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 fenwaydouble on Apr 14, 2022 9:04:44 GMT -5
No. That seems to be the biggest point of disagreement between posters here. Some see the flashes of potential and think Devers will turn into Vlad Jr. or Soto or Miggy. Maybe he will. But so far, he has not been even close to that level in terms of actual results. He was just barely more productive than Bogaerts and JD Martinez last year. Those are two very good hitters, but nobody around here is comparing those guys to Miguel Cabrera. Devers hasn't even hit his prime yet and he's putting up numbers. I think people look at this as paying 30 million a year 5 years ago. Players like Corey Seager are getting 30 million a year in this market. In about another few years 30 million a year is going to be the new 20. So you have to figure out how this guy is going to age once he gets paid. Vlad and Miggy certainly had similar profiles to him. I just think its crazy to let someone like this walk and expect to sign some random player to a 1 year contract and expect value. If there's an Beltre type player out there next year and they can sign him and trade Devers for elite prospects then fine. But there is not. This team won't be doing much in 2023 with a platoon of FA/Arroyo/Casas/Dalbec at 1st DH and 3rd. Just not going to work out. Corey Seager's career wRC+ is 12 points higher than Devers' and he plays shortstop. I, too, hope Devers finds another level, but he honestly doesn't belong in the same breath as Vlad Jr. right now, let alone Miguel Cabrera. |
|
|
|
Post by jerrygarciaparra on Apr 14, 2022 9:04:53 GMT -5
C'mon now. Mookie Betts was arguable the best (non-Trout) player in baseball when he was traded. Rafael Devers is not that and not close to being that, with far more warts (defense, plate discipline, weight) and far more risk. It is fine to be sentimental about a homegrown player, but that is absolutely emotion talking and not hard analysis. it isn't emotion, i think it is a fair indication of his market. Comps. Throw in market scarcity and FA premium. Rendon.....25 million.....5 years older Arrenado......32 million....5 years older Machado.......30 million....4 years older There is a new CBT....new (growing revenue streams).....and he isn't going to turn 26 until we are competing in the WS this year. If i am on the high end, which i might concede, is about 20-30 million for the length of the contract (which is nothing). If we are talking about an extension, we are talking about his market. I feel very confident that some team would offer these numbers for him and so that is what the Sox would have to pay. I also believe he is worth the risk. We aren't gonna see a guy who is gonna forget how to hit. His hit tool is not arguable. Add: and yours is based on emotion also. an emotional attachment to metric numbers. which is fine, but incidental to the players market value. |
|
|
|
Post by jerrygarciaparra on Apr 14, 2022 9:07:38 GMT -5
The aversion to long term, expensive deals by this fan base is really quite something (deals that occur mostly in FA market, not as much pre-arb deals). It reeks of groupthink and it is really just an ownership profit making constraint that has been easily accepted by fans. This man's market is easily 30 million a year. His ability to directly impact single games is not easily matched amongst his peers. That strength works well in playoff series. He fielding doesn't have the negative impact that people want to prescribe to his value. With opt-outs or other creative contract language, i don't see how someone can view a 10yr/300 million dollar contract for a player (at this age) like him as being risky, in as much as there is always a certain risk with that contract. Throw in that he is home grown, plays an important position and is an offensive savant, that is a fair contract to me. If he plays hardball from there and makes a deal unapproachable, then you can make the decision to walk. Is he really "easily" worth 30 million AAV though? There are only three 3rd baseman at or above to 30 million mark right now (Machado,Rendon,arrenado). I'd say they were all more established difference makers at time of signing than Devers currently has shown and all proven they can stay at 3rd probably for the entirety of the contract. If Devers has to move to first/DH he's almost certainly not worth 30+ AAV. Miguel Cabrera is the only first baseman to ever get 30+ AAV and Devers is not in the same tier that Miggy was when he signed it. Freeman got 27 AAV and he's the best first baseman in the league. I'm not saying a team won't give him 30 AAV, I could certainly see it but I could also see him having to settle for closer to 25 AAV. see my last post. I could concede that is high end. Do you think the NL having a DH increases his value ? Honest question. There are going to be more teams in play. |
|
|
|
Post by jaffinator on Apr 14, 2022 9:07:44 GMT -5
C'mon now. Mookie Betts was arguable the best (non-Trout) player in baseball when he was traded. Rafael Devers is not that and not close to being that, with far more warts (defense, plate discipline, weight) and far more risk. It is fine to be sentimental about a homegrown player, but that is absolutely emotion talking and not hard analysis. it isn't emotion, i think it is a fair indication of his market. Comps. Throw in market scarcity and FA premium. Rendon.....25 million.....5 years older Arrenado......32 million....5 years older Machado.......30 million....4 years older There is a new CBT....new (growing revenue streams).....and he isn't going to turn 26 until we are competing in the WS this year. If i am on the high end, which i might concede, is about 20-30 million for the length of the contract (which is nothing). If we are talking about an extension, we are talking about his market. I feel very confident that some team would offer these numbers for him and so that is what the Sox would have to pay. I also believe he is worth the risk. We aren't gonna see a guy who is gonna forget how to hit. His hit tool is not arguable. All of those years are 2 off. Rendon hit the market at 30. Devers would be hitting the market at 27 in two years time. |
|
|
|
Post by ematz1423 on Apr 14, 2022 9:09:37 GMT -5
Is he really "easily" worth 30 million AAV though? There are only three 3rd baseman at or above to 30 million mark right now (Machado,Rendon,arrenado). I'd say they were all more established difference makers at time of signing than Devers currently has shown and all proven they can stay at 3rd probably for the entirety of the contract. If Devers has to move to first/DH he's almost certainly not worth 30+ AAV. Miguel Cabrera is the only first baseman to ever get 30+ AAV and Devers is not in the same tier that Miggy was when he signed it. Freeman got 27 AAV and he's the best first baseman in the league. I'm not saying a team won't give him 30 AAV, I could certainly see it but I could also see him having to settle for closer to 25 AAV. see my last post. I could concede that is high end. Do you think the NL having a DH increases his value ? Honest question. There are going to be more teams in play. I dont think any team will be or should be lining up to pay a DH 30 million dollars a year for the 8+ years I'm sure he wants. So while it may increase the interested parties and overall increase his contract I don't know that it will make that much difference. |
|
|
|
Post by jerrygarciaparra on Apr 14, 2022 9:12:04 GMT -5
see my last post. I could concede that is high end. Do you think the NL having a DH increases his value ? Honest question. There are going to be more teams in play. I dont think any team will be or should be lining up to pay a DH 30 million dollars a year for the 8+ years I'm sure he wants. So while it may increase the interested parties and overall increase his contract I don't know that it will make that much difference. maybe...but competition is what drives up prices. there are gonna be opt outs...a whole number of factors that may mitigate this notion that he is gonna be a 33 year old DH making 30 million. |
|
|
|
Post by jerrygarciaparra on Apr 14, 2022 9:13:29 GMT -5
it isn't emotion, i think it is a fair indication of his market. Comps. Throw in market scarcity and FA premium. Rendon.....25 million.....5 years older Arrenado......32 million....5 years older Machado.......30 million....4 years older There is a new CBT....new (growing revenue streams).....and he isn't going to turn 26 until we are competing in the WS this year. If i am on the high end, which i might concede, is about 20-30 million for the length of the contract (which is nothing). If we are talking about an extension, we are talking about his market. I feel very confident that some team would offer these numbers for him and so that is what the Sox would have to pay. I also believe he is worth the risk. We aren't gonna see a guy who is gonna forget how to hit. His hit tool is not arguable. All of those years are 2 off. Rendon hit the market at 30. Devers would be hitting the market at 27 in two years time. They are todays numbers....that is what i am using to comp his value. and he will be a free agent in 1.5 years, at a very early age 27. |
|
|
|
Post by ematz1423 on Apr 14, 2022 9:13:58 GMT -5
C'mon now. Mookie Betts was arguable the best (non-Trout) player in baseball when he was traded. Rafael Devers is not that and not close to being that, with far more warts (defense, plate discipline, weight) and far more risk. It is fine to be sentimental about a homegrown player, but that is absolutely emotion talking and not hard analysis. it isn't emotion, i think it is a fair indication of his market. Comps. Throw in market scarcity and FA premium. Rendon.....25 million.....5 years older Arrenado......32 million....5 years older Machado.......30 million....4 years older There is a new CBT....new (growing revenue streams).....and he isn't going to turn 26 until we are competing in the WS this year. If i am on the high end, which i might concede, is about 20-30 million for the length of the contract (which is nothing). If we are talking about an extension, we are talking about his market. I feel very confident that some team would offer these numbers for him and so that is what the Sox would have to pay. I also believe he is worth the risk. We aren't gonna see a guy who is gonna forget how to hit. His hit tool is not arguable. Sorry for back to back posts, but my argument all along in terms of comparing those players and what they received to be 3rd baseman is that defensively those guys are either elite in Machado and arrenado or at least solid to where the teams at signing the contracts were probably pretty assured those guys can handle 3rd over most if not the entirety of the contract. I don't think the same can be said for Rafi so do teams kind of merge the market value for top end 3rd baseman with 1st baseman if they think that's where he's going to end up? I don't know how that will play out since as we've seen it only takes one or two teams to have their own opinion that maybe they do believe he stays at 3rd for the majority and maybe he even improves to average+. That would certainly skew his market value towards the 300 mil range. |
|
redsox04071318champs
Veteran
Always hoping to make my handle even longer...
Posts: 16,743
Member is Online
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Apr 14, 2022 9:17:54 GMT -5
No. That seems to be the biggest point of disagreement between posters here. Some see the flashes of potential and think Devers will turn into Vlad Jr. or Soto or Miggy. Maybe he will. But so far, he has not been even close to that level in terms of actual results. He was just barely more productive than Bogaerts and JD Martinez last year. Those are two very good hitters, but nobody around here is comparing those guys to Miguel Cabrera. Devers hasn't even hit his prime yet and he's putting up numbers. I think people look at this as paying 30 million a year 5 years ago. Players like Corey Seager are getting 30 million a year in this market. In about another few years 30 million a year is going to be the new 20. So you have to figure out how this guy is going to age once he gets paid. Vlad and Miggy certainly had similar profiles to him. I just think its crazy to let someone like this walk and expect to sign some random player to a 1 year contract and expect value. If there's an Beltre type player out there next year and they can sign him and trade Devers for elite prospects then fine. But there is not. This team won't be doing much in 2023 with a platoon of FA/Arroyo/Casas/Dalbec at 1st DH and 3rd. Just not going to work out. I agree with this point. Inflation happens within the game just about every year. Max Scherzer, an old pitcher, got 43 million per year, so the 40 million dollar barrier has been blasted through. It's really easy to see a player (Soto) getting 400 million plus over the life of a contract. I wouldn't be shocked if Soto got about 450 million. If not him, somebody will get a 400 million deal, so 300 million might become what a Devers gets. Whether he should or not is a different debate, but I can't imagine that the Mets or Dodgers or another team wouldn't give Devers 300 million. His arrow is still pointing up, so I expect the bat will be better - not Miguel Cabrera prime better, but lets' just say that Devers is probably on a path to 500 plus career HRs and he's not a one dimensional hitter. Then try to imagine a lineup the Sox have that doesn't include Devers in it, where Dalbec or Story are the 3b. I would assume X is probably gone...even if he wasn't he's not Devers offensively...unless the Sox are replacing Devers' production in RF, I don't see how the Sox offense doesn't lose out, even if Casas develops as hoped for. I'm not convinced that Devers cannot improve at 3b and be a viable 3b for quite a number of years. I'm not ready to assign him to DH or 1b. He doesn't have to be Brooks Robinson. He just has to be respectable at 3b, near average. I get that he hasn't been to date, but from observing him, I think his issues aren't a lack of ability to play 3b. Keep in mind, as he ages, say he signs a 10 year deal. Those first 5 he's probably a 3b and those last 5 he's a 1b/dh. By then star players will be making 40 or 50 million/year so his DH bat, which could still be quite effective, could be the equivalent of what JD Martinez has gotten, but at inflationary prices. So while I can see the reluctance to give the money to Devers, I can see the case for it. At some point...if you can't give a huge contract to a player like Betts who was great at everything, or a pure offensive monster like Devers (the closest LH bat to David Ortiz), then when can you give you out a contract to an elite player? Especially a homegrown one? I think the Sox need to sign one of X or Devers, with Devers being the best fit, and I figured the Sox would sign one of them, but now I'm starting to think, given the offers, that they are becoming more and more likely to sign neither....that Trevor Story is their big signing, spending 140 million so they don't have to spend 200 million for X or 300 million for Devers. I'd rather have X or Devers rather than Story, but now I'm starting to think that Story was the signing, not Devers or X. |
|
|
|
Post by jerrygarciaparra on Apr 14, 2022 9:21:47 GMT -5
One last post....i believe the vast majority of people on this thread would be totally fine if the parties agreed on 10yr / 250 million extension tomorrow.
If we take that supposition farther, the discrepancy is 1.5 year of baseball life and 5 million dollars/AAV. Believe me, the Sox can afford that.
|
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Apr 14, 2022 9:22:43 GMT -5
Devers hasn't even hit his prime yet and he's putting up numbers. I think people look at this as paying 30 million a year 5 years ago. Players like Corey Seager are getting 30 million a year in this market. In about another few years 30 million a year is going to be the new 20. So you have to figure out how this guy is going to age once he gets paid. Vlad and Miggy certainly had similar profiles to him. I just think its crazy to let someone like this walk and expect to sign some random player to a 1 year contract and expect value. If there's an Beltre type player out there next year and they can sign him and trade Devers for elite prospects then fine. But there is not. This team won't be doing much in 2023 with a platoon of FA/Arroyo/Casas/Dalbec at 1st DH and 3rd. Just not going to work out. I disagree that in a few years 30 mil will be the new 20 but that is just my opinion. Going back to the Devers thing, I mean no he hasn't produced triple crown type of years that miggy did but okay if you want to say that contract was a long time ago and isn't necessarily pertinent to the argument anymore I get that. So let's look at Freddie freeman. Freeman is a better hitter than Devers and got 27 AAV to play first. If a team signs Devers wanting him to play first then I can't see why they'd want to pay him more than what freeman got. It does only take one or two teams though. I'll end my post that, I want Devers long term, I want xandy long term and I sure as heck want at least one of them back. They do have the money and flexibility to pay market rate on one if not both. If Devers costs 8-10 years at 30 AAV I'd do if if I was the sox but on the same level I can understand the hesitancy not to if they believe he's going to have to move from 3rd sooner than later and who would know that better than them? You can't just leave age out of the comparison though. Freeman got a 27 million AAV for his age 32-37 seasons. Devers will hit free agency at 27. That's a massive difference. |
|
|
|
Post by ematz1423 on Apr 14, 2022 9:24:02 GMT -5
I disagree that in a few years 30 mil will be the new 20 but that is just my opinion. Going back to the Devers thing, I mean no he hasn't produced triple crown type of years that miggy did but okay if you want to say that contract was a long time ago and isn't necessarily pertinent to the argument anymore I get that. So let's look at Freddie freeman. Freeman is a better hitter than Devers and got 27 AAV to play first. If a team signs Devers wanting him to play first then I can't see why they'd want to pay him more than what freeman got. It does only take one or two teams though. I'll end my post that, I want Devers long term, I want xandy long term and I sure as heck want at least one of them back. They do have the money and flexibility to pay market rate on one if not both. If Devers costs 8-10 years at 30 AAV I'd do if if I was the sox but on the same level I can understand the hesitancy not to if they believe he's going to have to move from 3rd sooner than later and who would know that better than them? You can't just leave age out of the comparison though. Freeman got a 27 million AAV for his age 32-37 seasons. Devers will hit free agency at 27. That's a massive difference. Is it that big a difference though? If a team signs a 27 year old Devers to a 10+ year deal you're still taking a guy for his 32-37 years. |
|
|
|
Post by alexcorahomevideo on Apr 14, 2022 9:32:37 GMT -5
You can't just leave age out of the comparison though. Freeman got a 27 million AAV for his age 32-37 seasons. Devers will hit free agency at 27. That's a massive difference. Is it that big a difference though? If a team signs a 27 year old Devers to a 10+ year deal you're still taking a guy for his 32-37 years. Its a 5 year difference. 32 is towards the end of someones prime. Its assumed that the last two years of any of these long term deals are going to be a loss. Devers at 27 is beginning his prime. |
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Apr 14, 2022 9:33:53 GMT -5
You can't just leave age out of the comparison though. Freeman got a 27 million AAV for his age 32-37 seasons. Devers will hit free agency at 27. That's a massive difference. Is it that big a difference though? If a team signs a 27 year old Devers to a 10+ year deal you're still taking a guy for his 32-37 years. It's a massive difference! LA is getting none of Freeman's projected peak years. ZiPS, for instance, projects him for 4.6 WAR for this season, but already down to 3.2 for 2024. If you look at WAR totals even for Hall of Famers, most are like 2-3 WAR guys in their mid-30s. Yes, you're getting those decline years on a 10-year deal for Devers, too, but you're also getting several peak years, which are the most valuable in the player's career.
If Freeman could get 27 million as a 32 year old then he easily would have gotten 30+ million as a 27 year old.
|
|
|
|
Post by jaffinator on Apr 14, 2022 9:35:03 GMT -5
All of those years are 2 off. Rendon hit the market at 30. Devers would be hitting the market at 27 in two years time. They are todays numbers....that is what i am using to comp his value. and he will be a free agent in 1.5 years, at a very early age 27. You're comparing how old is two years before he enters free agency to how old the other guys were when they entered UFA. It's not the reasonable comparison point. |
|
|
|
Post by jaffinator on Apr 14, 2022 9:44:07 GMT -5
Devers hasn't even hit his prime yet and he's putting up numbers. I think people look at this as paying 30 million a year 5 years ago. Players like Corey Seager are getting 30 million a year in this market. In about another few years 30 million a year is going to be the new 20. So you have to figure out how this guy is going to age once he gets paid. Vlad and Miggy certainly had similar profiles to him. I just think its crazy to let someone like this walk and expect to sign some random player to a 1 year contract and expect value. If there's an Beltre type player out there next year and they can sign him and trade Devers for elite prospects then fine. But there is not. This team won't be doing much in 2023 with a platoon of FA/Arroyo/Casas/Dalbec at 1st DH and 3rd. Just not going to work out. I agree with this point. Inflation happens within the game just about every year. Max Scherzer, an old pitcher, got 43 million per year, so the 40 million dollar barrier has been blasted through. It's really easy to see a player (Soto) getting 400 million plus over the life of a contract. I wouldn't be shocked if Soto got about 450 million. If not him, somebody will get a 400 million deal, so 300 million might become what a Devers gets. Whether he should or not is a different debate, but I can't imagine that the Mets or Dodgers or another team wouldn't give Devers 300 million. His arrow is still pointing up, so I expect the bat will be better - not Miguel Cabrera prime better, but lets' just say that Devers is probably on a path to 500 plus career HRs and he's not a one dimensional hitter. Then try to imagine a lineup the Sox have that doesn't include Devers in it, where Dalbec or Story are the 3b. I would assume X is probably gone...even if he wasn't he's not Devers offensively...unless the Sox are replacing Devers' production in RF, I don't see how the Sox offense doesn't lose out, even if Casas develops as hoped for. I'm not convinced that Devers cannot improve at 3b and be a viable 3b for quite a number of years. I'm not ready to assign him to DH or 1b. He doesn't have to be Brooks Robinson. He just has to be respectable at 3b, near average. I get that he hasn't been to date, but from observing him, I think his issues aren't a lack of ability to play 3b. Keep in mind, as he ages, say he signs a 10 year deal. Those first 5 he's probably a 3b and those last 5 he's a 1b/dh. By then star players will be making 40 or 50 million/year so his DH bat, which could still be quite effective, could be the equivalent of what JD Martinez has gotten, but an inflationary prices. So while I can see the reluctance to give the money to Devers, I can see the case for it. At some point...if you can't give a huge contract to a player like Betts who was great at everything, or a pure offensive monster like Devers (the closest LH bat to David Ortiz), then when can you give you out a contract to an elite player? Especially a homegrown one? I think the Sox need to sign one of X or Devers, with Devers being the best fit, and I figured the Sox would sign one of them, but now I'm starting to think, given the offers, that they are becoming more and more likely to sign neither....that Trevor Story is their big signing, spending 140 million so they don't have to spend 200 million for X or 300 million for Devers. I'd rather have X or Devers rather than Story, but now I'm starting to think that Story was the signing, not Devers or X. I realize that I'm mostly responding to individual rhetorical points and not entire arguments, but some of these are crazy. No, we can't just agree that Devers is probably going to hit 500 homers! That is basically just assuming that you're going to get Miggy for the rest of his career (which the previous post tried to say it wasn't doing and then just did). It's not impossible, but that is not really the most likely outcome as of this instant. Love Raffy, don't think it's super duper unlikely for him, but you can't just blaze through like "yeah he'll probably join the 500 club..." |
|
|
|
Post by ematz1423 on Apr 14, 2022 9:48:33 GMT -5
Is it that big a difference though? If a team signs a 27 year old Devers to a 10+ year deal you're still taking a guy for his 32-37 years. It's a massive difference! LA is getting none of Freeman's projected peak years. ZiPS, for instance, projects him for 4.6 WAR for this season, but already down to 3.2 for 2024. If you look at WAR totals even for Hall of Famers, most are like 2-3 WAR guys in their mid-30s. Yes, you're getting those decline years on a 10-year deal for Devers, too, but you're also getting several peak years, which are the most valuable in the player's career.
If Freeman could get 27 million as a 32 year old then he easily would have gotten 30+ million as a 27 year old.
If you look at ZIPs it projects Devers for 4.5 and 4.6 WAR for 23 and 24. Freeman seems like someone who could buck the projections as well since he's such a good Profesional hitter who can withstand some loss of bat speed with his great approach. I get your point and maybe I'm naive but I don't really think a team that sees Devers as a first base is going to want to sign him to a 300 mil deal. |
|
|
|
Post by alexcorahomevideo on Apr 14, 2022 9:50:07 GMT -5
I agree with this point. Inflation happens within the game just about every year. Max Scherzer, an old pitcher, got 43 million per year, so the 40 million dollar barrier has been blasted through. It's really easy to see a player (Soto) getting 400 million plus over the life of a contract. I wouldn't be shocked if Soto got about 450 million. If not him, somebody will get a 400 million deal, so 300 million might become what a Devers gets. Whether he should or not is a different debate, but I can't imagine that the Mets or Dodgers or another team wouldn't give Devers 300 million. His arrow is still pointing up, so I expect the bat will be better - not Miguel Cabrera prime better, but lets' just say that Devers is probably on a path to 500 plus career HRs and he's not a one dimensional hitter. Then try to imagine a lineup the Sox have that doesn't include Devers in it, where Dalbec or Story are the 3b. I would assume X is probably gone...even if he wasn't he's not Devers offensively...unless the Sox are replacing Devers' production in RF, I don't see how the Sox offense doesn't lose out, even if Casas develops as hoped for. I'm not convinced that Devers cannot improve at 3b and be a viable 3b for quite a number of years. I'm not ready to assign him to DH or 1b. He doesn't have to be Brooks Robinson. He just has to be respectable at 3b, near average. I get that he hasn't been to date, but from observing him, I think his issues aren't a lack of ability to play 3b. Keep in mind, as he ages, say he signs a 10 year deal. Those first 5 he's probably a 3b and those last 5 he's a 1b/dh. By then star players will be making 40 or 50 million/year so his DH bat, which could still be quite effective, could be the equivalent of what JD Martinez has gotten, but an inflationary prices. So while I can see the reluctance to give the money to Devers, I can see the case for it. At some point...if you can't give a huge contract to a player like Betts who was great at everything, or a pure offensive monster like Devers (the closest LH bat to David Ortiz), then when can you give you out a contract to an elite player? Especially a homegrown one? I think the Sox need to sign one of X or Devers, with Devers being the best fit, and I figured the Sox would sign one of them, but now I'm starting to think, given the offers, that they are becoming more and more likely to sign neither....that Trevor Story is their big signing, spending 140 million so they don't have to spend 200 million for X or 300 million for Devers. I'd rather have X or Devers rather than Story, but now I'm starting to think that Story was the signing, not Devers or X. I realize that I'm mostly responding to individual rhetorical points and not entire arguments, but some of these are crazy. No, we can't just agree that Devers is probably going to hit 500 homers! That is basically just assuming that you're going to get Miggy for the rest of his career (which the previous post tried to say it wasn't doing and then just did). It's not impossible, but that is not really the most likely outcome as of this instant. Love Raffy, don't think it's super duper unlikely for him, but you can't just blaze through like "yeah he'll probably join the 500 club..." He just turned 25 in October and has 113 homers. With last year being his biggest power output. It would be a massive upset if he didn't get to 500 homers. Trading Devers is a different issue all together. If you're not going to sign him you can't let him walk. Seattle and Texas would be two teams that I would immediately call. Jung/Leiter/others or Rodriguez/Brash/others would be acceptable returns. Someone is going to get excellent prime years out of Devers. |
|
|
|
Post by ematz1423 on Apr 14, 2022 9:57:43 GMT -5
I realize that I'm mostly responding to individual rhetorical points and not entire arguments, but some of these are crazy. No, we can't just agree that Devers is probably going to hit 500 homers! That is basically just assuming that you're going to get Miggy for the rest of his career (which the previous post tried to say it wasn't doing and then just did). It's not impossible, but that is not really the most likely outcome as of this instant. Love Raffy, don't think it's super duper unlikely for him, but you can't just blaze through like "yeah he'll probably join the 500 club..." He just turned 25 in October and has 113 homers. With last year being his biggest power output. It would be a massive upset if he didn't get to 500 homers. The same was probably said about Prince Fielder when he signed with Detroit for his age 28 season. He had 192 at age 27. That's obviously an extreme example and I'm not saying that the comparison means very much but we've seen players start off fast and tail off rather quickly with what I would call a large body type. |
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Apr 14, 2022 9:59:01 GMT -5
Take the name off the resume and scouting report and there's no way there's this clamoring to give Devers $300M+ as a free agent. Which really means that we want to pay him a homegrown player premium to keep him here. Which is fine, let's just be transparent about it.
Here's a good illustrative comparison. Let's assume that Carlos Correa doesn't opt out next offseason for whatever reason and is a free agent in 2024 alongside Devers. Correa is six months younger than Devers, has basically been as good of a hitter (2019 to 2022, Correa is a 129 wRC+ and Devers is a 130 wRC+) and plays a more valuable position at a higher defensive level. Only con to Correa is that he's missed more games, but he's objectively a much better player. All of the same arguments for Devers (age, salary inflation, etc.) also apply to Correa.
|
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Apr 14, 2022 9:59:10 GMT -5
It's a massive difference! LA is getting none of Freeman's projected peak years. ZiPS, for instance, projects him for 4.6 WAR for this season, but already down to 3.2 for 2024. If you look at WAR totals even for Hall of Famers, most are like 2-3 WAR guys in their mid-30s. Yes, you're getting those decline years on a 10-year deal for Devers, too, but you're also getting several peak years, which are the most valuable in the player's career.
If Freeman could get 27 million as a 32 year old then he easily would have gotten 30+ million as a 27 year old.
If you look at ZIPs it projects Devers for 4.5 and 4.6 WAR for 23 and 24. Freeman seems like someone who could buck the projections as well since he's such a good Profesional hitter who can withstand some loss of bat speed with his great approach. I get your point and maybe I'm naive but I don't really think a team that sees Devers as a first base is going to want to sign him to a 300 mil deal. I think the reason to think a team wouldn't value Devers as much as Freeman is that Freeman has been a better hitter. He has a career wRC+ of 138, while Devers has never topped 134 in a single season. But Freeman is going to age. Almost no one maintains their peak level in their mid-30s. Certified Professional Hitter Joey Votto fell off at age 34. So did Cabrera. So did Alex Rodriguez. Pujols fell off at 33. Etc. etc. A bunch of guys in the late 90s managed to avoid that fate, but I think we can all agree those were exceptions that proved the rule...
But I'm finding myself right in the middle of this debate because I also don't think Devers is on the $30 million tier. Those contracts go to guys who are either better hitters than Devers or add more value on defense. Maybe Devers will improve and reach that tier, but he's not there yet.
|
|
redsox04071318champs
Veteran
Always hoping to make my handle even longer...
Posts: 16,743
Member is Online
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Apr 14, 2022 10:00:48 GMT -5
I agree with this point. Inflation happens within the game just about every year. Max Scherzer, an old pitcher, got 43 million per year, so the 40 million dollar barrier has been blasted through. It's really easy to see a player (Soto) getting 400 million plus over the life of a contract. I wouldn't be shocked if Soto got about 450 million. If not him, somebody will get a 400 million deal, so 300 million might become what a Devers gets. Whether he should or not is a different debate, but I can't imagine that the Mets or Dodgers or another team wouldn't give Devers 300 million. His arrow is still pointing up, so I expect the bat will be better - not Miguel Cabrera prime better, but lets' just say that Devers is probably on a path to 500 plus career HRs and he's not a one dimensional hitter. Then try to imagine a lineup the Sox have that doesn't include Devers in it, where Dalbec or Story are the 3b. I would assume X is probably gone...even if he wasn't he's not Devers offensively...unless the Sox are replacing Devers' production in RF, I don't see how the Sox offense doesn't lose out, even if Casas develops as hoped for. I'm not convinced that Devers cannot improve at 3b and be a viable 3b for quite a number of years. I'm not ready to assign him to DH or 1b. He doesn't have to be Brooks Robinson. He just has to be respectable at 3b, near average. I get that he hasn't been to date, but from observing him, I think his issues aren't a lack of ability to play 3b. Keep in mind, as he ages, say he signs a 10 year deal. Those first 5 he's probably a 3b and those last 5 he's a 1b/dh. By then star players will be making 40 or 50 million/year so his DH bat, which could still be quite effective, could be the equivalent of what JD Martinez has gotten, but an inflationary prices. So while I can see the reluctance to give the money to Devers, I can see the case for it. At some point...if you can't give a huge contract to a player like Betts who was great at everything, or a pure offensive monster like Devers (the closest LH bat to David Ortiz), then when can you give you out a contract to an elite player? Especially a homegrown one? I think the Sox need to sign one of X or Devers, with Devers being the best fit, and I figured the Sox would sign one of them, but now I'm starting to think, given the offers, that they are becoming more and more likely to sign neither....that Trevor Story is their big signing, spending 140 million so they don't have to spend 200 million for X or 300 million for Devers. I'd rather have X or Devers rather than Story, but now I'm starting to think that Story was the signing, not Devers or X. I realize that I'm mostly responding to individual rhetorical points and not entire arguments, but some of these are crazy. No, we can't just agree that Devers is probably going to hit 500 homers! That is basically just assuming that you're going to get Miggy for the rest of his career (which the previous post tried to say it wasn't doing and then just did). It's not impossible, but that is not really the most likely outcome as of this instant. Love Raffy, don't think it's super duper unlikely for him, but you can't just blaze through like "yeah he'll probably join the 500 club..." Let's see, Devers has 113 HRs thru his age 24 season, is probably good for another 70 HRs for this year and next combined, which puts him at 183 thru age 26 and having not hit his peak yet. If he averages 30 HRs for the next ten years, and with the way HRs are flying out of the ballpark at seemingly record rates every year, it's not crazy to think he can do it without having to be Miguel Cabrera, winning triple crowns, 3000 hits, etc. Am I guaranteeing it? Hell no. But is he on the path that guys who hit 500 carer HRs hit? Yeah, I'd say so. And yes, the path is probably littered with guys who were headed in that direction and veered off/got injured, etc. "Probably is too strong a word", which I shouldn't have used, but this guy has as much shot as anybody else really (Obviously I'd take better odds on Vlad Jr, Soto, and Acunas), so I don't feel it's outlandish at all to think this guy has a reasonable crack at it. Most guys his age don't. He does. If you think this guy has a strong 8 - 10 years in front of him, you extend him, even if you do have to overpay a bit. If you think he'll fall by the wayside, you don't invest. I mean, that is the crux of the argument. |
|
|
|
Post by notstarboard on Apr 14, 2022 10:01:42 GMT -5
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.
The Rays have had lots of bites at the cherry. The Dodgers before getting Mookie had a lot of bites at the cherry. The A's had lots of bites at the cherry etc...The Dodgers needed to go all in on a trade for a star in order to win. The one franchise I would say that was completely pure in regards to homegrown, not over extending themselves was Houston. But then again we know why they won. I also wouldn't call what Bloom has done thus far as a "roaring success". Hes been good but he also got absolutely destroyed on the one major trade he had to make (granted the first attempt at the trade was far better than the 2nd) and some of his FA signings have been meh. Lets see what happens this year and evaluate after. I love what hes done with the farm system. But as far as the major league roster, it seems like thats secondary. You need to eventually keep one or two of these guys. Otherwise you're a big market team with a mid market mentality. Which is good until you take ratings and ballpark prices into consideration. Baseball is still a business and in order to run a successful business you can't be 100% risk adverse. I'm going to copy and paste another comment I wrote on this a while back:
"If one team won 65% of their games in the regular season, that team would be a huge favorite in the playoffs. That's a record of 105-57. The playoff competition is stronger than the regular season, so let's assume this team wins roughly 55% of their games against other playoff teams. Statistically, this team would only win a 7-game series 61% of the time and a 5-game series 59% of the time. Assuming 10-team playoffs and that this team won their division, they would still only have a 22% chance of winning the WS. You'd have to replicate this season three times to have a greater than 50% chance of winning the WS. You'd have to replicate it three more times to have a greater than 75% chance of winning the WS.
Most playoff teams are way less dominant than this, though, and luck is a thing, so some teams will need many more attempts before winning the WS, even if they have great teams with a realistic shot. Incidentally, this is also why the Dodgers model is so good. The Red Sox have defied the odds to win the amount of titles they have. You're going to win more WS in the long run if you win your division consistently than if you boom and bust."
---
I would push back on Bloom having gotten "destroyed" on the Mookie trade. Especially given the state of the Sox roster when the trade was made, I would rather have had five years of Verdugo and $48 million of Price's money off the books than one season of Mookie Betts. This holds even if Downs and Wong never play another game in the majors. The Sox were not going to be competitive in 2020, so losing that year of Mookie wasn't really a negative. In practice it turned out to be a blessing because the Sox finished 24-36, picked fourth in the draft, and were able to select Marcelo Mayer, the consensus top talent in the draft. Mookie put up 1.5 more WAR than Verdugo in 2020, so keeping him would very likely have put Mayer out of reach; there were two teams at 25-35 and five teams at 26-34.
Preferring the Graterol trade is fine, but the Sox didn't like his medicals. I don't think it's fair to criticize the GM for trusting the team doctors. It's all fun and games until your flamethrower needs TJ. Plus, when that trade was altered I think many people, myself included, preferred getting Wong and Downs, who at the time was seen as a possible future MLB regular at 2B, over a relief pitcher with injury risk, great arm aside. I remember seeing multiple posts alleging that Graterol's "medical issue" was just a cop out because Bloom realized he was getting fleeced and wanted to alter the deal.
Bloom's "meh" FA signings have been exclusively one-year guys that were had at a discount because they were flawed players. The hope was to get them right and have a bargain that could help for 2022 as well. Not everyone is going to over-perform like Hunter Renfroe, though, and I don't understand begrudging Bloom the ones that didn't work out when they had no long-term impact on the team. Would you rather he not pick up guys at a discount because there's risk there, even if it means throwing out Baby Kiké with the bathwater? A wise man once said "in order to run a successful business you can't be 100% risk averse"  The Trevor Story contract is a perfect example of the kind of talent you can acquire on the FA market without overpaying and without taking on huge albatross risk.
I'm fine with making an extra effort to retain veteran fan favorites; they've proven they can succeed in Boston, it keeps the fans happy, and they will likely pay dividends in the leadership, marketing, and FA wooing aspects. At the end of the day, though, it doesn't make sense to overpay for a guy just because he's an established star. The deal also has to be fair. Anything else would be irrational.
|
|
|
|
Post by ematz1423 on Apr 14, 2022 10:09:04 GMT -5
If you look at ZIPs it projects Devers for 4.5 and 4.6 WAR for 23 and 24. Freeman seems like someone who could buck the projections as well since he's such a good Profesional hitter who can withstand some loss of bat speed with his great approach. I get your point and maybe I'm naive but I don't really think a team that sees Devers as a first base is going to want to sign him to a 300 mil deal. I think the reason to think a team wouldn't value Devers as much as Freeman is that Freeman has been a better hitter. He has a career wRC+ of 138, while Devers has never topped 134 in a single season. But Freeman is going to age. Almost no one maintains their peak level in their mid-30s. Certified Professional Hitter Joey Votto fell off at age 34. So did Cabrera. So did Alex Rodriguez. Pujols fell off at 33. Etc. etc. A bunch of guys in the late 90s managed to avoid that fate, but I think we can all agree those were exceptions that proved the rule...
But I'm finding myself right in the middle of this debate because I also don't think Devers is on the $30 million tier. Those contracts go to guys who are either better hitters than Devers or add more value on defense. Maybe Devers will improve and reach that tier, but he's not there yet.
I believe we're pretty much on the same page on this. I probably sound like I'm down on Devers with my string of posts trying to point out why I don't know that he's worth committing to if he's looking for 300+ mil. However I'm a giant Devers fan and want him along for the long haul. I don't find him to be an the upper echelon of players in the league who deserve to set the market. In my eyes he's a tier below that. That's still an awesome player who would be dang near impossible to replace directly. He's also got potential to reach that upper echelon so to make sure I don't hijack this thread I'll leave these final thoughts for time being. I want Devers long term on the sox. I think he can probably handle 3rd for the next 5+ years. His bat would play fine as a DH if he does have to move or play some hybrid 3rd/1st/dh to keep people fresh. If the market is 10 years 300 mil to keep him, well its not my money so I'd be okay with it. If the Sox think differently than I do and aren't willing to go that high then I'd understand that too while be bummed out. |
|
|
|
Post by jaffinator on Apr 14, 2022 10:09:12 GMT -5
I realize that I'm mostly responding to individual rhetorical points and not entire arguments, but some of these are crazy. No, we can't just agree that Devers is probably going to hit 500 homers! That is basically just assuming that you're going to get Miggy for the rest of his career (which the previous post tried to say it wasn't doing and then just did). It's not impossible, but that is not really the most likely outcome as of this instant. Love Raffy, don't think it's super duper unlikely for him, but you can't just blaze through like "yeah he'll probably join the 500 club..." He just turned 25 in October and has 113 homers. With last year being his biggest power output. It would be a massive upset if he didn't get to 500 homers. Trading Devers is a different issue all together. If you're not going to sign him you can't let him walk. Seattle and Texas would be two teams that I would immediately call. Jung/Leiter/others or Rodriguez/Brash/others would be acceptable returns. Someone is going to get excellent prime years out of Devers. In terms of players with the most homers through their age 24 seasons, Devers is 33rd. Which is great! His closest neighbors on that list are Ruben Sierra, Prince Fielder (both above), Eddie Murray, and Tom Brunansky. Eddie Murray is the only one who hit 500 - he hit 504 across 21 seasons. If you open it up to a wider range, you get Willie Mays (yes!), Troy Glaus (no), Adam Dunn (no), Cal Ripken (no), Justin Upton (no), and Darryl Strawberry (no). Obviously some great names up there, but "probably gonna hit 500" is a no and "massive upset if he doesn't" is patently absurd. |
|
|
The Trevor Story contract is a perfect example of the kind of talent you can acquire on the FA market without overpaying and without taking on huge albatross risk.