Article: Rafael Devers Is Gone, But The Red Sox Have A Bright Present And Future

[drewski6]

1 hour ago, Maxbialystock said:

Well, we just disagree.  I would love to see the hitting improve above 6th in runs scored and agree it will be harder without Devers.  But the Sox are going nowhere without pitching--and in the that 6 game winning streak the Sox lineup was without Bregman and Abreu plus the key hits were by players not named Devers.  

If the pitching turns around and resembles something like what we just saw, the Sox are in the postseason with or without great hitting.  

Bregman was our best hitter, but the real point is that both of them in lineup helped a lot.  Thus were the Sox 26-26 when Bregman went down.  Thus too they are back over .500 because of great pitching and without Bregman and Abreu and, for one game, Devers.  

A lot of truth in those pitcher injuries.  No wonder every MLB has 13 even though just one is on the mound at any given time.  

Right, pitching is about depth and injury luck in 2025.  Dodgers were supposed to be 7 deep this year and last and have had patchwork rotations. Like the Yankees, like the Braves.  Big investments in pitching results in big investments on the IL (unfortunately).

But I will concede that I did go too far when I said Raffy completely carried our lineup.  Good points there.  But I just think that in 2025, every pitcher is likely to get hurt, so invest in hitting

[moonslav59]

5 minutes ago, drewski6 said:

Sure - but is it really better. Is that what you want? Every year 3 new 1 yr contracts for pitchers and if they do great they are gone, while we struggle to score runs.

Our aversion to long term deals is part of the reason why we keep getting the Giolittos and Buehlers and paying them high AAVs. The James Paxtons and the Sandovals.

When you offer 1 yr deals, you get players who are willing to accept them.

You get what you pay for, agreed. I will say that other teams have better track records on these same types of deals, however.

We did step it up a little from the $10M/1 deals like for Kluber and Richards or less for Wacha, Hill, Paxton and Perez, when we signed Gio to $39M/2 and Buehler for $21M/1 w a buyout for year 2, but yes, these are not deals given for proven studs. I will also say that looking at the largest deals given in the history of MLB, more than half do not meet expectations, with a sizable chunk being busts from year 1 or 2 onwards.

Our biggest signings over the past 9 or so years: Price, Sale (extension), JD, Story, Pablito, HRam, Lackey, Bogey (extension) and Nate. One can argue that hasn't worked either.

[moonslav59]

3 minutes ago, drewski6 said:

Right, pitching is about depth and injury luck in 2025.  Dodgers were supposed to be 7 deep this year and last and have had patchwork rotations. Like the Yankees, like the Braves.  Big investments in pitching results in big investments on the IL (unfortunately).

But I will concede that I did go too far when I said Raffy completely carried our lineup.  Good points there.  But I just think that in 2025, every pitcher is likely to get hurt, so invest in hitting

This year, Brez did have the foresight to create a rotation with depth to the 10th to 12th slots, and we've already gone that deep (Newcomb) but have yet to use Criswell and traded away Priester (but added Harrison & Hicks, who will be in the pen.)

[mvp 78]

31 minutes ago, Kimmi said:

I'm not making it up any more than you're making it up that there was no clubhouse drama.  

It’s been reported that there weren’t issues with Raffy in the clubhouse. It hasn’t been reported that players were upset with Raffy in the way you presented it. The worst we heard was “he was just one of 26 and we’re moving on.”

[Kimmi]

On 6/18/2025 at 4:48 PM, mvp 78 said:

It’s been reported that there weren’t issues with Raffy in the clubhouse. It hasn’t been reported that players were upset with Raffy in the way you presented it. The worst we heard was “he was just one of 26 and we’re moving on.”

It has most certainly been reported that players were upset with Raffy.  How much did that impact the clubhouse?  My guess is as good as yours.

[TheSplinteredSplendor]

6-4  over the last 10, back to .500 and looking up at the Wild Card once again.

[moonslav59]

On 6/18/2025 at 3:24 PM, drewski6 said:

Sure - but is it really better. Is that what you want? Every year 3 new 1 yr contracts for pitchers and if they do great they are gone, while we struggle to score runs.

Our aversion to long term deals is part of the reason why we keep getting the Giolittos and Buehlers and paying them high AAVs. The James Paxtons and the Sandovals.

When you offer 1 yr deals, you get players who are willing to accept them.

I very much agree, here and have said often: you get what you pay for. Even stepping up from the $5-10M/1 deals to $21M/1 (Buehler) or $39M/2 (Giolito) deals isn't getting the job done. It takes bold spending and trading to get the job done.

That being said, take a look at the success rate of the biggest 2 or more year contracts give to pitchers, from the Price deal to 2022:

$43M x 3 Scherzer '22-'24

$36M x 9 Cole '20-'28

$35M x 7 Strasburg '20-'26

$34M x 3 Bauer '21-'23

$33M x 2 Verlander '20-'21

$33M x 6 Greinke '16-'21

$31M x 7 Price '16-22

$31M x 3 Kershaw '19-'21

$28M x 5 de Grom '19-'23

$27M x 5 Sale '20-'23

$25M x 7 Strasburg '17-'23

$25M x 3 Arrieta '18-'20

$25M x 2 Verlander '22-'23

$24M x 3 Stroman '22-'24

$24M x 5 Wheeler "20-'24

$23M x 6 O Corbin '19-'24

$23M x 5 R Ray '22-'26

$22M x 5 J Zimmerman '16-'20

$22M x 5 Gausman '22-'26

$22M x 2 Rodon "22-'23

$21M x 6 Darvish

$21M x 4 Porcello

One has to at least understand why many GM refuse to go down this road. It's not just about greedy owners.