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.
|
|
Post by incandenza on Apr 13, 2022 9:54:40 GMT -5
What's his market rate, though? Devers isn't a $300 million guy based on current performance. Last year, in his career best season with the bat, he was tied for 24th in baseball in wRC+ with shaky D. He might be worth $300 million in two years if he improves, but there's no reason Boston should pay that right now. As for why he'd take $200 million (or something around there)- he could lock in multigenerational wealth right now without having to risk getting hurt or worse during the next two years.
I think you'd be surprised what a guy like Devers, at his age, can get in a free agent market. I think he could fetch $300 million, shaky defense and all. His bat plays at 1b if need be. And Devers has been transparent. He's not worried about "security". He wants to be paid what he feels he's worth on the open market. He's not taking any discounts. I know you're basing this on Devers now, but even so, Devers is what 24 this season, 25? The arrow is pointing up for him offensively as he is obviously maturing, his walk total indicates that as he is laying off pitches that he used to get himself out on. He still has a chance to be better at 3b. He has the skills, but lacks the consistency, so I get what you're saying as far as him not being a $300 million guy now, but keep in mind... if he were a free agent right this moment at his young age...he'd have no problem fetching 300 million.But he's not a free agent right now. He'll hit free agency at 27. Machado, for comparison, got 10/300 as a 26-year-old with a significantly better track record than Devers, including 3 6-WAR seasons under his belt; that's a mark Devers has yet to hit. You can factor in a bit of inflation, but that's not enough to get Devers to $300 million. |
|
|
|
Post by bellhorndingers21 on Apr 13, 2022 9:55:46 GMT -5
Is it too soon to ask where Diego Cartaya or Brett Baty would rank in the top 5?
|
|
|
|
Post by julyanmorley on Apr 13, 2022 9:55:49 GMT -5
Take any leaked contract negotiation details with a grain of salt.
|
|
|
|
Post by alexcorahomevideo on Apr 13, 2022 9:57:32 GMT -5
This isn't some analytical take, but at some point you need to pay up for you own guys or you're going to lose the fanbase. Losing Mookie Betts and Rafael Devers within 5 years of each other is unacceptable for a team with as much capital as the Red Sox (and FSG in general). Are we really going to let Rafael Devers walk over, say, $6 million annually? You cant win every deal, sometimes you have to overpay. I think it's worth it for a relatively young generational hitter. Don't forget Xander as well. Those guys who still have a link to that 2013 team will always have a special place in Boston. Xander, while he wasn't a big part of that team was still on the roster. Since then he's been a lynchpin for this team and even took a team friendly deal. Thats who you should be prioritizing. Devers, same type of deal. Was a monster in the 2018 post season has done nothing but hit. Two proven playoff performers in Boston of all places are going to be gone within 24 months. Maybe they do feel like Story can be a good replacement at Short and maybe Nick Yorke takes a huge step forward and is on the roster next year. Who knows? Overall Bloom has rebuilt the farm which is very good but fair or not he could also be known as the GM that let Mookie Devers and Xander go by 2024. Thats a tough one. I'm not the GM. But it does seem like its a really bad idea to move on from Erod Xander and Devers within a span of 24 months and replace them with Story and whatever they get for Devers in trade. |
|
|
|
Post by ematz1423 on Apr 13, 2022 10:02:34 GMT -5
The three highest contracts given to 3rd basemen are Machado 10 years 300 mil signed at 26, arrenado 8 years 260 mil signed at 27 and Rendon 7 years 245 mil signed at 29. Considering the elite defense Machado and arrenado showed before signing I'd think Rendon is the best comp. I guess if you say Devers if signing at 27 and tack on 2 years at the same AAV you get 315 mil over 9 years for Devers. So it's not out of the question especially with inflation even though to me it doesn't exactly seem like teams are opening their check books for these types of deals any more or less than when Rendon was an FA. Rendon in the 3 years prior to signing put up 6.7,6.3 and 7 fWAR. Devers highest was 5.9 back in 2019 and 4.7 last year so his track record likely won't be as good as Rendons was at time of signing.
|
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Apr 13, 2022 10:07:37 GMT -5
I think you'd be surprised what a guy like Devers, at his age, can get in a free agent market. I think he could fetch $300 million, shaky defense and all. His bat plays at 1b if need be. And Devers has been transparent. He's not worried about "security". He wants to be paid what he feels he's worth on the open market. He's not taking any discounts. I know you're basing this on Devers now, but even so, Devers is what 24 this season, 25? The arrow is pointing up for him offensively as he is obviously maturing, his walk total indicates that as he is laying off pitches that he used to get himself out on. He still has a chance to be better at 3b. He has the skills, but lacks the consistency, so I get what you're saying as far as him not being a $300 million guy now, but keep in mind... if he were a free agent right this moment at his young age...he'd have no problem fetching 300 million.But he's not a free agent right now. He'll hit free agency at 27. Machado, for comparison, got 10/300 as a 26-year-old with a significantly better track record than Devers, including 3 6-WAR seasons under his belt; that's a mark Devers has yet to hit. You can factor in a bit of inflation, but that's not enough to get Devers to $300 million. Corey Seager has 2 6 WAR seasons, but none since 2017. Devers has 11.4 fWAR and Seager has 8.9 fWAR since 2019. Problem with letting Devers go is that there is no replacing his bat. Everyone who is not biased into being ultra negative can see that Devers is really close to breaking out into one of the best hitters in baseball. He's Vlad Jr. good when he stops chasing and he has done it for long stretches. |
|
|
|
Post by ematz1423 on Apr 13, 2022 10:14:31 GMT -5
But he's not a free agent right now. He'll hit free agency at 27. Machado, for comparison, got 10/300 as a 26-year-old with a significantly better track record than Devers, including 3 6-WAR seasons under his belt; that's a mark Devers has yet to hit. You can factor in a bit of inflation, but that's not enough to get Devers to $300 million. Corey Seager has 2 6 WAR seasons, but none since 2017. Devers has 11.4 fWAR and Seager has 8.9 fWAR since 2019. Problem with letting Devers go is that there is no replacing his bat. Everyone who is not biased into being ultra negative can see that Devers is really close to breaking out into one of the best hitters in baseball. He's Vlad Jr. good when he stops chasing and he has done it for long stretches. I thought the seager deal was pretty crazy of Texas but I'd assume their thought is he can play a viable SS for several more years which is generally a position paid higher than 3rd base and then slide over to 3rd if/when he needs to move. If Devers needs to move you're talking about a 30+ mil 1st base/DH so it's not exactly apples to oranges in my mind. I will not dispute that they won't be able to replace his bat though and I want him resigned at a fair price to both sides. |
|
|
|
Post by orion09 on Apr 13, 2022 10:24:04 GMT -5
You don’t just overpay for players because you can. You’re setting the bar for others. Bloom's job is to get them as cheap as he can. If he goes out and pays Devers 300 mil then other players are going to have those demands when speaking to us. If we stick to 4-6 year deals then we are setting up ourselves for the future and the present. Players trying to get paid play 110%. You got to have a hungry clubhouse not a fat one. I am just trying to do the math here. The money is either going to be on the field, or in John Henry's pocket. And if it's on the field, but not going to Devers and/or Bogaerts, I am struggling to see where it would go. Well, Bloom didn't splurge on a pricy free agent like E-Rod, but he did spend $7M on Michael Wacha. Just think... for $30M we could sign Devers... or we could have FOUR Michael Wachas |
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Apr 13, 2022 10:28:26 GMT -5
But he's not a free agent right now. He'll hit free agency at 27. Machado, for comparison, got 10/300 as a 26-year-old with a significantly better track record than Devers, including 3 6-WAR seasons under his belt; that's a mark Devers has yet to hit. You can factor in a bit of inflation, but that's not enough to get Devers to $300 million. Corey Seager has 2 6 WAR seasons, but none since 2017. Devers has 11.4 fWAR and Seager has 8.9 fWAR since 2019. Problem with letting Devers go is that there is no replacing his bat. Everyone who is not biased into being ultra negative can see that Devers is really close to breaking out into one of the best hitters in baseball. He's Vlad Jr. good when he stops chasing and he has done it for long stretches. Devers might have a breakout like that, but he was the same hitter in 2021 that he was in 2019 - his K rate actually went up - with a lousy (though certainly discountable) 2020 in between. He's been in the majors 5 years now, he's in his mid-20s... maybe he'll hit another gear, or maybe this is what he is.
But look, what he is is really good! I'm on record saying I'd physically compel Bloom to sign him to 10/250, if I were in a position to do so. But if the team balked at $300 million... well, I can understand that. As an irrational fan, if I found out tomorrow that they signed him to 12/360, I'd be thrilled about it. But from a detached perspective, I get why they wouldn't.
|
|
|
|
Post by awalkinthepark on Apr 13, 2022 10:30:43 GMT -5
I get that reluctance to be setting the market for players, but this still doesn't answer the question of where the money goes. The free agent classes over the next few years look extremely thin to me, I don't see any position player (outside of Devers/Bogaerts) who the Red Sox would be extending $150 million+ deals to. Which only leaves a few options in my eyes: 1. Sign Devers and/or Bogaerts 2. Trade for highly paid veterans like the Yankees do 3. Let them walk and run a payroll ~$50 million under the CBT threshold. Option 2 does not seem like something the Red Sox would do. So what does the lineup look like in 2024 if you go with option 3? Dalbec, Casas and Verdugo are the only ones that seem like not-god-awful bets to be above average hitters. Maybe Duran if he can figure it out. But after that, who? That is still too early to expect anything from Yorke or Mayer. I am just trying to do the math here. The money is either going to be on the field, or in John Henry's pocket. And if it's on the field, but not going to Devers and/or Bogaerts, I am struggling to see where it would go. You excluded option 4 which is the more likely option for Devers if they remain far apart in extension talks, which is trade Devers for a placeholder and a major prospect, and good prospect, and a lottery ticket. Bloom doesn't have to trade Devers or Bogaerts for a highly paid veteran. Makes more sense to trade for a young impactful player than do a Lester for Cespedes type deal. Bloom is trying to build a young core for the middle of the decade. But even if the do trade Devers and get some good players in return, that still isn't showing up in the salary. You would assume they would be getting back prospects and/or per-arb players like they did with Mookie. So if they do this it still falls under option #3 in my eyes. |
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Apr 13, 2022 10:41:44 GMT -5
You excluded option 4 which is the more likely option for Devers if they remain far apart in extension talks, which is trade Devers for a placeholder and a major prospect, and good prospect, and a lottery ticket. Bloom doesn't have to trade Devers or Bogaerts for a highly paid veteran. Makes more sense to trade for a young impactful player than do a Lester for Cespedes type deal. Bloom is trying to build a young core for the middle of the decade. But even if the do trade Devers and get some good players in return, that still isn't showing up in the salary. You would assume they would be getting back prospects and/or per-arb players like they did with Mookie. So if they do this it still falls under option #3 in my eyes. I took option 3 as literally let them leave as free agents with nothing but comp picks as the result. I didn't read that as trade for a reasonably cheap replacement plus prospects, which is what I think Bloom chooses if he has to trade Devers. He's only trading X if the Sox fall far out of contention this year and I don't see that happening. Devers is the guy they'd trade with a year to go if need be. |
|
|
|
Post by alexcorahomevideo on Apr 13, 2022 10:51:12 GMT -5
But even if the do trade Devers and get some good players in return, that still isn't showing up in the salary. You would assume they would be getting back prospects and/or per-arb players like they did with Mookie. So if they do this it still falls under option #3 in my eyes. I took option 3 as literally let them leave as free agents with nothing but comp picks as the result. I didn't read that as trade for a reasonably cheap replacement plus prospects, which is what I think Bloom chooses if he has to trade Devers. He's only trading X if the Sox fall far out of contention this year and I don't see that happening. Devers is the guy they'd trade with a year to go if need be. I think Devers gets traded in the offseason if they can't come to terms. Especially if Xander walks. They'll treat 3rd like what Tampa has done with first base the last few years. Maybe sign a guy to platoon with Dalbec and put Casas at 1st or maybe just start Casas at 3rd and hope for the best. At some point you need to pay players that came through the system. |
|
|
|
Post by julyanmorley on Apr 13, 2022 11:01:30 GMT -5
This offseason the Red Sox will be at the very top of the list of teams that would like to have a star 3B on a one year contract. I don't think the chances of them trading Devers are very high.
|
|
|
|
Post by nuttyredsox on Apr 13, 2022 11:04:56 GMT -5
This isn't some analytical take, but at some point you need to pay up for you own guys or you're going to lose the fanbase. Losing Mookie Betts and Rafael Devers within 5 years of each other is unacceptable for a team with as much capital as the Red Sox (and FSG in general). Are we really going to let Rafael Devers walk over, say, $6 million annually? You cant win every deal, sometimes you have to overpay. I think it's worth it for a relatively young generational hitter. No you don't have to over pay just because the team has money, THAT'S THE WRONG WAY. There's always other players to fill in and the true Red Sox fans will understand that's better to have a team that is constantly on top and with the flexiablity to improve, BECAUSE THEY DON'T end up with albatroz contracts. |
|
|
|
Post by alexcorahomevideo on Apr 13, 2022 11:06:57 GMT -5
This isn't some analytical take, but at some point you need to pay up for you own guys or you're going to lose the fanbase. Losing Mookie Betts and Rafael Devers within 5 years of each other is unacceptable for a team with as much capital as the Red Sox (and FSG in general). Are we really going to let Rafael Devers walk over, say, $6 million annually? You cant win every deal, sometimes you have to overpay. I think it's worth it for a relatively young generational hitter. No you don't have to over pay just because the team has money, THAT'S THE WRONG WAY. There's always other players to fill in and the true Red Sox fans will understand that's better to have a team that is constantly on top and with the flexiablity to improve, BECAUSE THEY DON'T end up with albatroz contracts. Sox built the 2018 team the "wrong way" and won. Dodgers also won in 2020. Fairly recent championship teams who did things the "wrong way" and "overspent". |
|
|
|
Post by taiwansox on Apr 13, 2022 11:14:09 GMT -5
No you don't have to over pay just because the team has money, THAT'S THE WRONG WAY. There's always other players to fill in and the true Red Sox fans will understand that's better to have a team that is constantly on top and with the flexiablity to improve, BECAUSE THEY DON'T end up with albatroz contracts. Sox built the 2018 team the "wrong way" and won. Yeah definitely with respect to the Price contract, but I think that was a result of the crappy Sandoval and Hanley contracts. Imagine if we had signed Scherzer instead during that offseason (2014-2015), we might not have needed to sign Price and we would have had the budget flexibility to extend our window instead of having to reload. We still would have had big contracts on the books, but we would have had a longer window. Also, our farm hasn’t produced much since the Theo drafts, so that hurt us as well. Cherington sucks lol. |
|
|
|
Post by redsoxfan2 on Apr 13, 2022 11:22:57 GMT -5
If this team loses Devers or Xander to free agency it will be a complete failure of the Bloom front office. We were told the Red Sox had to trade Mookie Betts to capitalize on his value, and truthfully, I like this team better with Verdugo rather than no Verdugo (not that I like it better over Mookie). This team has slid to 6th in baseball in spending. The Dodgers sit at $$285,508,333 million, the Mets $256,593,576, the Yankees at $245,190,714 and skipping to Boston at $201,816,000. www.spotrac.com/mlb/payroll/They can tack on $60 million and still not be first in spending. They have JD Martinez $19,350,000 coming off the books. Xander already makes $20 million. So we're talking a payroll increase of about 10 per for him. No chance Sale and his 27 million opts out. I believe JBJ has a mutual option of 12 million (colorblind makes it hard to see). This team could also save an additional 13 million by not exercising their option on Paxton. I've always defended Henry and love that Bloom is in charge, but these are two guys you don't lose for nothing, unless they let Xander go for Correa. There's not much for 2B options and the market is awful for 3B without any help coming from the farm. At least with Xander you can choose to sign a different SS or move Story over and put in a stop-gap with the promise of Nick York and/or Marcelo Mayer (but that's really pushing it with Mayer). Edit: I keep seeing what people think he's worth and that the Sox shouldn't go over. Alright, then who is playing 3B and how do the Red Sox make up the WAR in the aggregate all while saving money from not giving Devers what he wanted? I admit I mistakenly thought he was up after this year, not next. Point still stands though. |
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Apr 13, 2022 11:28:50 GMT -5
This isn't some analytical take, but at some point you need to pay up for you own guys or you're going to lose the fanbase. Losing Mookie Betts and Rafael Devers within 5 years of each other is unacceptable for a team with as much capital as the Red Sox (and FSG in general). Are we really going to let Rafael Devers walk over, say, $6 million annually? You cant win every deal, sometimes you have to overpay. I think it's worth it for a relatively young generational hitter. No you don't have to over pay just because the team has money, THAT'S THE WRONG WAY. There's always other players to fill in and the true Red Sox fans will understand that's better to have a team that is constantly on top and with the flexiablity to improve, BECAUSE THEY DON'T end up with albatroz contracts. In a way I agree with what you're saying but I also disagree. Flexibility is good, but at some point you do have to spend. In a way that's like saying I never want to get married or have a girlfriend because there's so many women on this planet and I want to keep my options open. But at some point, it doesn't become about being the most efficient team but being the winning-est team you can be. It's not about wins/$ but rather the most wins. It's great to have flexibility but there are going to be years that you don't get to fill in the blanks as desired and you wind up with a lesser player because the perfect short-term fit isn't available. It doesn't have to be Devers or Betts but at some point you might have to overpay for talent. I can almost imagine this conversation from 75 years ago if free agency had been around....well Ted Williams isn't much of a fielder, can't run, is temperamental...wants huge bucks, is he really worth overpaying for his declining years, especially when the guy is pretty much a DH now, let alone then? |
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Apr 13, 2022 11:49:45 GMT -5
There are not always other players to replace a 4-6 win player. The scarcity of those types of players are exactly why you pay them $30+ million rather than spending it on 4 1.5 WAR players. You overpay for guys like Devers and it's the right decision.
At this point in Devers' career, he still has a lot of upside and not that much downside. It's not like Machado or Seager or even Mookie, who looked to already be receding from their peaks when they signed their $300M deals.
If he cleans up his errors, he'll change from a below average (but not terrible) defensive 3B into an above average one. He has the ability and we've seen it many times.
If he stops chasing, he has shown he can be the best hitter in baseball. He has the ability and we've seen it many times.
There is his upside.
He has so far remained healthy (knock on wood).
His downside is that he is the same player he is now for years which isn't a bad thing at all.
I sign Devers to any price.
|
|
|
|
Post by alexcorahomevideo on Apr 13, 2022 13:30:15 GMT -5
Sox built the 2018 team the "wrong way" and won. Yeah definitely with respect to the Price contract, but I think that was a result of the crappy Sandoval and Hanley contracts. Imagine if we had signed Scherzer instead during that offseason (2014-2015), we might not have needed to sign Price and we would have had the budget flexibility to extend our window instead of having to reload. We still would have had big contracts on the books, but we would have had a longer window. Also, our farm hasn’t produced much since the Theo drafts, so that hurt us as well. Cherington sucks lol. Sox I think overpaid Price something stupid like 50 million more than what St Louis wanted to do. The owners wanted to not give big contracts to pitchers at the time but should have for Max |
|
|
|
Post by bosoxnation on Apr 13, 2022 14:39:26 GMT -5
There are not always other players to replace a 4-6 win player. The scarcity of those types of players are exactly why you pay them $30+ million rather than spending it on 4 1.5 WAR players. You overpay for guys like Devers and it's the right decision. At this point in Devers' career, he still has a lot of upside and not that much downside. It's not like Machado or Seager or even Mookie, who looked to already be receding from their peaks when they signed their $300M deals. If he cleans up his errors, he'll change from a below average (but not terrible) defensive 3B into an above average one. He has the ability and we've seen it many times. If he stops chasing, he has shown he can be the best hitter in baseball. He has the ability and we've seen it many times. There is his upside. He has so far remained healthy (knock on wood). His downside is that he is the same player he is now for years which isn't a bad thing at all. I sign Devers to any price. Yes but Blooms job is to sign him as cheap as he can. I’m sure he will pay the man but you also have to see what kind of trade packages you can get for him just in case there’s something that we can’t say no to. He is still locked up for this year and next so what’s the rush? If you’re going to pay him 300 million why not wait until you HAVE to. |
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Apr 13, 2022 18:00:46 GMT -5
You missed Eovaldi, who I would offer 5 years at $26M per to right now. Five years from now even a solid #3 will be worth that. Thor is the only one I'd throw big bucks at. I'm intrigued at Odorizzi for much less than Eovaldi, but he'll prob get at least 4 years at $20M per. The rest are dreck. So we should let our current 2, 3 and 4 hitters walk, and the big move to do with money we save is re-sign Eovaldi and maybe add Noah Syndergaard? Our lineup would be atrocious no matter how much good pitching we had. This was a pitcher discussion. I would also focus on extending Devers or Xander (if possible) and whichever I don’t get, I use the $$$$ and grab Trea Turner. Turner to SS, X or Devers to 3rd. |
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Apr 13, 2022 18:03:27 GMT -5
Sigh. I'd say maybe the move would be to trade Devers (which I would hate so, so much) and extend Xander and move him to third, but Xander seems to think he's a $30 million/year guy too. (Also I think people might be a little underwhelmed at what they could even get in a trade return for one year of Devers.) I love them both but they're not really on the level of any of the guys who have signed $300 million contracts. As for the free agent market, it really does look pretty bleak. Next offseason has a big SS class, with Turner, Correa, Bogaerts, Anderson, and Swanson, but beyond that there is like nothing for the next two seasons on the position player side. Some big pitching names might be available, but I'll believe Bloom is willing to sign a pitcher to a long-term deal when I see it. Heyman, who is a pipeline to Boras, X’s agent: nypost.com/2022/04/13/red-sox-far-apart-in-xander-bogaerts-rafael-devers-contract-talks/Excerpt: Boston and star shortstop Bogaerts were even further apart in concept, and in reality. Bogaerts, a three-time All-Star and four-time Silver Slugger winner who has an opt-out after the season on the deal that pays him $20 million annually through 2024, received an offer from Boston to simply add one year to the three he has his left on his deal. Sources suggest it was for about $30 million in that extra year, bringing his potential total to about $90 million. |
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Apr 13, 2022 18:07:08 GMT -5
There are not always other players to replace a 4-6 win player. The scarcity of those types of players are exactly why you pay them $30+ million rather than spending it on 4 1.5 WAR players. You overpay for guys like Devers and it's the right decision. At this point in Devers' career, he still has a lot of upside and not that much downside. It's not like Machado or Seager or even Mookie, who looked to already be receding from their peaks when they signed their $300M deals. If he cleans up his errors, he'll change from a below average (but not terrible) defensive 3B into an above average one. He has the ability and we've seen it many times. If he stops chasing, he has shown he can be the best hitter in baseball. He has the ability and we've seen it many times. There is his upside. He has so far remained healthy (knock on wood). His downside is that he is the same player he is now for years which isn't a bad thing at all. I sign Devers to any price. Yes but Blooms job is to sign him as cheap as he can. I’m sure he will pay the man but you also have to see what kind of trade packages you can get for him just in case there’s something that we can’t say no to. He is still locked up for this year and next so what’s the rush? If you’re going to pay him 300 million why not wait until you HAVE to. Bloom’s job is to put a winning team that has a legit playoff shot year-after-year on the field. There is no QO for players if the union and MLB agree on a intl draft. The rush was last two years. Now Devers will roll the dice, play it out and go to market. |
|
|
|
Post by notstarboard on Apr 13, 2022 20:31:03 GMT -5
No you don't have to over pay just because the team has money, THAT'S THE WRONG WAY. There's always other players to fill in and the true Red Sox fans will understand that's better to have a team that is constantly on top and with the flexiablity to improve, BECAUSE THEY DON'T end up with albatroz contracts. Sox built the 2018 team the "wrong way" and won. Dodgers also won in 2020. Fairly recent championship teams who did things the "wrong way" and "overspent". The Dodgers built their team the "right way", though; they never depleted their farm and did quite a bit of building from the bottom. They've also shown willingness to spend on major FAs and trade prospects from positions they're deep in for top talent. It's basically the big market Rays model, i.e. what Bloom is trying to do in Boston. It's also been a roaring success for them. They haven't had worse than what, a low-90s win pace for the past ten seasons? Meanwhile Boston had the worst farm in the majors and filthy books after 2018 and was forced into a rebuild.
Winning the WS is a weak justification for the merits of a team building approach given how much of a crap shoot the playoffs are. The 2021 Dodgers and Giants were both similarly good to the 2018 Red Sox and they both had to watch from home as the team with the worst record in the entire playoff field took home the trophy. Outcomes like that are common. The way to win more championships in the long run is to get more bites at the cherry. With the new playoff format there will be an increase in the odds of winning for teams that finish 1st or 2nd in the league, but it's still not worth forcing a rebuild to increase your odds of finishing in those slots. A team with a payroll like Boston's should not have to rebuild.
|
|
|
