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

genoasalami

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 4, 2006
2,591
I understand Fenway fits his swing better, but money aside ...he gets to call one of the nicest cities in the US home for a long time....and no more cold and miserable Aprils/Mays....
 

EvilEmpire

paying for his sins
Moderator
SoSH Member
Apr 9, 2007
17,399
Washington
I don’t understand the anger towards the Red Sox over letting Bogaerts go. Is there anyone here that would be happy if the Red Sox matched or topped the Padres 11/280 offer?
Assuming that they had to meet or exceed $280. Sure.

But they apparently didn't want Bogaerts back at $200, which seems to be in the ballpark of other offers he had. Would he have taken it? I think he was genuine in wanting to come back to Boston, but who knows? He didn't get a chance. Boston just didn't value him as much as the market, the market even excluding the Padres' monster offer.

Under those circumstances I can understand some fan anger that a home grown star player wasn't even given a competitive offer to remain with the team.
 

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
12,983
I'm not sure I buy this point about holes. In the 2019 season the core of the lineup was 28, 26, 22, 24, 29 and 26 (Vazquez, X, Devers, Benny, JBJ, Mookie). JD was only 31, for that matter. Seemed to me that we had several years to replenish the farm system and make smart mid-tier signings while that core matured. If DD wasn't the guy to do that, I get it. But we broke up that core by choice, for the most part. Most of the current holes are of our own making, not because of terrible moves by DD.
Agree, they won the World Series, followed it up with a disappointing season which was primarily a result of Sale, Price, and Eovaldi getting hurt - and then completely panicked and changed course. Now, we’ve got a better (albeit not among the best) farm club, but far less talent at the big league level. Yay?
 

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
55,873
deep inside Guido territory
Here are some key points from the Globe article referenced. It sounds like utter incompetence in reading the market on Bogaerts. At the end, the Red Sox weren't even in it. Completely brutal.

"The team drastically misread the market for Bogaerts repeatedly, right up to the end. Entering the Winter Meetings, baseball officials were divided over what a Bogaerts contract might eventually look like, with some speculating he might secure a six-year deal in the $150 million range and others envisioning a seven-year deal that could sneak past $200 million. Yet the spending frenzy that unfolded in San Diego — an 11-year, $300 million deal for Trea Turner and the Phillies in which the Padres had missed out with an even bigger offer; a nine-year, $360 million agreement between Aaron Judge and the Yankees in which the Padres had likewise emerged as a late bidder — suggested that $200 million represented a likely floor for where the Bogaerts market would go."

"According to a major league source, the Red Sox made a six-year offer with an average annual value of roughly $27 million — a higher AAV than the Padres ($25.5 million). Still, even with some belief in Bogaerts’s camp that the Sox would raise their offer, the gap in the number of guaranteed seasons was so enormous that the separation between the offers was decisive. The Red Sox weren’t even in the picture at the end. Along with the Padres, three to four other teams saw Bogaerts being worth at least $200 million. So far behind were the Sox that Bogaerts told a friend he had “zero choice” but to eliminate what was long his team of choice and have agent Scott Boras negotiate with the others."

As I and other have speculated and are now proven correct on, X was unhappy with the 4/90 offer in spring training. He would have been open to the final offer the Sox made had it have been offered in the spring, but it was not. X would have been open to negotiating during the year, but the Red Sox never reached out until after the season.

"But the Sox offered Bogaerts just one additional year and $30 million to pass on the right to opt out, essentially, a commitment of four years and $90 million. Bogaerts was stunned. The Sox had just signed Trevor Story — a player whose performance had not matched that of Bogaerts — to a six-year, $140 million deal. Bogaerts, a source suggested, would have been open to a new deal that was in the range of what Story received. The five-year, $151 million agreement that Astros star Jose Altuve landed in his extension several years earlier likewise represented a framework that Bogaerts would have welcomed. But the Sox’ offer was a non-starter. Bogaerts left spring training with a disappointed realization that the season might be his last with the Sox. Bogaerts initially suggested he didn’t want to negotiate a new deal in-season but softened that stance in May. Boras likewise said he would be open to calls. But the Red Sox never attempted another contractual outreach during the season."

Speier and Abraham take the FO to task on the topic of trading their soon-to-be-FA's.
"It also was puzzling that the Red Sox promised Bogaerts that he would not be traded but did not attempt to capitalize on that gesture by attempting to negotiate in-season.
Why not just trade Bogaerts if their valuation offered no path to an extension? The team’s trade of Jon Lester at the 2014 deadline, though painful, netted Yoenis Cespedes, who in turn allowed the team to acquire Rick Porcello in the offseason. Even if a trade of Bogaerts was not deemed acceptable, the Red Sox erred when they did not shed players at the trade deadline — J.D. Martinez, for instance — who would have allowed them to duck under the luxury-tax threshold. The team was 52-52 and mired in last place at the time.
Such a move would have given the Sox greater compensation (a pick between the second and third rounds) once Bogaerts left, while diminishing the penalties for signing other top free agents who received qualifying offers."

https://www.bostonglobe.com/2022/12/08/sports/xander-bogaerts-padres-red-sox/?s_campaign=bostonglobesports:socialflow:twitter
 

Auger34

used to be tbb
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
11,190
This team was on top of the world four years ago, and now look at the state of things.

Bemoan the Padres offering dumb money all you want in a market that's more cash flush than anyone expected, but 6/160 is not a serious offer. It just isn't. If that's the best that ownership would do for a franchise shortstop who has been a dependable, durable rock in the lineup for nearly a decade, then this team isn't serious about competing at a higher level. It's also such a total misread of the market that it makes me question Bloom's basic competency in this stuff. I know the Rays were never involved in free agency when he was in charge there, but he does know that it exists, right? And that other teams can make offers too?
This is my issue (and what the posters who stick up for Bloom no matter what never seem to address).

Chad Finn tweeted a picture of expert projections of what Bogey would get…6/160 was below all of them. It’s not a serious offer and if Bogaerts was really their priority then that makes the offer even worse.

This doesn’t even take into account the terrible offer in Spring Training which allowed it to get this far
 

chrisfont9

Member
SoSH Member
Philosophical question: If it’s a given that there is always at least one team that will overpay an elite free agent, is it ever a good idea to top that team’s offer?
The answer to this question is forever in flux, since it is a factor of two shifting elements, the market price and the LT threshold. The former is spiking now, so I'd be pretty nervous about paying top dollar unless I think the latter is going to fix the problem before long. The companion philosophical piece, or subset of the one you were raising, is whether you are better off with 25 above-average guys than a less balanced roster featuring an elite or two and a couple soft spots. I tend to think the former is a better bet, but the latter sells more fake jerseys.
 

YTF

Member
SoSH Member
Can this finally shut the door on the 'he was always going to free agency' crap? I mean, the guy already showed he was willing to sign before free agency with his first contract, and lo and behold there were a series of opportunities to do it again and they shit themselves.
Look I get the reporter/source relationship, but we have no idea of the source or when this discussion took place. Also it's odd for a writer to use the word "suggested" if this were an absolute.
 

IpswichSox

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
2,795
Suburbs of Washington, DC
I don’t understand the anger towards the Red Sox over letting Bogaerts go. Is there anyone here that would be happy if the Red Sox matched or topped the Padres 11/280 offer?
Respectfully, that's not the point. Two things can be true at the same time: 1) the Padres' offer was insane and 2) Bloom's offer of 6/$162 was unserious.
 

JM3

often quoted
SoSH Member
Dec 14, 2019
16,798
I'm not sure I buy this point about holes. In the 2019 season the core of the lineup was 28, 26, 22, 24, 29 and 26 (Vazquez, X, Devers, Benny, JBJ, Mookie). JD was only 31, for that matter. Seemed to me that we had several years to replenish the farm system and make smart mid-tier signings while that core matured. If DD wasn't the guy to do that, I get it. But we broke up that core by choice, for the most part. Most of the current holes are of our own making, not because of terrible moves by DD.
Let's see what those guys cost this year...

Vaz $7m (1.6 fWAR)
X $20m (6.1 fWAR)
Devers $11.2m (4.9 fWAR)
Benny $8.5m (2.7 fWAR)
JBJ $12m (-0.1 fWAR)
Mookie $30.4m (6.6 fWAR)
JD $22m (1 fWAR)

Plus...
Price $32m (0.1 fWAR)
Sale $25.6m (0.2 fWAR)
Eovaldi $17m (1.0 fWAR)

That's $185.7m for 10 players who earned a total of 24 fWAR...with almost no Major League ready cost controlled talent. Where are you getting the other 16 guys to fill out a roster that gets you to a successful team? Where are you getting the playable depth when injuries happen?

Even if you go to $270m like the Dodgers did this year, that gives you $85m to fill those spots, including almost literally an entire pitching staff. Continuing what the Red Sox were doing and being successful this past season would have been literally impossible.

For reference purposes, the Dodgers put up 63.6 fWAR this past season.
 

chrisfont9

Member
SoSH Member
Here are some key points from the Globe article referenced. It sounds like utter incompetence in reading the market on Bogaerts. At the end, the Red Sox weren't even in it. Completely brutal.

"The team drastically misread the market for Bogaerts repeatedly, right up to the end. Entering the Winter Meetings, baseball officials were divided over what a Bogaerts contract might eventually look like, with some speculating he might secure a six-year deal in the $150 million range and others envisioning a seven-year deal that could sneak past $200 million. Yet the spending frenzy that unfolded in San Diego — an 11-year, $300 million deal for Trea Turner and the Phillies in which the Padres had missed out with an even bigger offer; a nine-year, $360 million agreement between Aaron Judge and the Yankees in which the Padres had likewise emerged as a late bidder — suggested that $200 million represented a likely floor for where the Bogaerts market would go."

"According to a major league source, the Red Sox made a six-year offer with an average annual value of roughly $27 million — a higher AAV than the Padres ($25.5 million). Still, even with some belief in Bogaerts’s camp that the Sox would raise their offer, the gap in the number of guaranteed seasons was so enormous that the separation between the offers was decisive. The Red Sox weren’t even in the picture at the end. Along with the Padres, three to four other teams saw Bogaerts being worth at least $200 million. So far behind were the Sox that Bogaerts told a friend he had “zero choice” but to eliminate what was long his team of choice and have agent Scott Boras negotiate with the others."

As I and other have speculated and are now proven correct on, X was unhappy with the 4/90 offer in spring training. He would have been open to the final offer the Sox made had it have been offered in the spring, but it was not. X would have been open to negotiating during the year, but the Red Sox never reached out until after the season.

"But the Sox offered Bogaerts just one additional year and $30 million to pass on the right to opt out, essentially, a commitment of four years and $90 million. Bogaerts was stunned. The Sox had just signed Trevor Story — a player whose performance had not matched that of Bogaerts — to a six-year, $140 million deal. Bogaerts, a source suggested, would have been open to a new deal that was in the range of what Story received. The five-year, $151 million agreement that Astros star Jose Altuve landed in his extension several years earlier likewise represented a framework that Bogaerts would have welcomed. But the Sox’ offer was a non-starter. Bogaerts left spring training with a disappointed realization that the season might be his last with the Sox. Bogaerts initially suggested he didn’t want to negotiate a new deal in-season but softened that stance in May. Boras likewise said he would be open to calls. But the Red Sox never attempted another contractual outreach during the season."

Speier and Abraham take the FO to task on the topic of trading their soon-to-be-FA's.
"It also was puzzling that the Red Sox promised Bogaerts that he would not be traded but did not attempt to capitalize on that gesture by attempting to negotiate in-season.
Why not just trade Bogaerts if their valuation offered no path to an extension? The team’s trade of Jon Lester at the 2014 deadline, though painful, netted Yoenis Cespedes, who in turn allowed the team to acquire Rick Porcello in the offseason. Even if a trade of Bogaerts was not deemed acceptable, the Red Sox erred when they did not shed players at the trade deadline — J.D. Martinez, for instance — who would have allowed them to duck under the luxury-tax threshold. The team was 52-52 and mired in last place at the time.
Such a move would have given the Sox greater compensation (a pick between the second and third rounds) once Bogaerts left, while diminishing the penalties for signing other top free agents who received qualifying offers."

https://www.bostonglobe.com/2022/12/08/sports/xander-bogaerts-padres-red-sox/?s_campaign=bostonglobesports:socialflow:twitter
I mean, they had time to read the new market, which went way beyond the old one that they expected. I'm sure they knew what they were doing and just had no interest in going there. Not sure that's incompetence as much as a philosophical divide between the Padres' "fuck it, I'll be long gone, give him 11 years" approach and their own. It's kind of like negotiating with a crazy person, you either let them drag you into their space or you walk. They walked.
 

iddoc

New Member
Nov 17, 2006
148
I don’t understand the anger towards the Red Sox over letting Bogaerts go. Is there anyone here that would be happy if the Red Sox matched or topped the Padres 11/280 offer?
At least speaking for myself, the anger is more over the failure to offer something like 5/150 or 6/160 during this past season.
 

A Bad Man

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2016
1,050
In my opinion it is relatively apparent that the Red Sox did not have the intention of resigning Bogaerts because of the farm system and projected overall market. I also believe that this is a highly defensible position.
 

johnnywayback

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 8, 2004
1,422
Respectfully, that's not the point. Two things can be true at the same time: 1) the Padres' offer was insane and 2) Bloom's offer of 6/$162 was unserious.
OK, but that "unserious" offer was exactly where the board said it would draw the line -- quoting from that thread: "As of this edit (11/3), we have 18 contract offers for Bogaerts at an average length of 5.78 years, an average total value of 158.83mm and an average AAV of 27.47mm." And from what I've read, the team was pretty clear that they were willing to nudge it up a bit. I wager that if the poll question had been, "Would you do 7 years, $189 million?" the answer would have been a closely divided no.
 

CoffeeNerdness

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 6, 2012
9,025
Look I get the reporter/source relationship, but we have no idea of the source or when this discussion took place. Also it's odd for a writer to use the word "suggested" if this were an absolute.
Did this happen?

In 2019, one year from free agency, Bogaerts — then 26 — pushed Boras to get a deal done with the Red Sox. The result was a below-market, six-year, $120 million offer that proved a relative bargain, as Bogaerts spent 2019-22 as arguably the most productive offensive shortstop in baseball.
That's literally the thing people saying Boras clients never do actually happening... with Xander... the guy people are still insisting was always going to free agency.
 

8slim

has trust issues
SoSH Member
Nov 6, 2001
25,695
Unreal America
Let's see what those guys cost this year...

Vaz $7m (1.6 fWAR)
X $20m (6.1 fWAR)
Devers $11.2m (4.9 fWAR)
Benny $8.5m (2.7 fWAR)
JBJ $12m (-0.1 fWAR)
Mookie $30.4m (6.6 fWAR)
JD $22m (1 fWAR)

Plus...
Price $32m (0.1 fWAR)
Sale $25.6m (0.2 fWAR)
Eovaldi $17m (1.0 fWAR)

That's $185.7m for 10 players who earned a total of 24 fWAR...with almost no Major League ready cost controlled talent. Where are you getting the other 16 guys to fill out a roster that gets you to a successful team? Where are you getting the playable depth when injuries happen?

Even if you go to $270m like the Dodgers did this year, that gives you $85m to fill those spots, including literally an entire pitching staff. Continuing what the Red Sox were doing and being successful this past season would have been literally impossible.
By "this year" do you mean 2022? Because 5 of those 7 batters were on the team, of course. And Benny's 8.5M is the same as Kike's 8M, so that's wash.

I purposefully only wrote about batters, Price needed to be jettisoned, and I don't believe the point about "holes" was in reference to the staff anyway.

I don't see those salary commitments as supporting why we had to break up the 2018 core. Outside of Mookie, not much really changed.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
25,297
I mean, they had time to read the new market, which went way beyond the old one that they expected. I'm sure they knew what they were doing and just had no interest in going there. Not sure that's incompetence as much as a philosophical divide between the Padres' "fuck it, I'll be long gone, give him 11 years" approach and their own. It's kind of like negotiating with a crazy person, you either let them drag you into their space or you walk. They walked.
I think this is it. They mismanaged the time frame when they had exclusive negotiating rights with him for an extension. But when free agency blew up, it was like, absolutely NO WAY are we going to go anywhere NEAR 11 years, $280 million. And rightfully so, IMO.

The Padres' offer is truly crazy. Giving a 30 year old shortstop who has been in decline an ELEVEN year deal is nuts.

2019: .939 ops, 1 hr every 18.6 ab, .246 ISO
2020: .867 ops, 1 hr every 18.5 ab, .202 ISO
2021: .863 ops, 1 hr every 23.0 ab, .198 ISO
2022: .833 ops, 1 hr every 37.1 ab, .149 ISO

I'm not dissing him or saying he's bad or anything remotely like that. He's still a very very good baseball player and I wish he was still on the Sox. BUT...he has been in decline, and is past his prime. That contract is bonkers crazy.
 

chawson

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
4,683
I’m looping back around to incompetency reading this article, although I get the feeling the hidden truth of they didn’t really want him ever might still be there.
I think they just don't see him as a shortstop, which makes sense and has a lot of supporting evidence. If he's a 115-120 wRC+ 2B/3B/LF in two years, they probably see that they have a lot of other in-house options who can do that.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
25,297
OK, but that "unserious" offer was exactly where the board said it would draw the line -- quoting from that thread: "As of this edit (11/3), we have 18 contract offers for Bogaerts at an average length of 5.78 years, an average total value of 158.83mm and an average AAV of 27.47mm." And from what I've read, the team was pretty clear that they were willing to nudge it up a bit. I wager that if the poll question had been, "Would you do 7 years, $189 million?" the answer would have been a closely divided no.
Yeah and if that poll question was, "Would you do 7/200", just like one or two out of all those who responded would have said yes. Everyone else would have said no way.

If we are going to blame Bloom for misreading the market, clearly we *ALL* misread the market, and weren't even remotely close in actuality. Now we can say, well, that's his job. Which is totally fair. But then we also need to remember that there's all kinds of things he knows that we don't - like what their actual plan IS and what they've actually got cooking and how much money they really have to play with, etc, etc.
 

A Bad Man

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2016
1,050
It should also be mentioned that Rafaela, while currently pegged for an absolutely stunning CF, is also a wizard at SS
 

Manuel Aristides

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 7, 2009
238
In my opinion it is relatively apparent that the Red Sox did not have the intention of resigning Bogaerts because of the farm system and projected overall market. I also believe that this is a highly defensible position.
I really agree here, and it's not a new feeling. Almost all of Bloom's decisions are highly defensible, in a vacuum. But they just haven't come together into a cogent plan, at least not to my eyes. I feel like the current sox team is like many of my fantasy teams that come out of auction drafts: I get obsessed with value, make sure not to overpay for anyone, and then don't have the best player at any single position and produce a mediocre result. That's hyperbole, obviously, but, I don't know how else to express this feeling that the whole is unsatisfying even though each piece makes sense to me in isolation.
 

JM3

often quoted
SoSH Member
Dec 14, 2019
16,798
By "this year" do you mean 2022? Because 5 of those 7 batters were on the team, of course. And Benny's 8.5M is the same as Kike's 8M, so that's wash.

I purposefully only wrote about batters, Price needed to be jettisoned, and I don't believe the point about "holes" was in reference to the staff anyway.

I don't see those salaries commitments as supporting why we had to break up the 2018 core. Outside of Mookie, not much really changed.
Yes...I posted all of those players' salary & fWAR from 2022, proving that keeping the band together was an entirely unsustainable model & trying to do so would be a disaster. You can purposefully not mention pitching, but the Red Sox still need to...have pitchers. Trading Betts was the way the Red Sox were able to jettison even half of Price's contract. What is your solution for jettisoning it without Mookie?

The post is more directed to my frustration with people thinking that if we just kept going with Dombrowski's model things would somehow magically be ok now rather than a direct response to your post.
 

chief1

New Member
Aug 10, 2012
147


Great job Bloom.


Great job Bloom.
Bloom inherited 27 year 0ld Mookie Betts, 27 year old Bogaerts, and 25 year old Benintendi. He turned them into Verdugo, Downs, Wong, Franchy Cordero, Winckowski, Grant Gambrell, De La Rosa, Valdez and a 4th round comp pick while still having to pay the luxury tax for a last place finish.
You be the judge.
 

dhappy42

Straw Man
Oct 27, 2013
15,803
Michigan
At least speaking for myself, the anger is more over the failure to offer something like 5/150 or 6/160 during this past season.
I can understand that, but I doubt Bogaerts would have accepted that last year. I think Boras was taking him to free agency no matter what. That was the whole point of the opt-outs in his last contract.
 

Toe Nash

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 28, 2005
5,723
02130
I'm not sure I buy this point about holes. In the 2019 season the core of the lineup was 28, 26, 22, 24, 29 and 26 (Vazquez, X, Devers, Benny, JBJ, Mookie). JD was only 31, for that matter. Seemed to me that we had several years to replenish the farm system and make smart mid-tier signings while that core matured. If DD wasn't the guy to do that, I get it. But we broke up that core by choice, for the most part. Most of the current holes are of our own making, not because of terrible moves by DD.
Only 3, maybe 4 of those guys were much above average. 28 and 29 are not young these days and DD didn't draft anyone who is ready to break in to replace them. if you don't have guys ready to go that you drafted 3-5 years ago you're going to be filling in holes or paying average players. Sometimes those guys have good years and you win, but they also suck often.

I think they should have paid Mookie whatever he wanted because he is a legit MVP and a reasonable bet to be a plus fielder and hitter at a premium position for a while. I do not think the same of Xander or Devers at this point. But again, if they had more cheap young players who could fill in spots this and the next couple years, maybe you overpay Xander and hope he can remain at short until Mayer or whoever is ready.
 
Last edited:

chrisfont9

Member
SoSH Member
I think they just don't see him as a shortstop, which makes sense and has a lot of supporting evidence. If he's a 115-120 wRC+ 2B/3B/LF in two years, they probably see that they have a lot of other in-house options who can do that.
If he wasn't a great guy and a clubhouse cornerstone, they probably would have traded him six months ago and moved on without a second thought.
 

BringBackMo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
1,370
Speier's name on this piece gives it credibility. I said rather pointedly earlier that it was absurd to conclude that the Sox had misread Xander's market rather than that they had simply set a price and stuck to it. This piece, if it is accurate, makes clear that I was wrong. Even more, if this piece turns out to be accurate, it will mark the first time that I am having some concerns about Bloom and the front office. I'm not ready to run him out of town, but I will allow that I may have been giving him too much credit.

Edit: Tagging @Petagine in a Bottle because I directed my comments at him. Mea culpa.
 

A Bad Man

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2016
1,050
I really agree here, and it's not a new feeling. Almost all of Bloom's decisions are highly defensible, in a vacuum. But they just haven't come together into a cogent plan, at least not to my eyes. I feel like the current sox team is like many of my fantasy teams that come out of auction drafts: I get obsessed with value, make sure not to overpay for anyone, and then don't have the best player at any single position and produce a mediocre result. That's hyperbole, obviously, but, I don't know how else to express this feeling that the whole is unsatisfying even though each piece makes sense to me in isolation.
Well said and beautiful handle, just gorgeous, the best.

The cogent plan is to make the farm system into an absolute force while giving the team a shot at the playoffs. Until the farm is absolutely overflowing with top prospects, we don't go over the top. This requires some patience and understanding of longer term vision, which is a bit of a tough sell with the media histrionics. So it is a bit of a tightrope PR walk that Bloom is doing a relatively good job with, I would say, and was fully prepared for the Pete Abe DS nonsense, which is as predictable as a toddler wanting its bottle.
 

mcpickl

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2007
4,564
To join the choir, I never would've given Xander this contract, it sucks that they lowballed him last winter and again this winter, and it sucks he's gone.

The Red Sox are going to have to come to grips with the reality, the best players on the market are going to get overpaid and for much longer than you're comfortable with. Do you want the best players on the market? You've got to do business as business is being done.

And please learn your lesson. Whatever they think Devers is worth right now, add 25% to it and offer it to him today. It'll still end up being a bargain.
 

jezza1918

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
2,941
South Dartmouth, MA
Bloom inherited 27 year 0ld Mookie Betts, 27 year old Bogaerts, and 25 year old Benintendi. He turned them into Verdugo, Downs, Wong, Franchy Cordero, Winckowski, Grant Gambrell, De La Rosa, Valdez and a 4th round comp pick while still having to pay the luxury tax for a last place finish.
You be the judge.
View: https://twitter.com/Mike_Dyer13/status/1600725775883567105?s=20&t=Wzzetu5PZG8BBLQB8i6f7A

Were you gonna plagiarize the whole thing for us? Do you have any thoughts of your own on this matter? Or do you, is that your thing, you come into a message board, read some obscure tweet and then pretend - you pawn it off as your own, as your own idea just to impress some girls, embarrass my friend?
*This is meant to be in jest i promise, lot of heat flying in this thread right now!
 

dhappy42

Straw Man
Oct 27, 2013
15,803
Michigan
Bloom inherited 27 year 0ld Mookie Betts, 27 year old Bogaerts, and 25 year old Benintendi. He turned them into Verdugo, Downs, Wong, Franchy Cordero, Winckowski, Grant Gambrell, De La Rosa, Valdez and a 4th round comp pick while still having to pay the luxury tax for a last place finish.
You be the judge.
Especially considering part of the rationale for trading Betts was to free up money to pay Bogaerts and Devers when the time came.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
25,297
Bloom inherited 27 year 0ld Mookie Betts, 27 year old Bogaerts, and 25 year old Benintendi. He turned them into Verdugo, Downs, Wong, Franchy Cordero, Winckowski, Grant Gambrell, De La Rosa, Valdez and a 4th round comp pick while still having to pay the luxury tax for a last place finish.
You be the judge.
That's pretty depressing.

But can you do the other side too? Talk about the good things Bloom has done?

(BTW, losing Benintendi isn't that big a deal. He's a decent MLB player but nothing special. I thought he'd be much better.)
 

chrisfont9

Member
SoSH Member
Bloom inherited 27 year 0ld Mookie Betts, 27 year old Bogaerts, and 25 year old Benintendi. He turned them into Verdugo, Downs, Wong, Franchy Cordero, Winckowski, Grant Gambrell, De La Rosa, Valdez and a 4th round comp pick while still having to pay the luxury tax for a last place finish.
You be the judge.
He squeezed out the last few bargain Bogaerts years, got out from under the Price contract, and cut bait with Benintendi who is looking for his fourth team and hit 5 HRs last year, the same number JD Martinez hit in the last two weeks of the season. This isn't fantasy baseball, these guys don't exist in a vacuum nor are they frozen in 2018.
 

8slim

has trust issues
SoSH Member
Nov 6, 2001
25,695
Unreal America
Yes...I posted all of those players' salary & fWAR from 2022, proving that keeping the band together was an entirely unsustainable model & trying to do so would be a disaster. You can purposefully not mention pitching, but the Red Sox still need to...have pitchers. Trading Betts was the way the Red Sox were able to jettison even half of Price's contract. What is your solution for jettisoning it without Mookie?

The post is more directed to my frustration with people thinking that if we just kept going with Dombrowski's model things would somehow magically be ok now rather than a direct response to your post.
I said that it would have made sense to move on without DD, so I wasn't suggesting to "just keep going" with his model. However, I responded to a post that said the holes in our lineup were a direct effect of him. I don't see that. Needless to say the Sox weren't going to roll with the same 6-7 guys from 2018 to 2023. That's not how baseball works anymore. But to me many of our holes are due to decisions Bloom (and ownership) has made post-DD. We had a strong core in their 20s and now we don't. We have a bunch of mid-tier guys and hope that some prospects will save us.
 

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
12,983
Speier's name on this piece gives it credibility. I said rather pointedly earlier that it was absurd to conclude that the Sox had misread Xander's market rather than that they had simply set a price and stuck to it. This piece, if it is accurate, makes clear that I was wrong. Even more, if this piece turns out to be accurate, it will mark the first time that I am having some concerns about Bloom and the front office. I'm not ready to run him out of town, but I will allow that I may have been giving him too much credit.

Edit: Tagging @Petagine in a Bottle because I directed my comments at him. Mea culpa.
Hey, I appreciate that- all good. This whole thing is frustrating, and certainly the deal is quite a bit higher than anyone would really want to go. I do think the organization needs to rethink their approach and how they handled this from the get go. The 4/90 offer from ST was absurd and it really seemed to put the teams best player (and perhaps rest of the team) into a bad place going into the seasons. It was an unforced error, that they didn’t really address it until the season ended is disappointing. Too little, too late.

The FO’s communication with the team and its best players leaves a lot to be desired lately.
 

Garfinvold

New Member
Dec 8, 2022
20
I doubt they'll resign Devers it just doesn't seem to be what they do. So get ready for another weep fest next year when he signs his 13 year contract with the Rockies or whomever.
Also, This is my first post, but I have lurked here for a long time. I am not sure if this is a joke I am missing or if it is unintentional, but Rick Lancellotti's name is misspelled at the top of this page. I know there used to be some thing about Buchholz. I honor of this misspelling, I have misspelled my user name.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
25,297
So one thing that makes this palatable for me (though I still don't like it) is that they have Mayer. I know he's still a couple of years away. But he's an Uber-elite prospect that plays shortstop. He may not ever make it. Possible. But he may end being a superstar too. X already is a star and if Mayer gets to where X is, it'll be a huge win. BUT...in years past they haven't even had decent guys in the pipeline to come up and replace departing stars. Finally they've got someone who looks like he could be a superstar himself. Just need to plug the gap for a couple of years and then open the door to this kid, who looks like he could be special.

(trying to talk myself into being ok with Xander no longer being on the team)
 

CoffeeNerdness

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 6, 2012
9,025
View: https://twitter.com/Mike_Dyer13/status/1600725775883567105?s=20&t=Wzzetu5PZG8BBLQB8i6f7A

Were you gonna plagiarize the whole thing for us? Do you have any thoughts of your own on this matter? Or do you, is that your thing, you come into a message board, read some obscure tweet and then pretend - you pawn it off as your own, as your own idea just to impress some girls, embarrass my friend?
*This is meant to be in jest i promise, lot of heat flying in this thread right now!
Bloom trolling the media with that bottle of wine is going to be his Pitino "fellowship of the miserable" and " the negativity in this town stinks" moment of utter tone-deafness that will linger years and years after his regime has collapsed. People are pessimistic because you're running the team like a clown.
 

DeadlySplitter

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 20, 2015
34,169
I think they just don't see him as a shortstop, which makes sense and has a lot of supporting evidence. If he's a 115-120 wRC+ 2B/3B/LF in two years, they probably see that they have a lot of other in-house options who can do that.
This is totally fair but why offer the 4/90 then the 6/160 and ever expect he might take either at the time? Both offers are absurdly low in their context. They would have been better off not offering anything if they were this firm with their evaluation.

And again that McWilliams article I linked on the page prior suggests they actually thought he’d take 6/160, with live reaction to Chaim & others finding out on their phones at the airport. No sensationalism I can see in that article either, albeit I concede I might have blinders on here. Did Boras work them over and they didn’t even know it until Passan’s tweet or something?
 

ehaz

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 30, 2007
4,993
Another thing. The Padres clearly outbid not just the Sox but every other team by a wide margin. And Xander was their third choice for who they were willing to spend $300M++ on. They lost out on Turner and Judge first. The Sox's strategy with Xander appeared to be go test the market, here's our offer, come back to us before you make a decision. From all the reporting, it sounds like Bloom expected that if he was in the ballpark, Xander was willing to leave something on the table kind of like Aaron Judge. It looks like Bloom was right, and if San Diego hadn't completely blown them out of the water, the Globe suggested Boston was willing to raise their offer.

The problem with this strategy was that San Diego missed out on the first two guys they were willing to throw $300M - $400M at. They outbid Philly on Turner and were at least willing to outbid New York on Judge. I think there was likely an opportunity to sign Xander at something like 7/$190M. That's just tacking on another year to the reported 6/$160M, but the opportunity to do that was at the beginning of free agency, while the Padres were occupied with Turner and Judge and before their attention turned to Bogaerts. Apparently there were 3 or 4 other teams that valued him at around $200M so this may have been close enough to get a deal done if they offered it sooner.
 

BringBackMo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
1,370
This is just infuriating from the piece. I have been assuming the entire time that this was all part of a plan, that there wasn't just a backup to X leaving, but that that was the expected outcome and that Bloom had something exciting in his back pocket to follow. Apparently not.

That deal included an opt-out after the 2022 season, giving Bogaerts the opportunity to walk away from the final three years and $60 million for a more lucrative contract. The Sox and Bogaerts spoke of their desire to extend the relationship of a player who signed his first professional contract with the team in 2009, and met to discuss a potential extension in spring training this year.

But the Sox offered Bogaerts just one additional year and $30 million to pass on the right to opt out, essentially, a commitment of four years and $90 million. Bogaerts was stunned. The Sox had just signed Trevor Story — a player whose performance had not matched that of Bogaerts — to a six-year, $140 million deal.

Bogaerts, a source suggested, would have been open to a new deal that was in the range of what Story received. The five-year, $151 million agreement that Astros star Jose Altuve landed in his extension several years earlier likewise represented a framework that Bogaerts would have welcomed.
 

JM3

often quoted
SoSH Member
Dec 14, 2019
16,798
I said that it would have made sense to move on without DD, so I wasn't suggesting to "just keep going" with his model. However, I responded to a post that said the holes in our lineup were a direct effect of him. I don't see that. Needless to say the Sox weren't going to roll with the same 6-7 guys from 2018 to 2023. That's not how baseball works anymore. But to me many of our holes are due to decisions Bloom (and ownership) has made post-DD. We had a strong core in their 20s and now we don't. We have a bunch of mid-tier guys and hope that some prospects will save us.
The holes NEEDED to be created, though. In large part because the Red Sox were on the hook for huge amounts of money to Price/Sale/Eovaldi & had no Major League ready minor league talent.

Not sure how DD gets credit for that young core either...he was there from August 2015 to September 2019.

Vaz - 2008
X - 2009
Devers - 2013
Benny - June 2015
JBJ - 2011
Mookie - 2011

& then he signed Price/Sale to albatross contract's which, along with the JD/Eo deals, & 0 Major League ready talent, made it impossible to keep that core together.

The plus side: 2018 was awesome
The downside: Digging out of that hole
 

Manuel Aristides

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 7, 2009
238
Well said and beautiful handle, just gorgeous, the best.

The cogent plan is to make the farm system into an absolute force while giving the team a shot at the playoffs. Until the farm is absolutely overflowing with top prospects, we don't go over the top. This requires some patience and understanding of longer term vision, which is a bit of a tough sell with the media histrionics. So it is a bit of a tightrope PR walk that Bloom is doing a relatively good job with, I would say, and was fully prepared for the Pete Abe DS nonsense, which is as predictable as a toddler wanting its bottle.
Right back at you handsome.

I want to believe this is right... but but, if the intention is to not actually "go all out" to compete until the farm is overflowing... they should have traded X and JDM at the deadline, and not fooled around and looked weak in public by making mediocre offers to X. If the thinking is that it helped avoid negative media attention... I'm not sure I agree that's a good plan, or a successful one to this point.

I'll wait until the Chaim Bloom era is over to pass any final judgments myself, because as you say, there's a chance this is part of a really prudent and practical 10 year plan. But if he's gone in a year or three, this is all going to look kind of ugly in the rearview.
 

8slim

has trust issues
SoSH Member
Nov 6, 2001
25,695
Unreal America
So one thing that makes this palatable for me (though I still don't like it) is that they have Mayer. I know he's still a couple of years away. But he's an Uber-elite prospect that plays shortstop. He may not ever make it. Possible. But he may end being a superstar too. X already is a star and if Mayer gets to where X is, it'll be a huge win. BUT...in years past they haven't even had decent guys in the pipeline to come up and replace departing stars. Finally they've got someone who looks like he could be a superstar himself. Just need to plug the gap for a couple of years and then open the door to this kid, who looks like he could be special.

(trying to talk myself into being ok with Xander no longer being on the team)
Meh, I'm not feeling it. If Mayer had played in September last year and was about to be our everyday SS, then fine. But he's so far away. Not only won't he be in Boston for a while, but then he'll almost certainly need a year or 2 to start performing at a really strong level (just like X and Devers). And this all assumes that he won't flame out, which happens all the time.
 

Jeff Van GULLY

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 13, 2005
4,049
Did the Sox really offer 6/160 and then go leak to the media that they were going to sign X to that yesterday afternoon? Absolutely wild if that's the case and couple that with Speier piece of them being shell-shocked last night, it points to them not have a pulse on the market.

With reporting that ownership came involved and upped their offer, what was it before 6/160?
 

chrisfont9

Member
SoSH Member
This is just infuriating from the piece. I have been assuming the entire time that this was all part of a plan, that there wasn't just a backup to X leaving, but that that was the expected outcome and that Bloom had something exciting in his back pocket to follow. Apparently not.
Remember a year ago when we all thought his time at SS was just about over? No?

Maybe I am too quick to forgive Chaim -- he actually does this for a living so I would assume he knows way more than me -- but it seems like Bogaerts was kind of a valuation nightmare. Before this season, that time when Bloom was supposed to get a deal done, the signs of him being in decline defensively, and whatever you can infer from that for his offense, were such that just throwing money at him seemed like a bad idea. But he's a great guy who you'd like to keep, but he's aging and was never more than a 5-WAR type. Then he goes out and fixes his D. Or did he? Single-season metrics can be tough.

If they had someone like Soto, a no-brainer superstar, then the job is easy -- find the market, try not to inflate it, but pay what's needed and it'll be worth it. With Bogaerts, with a team that has multiple needs and is shoring up the minors but let's not confuse them with a half-dozen other systems that are truly loaded -- these are hard calls. So I don't accept any of the "Bloom is an idiot" stuff. He tried to navigate a very tricky course, and the Padres just torpedoed everyone.
 
Last edited:

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
25,297
Did the Sox really offer 6/160 and then go leak to the media that they were going to sign X to that yesterday afternoon? Absolutely wild if that's the case and couple that with Speier piece of them being shell-shocked last night, it points to them not have a pulse on the market.

With reporting that ownership came involved and upped their offer, what was it before 6/160?
If the market was 11/280, then NOBODY had a pulse on the market because by all accounts nobody else was close to San Diego’s offer. They blew everyone out of the water.
 

curly2

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 8, 2003
4,956
I don’t understand the anger towards the Red Sox over letting Bogaerts go. Is there anyone here that would be happy if the Red Sox matched or topped the Padres 11/280 offer?
Not speaking for anyone else, but I'm angry they let it get to this point. Give him a reasonable offer in spring training, and maybe he stays. An offer of 4/90 was not a realistic offer.
 

soxhop411

news aggravator
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
46,861
Bogaerts, a source suggested, would have been open to a new deal that was in the range of what Story received.
that's literally saying nothing "would be open" does not mean would sign..... and who would that source be, Only one I can think would be Boras....

and yes as other have said the final deal that Xander got from SD was so out of the blue I dont think anyone had a read on the market... Just go look at the Pre- winter meeting projections for what the FA SS would get


Bogaerts' deal is the longest contract ever signed at age 30 or older.
View: https://twitter.com/ESPNStatsInfo/status/1600725203797114881
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
21,308
Maine
Did the Sox really offer 6/160 and then go leak to the media that they were going to sign X to that yesterday afternoon? Absolutely wild if that's the case and couple that with Speier piece of them being shell-shocked last night, it points to them not have a pulse on the market.

With reporting that ownership came involved and upped their offer, what was it before 6/160?
My impression of things is that they felt they were still in the running with the 6/160 (and were willing to go higher), not that they thought it would get done at 6/160. Then the Padres came out of nowhere and way over the top with their offer and that's what left them shell-shocked.