X Leaves the Spot for San Diego: 11 years, $280M

streeter88

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 2, 2006
1,807
Melbourne, Australia
There's a tendency around here to give the front office too much agency, like they can do whatever they want if only they try hard enough. But the team can't control players, or control other teams, and they just have to make the best choices with the hands they are dealt. I think they did that here. So long Xander, thanks for everything, interested to see what's next for this team.
This is a reasoned and reasonable take, but this really stings.

I hate that the Red Sox lately seem to always be the team that can't retain their homegrown stars, and with the new information about what they offered X, it's very clear that current management is being very careful about the length of contracts given out - maybe as a response to several high profile failures over the last few years (Sale, Pedroia for example). That is OK, but it is very sad that our chief rivals can get their stars to stay for life - and sometimes it even kind of works out (Jeter), but we don't seem to value that.
 

MuzzyField

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Mookie Wilson?
Busted!

Too much info flowing in too little time.

But after the original typo was corrected, I'm fine with my post.

It's all about player development machine 2.0. The Sox must grow more homegrown stars.

We've been trying to wishcast AAAA talent into MLB players, In a good system, these guys should have been trade filler. The system failed at doing its job and delivering the next gen replacements it must do going forward.
 

soxhop411

news aggravator
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
46,274
Completely fair offer and pretty close to what was predicted he would get at the start of FA. Cant blame the sox for the padres going to an insane contract
I'm a little concerned that they thought 6/160 would get it done in this market. And this isn't all just Boras leaking unless this REd Sox executive was lying to Sean McAdam:

View: https://twitter.com/Sean_McAdam/status/1600575802818469888
Yes. But again. SD is spending money like someone with no financial responsibility. You cant fault the sox for SD barging in the last second and offering an obscene contract like that
 
Last edited:

koufax37

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
2,472
A 11 year contract to a 30 year old is silly at some levels and this reminds me of when the Cards were so far away when Pujols went to the Angels.

But remember that the Pujols deal wasn’t bad because of being 41 and 42. It was bad because he didn’t perform from 35 to 38. Years 10 and 11 aren’t what makes this contract so let’s think about it as a 9/230 for starters that might still be an overpay.

Since I can see Petco from my deck and don’t get out to Fenway much recently I get to see this one from both sides. I think Bloom is being cautious and might provide us with some benefit 6+ years out if Xander is underperforming, but over the next five years the Padres are unquestionably the winners and the Red Sox are unquestionably the losers. And the 26M we saved doesn’t buy what it used to.

In any 11 year period players change but so do budgets. We haven’t had an inflationary period like our current one in a long time. Sitting around and thinking that paying a 41 year old 26M in 2034 is somehow bad business that will hurt the ballclub seems pretty timid and flawed. The good news is with Story we done need a shortstop before Meyer is ready and can find value where the market allows it without participating in the giant superstar contracts.

Sad for the Sox, but I look forward to seeing Xander in person more often. If he is healthy this deal will look great for the rest of the decade before we see how it finishes up in the 2030s.
 

chrisfont9

Member
SoSH Member
A 11 year contract to a 30 year old is silly at some levels and this reminds me of when the Cards were so far away when Pujols went to the Angels.

But remember that the Pujols deal wasn’t bad because of being 41 and 42. It was bad because he didn’t performfrom 35 to 38. Years 10 and 11 aren’t what makes this contract so let’s think about it as a 9/230 for starters that might still be an overpay.

Might still be an overpay, but since I can see Petco from my deck and don’t get out to Fenway much recently, I think Bloom is being cautious and might provide us with some benefit five years out if Xander is underperforming, but over the next five years the Padres are unquestionably the winners and the Red Sox are unquestionably the losers. And the 26M we saved doesn’t buy what it used to.

In any 11 year period players change but so do budgets. We haven’t had an inflationary period like our current one in a long time. Sitting around and thinking that paying a 41 year old 26M in 2034 is somehow bad business that will hurt the ballclub seems pretty timid and flawed. The good news is with Story we done need a shortstop before Meyer is ready and can find value where the market allows it without participating in the giant superstar contracts.

Sad for the Sox, but I look forward to seeing Xander in person more often. If he is healthy this deal will look great for the rest of the decade before we see how it finishes up in the 2030s.
I'm not sure it's just about cash and years. It's partly about blocking their clear #1 top prospect. They need to allocate money to various parts of the roster -- and most years the team with the deepest pitching wins -- so locking up X at a silly rate is dicey enough even before you look at Mayer.
 

ehaz

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 30, 2007
4,948
I'm a little concerned that they thought 6/160 would get it done in this market. And this isn't all just Boras leaking unless this REd Sox executive was lying to Sean McAdam:

View: https://twitter.com/Sean_McAdam/status/1600575802818469888
My guess, if the executive or McAdam weren't just lying, is that they thought 6/$160M was going to be close enough and that Xander would've taken it over something like 8/$210 from like the Twins or whoever. Then San Diego came out of nowhere and offered $120M more.
 

StuckOnYouk

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 26, 2006
3,538
CT
So doesn't Preller trade Kim now that they have Xander at SS and Cronenworth at 2B? That makes sense as a move that would probably interest Bloom depending on the prospect package San Diego would be asking for.

Or would they rather trade Cronenworth and move Kim to 2B?
 

DeadlySplitter

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 20, 2015
33,247
My guess, if the executive or McAdam weren't just lying, is that they thought 6/$160M was going to be close enough and that Xander would've taken it over something like 8/$210 from like the Twins or whoever. Then San Diego came out of nowhere and offered $120M more.
I feel like a hometown discount can only go so far. Not everyone is a Judge or Turner willing to leave 40M on the table.

Maybe Xander would have been like that but even still, every year now we get these stupid money deals. You have to expect at least one team to go off the deep end, especially at hte winter meetings, if you really wanted to keep the player.

Which goes back to my original point last week.... I really think they are down on how X is likely to age and never were all-in on keeping him. We're never going to know where the 4/90 spring offer came from, but I feel like its origins have to be some really pessimistic internal projections. And then despite the WAR, he had these underlying Statcast percentiles:



Curious indeed. (Note the 88%th Outs About Avg, if you break it down, most of that value came from playing the right side of second in the shift, which is disappearing. He was slightly below average at traditional short, again.)
 

koufax37

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
2,472
I'm not sure it's just about cash and years. It's partly about blocking their clear #1 top prospect. They need to allocate money to various parts of the roster -- and most years the team with the deepest pitching wins -- so locking up X at a silly rate is dicey enough even before you look at Mayer.
But we both know that X can and will play elsewhere. And while I am bullish on Meyer (my son played against him in high school) he is not yet Tatís or even Kim, and might be a ways away. Mookie moved because he was blocked and it worked out fine.

And yes SS is covered with Story to Meyer, but will we replace what X does for the lineup over the next five or six years with the money we saved? I haven’t seen us be too amazing on the medium tier contributor signings which is what the hope would be at this point.
 

Hee Sox Choi

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 27, 2006
6,133
So doesn't Preller trade Kim now that they have Xander at SS and Cronenworth at 2B? That makes sense as a move that would probably interest Bloom depending on the prospect package San Diego would be asking for.

Or would they rather trade Cronenworth and move Kim to 2B?
Pads have been talking about Kim to 2b and Cronenworth to 1b.
 

curly2

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 8, 2003
4,887
Story because a terrific defensive second baseman last year. That should be his position going forward. He doesn't have the arm for short anymore.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
70,713

curly2

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 8, 2003
4,887
Underachieving, injured, and useless in October!

Not for a lack of trying!

I'll still enjoy Announcer Boy's west coast calls. What a joy compared to DOB blah.
They did take out the Mets, with every game on the road, and then beat the mighty Dodgers. Don't know if that underachieving or useless. To that lineup they'll add Tatis and Bogaerts.
 

ehaz

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 30, 2007
4,948
I feel like a hometown discount can only go so far. Not everyone is a Judge or Turner willing to leave 40M on the table.

Maybe Xander would have been like that but even still, every year now we get these stupid money deals. You have to expect at least one team to go off the deep end, especially at hte winter meetings, if you really wanted to keep the player.

Which goes back to my original point last week.... I really think they are down on how X is likely to age and never were all-in on keeping him. We're never going to know where the 4/90 spring offer came from, but I feel like its origins have to be some really pessimistic internal projections. And then despite the WAR, he had these underlying Statcast percentiles:



Curious indeed. (Note the 88%th Outs About Avg, if you break it down, most of that value came from playing the right side of second in the shift, which is disappearing. He was slightly below average at traditional short, again.)
Yeah it wouldn't surprise me if the extensions/offers we viewed as embarrassing lowballs were, in their eyes, fair value. They didn't buy the glove, internal underlying metrics showed the bat in decline, massive drop in xSLG, etc. Hopefully they have a plan. Someone like Amed Rosario as a 1-year rental (4.2 bWAR) wouldn't completely suck as long as they continue to sign players.

Edit:

View: https://twitter.com/PeteAbe/status/1600761292528111616?s=20&t=O1wGHlRLNQ-f8Ti4a5N7gg
 

MuzzyField

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Yeah it wouldn't surprise me if the extensions/offers we viewed as embarrassing lowballs were, in their eyes, fair value. They didn't buy the glove, internal underlying metrics showed the bat in decline, massive drop in xSLG, etc. Hopefully they have a plan. Someone like Amed Rosario as a 1-year rental (4.2 bWAR) wouldn't completely suck as long as they continue to sign players.

Edit:

View: https://twitter.com/PeteAbe/status/1600761292528111616?s=20&t=O1wGHlRLNQ-f8Ti4a5N7gg
Thanks for that on the spot report, Pete!
 

beautokyo

New Member
Jun 5, 2008
267
Tokyo, Japan
Boras clients are like any other agents' clients. The choice is theirs, not the agents.

Boras didn't want Jared Weaver to sign back in the day, but Weaver overruled him. Even Xander signed once already before he needed to. Maybe X was determined to go to free agency this time, maybe he would have signed an actual deal. 4/90 was never a serious offer.
Dice comes to mind too. Boras wanted him to go back to Japan and Dice said NO!
 

P'tucket rhymes with...

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2006
11,624
The Coney Island of my mind

rodderick

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 24, 2009
12,750
Belo Horizonte - Brazil
I guess it's fine to value Bogaerts at 6/160 and make that your final offer. But it's very concerning to have any sort of strong belief you were keeping him at 6/160. If there indeed was a hope that'd be enough, I think they are severely misreading this market.
 

Pat Spillane

New Member
Feb 12, 2021
61
It hurts but glad we are not paying that. Keeping flexibilty over the next few years is valuable for when we want to go all in. Xander on that contract is an albatross. I remember Hanly and Panda eating up the payroll (in Panda's case literally). I think we wold quickly regret a long term deal for 30 year old Xander. The Sale and Pedroia contracts are good examples of sentimental contracts blowing up on us
 

P'tucket rhymes with...

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2006
11,624
The Coney Island of my mind
It hurts but glad we are not paying that. Keeping flexibilty over the next few years is valuable for when we want to go all in. Xander on that contract is an albatross. I remember Hanly and Panda eating up the payroll (in Panda's case literally). I think we wold quickly regret a long term deal for 30 year old Xander. The Sale and Pedroia contracts are good examples of sentimental contracts blowing up on us
The Pedroia deal wasn't anything close to a sentimental overpay at the time, and didn't significantly strain the salary cap even in the later years--there were much larger albatrosses on the books.
 

mauf

Anderson Cooper × Mr. Rogers
Moderator
SoSH Member
I wonder if expectations of higher long-term inflation are driving some of these contracts. If inflation averages 4-5% over the next decade instead of 2%, the burden of commitments to players like X and Judge 8-10 years from now will be materially lessened.
 

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
11,920
Tough news to wake up to, but seems like the Sox weren’t actually close to bringing him back at all; certainly feels like they botched the negotiations and were way off on his market value from the get go, but we will have to see how they respond. Losing a 5 win player is a pretty big blow, and if they are going to hold the line on the length of deals they offer, Devers is gone too. But who knows; perhaps they pivot to Correa.
 

Traut

lost his degree
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
12,750
My Desk
I guess it's fine to value Bogaerts at 6/160 and make that your final offer. But it's very concerning to have any sort of strong belief you were keeping him at 6/160. If there indeed was a hope that'd be enough, I think they are severely misreading this market.
This is free agency. It’s an auction. And it’s why players and agents love it. In an auction, all it takes is one bidder to drive up the price.

Values in any market aren’t flat. A player, land, IP, whatever could be worth multiples to one party as opposed to another.

In this case the Padres aren’t looking at this as an 11 year deal. They look at it as a 2-3 year deal amortized over 11 years. They are playing to win now.

Even the most optimistic Sox fan can’t think our next window is the next 1-2 seasons.

This is fine for both the Sox, Padres, and Xander.
 

JCizzle

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 11, 2006
20,530
Yeah it wouldn't surprise me if the extensions/offers we viewed as embarrassing lowballs were, in their eyes, fair value. They didn't buy the glove, internal underlying metrics showed the bat in decline, massive drop in xSLG, etc. Hopefully they have a plan. Someone like Amed Rosario as a 1-year rental (4.2 bWAR) wouldn't completely suck as long as they continue to sign players.

Edit:

View: https://twitter.com/PeteAbe/status/1600761292528111616?s=20&t=O1wGHlRLNQ-f8Ti4a5N7gg
This is simply inexcusable by the team’s leadership and does reinforce the idea that they also low ball their players with pre-FA extension offers. They’re divorced from new spending realities and take too long to catch up.
 

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
11,920
This is simply inexcusable by the team’s leadership and reinforces the idea that they also low ball their players with pre-FA extension offers. They’re divorced from the new spending reality.
As far as we know, the Sox offered X 4/80 before the season started, and then 6/160 now. So the combined total of their two offers was still less than he ended up getting. Yikes. Perhaps they will end up being “right” on this but it’s a tough stance to take when you are a big market team that is completely lacking in high end, top tier players.
 

rodderick

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 24, 2009
12,750
Belo Horizonte - Brazil
This is free agency. It’s an auction. And it’s why players and agents love it. In an auction, all it takes is one bidder to drive up the price.

Values in any market aren’t flat. A player, land, IP, whatever could be worth multiples to one party as opposed to another.

In this case the Padres aren’t looking at this as an 11 year deal. They look at it as a 2-3 year deal amortized over 11 years. They are playing to win now.

Even the most optimistic Sox fan can’t think our next window is the next 1-2 seasons.

This is fine for both the Sox, Padres, and Xander.
Yeah, I'm not living in a world where the only other contract on the table for Bogaerts was 6/160 and the Padres ended up giving him close to 300 million. There are reports he had multiple 200+ milion offers and that's the scenario that makes more sense. In any case, as I mentioned previously 6/160 isn't an insulting offer and I'm fine with that being their valuation of Xander, it's just an amount of money you absolutely have to imagine will be surpassed by someone else, so I think it's foolish to be confident in him coming back at that price (if they were indeed confident he'd re-sign).

The Pedroia deal wasn't anything close to a sentimental overpay at the time, and didn't significantly strain the salary cap even in the later years--there were much larger albatrosses on the books.
Right. And Sale was always an injury risk as well, which Xander isn't. It's fine not to want to give Xander 11 years, but let's not pretend he was anything but an incredibly consistent player with the Red Sox who just turmed 30 years old. There are valid concerns about the underlying profile of his batted balls, but to characterize the decision to bring him back as "sentimental" would be silly. They wouldn't be paying him for past performance, odds are still in his favor to continue being a 4.5-5 WAR/year SS, at least in the short term.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,370
Going through the "Best offers" thread, here's what we had collectively suggested:

6/162
5/160
6/150 with maybe some escalators
7/175
7/175
6/165 with opt outs
6/156 with incentives and an option for a 7th year
4/105
6/175
5/160
4/100
6/150
7/177
7/196 referencing speculation by Jim Bowden
4/110 with mutual options for a 5th/6th/7th year
7/200 plus 2 option years (this was by @Dewey'sCannon )
7/210
5/130 plus a vesting option to bring it to 6/150
7/160

@nvalvo wrote, "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."

So here's the thing. Our longest contract was Dewey's Cannon, for 7 years plus two option years to get to 9. Of the 19 submissions in that thread, only 7 of them went to 7 years. That means that 12 of the 19 (63%) of the suggested HIGHEST offers were for 6 or fewer years.

Xander got *11*.

Dewey's Cannon also suggested the highest overall possible contract if the option years happened, so it would have been about 9/257 if it all came to pass.

Which was way higher than anyone else here. It was also $23 million short of what X got.

The average contract we suggested was about 6/159 ($26.5m AAV).

In other words, we as a collective group got the AAV approximately right (X is getting $25.4m AAV), but we were WAY, WAY off in both years and dollars. He ended up getting about DOUBLE what we had collectively suggested, on average.

Holy crap.

So here's the thing. Here's the median of the top 5 team opening day payrolls year to year since 2012 (so the last 11 years). That's a clunky way of saying the third highest payroll each year. I'm using this to reference a super high, but not THE highest, payroll each year. Let's see the trend.

http://www.stevetheump.com/Payrolls.htm

2012: $173m (Bos)
2013: $165m (Phi)
2014: $180m (Phi)
2015: $187m (Bos)
2016: $182m (Bos)
2017: $200m (Bos)
2018: $186m (LAD)
2019: $206m (NYY)
2020: skip due to Covid warping the numbers
2021: $180m (Bos)
2022: $240m (NYY)

So in 11 years the #3 payroll in MLB has gone from $173m to $240m. Not linear growth. That represents about a 39% increase from 2012, or about $6m a year on average. So let's just have fun and project that out.

Year: #3 payroll - % of payroll taken up by Xander's $25.5m
2023: $246m - 10.4%
2033: $342m - 7.5% (the $342m number is 39% growth from the $246m number)

So relative to the overall team payroll, Xander's percentage will obviously go down a sizable amount.

But still.

ELEVEN years.
TWO HUNDRED EIGHTY MILLION dollars.

SOSH, we weren't even CLOSE.
 

BringBackMo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
1,316
I'm a little concerned that they thought 6/160 would get it done in this market. And this isn't all just Boras leaking unless this REd Sox executive was lying to Sean McAdam:

View: https://twitter.com/Sean_McAdam/status/1600575802818469888
Yours is a fair response. Just pointing out that this tweet read bizarre to me even the first time I saw it. It reads to me as though McAdam is reporting second hand a conversation someone else told him they had with someone with the Sox.
 

Traut

lost his degree
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
12,750
My Desk
Yeah, I'm not living in a world where the only other contract on the table for Bogaerts was 6/160 and the Padres ended up giving him close to 300 million. There are reports he had multiple 200+ milion offers and that's the scenario that makes more sense. In any case, as I mentioned previously 6/160 isn't an insulting offer and I'm fine with that being their valuation of Xander, it's just an amount of money you absolutely have to imagine will be surpassed by someone else, so I think it's foolish to be confident in him coming back at that price (if they were indeed confident he'd re-sign).
In hindsight it sure looks that way. But I can hardly fault the Sox or any team for being wrong on market projections. Nothing that I’ve read anywhere suggested this much money for Xander.

It’s reasonable they simulated markets for him. They used available information and made their best guess.

Should they have seen Dombrowski throwing that much money at Turner? And/or Turner turning down that much money from the Padres? That’s all doubtful.

There are so many factors, so many human variables at play, and look at the NFL draft. Every single year in the first round there are multiple surprises despite intense dissection by people whose job it is to understand the draft.

All it takes is one owner to open the vaults to win now. The Sox would be foolish given their multiple needs to open the vault this offseason for a 31 year old SS who is on the decline at least defensively.
 

soup17

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
242
I haven’t had caffeine yet, but this is a brilliant deal for the Padres - the kind of deal the Boston team used to put together.
Economics:
1) what’s $27M going to be worth in 2031 - $22M maybe?
2) a RH PH / occasional DH/ 1B is probably going to be getting $20-22M in 9 years on the open market
3) luxury tax limits are going to continue to rise - maybe 10-15% higher in 8 years - that just absorbed X’s tax hit.

So the Padres can afford to field a team with X, Machado, Soto, and Tatis, but the $3.9B BOSTON RED SOX can’t?
 

NJ_Sox_Fan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 2, 2006
10,736
NJ
Not even slightly upset the Sox didn’t beat this offer. It’s a ridiculous contract for X, especially when there’s a better SS still out there.

SD loves throwing around money apparently.

11 years is almost laughable really.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,083
In a vacuum, I don’t mind this decision but the problem is we don’t live in a vacuum. The Red Sox keep losing their best players and they aren’t replacing them (yet). It’s hard to really ascertain what Chaim’s plan is here.

If he gives a similar contract to Correa, that’ll help. I certainly hope it’s not Swanson.

Devers extension becomes of prime importance now. And hard to think it’ll get done given these crazy FA dollars.
 

rodderick

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 24, 2009
12,750
Belo Horizonte - Brazil
In hindsight it sure looks that way. But I can hardly fault the Sox or any team for being wrong on market projections. Nothing that I’ve read anywhere suggested this much money for Xander.

It’s reasonable they simulated markets for him. They used available information and made their best guess.

Should they have seen Dombrowski throwing that much money at Turner? And/or Turner turning down that much money from the Padres? That’s all doubtful.

There are so many factors, so many human variables at play, and look at the NFL draft. Every single year in the first round there are multiple surprises despite intense dissection by people whose job it is to understand the draft.

All it takes is one owner to open the vaults to win now. The Sox would be foolish given their multiple needs to open the vault this offseason for a 31 year old SS who is on the decline at least defensively.
If by "open the vault" you mean giving him what the Padres are paying, I agree. I'm not faulting the Sox for lowballing Xander considering the Padres were willing to reach a number pretty much no one saw coming when free agency started.
 

Johnnyfnfoxboro

New Member
Nov 21, 2021
6
Because I really like Xander, I love this deal. He gets 100M more and does not have to shovel in February. Really good for other shortstops and aging players in general. He won big, and the Red Sox escape investing big in a depreciating asset. High character guy and will be missed - will love to watch him in SD.
 

BringBackMo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
1,316
Very sad to see Xander go, like everyone else. I do feel that people are reading way, way too much into McAdam’s rather vague tweet. This front office has leaked nothing, to anyone. I’m not buying that anyone important in the organization suddenly told someone without hesitation that they were confident they were going to resign X. The two-hour Xander is Coming Home! social media blitz yesterday afternoon looks in hindsight very much like a campaign to get SD to bid against itself and up what was already the best offer for Bogaerts. Regardless, if anyone here wants to criticize the Sox for their approach to the X negotiations going back a year or two, have at it. But to imply that this organization is so incompetent that it is clueless about the market rates for free agents in 2022–especially in light of the contracts handed out over the past 48 hours—simply strains credulity. If that’s your take, you are the one who is likely out of touch. The Sox had a number they valued X at. They offered that number. That‘s all there is to it. I’m sad he won’t be with the Red Sox. I wanted him to retire here. I’m also very confident the Sox have planned for this outcome.
 

mikeford

woolwich!
SoSH Member
Aug 6, 2006
29,517
St John's, NL
11 years 280m is too rich for my blood for a guy with no power anymore. Love you X but enjoy playing for a loser franchise for the rest of your life.

Sign Correa.