Yeah, I love Devers but I think people in Boston are overrating him to an extent, especially as a hitter. If anything close to 400 million is what it costs to keep him, I'd be more than fine letting him go. A lot of his value is tied to being a third baseman, if he can't play the position five years into his contract you're already not getting your money's worth at that price.
Riley signed his deal with more than 3 years left until FA (after 2025), Devers is 1 year away now, that’s the big difference.
If you figure a typical arb progression for those three years, call it $10M, $16M, $22M (I'm aware that that's not what Riley will actually be paid for those seasons), the remainder of his deal is roughly 7/164. If we look at it that way, seems like a comparable offer to Devers today, buying out his last arb-year, would probably be something like 8/200. Which is, if rumored offers are true, where the Sox seem to be or at least were at the start of the off-season. Safe to say at this point that won't get it done.
Those would be incredibly high for arbitration. Judge settled for $20M in year 3. Devers got $5 and $11M in his first two years and wont hit $20 in his third. There's almost no way Riley would approach $50M over the three years. A realistic estimate is more along what Devers will likely get or $35-$40M total (Devers expected to be right around $35M, likely less, hed need to pop close to 20M to get there). In theory arbitration should reflect moves in the free agency market, but they really havent - they've been stuck awarding the same contracts for 10+ years.
Just to be clear, you don't think David Ortiz was an elite hitter?
You said it yourself, David Ortiz's career OPS, which includes his so-so Twins years and his entire 30s, is the same as Devers' best season. I consider an elite hitter one who regularly puts up an OPS+ better than 150 and is in MVP discussions. Papi was that guy in his prime. Devers has not shown that consistent ability yet. He's young and may take a step forward, or he's just a guy who peaked early and this is who he is.
David Ortiz had 11 seasons of an 140 OPS+ or higher in his career and his Red Sox only OPS+ is 148, which Devers has never reached. Ortiz failed to reach 140 OPS+ in only three seasons with the Sox, from '08 to '10 and if you take his combined hitting in that period it amounts to a .854 OPS (120 OPS+), while Devers is a career .854 OPS hitter (124 OPS+), though he's at 132 OPS+ since 2019, which might be the fairer way to evaluate it. In any case, I believe we can agree there's a chance Devers grows into a David Ortiz level hitter, but he's not really there yet. That BR list of similar players at Devers' age also includes a lot of guys who are/were far better defenders than he is.
He is 25 and and his OPS+ *your stat) in his first four full seasons was:
Riley was a super-2 so he got four years of arbitration, the first of which was $4M. That's why I was high on the estimates...his third year likely would have matched Devers' third, and then he'd get another. All I was trying to do was factor in the buying out of those years to determine what the free agent years were truly worth. Riley's AAV of 21.2M is not indicative of his true market value. It reflects a discount for buying out his cheaper years. So I'm estimating his free agent market value at 7/165ish or closer to 23.5M. Call it 24 if we want to call my arb estimates too high. A Devers deal now would be buying out just one year of arbitration rather than three, hence only making it an 8 year offer to make it directly comparable to Riley's deal (7 years of free agency + arb years). Regardless if it's 8 or 10 years, any $25M AAV offer would put the Sox right in the Riley ballpark. And that seemed reasonable a month ago. Now, not so much.
I got your math and its probably meaningless because the market has continued to increase, but I dont think a signing three years from free agency is comparable with one that is one even after taking out the arbitration estimates. The guy with three years is going to take more of a discount above and beyond the realistic estiamte of arbitration awards - the team gets those three years no matter what, there is no reason for them to extend early unless they are getting a discount beyond that. That discount is greater at three years out than one year out. People can debate what exactly the discounts should be, but its definitely not zero and it definitely goes down as you get closer to free agency.
So any smart GM would look at a list of players who were good into their 30s and decide to lock them up at 26? No way! Why can't we get a smart GM like that?
Well the second of those isn't happening. They didn't do it before, during or after what turned out to be Betts' or Xs' last seasons with the organization, it's reasonably clear the "offer he can't refuse" is not a part of their current repertoire. They're either going to grind to a number with him before the season, or they'll be the fourth-place bidders next year.
Don’t worry, we’ll trade him for someone we DFA on 2025 that in the meantime puts up a sub .300 OPS but plays 5 positions!
Or is just a negotiation tactic like with Bogaerts and judge (or with any athlete)
But that is not the plan Bloom is executing. It’s to hold everyone because they’re still “in the hunt for the last wild card” near the end of July. Then not to bother spending money on stars because you’d rather have the financial flexibility to give the money to use last year to give $10m to a guy coming off TJS whom generally missed half a season even before that (Paxton), to take on $9.5m and spend a combined $5m on Kevin Plawecki and Hansel Robles.
They won’t “lose” me if they fail to extend Raffy but my level of give a damn about the team will definitely take a hit. It’s hard to maintain interest when you know all of your favorite players are just rentals until they get too expensive. I feel like an A’s fan.
If ratings are down 30% and butts in seats down a similar amount, minds might change
The time to make the offer is now. I don't blame him for wanting to stay focused during the season, especially after the gamble Judge made last year and saw pay off handsomely. An injury would quickly derail such dreams, but a young athlete like him is more likely looking toward the promise of riches than the possibility of diminished returns. We, likewise, shouldn't be rooting for an injury to lower his price (I know that's not remotely what you meant).
I NEVER thought I'd type the following, but here goes - sign him to a 14 year, $450M deal before Christmas (gulp) or see if Steve Cohen or Dave Dombroski or anyone else will continue to back up the Brinks truck filled with prospects for us. I would think that the Correa deal removes the Mets from the equation, but who knows what Cohen is thinking this year. It's going to be nice to be a Mets fan this year.
Sadly, there are an almost limitless number of people like me who rarely get back to New England and will still buy tickets this summer (tentative plans to go). I have a number of friends here in North Carolina who say they'd love to visit Fenway and this might be there chance. Ownership really isn't going to feel the pinch of lost ticket sales, imho. People who couldn't afford to go before will scoop up any discounts even to see a flailing team play in the shrine known as Fenway. Heck, most of them don't even like the Sox, they just want to see Fenway once in their lifetime and will happily make the pilgrimage.
Bloom should be on the phone with Devers this morning using Correa's new number as a start to to launch a new offer in the 10/315 range.
While I get your point, does the evidence really support that?
You’re a Sure Thing.
I would hope the Sox are at 10/300m for Devers now. That is an overpay but there is potential for an elite bat even if the defense is projected to be average at best. Add another 10% for 12/330 due to Devers leverage. If that doesn’t do it move him asap.
You seem to be yearning for a new FO that will pitch the owners on signing those big deals again, but look at the list you made:
Exactly....If they do extend him at least he will be age 36 at the end which I can still see as a useful DH/1b type.... instead of a 41 year old SS. Giants may be desperate here...Harrison , Lucianao, Matos...
Vlad Sr.? I think most teams would have been fine with this production on a 5 year / $70 million contract.
This is true. But you need runs (or to prevent them) to win baseball games and they have to come from somewhere.
Agree. I also think Devers is the right age and production level to give a 10 year agreement to before the season. This is the price of premium talent. This feels like the 2020 housing market right now. High prices with a lot of buyers flush with cash and even more waiting to spend money if opportunities present themselves. Sox can keep waiting for premium talent at good prices but the FA market doesn't look like it's going to help them out here. Or they can keep signing older players to short deals, cross their fingers on their prospects, and watch Devers play for the Twins or something.
I agree, but there's a baseball argument to be made that giving 10 years to Devers is too risky. If the Sox believe that, trade him before the season for the best package you can get and move on.
Devers feels like the linchpin moment for this management group. I still think they trade him
Fair, and a couple of reasons:
