A Realistic View of the 2025 Red Sox: Part II

[Hugh2]

4 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

'3rd highest of all time' doesn't mean much when prices are rising all the time and we're talking about the 2nd best player in the game at the time.

Their best offer didn't get to $300 million.  It was short of market value.   

They shouldn't get a pass for losing one of the best players in franchise history because he wouldn't sign a 'team friendly' deal.  Devers certainly didn't get a a 'team friendly' deal and he was a much lesser talent.   

When you're talking about extensions it certainly does.  If a guy is getting record setting money like that it's because they want to go to free agency and you have to offer them something higher to stop it from happening. That kind of money 2-3 years shy of FA is a lot different than offering it in a walk year. 

Your last sentence is why I make this stand, again and again and again....The Sox f***ing up the Mookie Betts situation should never be a point of criticism of them making smart moves in the future.  I think Lou Merloni said something exactly like this in a section 10 podcast and I'm paraphrasing "Just because the Sox didn't sign Mookie Betts doesn't mean they aren't allowed to go out and spend big money ever again" but yet people will bring it up every time they pay a guy money. 

I'm not saying the Sox did the right thing, that's obviously subjective and Betts is an immense talent.  But if you know you can't or won't resign a guy it's best to get something rather than nothing from him.

Perhaps a better way to phrase my point is this. If you could definitively know the Sox would not spend what it takes to keep Mookie Betts should they have traded his last year of team control or kept him for one more season? To be fair, you have to pretend like you don't know how s***** Jeter Downs turned out. 

[Hitch]

7 hours ago, 5GoldGlovesOF,75 said:

Another perspective to consider: if Spring Training offensive stats are meaningless -- batting vs. big leaguers trying new pitches or grips, or minor leaguers stressing to impress -- then so are early season stats.

An interesting view point for sure. Except there aren't pitchers trying new things and not caring about numbers in season. This smacks of trying to shoehorn a point in to fit a narrative.

7 hours ago, 5GoldGlovesOF,75 said:

Not all hitters flop like Holliday when first promoted to the majors. Sometimes, players enjoy more success seeing more strikes to swing at, under better lighting conditions, after better rest and nutrition from big league travel and accommodations, with bigger crowds cheering them on. At least, initially -- until pitchers (and advance scouts) find a hole in their swings to exploit.

Sure, except the numbers are clearly on the side of players that do not make it (and players that struggle in the transition up). This isn't even up for debate. It's one of those rare moments when the numbers are very much on one side of the debate. For just a modern take on the subject - 

Why top hitting prospects are having a harder transition to the majors than in the past - The Athletic

7 hours ago, 5GoldGlovesOF,75 said:

Mayer's production at Worcester doesn't show struggles: 4 HRs, 22 RBI in 17 Games. He also has 16 Ks, so a similar profile to Story's start in Boston: 5 HR, 14 RBI, 25 Ks in 22 G. 

So why argue he needs to come up? If he's doing no better than those above him when he's up against sub-standard pitching? And his OPS and batting average showed struggles. 

I notice there was no argument back about the mental side of the pressure these players are being put under in this environment.

[Hitch]

8 hours ago, Bellhorn04 said:

Composure is kind of a big ask for a sports fan web site.

Why? Can't you be passionate and also somewhat logical? Does everything have to be hyperbole? 

I'm not pointing fingers at you by the way, I mean in general. 

8 hours ago, Bellhorn04 said:

As for the Red Sox, starting with 2022 there have been plenty of reasons for angst and dissatisfaction in the fandom.  And the early results in 2025 contain some bad signs that there is more on the way.  When it's an enormous struggle to beat the White Sox, that's concerning.    

I don't disagree on point one. Let's see where we are on point two in a month shall we? How do we know what we have right now? It's far too early.

[Old Red]

2 hours ago, Bellhorn04 said:

No posters were going crazy about it.  Some people thought they should have made a more serious effort to extend Bogaerts instead of signing Story.  Certainly no one was in favor of giving Bogaerts $280 million.

  

 

Exactly! No one was going crazy after Bogey signed the contract that he did with the Padres. Most of the complaints came when the Red Sox were lowballing Bogey when they did try to sign him at the end, and believe there was more than one calling it a slap in the face.

[Bellhorn04]

36 minutes ago, Hitch said:

Why? Can't you be passionate and also somewhat logical?

Of course.  But we can't control the way others choose to express themselves, assuming they're not breaking any forum rules.  Everybody does their fan thing their own way.  I think we have a pretty good cross-section of fandom here.  I also think a lot of what occurs on sports message boards is some sort of cathartic behaviour (especially game threads).  I'm certainly guilty of using it that way some times myself.  

[Hitch]

15 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

Of course.  But we can't control the way others choose to express themselves, assuming they're not breaking any forum rules.  Everybody does their fan thing their own way.  I think we have a pretty good cross-section of fandom here.  I also think a lot of what occurs on sports message boards is some sort of cathartic behaviour (especially game threads).  I'm certainly guilty of using it that way some times myself.  

That's all fine, I have no problem with any of that. And I get the cathartic point, though the general feeling around the situation at the moment feels much odder than that. But it's also a discussion forum so I don't think it's asking much for people to understand they'll have their opinions questioned. 

[Larry Cook]

2 hours ago, Nick said:

If Casas can't hit in April, he might as get left behind down South. 

We're wasting his bat. We don't need his ceiling right now. We just need someone to come in and hit .700 ops. That should not be very difficult at 1B.

HE IS RANKED 25 OUT OF 25 1B THAT QUALIFIES IN MLB. 

 

Maybe Casas is tanking in purpose and angling for a trade or an extension???? At this point trading for dalbec is looking like a better option for first base 

[TheSplinteredSplendor]

17 hours ago, moonslav59 said:

Defense is supposed to be the easiest part of the game to project. I don't get it.

I'm not worried about the bats. I think Devers, Casas and Duran will come around, and in a big way. I just hope Story, Abreu and Campbell keep it going.

I'm worried about Houck and Buehler to a lesser extent. If one or both don't come through we need some borderline promises to step it up (3 or 4 from Bello, Gio, Fitts, Dobbins and maybe Crawford or Sandoval, later on.)

so, twice you have continued to ignore this so I will post it again,

 

You continue to claim this but I see very little evidence of it.

They have basically played .500 ball against a very easy early schedule and have gone 2-6 vs. teams over .500.

[moonslav59]

4 hours ago, Bellhorn04 said:

No posters were going crazy about it.  Some people thought they should have made a more serious effort to extend Bogaerts instead of signing Story.  Certainly no one was in favor of giving Bogaerts $280 million.

 

We may disagree on what "going crazy" entails, but I stand by my comment. It was a red hot topic, where people were saying JH should go. It did not reach the Betts level, but because it was in conjunction with losing Betts, several posters were clearly irritate. 

Nobody is mentioning wishing he was back. Nobody.

[moonslav59]

2 hours ago, Old Red said:

Exactly! No one was going crazy after Bogey signed the contract that he did with the Padres. Most of the complaints came when the Red Sox were lowballing Bogey when they did try to sign him at the end, and believe there was more than one calling it a slap in the face.

More strawman. I never said after the Padre signing. I specifically mentioned "had we signed him for $200M/7 or $160M/6," as in an extension.

You were front and center on bashing management for not extending him, although we never knew what it would have taken to get him to sign. My point was even if he accepted $200M/7 the year or two before he bolted, would we be sure that was a good deal to make?

[moonslav59]

59 minutes ago, TheSplinteredSplendor said:

so, twice you have continued to ignore this so I will post it again,

 

You continue to claim this but I see very little evidence of it.

They have basically played .500 ball against a very easy early schedule and have gone 2-6 vs. teams over .500.

Evidence of what?

I can't think players will not continue what they have donover 3 weeks for the rest of their careers?

I need to show evidence that players go through slumps and hot steaks?

Or do you want evidence that our defense looked better on paper going into 2025? I'm not claiming we are playing better D. We aren't.

Duran was off to a poor start, last April and had a great year. I can't think he might get better without having to prove it based on something I've seen in 3 weeks?

Casas has been horrible. There is no "evidence" based on 2025 to show you why he might get better. I guess you need to show me evidence that proves that all players off to horrific 3 week starts are doomed to continue sucking.

[Old Red]

7 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

More strawman. I never said after the Padre signing. I specifically mentioned "had we signed him for $200M/7 or $160M/6," as in an extension.

You were front and center on bashing management for not extending him, although we never knew what it would have taken to get him to sign. My point was even if he accepted $200M/7 the year or two before he bolted, would we be sure that was a good deal to make?

I was front, and center on the lowball offer, and slap in the face while doing it. My biggest beef was DD, which I said should have been a better contract in the first place with no opt-outs, which would mean this would have been the last year of the contract, and also most likely would had been no Story signing.

[moonslav59]

3 minutes ago, Old Red said:

I was front, and center on the lowball offer, and slap in the face while doing it. My biggest beef was DD, which I said should have been a better contract in the first place with no opt-outs, which would mean this would have been the last year of the contract, and also most likely would had been no Story signing.

Wow. How original. We all wished DD had extended him with no opt out, even if it cost more, which it would have. You went on and on about the need to extend Bogey, but you would never say for how much. When I kept saying he was not extended, because we never offered what it would take, and nobody knew what that number was, you just kept saying we need to extend him.

Nobody said we should have matched or come close to the Padre offer, so bringing that up was trolling at its finest.

A lot of posters and Sox fans were very upset we didn't or couldn't extend Bogey. Using the term "crazy" may not be a term many would use, but I think it got very serious, where posters were calling for heads to roll over the failure to keep him in a Sox uniform.

I do think we low balled him on the initial offer, much like with Lester and others before and afterwards. That was a mistake. That does not mean we could have signed him for $160M/6 or $200M/7, except for maybe when DD was dealing with him.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

5 hours ago, Hitch said:

So why argue he needs to come up? If he's doing no better than those above him when he's up against sub-standard pitching? And his OPS and batting average showed struggles. 

I notice there was no argument back about the mental side of the pressure these players are being put under in this environment.

No one is arguing Mayer "needs to come up." There is no thread on the forum like the one titled "Roman Anthony SHOULD be on the big league roster." 

Marcelo Mayer outplayed both Anthony and Kristian Campbell for a month in Spring Training, and is clearly as good as any other Red Sox infielder with his glove and arm in the majors right now.

"The mental side of the pressure" for Mayer was knowing he earned and thereby deserved a spot on Boston's roster, but had to go back to Worcester to bide his time (at least, that's what he said to the press).

Mayer is MLB ready, and might already even be at Chase Meidroth's level if he played in another organization and wasn't blocked at his position by Boston's current leader in batting average and slugging percentage. 

Then again, we know that's not the only reason, because the Red Sox owe their current shortstop over $80 million dollars... 

 

[Larry Cook]

12 minutes ago, 5GoldGlovesOF,75 said:

Mayer is MLB ready, and might already even be at Chase Meidroth's level if he played in another organization and wasn't blocked at his position by Boston's current leader in batting average and slugging percentage.

 

If if if if!!!!  The fact is Mayer is currently blocked!  Campbell and story are hitting over .300 and bregman is playing 3B! 
 

 

[iortiz]

7 hours ago, Nick said:

Technically we have 9 starters. This has to be our deepest group. (assuming they can all get healthy at the same time)

1 Crochet

2 Houck

3 Bello

4 Buehler

5 Newcomb

6 Fitts (IL)

7 Giolito (IL)

8 Fitts (IL)

9 Kutter (IL)

… and Sandoval will join to the party at some point. 

[iortiz]

43 minutes ago, Larry Cook said:

If if if if!!!!  The fact is Mayer is currently blocked!  Campbell and story are hitting over .300 and bregman is playing 3B! 
 

 

Give him the 1B. It’s incredible all the chips are on Casas on 1B and we don’t even have a plan B at the position. 

[Larry Cook]

6 minutes ago, iortiz said:

Give him the 1B. It’s incredible all the chips are on Casas on 1B and we don’t even have a plan B at the position. 

Even worse, this happened last year and we never learned our lesson. 

[moonslav59]

1 hour ago, iortiz said:

… and Sandoval will join to the party at some point. 

Could have said 11, before the Priester trade, and Criswell isn't even on the list of 10.

Crochet, Buehler, Houck, Bello, Crawford

Giolito, Fitts, Newcomb, Dobbins + Sandoval

(Whitlock and Wink have started many games in recent years, as well, but hopefully, never again.)

Drohan is pitching very well, now, but he's not on the 40.

[moonslav59]

We've used 6 SP'ers and 12 RP'ers, already with nobody doing both roles, so far.

Surprisingly, as a group, our 3 depth SP"ers (Newcomb, Fitts & Dobbins) have a better ERA than the group of Crochet + Buehler + Houck, We have yet to see Gio, Bello o Crawford pitch for the Sox, and we may not see Sandoval, this year. When these guys come back, we may slide a starter to the pen to give us several multi inning pen arms to join Whitlock.

Of the 12 RP'ers, Fulmer is already gone and a few others got off to rocky starts, SSS and all.

Our best OPS Against pen arms, so far (not counting today) are:

.315 Slaten

.463 Bernardino

.527 Chapman

.577 Whitlock

(Seems like a formidable 4.)

.588 Wink

.643 Weissert

.742 Wilson

.795 Kelly

.819 Stock

.967 Criswell

1.280 Fulmer (gone)

1.800 Hendriks

Top WOO OPSA

.390 Stock (16 IP)

.393 Hendriks (2)

.477 Van Belle (8)

.489 Drohan (19 as SP)

.507 Burdi (6)

.633 Gio (6)

.713 Criswell (6)

.716 Bello (10)

.722 Mata (11)

 

[iortiz]

7 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

Could have said 11, before the Priester trade, and Criswell isn't even on the list of 10.

Crochet, Buehler, Houck, Bello, Crawford

Giolito, Fitts, Newcomb, Dobbins + Sandoval

(Whitlock and Wink have started many games in recent years, as well, but hopefully, never again.)

Drohan is pitching very well, now, but he's not on the 40.

I love what I have seen from Fitts and Dobbins, I really do. I won't be surprised if both end up as No. 2 and 3 in this rotation. Giolito is meh. Newcomb could be a solid BP (long-reliever). Sandoval if healthy everyone is going to love him, trust me. Bello is nothing but a No. 4 until he proves me wrong. Crawford has to probe he's for real for once and for all. Houck is a huge question mark to me. Guy lacks of consistency. Buehler will be a solid No. 3-4 but that's it. Crochet is the real deal in my book and we haven't even seen his ceiling yet, but again, he has to be healthy. 

[Bellhorn04]

16 hours ago, Hugh2 said:

I'm not saying the Sox did the right thing, that's obviously subjective and Betts is an immense talent.  But if you know you can't or won't resign a guy it's best to get something rather than nothing from him.

Perhaps a better way to phrase my point is this. If you could definitively know the Sox would not spend what it takes to keep Mookie Betts should they have traded his last year of team control or kept him for one more season? To be fair, you have to pretend like you don't know how s***** Jeter Downs turned out. 

Once they decided they wouldn't be signing him it made sense to trade him, I'm not arguing with that, that's never been my issue.  I always thought it was strange that the trade came so late, though.  When the Padres traded Soto it happened on December 7.  Betts wasn't traded until February 10.  Maybe the Sox were worried about the effect on ticket sales, is the only thing I can figure.

[Bellhorn04]

8 hours ago, iortiz said:

Buehler will be a solid No. 3-4 but that's it. 

You're a hard marker, man. 🙂  

[Hugh2]

3 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

Once they decided they wouldn't be signing him it made sense to trade him, I'm not arguing with that, that's never been my issue.  I always thought it was strange that the trade came so late, though.  When the Padres traded Soto it happened on December 7.  Betts wasn't traded until February 10.

Yeah, ok so we mostly agree on this.  If you're not going to sign a guy, you should trade him (unless you have serious playoff ambitions) but how serious the Sox were about trying to resign him, and were they draw their line in the sand is objective and open to criticism.  That's fair. 

I forgot that he was traded so late in the offseason,  Was that when it was initially reported or finalized, because I do seem to remember the trade got held up for a little while due to some medical concerns. 

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

4 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

Once they decided they wouldn't be signing him it made sense to trade him, I'm not arguing with that, that's never been my issue.  I always thought it was strange that the trade came so late, though.  When the Padres traded Soto it happened on December 7.  Betts wasn't traded until February 10.  Maybe the Sox were worried about the effect on ticket sales, is the only thing I can figure.

It took that long for another team to finally agree to take Price -- if we paid them to.

[Bellhorn04]

2 minutes ago, Hugh2 said:

Yeah, ok so we mostly agree on this.  If you're not going to sign a guy, you should trade him (unless you have serious playoff ambitions) but how serious the Sox were about trying to resign him, and were they draw their line in the sand is objective and open to criticism.  That's fair. 

I forgot that he was traded so late in the offseason,  Was that when it was initially reported or finalized, because I do seem to remember the trade got held up for a little while due to some medical concerns. 

You're right, it did get held up a week or two because of concerns over Graterol's medicals.

[Hugh2]

4 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

You're right, it did get held up a week or two because of concerns over Graterol's medicals.

I had literally forgotten about that until right now.  Graterol would have been a much better return in hindsight.  

Downs was a top 100, top 50 prospect in some rankings at the time, and up the middle was an obvious need at the time.  In an alternate universe if Downs pans out, and the Sox spend the Trevor Story money more wisely people probably are still very upset with the Mookie Betts trade lol, but perhaps slightly less. 

That's the risk you take when trading a bird in hand for two in the bush. 

[Bellhorn04]

2 minutes ago, Hugh2 said:

I had literally forgotten about that until right now.  Graterol would have been a much better return in hindsight.  

Downs was a top 100, top 50 prospect in some rankings at the time, and up the middle was an obvious need at the time.  In an alternate universe if Downs pans out, and the Sox spend the Trevor Story money more wisely people probably are still very upset with the Mookie Betts trade lol, but perhaps slightly less. 

That's the risk you take when trading a bird in hand for two in the bush. 

The Padres did much better with the Soto trade, that was a bit irksome to see.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

5 minutes ago, Hugh2 said:

In an alternate universe if Downs pans out, and the Sox spend the Trevor Story money more wisely people probably are still very upset with the Mookie Betts trade lol, but perhaps slightly less. 

That's the risk you take when trading a bird in hand for two in the bush... 

... league

(confession: I insisted on Verdugo in the Mookie deal, but also demanded a young pitcher, since LA cornered the world on stockpiling arms)

[Bellhorn04]

6 minutes ago, 5GoldGlovesOF,75 said:

... league

(confession: I insisted on Verdugo in the Mookie deal, but also demanded a young pitcher, since LA cornered the world on stockpiling arms)

When you see what the Padres got for Soto, it makes the Sox return look pretty light.  As you keep pointing out of course, part of the Sox return was getting $45 million shaved off their obligation to Price.  

Maybe Breslow pulled a little rabbit out of the hat by getting Fitts for Verdugo.