SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
Who should the Red Sox extend in 2022?
|
Post by incandenza on Apr 7, 2022 18:50:45 GMT -5
Shortstop Xander Bogaerts, Boston Red Sox remain at odds over contract ahead of season opener www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/33692496/shortstop-xander-bogaerts-boston-red-sox-remain-odds-contract-ahead-season-openerNEW YORK -- With shortstop Xander Bogaerts set to opt out of his contract after 2022, the question of whether he will be back with the Boston Red Sox next year looms over the team's season. When asked on Thursday whether he expected to come to an agreement with the Red Sox on a contract extension before their season starts on Friday, Bogaerts did not mince words. "No," Bogaerts said. "No." Boston offered Bogaerts an extension during the offseason, but the 29-year-old turned down the offer. According to team sources, Bogaerts asked for a contract that paid him in line with the game's highest-paid shortstops: Carlos Correa (who makes $35.1 million with the Minnesota Twins), Francisco Lindor (who makes $34.1 million with the New York Mets) and Corey Seager (who makes $33 million with the Texas Rangers).The Red Sox declined to match that request. It's weird to group those three like that - Correa is ridiculously underpaid and the other two are overpaid; the difference is all in the length of the contract. I'd be perfectly happy for the Sox to sign him for 3/105 like Correa. But a 10-year/$30 million AAV deal like the other two got for a 30-year-old Bogaerts would be completely ridiculous.
The more relevant comp might be Rendon, who got 7/245 as a 30-year-old. But a) Rendon had a better track record than Bogaerts heading into free agency, and b) that was a pretty big overpay.
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Apr 7, 2022 21:50:20 GMT -5
Bottom line: Sox let X AND Devers go, then *I* am a free agent for new team. And I don’t need any “I guess they wanted to leave” jive. When that is the excuse for multiple guys, the question starts to become: what is wrong with playing here?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 7, 2022 23:20:01 GMT -5
Bottom line: Sox let X AND Devers go, then *I* am a free agent for new team. And I don’t need any “I guess they wanted to leave” jive. When that is the excuse for multiple guys, the question starts to become: what is wrong with playing here? X will need to like his new 3B position, and Devers will be the new Ortiz complete with big smile and 13 years as a DH…… then they can sign new contracts
|
|
|
Post by Underwater Johnson on Apr 7, 2022 23:36:23 GMT -5
Bottom line: Sox let X AND Devers go, then *I* am a free agent for new team. And I don’t need any “I guess they wanted to leave” jive. When that is the excuse for multiple guys, the question starts to become: what is wrong with playing here? X will need to like his new 3B position, and Devers will be the new Ortiz complete with big smile and 13 years as a DH…… then they can sign new contracts It's the other way around. You pay them and then you tell them "Hey, we're paying you $25-$30m, you'll play where we tell you to play."
|
|
|
Post by bluechip on Apr 7, 2022 23:41:54 GMT -5
Xander should absolutely try to get as much as possible and opt out. That being said, Trea Turner and Correa are also going to free agents and looking for big deals, so he will have competition. Of those three, I’d prefer to keep Xander.
If any of those shortstops are signed to a ten year deal, I have a feeling the team will be regretting before the end.
|
|
|
Post by bosoxnation on Apr 7, 2022 23:45:32 GMT -5
X took a huge pay cut the last few years. 4 years 125 mill. Wrap it up Bloom.
|
|
|
Post by nuttyredsox on Apr 8, 2022 2:21:11 GMT -5
Trade them X ASAP and Devers at the trade deadline (preference) or during the off season.
I'm sure we can pick up some serious talent and will soon forgot about them.
I AM A RED SOX FOR LIFE.... NOT THE PLAYERS
|
|
|
Post by voiceofreason on Apr 8, 2022 3:30:50 GMT -5
Bottom line: Sox let X AND Devers go, then *I* am a free agent for new team. And I don’t need any “I guess they wanted to leave” jive. When that is the excuse for multiple guys, the question starts to become: what is wrong with playing here? Hyperbole
|
|
|
Post by voiceofreason on Apr 8, 2022 10:02:08 GMT -5
OK so it is looking like I am wrong again if Xander wants top dollar and is drinking the Scott Boras kool aide on his value. He has been great for us but I'm not in favor of a LT 30m contract and I don't think Chaim is either. I would hate to see him go via free agency with no prospects in return via trade but I would hate for the Sox to be out of the race at the deadline even more. So if there is a deal to be made that makes sense then pull the trigger regardless of the standings and put Story at SS. I think that is how Chaim might be looking at it as he isn't afraid to make moves and remember they traded Nomar mid season and that worked out fine.
|
|
|
Post by alexcorahomevideo on Apr 8, 2022 10:23:51 GMT -5
Offer Xander the same contract as Ramirez and offer Devers 10/300. I doubt they did either which is why it was rejected.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Apr 8, 2022 10:31:25 GMT -5
OK so it is looking like I am wrong again if Xander wants top dollar and is drinking the Scott Boras kool aide on his value. He has been great for us but I'm not in favor of a LT 30m contract and I don't think Chaim is either. I would hate to see him go via free agency with no prospects in return via trade but I would hate for the Sox to be out of the race at the deadline even more. So if there is a deal to be made that makes sense then pull the trigger regardless of the standings and put Story at SS. I think that is how Chaim might be looking at it as he isn't afraid to make moves and remember they traded Nomar mid season and that worked out fine. It would be a shame if Bogaerts goes the full Boras route of holding out for an unreasonable contract. The only two possible outcomes of that are that some team gives him an unreasonable contract (like 7/210 or more) or else he holds out until late in the offseason and the Red Sox are compelled to plan around him. If that's what happens, I would say that it's nice that the Red Sox kept him around for an extra 3 years but it just wouldn't make sense to keep him on those unreasonable terms.
But I've thought for a while (actually since he signed the extension in 2019) that he was probably gonna leave after this season. I've been girding myself for it.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Apr 8, 2022 11:06:15 GMT -5
People are acting like a player can’t hit free agency then resign with their current team. Happens all the time, sure it also doesn’t happen a lot but that’s the deal. Xander and Devers both have flaws working against them, it’s possible the best thing is for them to test the market and see what’s out there so them and the Red Sox can come to a reasonable agreement.
|
|
|
Post by Underwater Johnson on Apr 8, 2022 11:10:59 GMT -5
It's called negotiation. Only a fool would come out in the media and say "Yeah, I love it here and will take whatever they think is fair," even if he feels that way. I think X and Raffy will both be Sox in 2030 (although X might be a recently retired Sox).
EDIT: I've been pro-extend-them-both all along but the more I think about it, the less downside I see. Neither guy is likely to fall off a cliff, performance-wise. Neither guy is likely to embarrass the club off the field. If there are obvious, persistent defensive issues, once they're signed they have to play where the manager tells them to play. There's money coming off the books in 2023 and 2024 and the CBT is going up. Just do it.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaydouble on Apr 8, 2022 11:20:07 GMT -5
I still there’s a very good chance that one of Bogaerts or Devers re-signs. But I hate that we’re in a position now where the better Bogaerts plays this year, the more likely it is he leaves. I don’t think Chaim is going to give him $250 million no matter how well he plays this year, but some dumber team probably will if he pops a 6 WAR season or something.
|
|
|
Post by wcsoxfan on Apr 8, 2022 11:30:45 GMT -5
I was curious so I looked up the frequency of players re-signing with their former teams this past off-season and found that it happened 16.2% of the time.
There were two Red Sox: Hansel Robles and Travis Shaw.
Of the top 25 player (according to steamers) there were 5 instances. All 5 instances included either the Dodgers or the Giants.
(sample included all free agents who were on an MLB team last year and signed with an MLB team up to this point)
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,897
|
Post by nomar on Apr 8, 2022 11:37:12 GMT -5
We’ll see what the open market dictates. Devers and Bogaerts don’t have the defensive value of a lot of these guys getting huge deals. That muddies up their floors and will likely hurt them in free agency, granted all it takes is one believer to sign them to a crazy deal.
Bloom probably isn’t married to anyone on this roster. There is no generational talent on this team. There’s a lot of very good players, and a couple great ones, but nobody who realistically can be a top 5 player in baseball (unless Devers really improves his defense which I doubt given his body type). Maybe he’ll be reluctant to go too heavy on big contracts with anyone. He seems like a really savvy GM, so I’m not going to doubt him until he proves otherwise.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Apr 8, 2022 13:57:34 GMT -5
It's called negotiation. Only a fool would come out in the media and say "Yeah, I love it here and will take whatever they think is fair," even if he feels that way. I think X and Raffy will both be Sox in 2030 (although X might be a recently retired Sox).
EDIT: I've been pro-extend-them-both all along but the more I think about it, the less downside I see. Neither guy is likely to fall off a cliff, performance-wise. Neither guy is likely to embarrass the club off the field. If there are obvious, persistent defensive issues, once they're signed they have to play where the manager tells them to play. There's money coming off the books in 2023 and 2024 and the CBT is going up. Just do it.
I’m pretty sure most of us are in the pro-sign them group but some things are just silly to do, so without knowing the numbers it’s hard to get riled up. Devers bat plays everywhere, Xanders is a great at short and then it loses value elsewhere, especially when you factor in future decline. Signing him too long at 30+m is likely going to be a disaster: I think the Kris Bryant deal (7 years) plus a couple million per is where X should be. Call it 7/200… i think that’s actually still an over-pay but a reasonable one for him.
|
|
|
Post by GyIantosca on Apr 15, 2022 17:40:25 GMT -5
Me personally I want Devers signed sealed and delivered.
I like Xman, but i'm on team Bloom I just wish they were more authentic with there offer. But the temptation in 2023 and 2024 with the financial flexibility Bloom has coming, Is like a painter staring at a blank canvas just starting there masterpiece. We know whose contracts are up and each one he can take his time because he has a mountain of money he can bring back whoever he wants unless the player is bitter to the team.
I bet you this was a major selling point for him to come here. We never had this staring at us. See DD had a treasure trove of grade a prospects but not endless money. This is gonna be fun. I am in no rush to get to it yet. To much baseball to play.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Apr 15, 2022 18:40:56 GMT -5
Eh at those prices listed the only one I'd say would be Devers. I love eovaldi but I'm not giving him a 4 year deal with his injury history. Xander I hate to say it the writing is on the wall with Story signing. JD has been great here but I don't want anymore long term high dollar DHs. Maybe Hernandez if he replicates last year, I don't think that'd be a crazy offer looking at what Chris Taylor got. Vazquez if he'd sign that deal would be a good deal but doubt he would. I know ZIPS likes Kiké to stay a bargain in the 3-4 WAR range. These guys think he's been very unlucky and is due to hit for more power: fantasy.fangraphs.com/whos-been-unlucky-the-hitters-2/ . I'd definitely take that deal on him if he produces at the upper end of that range this year. Even if he declines slightly faster than anticipated with age, his versatility is really valuable...even as a 2-2.5 WAR player you could argue he'd be worth more than his contract. I'd actually prefer a 5/70, if he'd do it. It would lower the salary cap hit, give him a bit more security and overall value, and I think he's still be a useful player at 35 if not a pretty good one. Raffy...whew. I really didn't know what to do with him when I first thought about it. He's looking more and more like he might become a regular .280-.300/.380/.600+ guy, at least for a solid stretch. Dude's still SO young. I think he's maybe even worth $32M AAV at 34 on his current career arc; when he came up at 20 and performed as he did, I saw an analysis on fangraphs that used roughly his performance criteria and historical comps and pegged it at around a 1 in 7 shot at the HOF. I'd say it's closer to 1 in 3 or 2 in 5 now, and that's a guy you keep. But boy, they better have some pitching in development because that's a substantial chunk of salary. Then again, that's exactly the type of player you pay. On the other hand...he's going to have to be Papi-esque (which he certainly could do) or channel Mo Vaughn if his defense declines at all before 30, and that seems pretty likely. Still, his .280/40/120 or so annually and maybe .320/45/145 career year (I'm intentionally being what I'd consider conservative there, too...he's got 5 years of prime left to do it) is huge in the middle of the lineup. I really wanna see Bogey back, but only if it's mutually reasonable, and I think at this point the two sides are too far apart on what each needs from the other. Gonna bum me out if he goes. Such a classy guy and an excellent, consistent player.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Apr 15, 2022 19:01:34 GMT -5
I understand the points forever9 and julyanmorley are making and, in fact, was already aware of them. Before I posted, I thought I recalled reading that an all-replacement level team would win about 48 games. I searched and found this article, which seems to confirm that: www.beyondtheboxscore.com/2018/12/26/18155292/correlation-war-wins-pythagorean-expectation-second-order-wins-third-order-winsIt says, "A replacement-level team, rather, is projected to post a .294 winning percentage. Over the course of a 162-game season, this team would win 47.628 games. Thus, for every single WAR above this, a team should be worth WAR + 47.628." So, getting to 90 wins at $8M per would get your payroll to $336 million (42 x $8M). If I understand julyanmorley's post, it says the same thing. Getting to 81 wins requires a 33-WAR roster. You get 48 for being replacement level and need another 33. I'm also aware that the high-end cost per WAR that gets quoted is for FAs. The lesson I take from that is that it's best to avoid big FA contracts when you can. They are an inefficient and super high-risk way to add talent. If you feel your team in nearly complete, but you just need another piece or two to go on a run that could bring one or more titles, then go ahead and overpay. Three years of paying David Price to pitch in LA is painful, but he was integral to the 2018 championship, so I'm Ok with it.There's also the issue of downside risk. The question the thread poses is whether we would pay Raffy $300 million for nine years. That's $33.3 million/year. If his career were to go the way of, let's say, Nomar's, the RS would have a massive sunk cost on their hands. Nomie put up 2.4 WAR from his age 30 to 33 seasons. Starting a nine-year Raffy contract now (in other words buying out his last two arb years) would take him through his age 33 season. Mo Vaughn is another example. Mo put up 3.6 WAR in his age 31 to 33 seasons while drawing checks from the Angels. I'll grant you that Mo's lifestyle probably didn't help. The VIP lounge at the Foxy Lady and buffet restaurants aren't known as great training facilities. He let himself go when it came to conditioning. Nomar and Mo are probably extreme examples of guys who fell of a cliff. But I think we all agree that the second halves of these massive contracts are usually disasters. In general, I'm extremely wary of massive long-term contracts, as I guess you can tell. But they have to spend their money on somebody. They can't realistically get up to a $230 million payroll on $7-10 million/year deals. And a really good team needs a few great players, which you can't just count on getting solely from cost-controlled guys. Even if it is not maximally efficient from a WAR perspective, it still makes sense to sign the occasional expensive long-term deal.
Of course those deals can go sideways so you want to be smart about it. So what are the best bets? Well, if the player in question still has two years of control you ought to get him at a discount relative to FA prices. And if he's 25 you're at less risk of decline. In short, if you're ever going to give a player a $300 million contract - and you should occasionally want to do that - Devers is the guy to give it to.
Exactly. Pay for rarity (superstars), cost certainty (long-term deals for young guys who project as regulars or stars), and on short-term deals where you like the risk/reward ratio (Eovaldi). Unless a team has literally no minor league system, there are always going to be savings on 4-7 or so spots where guys are making league minimum to roughly $2M. I get the FA calculators, but they're just that: Free Agency calculators. FA has always been a player-friendly venue. That's why it exists. But I think FA is unfairly maligned/makes people heedlessly nervous because there are so many bad contracts handed out as a product of poor team decisions. A smart FO will make intelligent risk analyses and (see Trevor Story) add the right players. Those contracts do carry substantial risk, but they can be incredibly smart in the right context. The key is player development and shrewd peripheral talent assessment (Kiké...love that guy) provide the cost savings elsewhere. It just means being more vigilant about wasteful spending.
|
|
TearsIn04
Veteran
Everybody knows Nelson de la Rosa, but who is Karim Garcia?
Posts: 2,837
|
Post by TearsIn04 on Apr 15, 2022 23:03:29 GMT -5
But they have to spend their money on somebody. They can't realistically get up to a $230 million payroll on $7-10 million/year deals. And a really good team needs a few great players, which you can't just count on getting solely from cost-controlled guys. Even if it is not maximally efficient from a WAR perspective, it still makes sense to sign the occasional expensive long-term deal.
Of course those deals can go sideways so you want to be smart about it. So what are the best bets? Well, if the player in question still has two years of control you ought to get him at a discount relative to FA prices. And if he's 25 you're at less risk of decline. In short, if you're ever going to give a player a $300 million contract - and you should occasionally want to do that - Devers is the guy to give it to.
Exactly. Pay for rarity (superstars), cost certainty (long-term deals for young guys who project as regulars or stars), and on short-term deals where you like the risk/reward ratio (Eovaldi). Unless a team has literally no minor league system, there are always going to be savings on 4-7 or so spots where guys are making league minimum to roughly $2M. I get the FA calculators, but they're just that: Free Agency calculators. FA has always been a player-friendly venue. That's why it exists. But I think FA is unfairly maligned/makes people heedlessly nervous because there are so many bad contracts handed out as a product of poor team decisions. A smart FO will make intelligent risk analyses and (see Trevor Story) add the right players. Those contracts do carry substantial risk, but they can be incredibly smart in the right context. The key is player development and shrewd peripheral talent assessment (Kiké...love that guy) provide the cost savings elsewhere. It just means being more vigilant about wasteful spending. I never said I don't want the RS to pay for players. I want them to spend as much as they can without having their draft pick moved back 10 spots. I love X and Raffy and hope the RS sign them both to reasonable deals. But I DON'T want the RS locked into massive, long-term deals that inhibit their chances of winning for years at a time. How much better could the 2021 and 2022 rosters have been if the payroll wasn't burdened with Sale's $25.6 million AAV? An exec as smart as CB can do a lot with that amount of money. How much better could the 2015 to 2019 teams have been if they hadn't been stuck with Fat Panda's $19.5 million AAV and his incredible -1.6 B-Ref WAR in two-plus years he spent here? (Ok, I'll grant you that the '18 team couldn't have been much better, but the point stands for the other years that Panda puffed himself up at the buffet while drawing checks from the RS.) I want the RS to develop players, develop players and develop players. Once they're done with that, I want them to develop more players. They should extend their homegrown guys who are willing to take deals that work for both sides. They should trade guys who want to max out before they hit free agency. They would have had more flexibility to extend Devers after the 2019 or 2020 seasons if they weren't so close to the LTT due to some unproductive contracts. If Mayer/Casas/Mayer etc. become stars, I'd love for the RS to have the flexibility to sign them to reasonable long-term deals a few years before they hit FA. (The TBR were able to get Wander Franco at a reasonable AAV because they made the deal so early in his pre-arb years.) It'll be tougher if we're overpaying X to play a non-premium position and paying Raffy some of the amounts I see tossed around on this site.
|
|
|
Post by bosoxnation on Apr 16, 2022 0:12:59 GMT -5
I don’t think X is asking for that type of money. 5 years 140 mill should be fine. Not only is he a class act and our most consistent player in the last 5 years. Plus he recruits!
|
|
|
Post by notnickyorke on Apr 16, 2022 5:36:52 GMT -5
The time to extend Devers was two years ago. For them to do it now they are going to need to spend FA market prices and there is no reason to do that two years before he hits free agency. Players can fall apart in two years. The players they should extend now are the ones that could sign team friendly deals like they did with Whitlock. Verdugo should be the top target. Then Houke, Dalbec, and Piveta if they are having decent years. Maybe Kiki as well, because they have no one to play center next year and the free agent market is ****.
Also 30mil a year for Devers is objectively an overpay. Look at the list of 30mil players (Trout, Betts, Machado, Arenado, Lindor, Rendon, Correa, Seager) all are in a completely different league when it comes to stats and accolades. The worst of the group is Seager, who has about double the WAR of Devers. Devers has not accomplished what those players have. Every single one has at least one top 5 MVP finish, most have multiple. Devers have never finished in the top 10. Also none of them are likely to be playing 1st base in two years. Devers is obviously a very good player, but not the caliber of one who is getting paid 30mil. Nine or ten years around 230mil should be the max. Anymore and let him walk or trade him for prospects.
|
|
jimoh
Veteran
Posts: 3,989
|
Post by jimoh on Apr 16, 2022 7:13:21 GMT -5
I don’t think X is asking for that type of money. 5 years 140 mill should be fine. Not only is he a class act and our most consistent player in the last 5 years. Plus he recruits! That's $28M per year and a good start. Say to Xander, we'll offer you the same deal as Story, but we think you are much better, so we'll offer you $5M more year: 6 x 28 = 168, with an opt-out after 4 years, except the Red Sox can void the opt-out by using their option to add a seventh year for $35M. Who knows whether $28M or $35M will be a lot of money in five years or seven years?
|
|
|
Post by brad7434419 on Apr 27, 2022 18:00:27 GMT -5
If the Sox continue their horrendous play, it may be time for a fire sale. I love Xander and Nate, but if Chaim doesn't believe they will sign with us, then I absolutely hate the idea of letting them go for nothing at the end of the year. They have so many free agents, so the real question is what can 4+ months of Eovaldi, Xander, Kiké, JD, Vasquez, JBJ get us in trades? We have money, so we could even offer to pay the majority of their salaries this year for a better return. I am not as knowledgeable about the farm systems of the other MLB teams as many of you on the forum, so I am curious what could be out there. Obviously, the teams we would be dealing with would have to be contenders or they wouldn't want any of these guys for only 4+ months BUT, with the extra playoff teams now, that should at least open up the number of teams we could deal with.
I still hope they go on a long winning streak and none of this is necessary. But, if they get off to something like a 15-25 start, it could be time to punt.
Curious what you guys think is out there.
|
|
|