What does 2023 look like?

dhappy42

Straw Man
Oct 27, 2013
14,213
Michigan
I have pointed out several times that the RS and RA would suggest that the pitching was the main issue despite what often seemed like an anemic offense. Interpretation of that data has to take into account the several amazingly lopsided losses sustained by the Red Sox last year, the ultimate example being the 28-5 drubbing by Toronto.
Red Sox pitching was 2nd worst in runs allowed in the AL. Adjusting for blowouts would improve them to what? 5th worst?
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
17,570
Maine

snowmanny

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
14,172
Red Sox pitching was 2nd worst in runs allowed in the AL. Adjusting for blowouts would improve them to what? 5th worst?
If you adjusted blowouts so the max # of runs allowed was 10 (e.g. the 28 run game would be scored as 10 runs against), then they would drop below the A's and be third worst.
 

dhappy42

Straw Man
Oct 27, 2013
14,213
Michigan
I'm guessing no. Wasn't the story in the spring that he turned down $200M? Unless we think the Sox were offering that over a longer deal than seven years, seems unlikely that it would get it done now.
I thought the “insulting” spring offer was akin to Atlanta’s deal with Olson, 8/168. That’s $21 AAV. 7/200 is $28.5 AAV. The article comps Devers and Austin Riley:

But Atlanta also extended third baseman Austin Riley this season on a 10-year, $212 million deal, an extension that could be a bit closer to what Devers is seeking even though Riley was just one year into arbitration.

Both players just completed their age 25 seasons. In 159 games this season, Riley hit .273 with an .878 OPS, 38 homers and 142 OPS+. In 141 games, this year, Devers hit .295 with an .879 OPS, 27 homers and a 141 OPS+.
 

mikcou

Member
SoSH Member
May 13, 2007
635
Boston
I thought the “insulting” spring offer was akin to Atlanta’s deal with Olson, 8/168. That’s $21 AAV. 7/200 is $28.5 AAV. The article comps Devers and Austin Riley:
They are pretty comparable players and similar ages with very different contractual outlooks that will make the valuations materially different. Austin Riley has all three years of arbitration remaining from 23-25. If you give him $30M+change for the three arbitration years, its a 7/180 or so for his FA years or $26M or so a year. An equal length deal for Devers is 10/255 or so ($260 less a pay cut for his $18-20M arbitration pay). Theres likely a 10%+ discount being applied for getting the money as early as he did so 10/275 or so seems the lowest equivalent deal for a 5 year player.

I dont see Devers taking anything in the 200M range (unless its something like a 5/200 that would put him back out in the market for another large deal) - high 200s is the basement and were likely in the 300s. This of course comports with them being $100M apart last offseason and the rumored offer that was based on Matt Olsens deal.
 

Sandy Leon Trotsky

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2007
4,624
Just throwing this out there: Joe Kelly had a .382 BABIP this year. Homers, LD% both down, K rate up, walks up a tick but not enough to account for his massive ERA+ swing. Is this a nice buy low for a guy who can handle Boston in medium-leverage situations?
I say yes. I can't imagine it'd cost anything that would hinder any other moves. Probably what? $2M? Kelly was maddening but had some transcendent stretches with Boston and I generally think (I don't know) he was a good presence
 

chawson

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
3,257
I say yes. I can't imagine it'd cost anything that would hinder any other moves. Probably what? $2M? Kelly was maddening but had some transcendent stretches with Boston and I generally think (I don't know) he was a good presence
Kelly's still got another year on his contract, at $8.5 AAV (and a '24 club option I can't tell if there's a buyout for). The White Sox seem to be in disarray so I wouldn't doubt he's available, and I can't imagine it'd be for much. Steep price but he was mighty unlucky this year and still seems to have the goods.
 

chrisfont9

Member
SoSH Member
Kelly's still got another year on his contract, at $8.5 AAV (and a '24 club option I can't tell if there's a buyout for). The White Sox seem to be in disarray so I wouldn't doubt he's available, and I can't imagine it'd be for much. Steep price but he was mighty unlucky this year and still seems to have the goods.
We could toss them a lower prospect/lottery ticket if they eat some of the $8.5m.
 

Sandy Leon Trotsky

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2007
4,624
So crap shoot Kelly AND crap shoot Barnes for a touch under $18M? No thank you.
I thought Kelly was a FA. Either way if he could be picked up for under $4M I’d be down. North of that and it’s a hard pass.

But I’m pretty bullish on Barnes for ‘23. In 22 innings after he returned from his injury he was one of the other bright spots in the pen. 20K’s and a 1.60 ERA.
He’s probably overpaid considering what he did for the time from mid July ‘21 through mid July ‘22 but it really seems there was an injury there.
He clearly lost his role as the closer and has slid to the 3rd guy in the pen (if Houck is healthy) since Whitlock is likely a starter.
 

JM3

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 14, 2019
1,975

nvalvo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
20,016
Rogers Park
I thought Kelly was a FA. Either way if he could be picked up for under $4M I’d be down. North of that and it’s a hard pass.

But I’m pretty bullish on Barnes for ‘23. In 22 innings after he returned from his injury he was one of the other bright spots in the pen. 20K’s and a 1.60 ERA.
He’s probably overpaid considering what he did for the time from mid July ‘21 through mid July ‘22 but it really seems there was an injury there.
He clearly lost his role as the closer and has slid to the 3rd guy in the pen (if Houck is healthy) since Whitlock is likely a starter.
Another hypothesis: Barnes was a victim of enhanced sticky stuff enforcement in 2021 who has benefited somewhat from the quiet reintroduction of sticky stuff (and resulting rising league wide spin rates, which are up but not quite to their pre-ban levels) this season.

56927
 

Sandy Leon Trotsky

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2007
4,624
Another hypothesis: Barnes was a victim of enhanced sticky stuff enforcement in 2021 who has benefited somewhat from the quiet reintroduction of sticky stuff (and resulting rising league wide spin rates, which are up but not quite to their pre-ban levels) this season.

View attachment 56927
If he’s using it in a way that’s more effective than everyone else using it and continues to be, I’m good with that….assuming it’s not Illegal then?
 

nvalvo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
20,016
Rogers Park
If he’s using it in a way that’s more effective than everyone else using it and continues to be, I’m good with that….assuming it’s not Illegal then?
What seems to be the case, per Eno Sarris at the Athletic, is that pitchers have moved to new substances, tackier than the sunscreen and rosin combo but less tacky than Spider Tack, that are allowing them to raise their spin rates while still passing the inspections. There are hypotheses that pitchers are either using some sort of clear wipeable or soluble substances that can help them pitch but be off their hands by the time they meet the umpire at the sideline for the hand massage.

The charts of league-wide spin rates in that article make matters pretty clear.

So it is illegal, but at least currently tolerated or at least eluding enforcement.
 

Ganthem

a ray of sunshine
SoSH Member
Apr 7, 2022
826
Jon Heyman reporting the Sox and Devers are still far apart. Sox offer is $200 million plus and Devers wanting at least 10 years and $300 million.
https://nypost.com/2022/10/27/red-sox-rafael-devers-remain-far-apart-in-negotiations/amp/
Isn't that what Devers will get if he hits free agency? He is also going to clear at least 20 million in arb, so it seems to me Bloom needs to accept Devers is going be market rate and given his age and improved defense I see nothing wrong with that.
 

ehaz

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 30, 2007
4,077
Since Nimmo’s been discussed:

View: https://twitter.com/TalkinBaseball_/status/1585748515115962371?s=20&t=8YE6DAhKF7QA1DUaHOG9kw


I don’t think that’s particularly unreasonable for a guy who has been a 4 - 5 WAR (per 150 games) player over the last few years with excellent on base skills and solid defense in CF.

But it’s a bit risky given his injury history. I’d strongly prefer prioritizing Xander and Devers but I wouldn’t hate Nimmo as a pivot from one of them if you can’t extend both.
 

Ganthem

a ray of sunshine
SoSH Member
Apr 7, 2022
826
Since Nimmo’s been discussed:

View: https://twitter.com/TalkinBaseball_/status/1585748515115962371?s=20&t=8YE6DAhKF7QA1DUaHOG9kw


I don’t think that’s particularly unreasonable for a guy who has been a 4 - 5 WAR (per 150 games) player over the last few years with excellent on base skills and solid defense in CF.

But it’s a bit risky given his injury history. I’d strongly prefer prioritizing Xander and Devers but I wouldn’t hate Nimmo as a pivot from one of them if you can’t extend both.
Before this season, Nimmo hasn't topped 100 games since 2018. If the Rockies want to pay that mich awesome. I hope the Sox stay clear.
 

mikcou

Member
SoSH Member
May 13, 2007
635
Boston
In all seriousness….. is Devers a $30M per year player…. Not just in 7-10 years, but in the next 4-5 years??? I’m not sure
Yes and I dont think its particularly arguable (at least over the next 5). He may not quite get that on AAV on a 10-12 year deal (although I suspect he will), but hes definitely a $30M/yr guy now and isnt really prime yet.

Hes been a pretty consistent 4.5+ win player; would anyone be surprise if he popped a few 6+ win years in his late 20s? I'd bet on it.
 

Yo La Tengo

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 21, 2005
458
Before this season, Nimmo hasn't topped 100 games since 2018. If the Rockies want to pay that mich awesome. I hope the Sox stay clear.
I totally agree about steering clear of Nimmo. What is interesting is to try and figure out how the Sox should spend money this offseason if they don't sign Devers and Xander.

And, Nimmo's stats kinda remind me of Charlie Blackmon (before the big power surge) which makes Colorado an interesting landing spot. Plus, Nimmo grew up in Wyoming.
 

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
6,606
Don’t we need to extend Devers, sign Bogaerts or someone similar, and acquire upgrades to improve the team?

I get the concerns with Nimmo- but every top free agent is going to sign for a huge amount of money and will all come with risks.

Sox have money, what’s the alternative use if not spending it?
 

YTF

Member
SoSH Member
Don’t we need to extend Devers, sign Bogaerts or someone similar, and acquire upgrades to improve the team?

I get the concerns with Nimmo- but every top free agent is going to sign for a huge amount of money and will all come with risks.

Sox have money, what’s the alternative use if not spending it?
I don't disagree, but as fans we also need to appreciate how that money is spent. Not only in terms of how much, but for how long. Every player is going to want as much as he can get, for however long he can get it for and I don't blame them. On the flip side, teams can't always meet the year or dollar commitment of every player they go after. There's a balancing act with these contracts, meaning you can't over extend and get locked into a period of years where you have no expiring contracts that allow for future spending on future needs.
 

Yo La Tengo

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 21, 2005
458
Don’t we need to extend Devers, sign Bogaerts or someone similar, and acquire upgrades to improve the team?

I get the concerns with Nimmo- but every top free agent is going to sign for a huge amount of money and will all come with risks.

Sox have money, what’s the alternative use if not spending it?
I think Devers and Xander are more likely to produce at a high level than any of the available free agents this year, which is why I want the Sox to pay them. The other upgrades/additions should come from trades (hopefully followed by moderately affordable extensions) or mid-range free agents.
 

Dewey'sCannon

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
763
Maryland
I'd probably offer Xander and Raffy similar deals - 8/240-250, with 2 option years @25 per that vest based on PAs in year 8 (and 9) and a$10m buyout. So guaranteed 250, max is 10/290-300. Xander would be older, in the later years of the deal but I'm more confident he'll still be in decent shape and will retain at least his bat-to-ball skills. Each will probably have to move positions in 3-4 years, but in both cases they're being paid for their batting skills rather than defense. X does get the SS premium in the short term, and both need to be recognized as franchise cornerstones.

My next move would be to try to get Trea Turner to play CF or RF and bat leadoff. He played some OF back in his days with the Nats and was pretty decent. He might be open to it Or at least as open as he might be to team that want him to play 2B). It's worth a shot - we need to upgrade the OF, and getting a leadoff hitter would also help.

That would cover it from the offensive side, I think. I'd consider bringing JD back on a short-term deal (1 or 2 years) for a lot less money ($10m per), but he'll probably get more elsewhere.

Spend the rest of the money on pitching, especially on at least one major addition to the bullpen.
 

Max Power

thai good. you like shirt?
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
6,373
Boston, MA
If Devers is worth 10/300 then Bogaerts is worth 7/225. Add Story’s 6/140 and major league minimum for Casas at 1B and that’s an 85-$86 million AAV infield.
Those guys probably aren't going to be 85 times better than Mule Suttles, Ray Dandridge, and Willie Wells.
 

dhappy42

Straw Man
Oct 27, 2013
14,213
Michigan
My next move would be to try to get Trea Turner to play CF or RF and bat leadoff. He played some OF back in his days with the Nats and was pretty decent. He might be open to it Or at least as open as he might be to team that want him to play 2B). It's worth a shot - we need to upgrade the OF, and getting a leadoff hitter would also help.
I they’re willing to splurge on Turner to play OF, why not splurge a little more on Judge instead? That’d not only fill a huge hole on the Red sox, it’d create one on the Yankees.
Spend the rest of the money on pitching, especially on at least one major addition to the bullpen.
After spending $75-&85 million on Bogaerts, Devers, and Turner (or Judge) there’s not much left over for pitching.
 

chrisfont9

Member
SoSH Member
I'd probably offer Xander and Raffy similar deals - 8/240-250, with 2 option years @25 per that vest based on PAs in year 8 (and 9) and a$10m buyout. So guaranteed 250, max is 10/290-300. Xander would be older, in the later years of the deal but I'm more confident he'll still be in decent shape and will retain at least his bat-to-ball skills. Each will probably have to move positions in 3-4 years, but in both cases they're being paid for their batting skills rather than defense. X does get the SS premium in the short term, and both need to be recognized as franchise cornerstones.

My next move would be to try to get Trea Turner to play CF or RF and bat leadoff. He played some OF back in his days with the Nats and was pretty decent. He might be open to it Or at least as open as he might be to team that want him to play 2B). It's worth a shot - we need to upgrade the OF, and getting a leadoff hitter would also help.

That would cover it from the offensive side, I think. I'd consider bringing JD back on a short-term deal (1 or 2 years) for a lot less money ($10m per), but he'll probably get more elsewhere.

Spend the rest of the money on pitching, especially on at least one major addition to the bullpen.
Devers won't bite on that deal right now, but it's a different number when you are trying to get a guy to give up a chance at free agency. A year from now, maybe that number looks reasonable to him, if the market for him is around that number. X is there, so he has more incentive to sign.
 

Yaz4Ever

stumps for Trump
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
I agree with @Lose Remerswaal ... Someone is going to pay Judge $400M+ for 10+ years. I hope it's not us. I love the idea of Turner being added to this lineup.

Devers isn't going to agree to the same deal as Xander. He's going to want more years and a higher AAV and he's going to get it. I really hope the Sox go all in with their offers as soon as the World Series ends so they can fill holes or look elsewhere. I don't know if Boras will cooperate with that, but I'd love to have a sense of our lineup before Christmas and not have a long dragged out media circus about "cheap owners" or "greedy players".
 

Sandy Leon Trotsky

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2007
4,624
Not that it's a surprise, but MLB Trade Rumors is reporting that the Sox do not plan to extend a Qualifying Offer to JD.
This would be a surprise actually. That's a lot of dough for JDM when he's not likely to get anything more than a one year offer in FA at this point- for likely less than $15M. It's been discussed here plenty, but I'd really like to just get past the DH as a full timer and use it to rest guys while keeping their bats in the game. That $19M for the QO to JDM could be used for two good bullpen arms easily.
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
80,960
Oregon
But the Red Sox pay him the minimum still, right?
Yep, and so would anyone they trade him to ... though I suspect they might wait until they see about Casas's health and/or readiness before doing so.
 

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
6,606
Only concern with holding on to Hosmer is it locks up a roster spot and potentially makes it more difficult to acquire someone who would be a better fit to a back up 1b (although I guess that could be Dalbec). Flipping Hosmer for a player that better fits the roster seems ideal for all sides.
 

Sox Puppet

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2016
684
I'd love to see José Abreu at a reasonable contract. He still has enough left in the tank to spell Casas against tough lefties and DH when he's not playing the field.
 

moondog80

heart is two sizes two small
SoSH Member
Sep 20, 2005
6,775
Refsnyder occupying a roster spot for small money presumably (hopefully) means not a smaller payroll, but more money to spend on other parts of the team.
 
Last edited: