less than 6 years and less than 25 a year I think get laughed at, and if that's what the Sox want to pay him, they might be better off not making an offer rather than perpetuate the Sox-don't-pay story arc. Now whether Xander gets those numbers elsewhere as has been suggested, I'm also not convinced, but even if he doesn't get those numbers, what do we get for proving him wrong? If they want him, they're gonna probably have to overpay.

Devers? I guess 10/340? Or 3/9, why not try that?

 

[AlNipper49]

Friendly reminder that Rafael Devers has never finished in the top 10 of MVP voting, and won't this year either (probably). And MVP voting usually doesn't place much weight in defense. And 10/375 would be the second biggest contract of all time, and the highest AAV for anything approaching that length. For a guy who is not actually a free agent.

That's the problem. Using a 10/320 as an example you're taking on a lot of risk on the back end of the contract. Most players who are signing elite days are elite players. Devers is definitely very, very good. He just came off a second half of the season where he was one of the worst players in baseball. I would not want to be in Bloom's shoes for this one.

 

[jon abbey]

Apropos of not much, but all these numbers flying about rustled up a figure from my memory -- 3 years 9 million total. Kirby Puckett. Anyway, I used to sit with my father's professor colleagues in their faculty lounge in the mornings before heading down the hill to elementary school, and for some reason I remember the talk one morning being about this astronomical new contract, 3 years and $9,000,000! No clue why that stuck in my 9 year old brain (well, maybe one clue), but I also remember one of my father's colleagues pointing out to be that the minimum wage was $68,000 (actually I remembered it at 69,500 for whatever reason, but thanks Google, and I wasn't too far off).

I know many of you here remember Nolan Ryan and others much earlier in terms of groundbreaking salaries and 33 years isn't that long ago, but I felt the urge to share.

The one I always think of is Wayne Garland’s giant 10 year deal in 1976, for a grand total of $2.3M.

 

[OCD SS]

To everyone saying "no opt outs" in your posts without having significantly bigger years or AAV or total - why would either of them take your offer over a comparable one elsewhere when opt outs seem to be the biggest leverage piece in contracts now?

X appears to opting out so that he lock in the rest of his playing time with a single team (which I'm guessing he wants to be the Sox); an opt out for him seems kind of beside the point. He'd probably rather have the money.

Devers, I'm less sure of, but since he's not a FA, I hope the FO can keep the term set and avoid screwing around with an opt out. I suspect if the money is good, he's not going to turn the deal down because it doesn't have an opt out...

 

[Mueller's Twin Grannies]

X - 4 years, $110, with a mutual option for a 5th year at $25 million, and a player option for the 6th at the same number, with a club buyout of $7 million, and bonuses that could increase the total max value of the 5th and 6th years to $30 million, for a total max value of $170 million, minimum $147 million

Devers - 7 years, $235 million, opt out after three seasons, bonuses that could push total max value to $250 million over the life of the deal. Give a vesting option for an 8th year at $37 million if he plays 550 games at 3B.

 

[P'tucket rhymes with...]

The one I always think of is Wayne Garland’s giant 10 year deal in 1976, for a grand total of $2.3M.

Oh, yeah. I was living outside Cleveland around then, and Wayne Garland's Wildly Underperforming Contract was a regular feature in the Plain Dealer. He was Mike Hampton before Mike Hampton.

 

[moondog80]

That's the problem. Using a 10/320 as an example you're taking on a lot of risk on the back end of the contract. Most players who are signing elite days are elite players. Devers is definitely very, very good. He just came off a second half of the season where he was one of the worst players in baseball. I would not want to be in Bloom's shoes for this one.

I think Bloom is pretty steadfast in his vision, or at least I hope he is. He'll extend Devers at a price that makes sense or he'll let him play out his contract, keeping the Sox long term options open while still spending to the tax in the near term and Devers on the books for only 17 mil next year.

 

[Dewey'sCannon]

X: 7/200, plus 2 option years at $25m/yr that vest based on 502 Pain prior year; option escalates to $30m if top-10 in MVP voting the prior year.
I agree with those who have commented that Xander probably wants a deal that covers the remainder of his career, especially if he's staying here.

Raffy: 10/310. I might shoot for 8/250-260 first, with a couple of vesting option years (based on PAs) to protect against a mid-30s decline or injuries, bu would go to 10 years and cross my fingers if that's what it takes to get the deal done.

 

[Alex Cole's Rec Specs]

Bogaerts: 7 years, $210 million

Devers: 10 years, $300 million

 

[Blizzard of 1978]

Bogaerts 7 for $180 million
Devers 10 for $300 million
I don't think they sign both.
These dudes let Nomar, Pedro and Betts go. We will find out soon with Bogaerts.

 

[ookami7m]

Bogaerts 7 for $180 million
Devers 10 for $300 million
I don't think they sign both.
These dudes let Nomar, Pedro and Betts go. We will find out soon with Bogaerts.

2 of those 3 were the right call, regardless of emotions.

 

[Red(s)HawksFan]

2 of those 3 were the right call, regardless of emotions.

And the jury is still out on the third, for better or worse.

 

[ookami7m]

And the jury is still out on the third, for better or worse.

Maybe. But this site was far far far more up in arms over Mookie leaving. We had accepted it was probably time for Nomar to go as much as we had all loved his early years. No one here thought it was worth matching Pedro’s deal to keep him on the wrong side of the age and injury curves.

Maybe Mookie plays out long term, but can anyone honestly say the team would not have been better with Mookie the last few years?

(Yes I know salary threshold and dumping Price etc, not litigating the why and how. Just that they really aren’t the same)

 

[moondog80]

Mookie Betts ain't walking through that door folks. It's time to move on.

 

[Red(s)HawksFan]

Maybe. But this site was far far far more up in arms over Mookie leaving. We had accepted it was probably time for Nomar to go as much as we had all loved his early years. No one here thought it was worth matching Pedro’s deal to keep him on the wrong side of the age and injury curves.

Maybe Mookie plays out long term, but can anyone honestly say the team would not have been better with Mookie the last few years?

(Yes I know salary threshold and dumping Price etc, not litigating the why and how. Just that they really aren’t the same)

No one is saying the team wouldn't have been better with him the last couple years. What I'm refering to when saying the jury is still out is strictly the back end of the deal. Like you say, we all understood that when the Sox didn't re-sign Pedro that it wasn't about the first year or two of his deal, but the last couple. I think Mookie is the same only the scale in terms of years is much bigger. Instead of fretting about years 3 and 4 of a four year deal, the concern is years 6-12 of a twelve year deal. The Sox were justified not going four years for Pedro and not going long term with Nomar. We won't know if they were justified not wanting to go 10+ on Mookie for another half decade or so.

 

[OCD SS]

Bogaerts 7 for $180 million
Devers 10 for $300 million
I don't think they sign both.
These dudes let Nomar, Pedro and Betts go. We will find out soon with Bogaerts.

Devers: 9 years, $280 M
Xander: A set of steak knives.
JD Martinez: You're fired.

 

[Pedroia's Itchy Nose]

I've tabulated the data so far and updated the top post with the results to date. Thanks everyone for your responses so far!

 

[Hatcher Steals Home]

Devers: 11/341 million. opt out and NTC, allowable performance/MVP incentives
Xander: 5/130, player option that can vest for 6/150 based roughly on games played in year 5

 

[ehaz]

Xander: 7/$160
Devers: 8/$225 with opt-out(s).

It’s an overpay but I’m OK if Xander gets roughly the Semien deal.

I really want them to keep Devers but I’m a bit surprised by all the $300M+ max offers. Arenado and Rendon were objectively superior players both offensively and defensively when they got their deals. Rendon got 7/$245M and Arenado got 8/$260M. Machado got 10/$300M as a unique case where he entered FA after his age 25 season and he had two 7+ WAR seasons on his resume. All three ranged somewhere from excellent to best-on-the-planet defensively so if the bat declined, less of a risk that those deals turned awful.

I guess, Devers would sign at a younger age than Rendon/Arenado but I think folks are forgetting that Rendon was coming off three consecutive excellent years without any injuries capped by a near MVP and ring in 2019. Hard to predict but I just don’t see anyone giving Devers 10/$320 or something like that.

 

[chrisfont9]

Xander: 7/$160
Devers: 8/$225 with opt-out(s).

It’s an overpay but I’m OK if Xander gets roughly the Semien deal.

I really want them to keep Devers but I’m a bit surprised by all the $300M+ max offers. Arenado and Rendon were objectively superior players both offensively and defensively when they got their deals. Rendon got 7/$245M and Arenado got 8/$260M. Machado got 10/$300M as a unique case where he entered FA after his age 25 season and he had two 7+ WAR seasons on his resume. All three ranged somewhere from excellent to best-on-the-planet defensively so if the bat declined, less of a risk that those deals turned awful.

I guess, Devers would sign at a younger age than Rendon/Arenado but I think folks are forgetting that Rendon was coming off three consecutive excellent years without any injuries capped by a near MVP and ring in 2019. Hard to predict but I just don’t see anyone giving Devers 10/$320 or something like that.

Good points, but the LT is going up and money continues coming in, so the market for very young/super elite talent is at the very least creeping up every year.

 

[snowmanny]

Bogaerts 7 for $180 million
Devers 10 for $300 million
I don't think they sign both.
These dudes let Nomar, Pedro and Betts go. We will find out soon with Bogaerts.

2 of those 3 were the right call, regardless of emotions.

Yes but they would have been even better calls if they had spent the money they saved on Pedro and Nomar in a better manner. They did sign some crap FA starting pitching and some crap FA shortstops. Which brings me back to: where is the money going instead? Nobody loves this year’s FA options all that much.

 

[YTF]

Maybe. But this site was far far far more up in arms over Mookie leaving. We had accepted it was probably time for Nomar to go as much as we had all loved his early years. No one here thought it was worth matching Pedro’s deal to keep him on the wrong side of the age and injury curves.

Maybe Mookie plays out long term, but can anyone honestly say the team would not have been better with Mookie the last few years?

(Yes I know salary threshold and dumping Price etc, not litigating the why and how. Just that they really aren’t the same)

Up until now has anyone ever argued otherwise?