What are your best offers to Devers and Bogaerts?

AlNipper49

Huge Member
Dope
Apr 3, 2001
43,713
Mtigawi
I agree Renton and Arenado were better players and Arenado is a better player now. Other risk factors are that Devers doesn’t look like the type to age well and his second half this year was historically bad. On the other hand he’s a known quantity, well-liked and a top 5ish 3Bman.

I care less about payroll now as it’s cleared up a bit and will get way more clear by the time any reasonable non-Correa contract is up. It’s the tail end that could hamper the Sox for a decade.
If I was Bloom I would offer 6/210.

The market out there sucks. He’s good. I’d Pablo’s him out of the water AAV in order to get less years. That gives us enough time to get his replacement up and cost controlled, probably dovetailing the end of his tenure here.
 

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
53,934
deep inside Guido territory
Both Jon Heyman and Jim Bowden put out articles on the top free agents and "experts" projections on contracts.

Shortstops

Heyman
Carlos Correa 9/275
Trea Turner 9/275
Xander Bogaerts 8/225
Dansby Swanson 7/175

Bowden
Correa 10/327
Turner 8/264
Bogaerts 7/196
Swanson 6/154
 
Last edited:

nvalvo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
20,716
Rogers Park
So, Heyman predicts that Bogaerts will get 8/$225m, which I think we can safely interpret as what the Boras camp would like to see.

I think a reunion could definitely happen, but I doubt it happens before he opts out.
 

fivejackace

lurker
May 2, 2008
9
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.
FWIW, Devers' most similar batters thru age 25 on B-Ref is a horror show of guys who flamed out early.

1. Eric Chavez, zero impact seasons after age 26 (!!)
2. Ryan Zimmerman, 1 good season after age 28
3. Bob Horner, finished at 28
4. David Wright, last good, healthy season at 29
5. Scott Rolen, pretty mediocre after 30, also maybe not a good comp because can't think of Devers in the same stratosphere defensively
6. Longoria, last good fully healthy season at 30
7. Troy Glaus, last good season at 31
8. Harland Clift, all but finished at 28
9. Arrenado
10. Ron Santo, hall of famer finished at 33.
 

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
53,934
deep inside Guido territory
The Red Sox are in active talks with homegrown stars Rafael Devers and Xander Bogaerts, but sources suggest there is plenty of work to do to complete a deal with either of them.

The feeling is their chances at present are somewhat better to get a Devers deal done, but sources say they remain “oceans apart” in even those talks.
The Red Sox are said to have offered Devers a bit more than the $212 million deal Austin Riley signed with the Braves, but he is seeking significantly more than that. He has the most extra-base hits in baseball over the past four years, is second in total bases to Freddie Freeman by two, is also second in RBIs in the American League to Jose Abreu, and third in home runs in the AL to Aaron Judge and Marcus Semien.

Also of significance: Devers, who is seeking $300 million-plus, is only a year away from free agency.

Word is, Devers is willing to be patient, which should come as no surprise since he’s holding a lot of the leverage, if not all of it. One source thought he may even wait to see what happens with his good friend and longtime Red Sox teammate Xander Bogaerts. Perhaps complicating matters, talks with Bogaerts seem even less promising at the time.
https://nypost.com/2022/11/09/red-sox-remain-far-apart-with-rafael-devers-xander-bogaerts/
 

iddoc

lurker
Nov 17, 2006
95
X: 6/168. Maybe a bit higher, more out of sentimentality than reason.

Devers…worries me a bit. If a relatively minor hamstring injury derails him to the point of what we saw in the second half of this season, at what should be the peak of his career, I am concerned that such stretches will become increasingly common as he ages. 4/120 after 2023.
 

Minneapolis Millers

Wants you to please think of the Twins fans!
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
4,700
Twin Cities
I’m starting to think, given this emerging high $ market, that if want X, we’re going to have to go long on years. Have to get to $200M+, so maybe 7/$200 and an option year based on ABs? That keeps his AAV under $30.

Go long and figure out where to play him later. His body type should age well.

The one thing we can offer him that other teams can’t: legacy. That requires years more than AAV.
 

Manuel Aristides

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 7, 2009
147
I’m starting to think, given this emerging high $ market, that if want X, we’re going to have to go long on years. Have to get to $200M+, so maybe 7/$200 and an option year based on ABs? That keeps his AAV under $30.

Go long and figure out where to play him later. His body type should age well.

The one thing we can offer him that other teams can’t: legacy. That requires years more than AAV.
Agreed. 8/$200 and 10/$300. Hitch the wagon to these two. Not a very sophisticated analysis but: you have to make something the face/core of a team with this much money and fan attention; homegrown all-star infielders seems like the best choice available.
 

Dewey'sCannon

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
782
Maryland
I’m starting to think, given this emerging high $ market, that if want X, we’re going to have to go long on years. Have to get to $200M+, so maybe 7/$200 and an option year based on ABs? That keeps his AAV under $30.

Go long and figure out where to play him later. His body type should age well.

The one thing we can offer him that other teams can’t: legacy. That requires years more than AAV.
That's almost exactly what I said I'd offer X upthread a week or two ago (including option year or years based on PAs so that he can finish his career in Boston).

It's all well and good to place a value on a player and say that you're not going to overpay by going over that number. But if you keep losing out on them as a result, then it probably says you're not valuing them in accordance with the prevalent market. Sure, you'll have your principles intact, but your team will probably suck.

Just pay the man. It's not that hard. They can afford it. Correa or Turner would cost them more, and Swanson will cost almost as much, isn't as good, and doesn't have the track record (especially in Boston), so the alternatives to X are just not all that attractive.
 

Minneapolis Millers

Wants you to please think of the Twins fans!
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
4,700
Twin Cities
That's almost exactly what I said I'd offer X upthread a week or two ago (including option year or years based on PAs so that he can finish his career in Boston).
You, sir, are a freakin clairvoyant genius! . (Especially if they actually sign him for something like this.)
 

Big Papi's Mango Salsa

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2022
272
There are very few players I'd say this about but on Bogaerts, my answer is "whatever it takes that is less than Turner got."

He's been very durable. He's always been an excellent performer offensively and somewhere between the slightest bit below average to pretty darn good defensively. The intangibles are all there, although I don't know how to quantify it, I DO think that being able to handle the day to day of playing in places where baseball still matters (Boston, New York, Philly, the Cubbies) is an actual skill that some have and some don't - and we know Bogaerts can handle it here in Boston.

As for what dollar amount, to try answer the question, Turner signed for an AAV of $27.27m per year (with 11 years). He's the same age, and has been a little bit better offensive player and a considerably better (or at least more consistent) defensive shortstop.

I'd give him the option of two types of contracts, one with a higher AAV and shorter time frame such as 7yrs / $205m (or $29.25m per year) or a longer time frame but lesser AAV with something like 9 years / $225M at $25m per season.
 

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
53,934
deep inside Guido territory
If they wouldn’t sign Betts and Bogaerts to long-term big money deals why does anybody think they’ll do it with Devers? Might as well trade Devers now so you can maximize the return and get more cost-controlled young talent they won’t pay down the line.
 

AlNipper49

Huge Member
Dope
Apr 3, 2001
43,713
Mtigawi
I’m ok with that. The market changed a bit but San Diego is in GFIN mode. The Sox are not. That’s how it works.
 

Yaz4Ever

stumps for Trump
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2004
10,778
MA-CA-RI-AZ-NC
I can't be upset with management nor do I blame Xander, but this still sucks. At this point, I really hope the front office is working on locking down Devers now with an eye on trading him if they can't this off-season. No one wants to go through this again next year.
 

jsinger121

@jsinger121
SoSH Member
Jul 25, 2005
17,169
The Red Sox should put the Aaron Judge contract in front of Devers now and see if he would sign it.
 

AlNipper49

Huge Member
Dope
Apr 3, 2001
43,713
Mtigawi
Devers has never finished in the top ten for MVP voting. Judge just won one in one of the most dominating performances ever.
 

Yaz4Ever

stumps for Trump
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2004
10,778
MA-CA-RI-AZ-NC
He'd be nuts not to--Judge is older but discarding the COVID year, Judge's WAR floor is Devers's ceiling.
I agree completely, but some will still say the Sox were too cheap even if they made that offer, which I don't think they will nor should. 10 years/300M would be my maximum and then trade him if he refuses, others mileage may vary.
 

Big Papi's Mango Salsa

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2022
272
I think "being cheap" and "disagreeing with how money is spent" are two different arguments. The Red Sox are not cheap. They've always had a high payroll, and I think they'll continue to. However, I do think it's fair to question how they allocate that money - specifically under this front office (to be clear, I'm differentiating front office from ownership, the owners will spend the money but I think the FO - or Theo, Cherington, Dombrowski and now Bloom decide how it's spent).

Hopefully they will put whatever their best offer is going to be in front of Devers in the next couple of weeks. They already know what they're willing to go to - and that's fine. Negotiate up to that amount right now. If it takes something they're comfortable spending, awesome. If he doesn't, trade him now.

To be clear, I think this is more egregious than Lester or Betts. At least with both players, we recouped something of value moving them in years where contention was out the window and we weren't going to market on the player. In this case, we just lost Bogaerts for nothing, that is the inexcusable part. If you want to build through your farm ala Houston or Atlanta (which is totally defensible and likely "correct") then maybe move players you know you aren't going to sign to get more pieces for said farm system.
 

jsinger121

@jsinger121
SoSH Member
Jul 25, 2005
17,169
Are we sure that they want to commit $360 million to any one player?
I would but they won’t. This is what top of the market players get and the Red Sox have let two really good players walk because they constantly low ball them.
 

sezwho

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
1,190
Isle of Plum
I would but they won’t. This is what top of the market players get and the Red Sox have let two really good players walk because they constantly low ball them.
As much as I think lowballs are genuinely stupid and counterproductive, it’s not why they walked. If the Sox were in at the number they’d just as easily be in Boston.

Edit-maybe that’s what you meant?
 
I've been holding off on posting my thoughts in this thread as I didn't want to bias it, but now that X is off the table I'm less concerned about that. We're also far enough down that I think most people who haven't already voted probably won't read this before voting!

Anyway, there's no way I would offer Judge's contract to Devers. But I might be OK with offering him something in the 300-350 range for 15 years. The trend seems to be toward these "rest of your career" offers, and Devers is young enough that there is some upside to that. The total $ amount is massive enough to be seriously tempting, but the length pushes the AAV down, and by the back half of the contract the AAV will likely look like even less of an burden.
 

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
8,460
Does Devers even want to resign with the team at this point? He has seen the team stripped of most of the players he grew up and won with- were I him (I wish!) I would want to see some moves this off-season that suggest the team is really serious about contending in the short term. I would offer 12/360 and a full no trade. No idea if that gets a deal done at this point, but I think it shows that the team is looking forward and trying to add credibility.
 

jwbasham84

lurker
Jul 26, 2022
71
South Bend, IN
It is pretty apparent that they will not sign Devers to a (new) market rate deal. I am honestly not sure I would want them to. He is a great player that came up through our system, but I don't see him ever putting up a year like Judge just had. Why would be pay him as if he already has? I would love to keep our home-grown talent too, but we have too many spots to fill in our roster right now. Sure, we can afford it as a team and Henry can as an owner, but this isn't the Mike Illitch Tigers where the owner is willing to try and throw money out to just finally win a Championship. This ownership group has delivered 4 of them. With that being the case, TRADE HIM tomorrow. Don't allow him to lose any further value. I don't want to see him go, but it is the best way to maximize our return. Another 4th round pick after he doesn't accept our QO isn't a good enough.