Question of the week: Was trading Devers the right call?

[mvp 78]

11 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

I see no reason for fear.  No doubt he was included by the Giants for some payroll relief.  I'm sure Breslow hopes he can be a solid late inning guy, but I'm also pretty sure Breslow doesn't see him as a slam dunk replacement for Chapman...

If he can be a 7th/8th inning guy, I'm fine with it. He also may end up DFA'd and whatever. I think the real get is supposed to be Harrison, but we'll see. A lot to work on for him. 

[drewski6]

39 minutes ago, notin said:

I’m honestly not in agreement with the whole “overpaid to be a DH” aspect.  Devers was signed in accordance with his offensive skill set at 3b.  That salary doesn’t affect my opinion as his roles change over time.  And it’s far from the worst allocation of money we’ve all seen.

I hate losing the bat, but I don’t mind seeing the whiny “me first” attitude hit the road.

I think they did ok on the return.  Time will tell, but most teams seem to fair poorly when dealing superstars for multiple prospects.  Certainly there have been some success stories (most recently the Nats).  My biggest fear was the acquisition of Hicks.  Was he only included for money?  Or as a replacement for Chapman as there is no next man out the door?

TY!  I dont think he was overpaid or "just a DH", if he was a free agent right now, he would get a contract larger than the one he has.  I dont think a team is going to be like , we might turn you into a 1b, we might put you back at third , we might keep you as a DH.  But because of the uncertainty regarding where/if you will field, we are adjusting how much we think you are worth from 500M to 200M.  

He was paid for his bat. Just like Vlad.  Just like Soto. The fact that one plays a below average first base or outfield and Devers doesnt (but may with a fresh start) ...I dont think that makes Vlad worth 500m and the Dev overpaid at 280.

I think if you sign Pete Alonso after this year, you arent getting him for what you paid devers.  I think it will be a lot more.  So all this, "we'll see how they use the money" I think people are too excited for the money to be freed up. I dont think 280m goes as far as people think in this economy. I think Devers was a bargain because I think elite hitters are gonna go for more now that the market has been set with the ohtani/soto /vlad contracts.

If one dude is .850 OPS and a lousy defender , he gets 500m
The other dude is an .850 OPS and doesnt take the field at all, he gets 280M

I honestly think the latter is the better value.  

If you wanna add a really good hitter, he almost has to be a DH otherwise, hes out of Henrys price range.

[Bellhorn04]

4 minutes ago, drewski6 said:

TY!  I dont think he was overpaid or "just a DH", if he was a free agent right now, he would get a contract larger than the one he has.  I dont think a team is going to be like , we might turn you into a 1b, we might put you back at third , we might keep you as a DH.  But because of the uncertainty regarding where/if you will field, we are adjusting how much we think you are worth from 500M to 200M.  

He was paid for his bat. Just like Vlad.  Just like Soto. The fact that one plays a below average first base or outfield and Devers doesnt (but may with a fresh start) ...I dont think that makes Vlad worth 500m and the Dev overpaid at 280.

I think if you sign Pete Alonso after this year, you arent getting him for what you paid devers.  I think it will be a lot more.  So all this, "we'll see how they use the money" I think people are too excited for the money to be freed up. I dont think 280m goes as far as people think in this economy. I think Devers was a bargain because I think elite hitters are gonna go for more now that the market has been set with the ohtani/soto /vlad contracts.

If one dude is .850 OPS and a lousy defender , he gets 500m
The other dude is an .850 OPS and doesnt take the field at all, he gets 280M

I honestly think the latter is the better value.  

If you wanna add a really good hitter, he almost has to be a DH otherwise, hes out of Henrys price range.

Alonso is actually a great example of teams not necessarily lining up to pay a truckload of money to a bat-only guy.  Some cash in and some don't.  There's some luck and timing involved.  And the Vlad Jr lockup by the Jays had a significant PR component.  

 

[Bellhorn04]

6 minutes ago, drewski6 said:

If you wanna add a really good hitter, he almost has to be a DH otherwise, hes out of Henrys price range.

No credit for Bregman?

[drewski6]

8 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

Alonso is actually a great example of teams not necessarily lining up to pay a truckload of money to a bat-only guy.  Some cash in and some don't.  There's some luck and timing involved.  And the Vlad Jr lockup by the Jays had a significant PR component.  

 

all fair points. I do agree timing matters. Some years, it seems like teams are just wildly out of control bidding and some years everyone decides to be frugal.  But I do think that over time, salaries go up even if the trend isnt 100% linear.

[drewski6]

5 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

No credit for Bregman?

Bregman overplayed his hand , priced himself out of Houston and Detroit, then when teams who were potential landing spots started moving on, he pivoted to a short term deal.

But sure, Ill give em some credit there.

[mvp 78]

12 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

Alonso is actually a great example of teams not necessarily lining up to pay a truckload of money to a bat-only guy.  Some cash in and some don't.  There's some luck and timing involved.  And the Vlad Jr lockup by the Jays had a significant PR component.  

 

Vlad 2.2 fWAR

Devers 2.0 fWAR

The Devers contract is the one that's under water though according to BTV! 

[Soxlover]

12 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

Vlad 2.2 fWAR

Devers 2.0 fWAR

The Devers contract is the one that's under water though according to BTV! 

Yup.

Fangraphs has Devers worth about $28-30M per 150 games over the past 2.6 seasons. 
he’s not worth more than his current pay.

[Bellhorn04]

1 hour ago, drewski6 said:

Bregman overplayed his hand , priced himself out of Houston and Detroit, then when teams who were potential landing spots started moving on, he pivoted to a short term deal.

But sure, Ill give em some credit there.

Bregman passed on a 6-172 offer from Detroit.  He took a lot less guaranteed money to sign with the Sox.  

[vegasbob]

In response to the thread question , the answer is yes, trading Devers was the right thing to do.

The many reasons have been worn out in all the posts above but in a simple way, the commitment of the FO/Ownership to rebuild the MiLB system with young, cost controlled guys over the next 5+- years  is now reaching fruition in  Rafaela, Anthony, Mayer and Narvaez is a lucky pick bonus by Breslow.  

Devers marches to his own drummer and chose not to be a factor in the team building.   I think the FO considered him a poor example for the other young players.    Devers is not  exceptional  in terms of a complete ballplayer , and while statistically an upper half hitter , he was not going to get  better over the coming years. 

Beyond that I just thought he was an arrogant, lazy prick with great immaturity .

[drewski6]

36 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

Bregman passed on a 6-172 offer from Detroit.  He took a lot less guaranteed money to sign with the Sox.  

Which is my point - if the red sox want to sign a really good hitter, that hitter will likely either accept a discount or less guaranteed money or be a DH or be extended when the team had control left.

But my point is that it appears to me that people think the money saved from flipping Devers has more spending power than it does.  Its not going to give you a comparable bat who also contributes defensively.

[drewski6]

I guess my main point is - are the sox better without devers? were we wise to trade him? who was at fault for the relationship deteriorating? how will they spend the money going forward?  All of these are very good questions - and lets park them off to the side because my point boils down to:

I disagree with how much value most subtract (include BTV, fangraphs, Moonslav, maybe you as well but Ill let you speak for yourself) - but I disagree with how much value sources tend to subtract from DHs for being a DH

If we signed Soto to that 700M+ contract we all wanted to sign him to, he would be our DH right now. Because we have 3 better defensive outfielders.  

[mvp 78]

1 hour ago, Bellhorn04 said:

Bregman passed on a 6-172 offer from Detroit.  He took a lot less guaranteed money to sign with the Sox.  

If they signed Soto, they would have dealt multiple everyday players to make the lineup work. 

[notin]

27 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

If they signed Soto, they would have dealt multiple everyday players to make the lineup work. 

But all our expensive players were infielders and DHs…

[mvp 78]

4 minutes ago, notin said:

But all our expensive players were infielders and DHs…

It wouldn't have been to make the money work... Though they may have tried to trade Devers at some point too? IDK. 

[drewski6]

That just doesnt make sense to me.  Lets make moves that make us worse defensively.  Or maybe not, but lets make moves to clear an OF vacancy for Soto for the sole reason that we cant sleep at night knowing that BTV says we massively overpaid for Soto because we made him a DH.  So we NEED to trade someone so we can put an OF next to Sotos name, and get worse defensively in the process.  All this just so a lousy defensive player can play a lousy OF

Or just keep your solid defensive of intact and put Soto at DH.

Bad defensive players who can hit really well, dont go from overpaid at 280m to good value at 700m just because you forced them to take the field.

Id rather have my best bat DH, assuming they have a prototypical HR hitters body-type. Less chance for injury and most of them with that body type are bad defensive players anyways.

[drewski6]

Soto was paid 700m for his bat.  Now if you want him to play OF, the advantage in that is it allows you to also play a DH. So sure, some value in that. But its not very much.

Soto gets 700M. Lets move him into the OF. The value in that is the savings from the cost differential in a hitter who can play the field and one who cannot.

So lets say you can sign JDM for 8M but he would cost 12M if he could play a passable OF. 

The value from forcing Soto to play OF is 4M. Because now you can save 4m by getting JDM because hes 4 mil cheaper because he can only DH.

Its not even worth the increased injury risk.  Especially in Devers case (body type). 

[drewski6]

Lets say we traded Yoshida for Soto today.  Just hypothetically.  You guys would rush to trade an OF so Soto can play the field? Why? It doesnt seem worth it to me. 

[Soxlover]

1 hour ago, drewski6 said:

I guess my main point is - are the sox better without devers? were we wise to trade him? who was at fault for the relationship deteriorating? how will they spend the money going forward?  All of these are very good questions - and lets park them off to the side because my point boils down to:

I disagree with how much value most subtract (include BTV, fangraphs, Moonslav, maybe you as well but Ill let you speak for yourself) - but I disagree with how much value sources tend to subtract from DHs for being a DH

If we signed Soto to that 700M+ contract we all wanted to sign him to, he would be our DH right now. Because we have 3 better defensive outfielders.  

Devers was such a bad 3Bman that I see him as more valuable as a DH. I had hoped he could be a decent 1Bman, but that was speculative. I do think he’ll be better than Casas.

I was happy with the Devers signing and he’s still the hitter I expected him to be. I never viewed him as selfish before this year. That part changed for me.

if we spend over the tax line this winter, I won’t be pissed at the trade, even if we swing and mi$$.

[mvp 78]

31 minutes ago, drewski6 said:

That just doesnt make sense to me. 

They didn't want to pay Devers 300M to just play DH. They wouldn't pay 700M for Soto to just play DH. 

Raffy stays at 3b. They don't sign Breggie. Soto moves to LF. 

Sox decide on trading either Abreu or Duran and consider trading both (Anthony could start season in RF). 

[Hitch]

5 hours ago, drewski6 said:

TY!  I dont think he was overpaid or "just a DH", if he was a free agent right now, he would get a contract larger than the one he has.  

Without recent context - sure, probably. 

But off the back of showing he is a lousy teammate, or at least has become one, and seems to be skipping practises already - probably not. 

[Dynasty Prospects Anon]

Unsure if this was mentioned earlier and I missed it:

Will Flemming of WEEI was on their afternoon show (I think, or midday I forget) and relayed that the second day Devers was there he had a scheduled 1B fielding training with giants legend Will Clark, and instead blew it off and didn’t show up. 
 

Interesting at the very least, and I figured I’d bring this to the conversation for discussion 

[Dynasty Prospects Anon]

Looks like Hitch had at least mentioned it

22 minutes ago, Hitch said:

Without recent context - sure, probably. 

But off the back of showing he is a lousy teammate, or at least has become one, and seems to be skipping practises already - probably not. 

 

[Yaz Fan Since 67]

6 hours ago, Bellhorn04 said:

Sure, but a number of Sox fans were freaking out because the offense hit the skids for a little stretch after trading Devers.

I hear you but let's not forget the team is scoring runs now against bad teams  But I"m not fooled, this is still a bad lineup, These hot bats will cool and Raffy will be missed bigly.  We should expect many more "skids" as the year goes on.  Again their stats are misleading, once again they are putting up monster run totals in isolated games but they are scoring only a few runs in far more games and I expect that to continue.

Frankly I'm stunned so many fans are on board with this trade. But again as I said I clearly remember the same posts after Mookie was traded and we see how that worked out.  

[Hitch]

12 minutes ago, Dynasty Prospects Anon said:

Unsure if this was mentioned earlier and I missed it:

Will Flemming of WEEI was on their afternoon show (I think, or midday I forget) and relayed that the second day Devers was there he had a scheduled 1B fielding training with giants legend Will Clark, and instead blew it off and didn’t show up. 
 

Interesting at the very least, and I figured I’d bring this to the conversation for discussion 

Yeah, I posted the video on the last page. Not a good look at all 

The whole video is worth a watch.

[Larry Cook]

I believe bres-slow did what was best for the team! And I applaud him for having the courage to make such a bold move!!!  

but while I think it had to be done, but I do believe communication was poor and the way bres-slow handled it was extremely sloppy!!!  Bres-slow created excess drama and that excess drama hung around the team for an extended period of time!!!!  I hope bres-slow has learned from this miscommunication!!!!  

but at the end of the day, moving Devers was the correct move!!!  The return was appropriate given that San Francisco ate the whole contract!!!!!!

[notin]

6 hours ago, drewski6 said:

TY!  I dont think he was overpaid or "just a DH", if he was a free agent right now, he would get a contract larger than the one he has.  I dont think a team is going to be like , we might turn you into a 1b, we might put you back at third , we might keep you as a DH.  But because of the uncertainty regarding where/if you will field, we are adjusting how much we think you are worth from 500M to 200M.  

He was paid for his bat. Just like Vlad.  Just like Soto. The fact that one plays a below average first base or outfield and Devers doesnt (but may with a fresh start) ...I dont think that makes Vlad worth 500m and the Dev overpaid at 280.

I think if you sign Pete Alonso after this year, you arent getting him for what you paid devers.  I think it will be a lot more.  So all this, "we'll see how they use the money" I think people are too excited for the money to be freed up. I dont think 280m goes as far as people think in this economy. I think Devers was a bargain because I think elite hitters are gonna go for more now that the market has been set with the ohtani/soto /vlad contracts.

If one dude is .850 OPS and a lousy defender , he gets 500m
The other dude is an .850 OPS and doesnt take the field at all, he gets 280M

I honestly think the latter is the better value.  

If you wanna add a really good hitter, he almost has to be a DH otherwise, hes out of Henrys price range.

I never really saw how putting a bad fielder on the field justified his salary.  Sure you can then squeeze another hitter into the DH slot, but whatever you get from those 4-5 PA per game can easily be offset by porous defense…

[Yaz Fan Since 67]

48 minutes ago, notin said:

I never really saw how putting a bad fielder on the field justified his salary.  Sure you can then squeeze another hitter into the DH slot, but whatever you get from those 4-5 PA per game can easily be offset by porous defense…

Raffy had 12 errors for the entire 2024 season, I can't find 2025 stats but I'm pretty convinced that a lot of those errors were throwing errors and I am equally convinced that like Bregman and all the other infielders a legit first baseman cuts down those numbers.   For his career I read he averaged 24 errors for 162 games. As nobody plays all 162 that average is clearly a bit lower.

Now we get to his replacement in the batting order.  Are you really claiming the difference between Raffy's bat and his replacement will be offset by better defense?  What is the difference between 24 errors and the league average which looks to be about 10 per season for a 3rd baseman.  It's 14 errors for an entire season.

I'm pretty convinced Devers' bat over his replacement will account for more than an addional 10 errors over  an entire season.  Wouldn't the additonal 10 home runs alone, not to mention the RBIs and doubles, would more than offset 10 additional throwing errors?  

[mvp 78]

14 hours ago, Hitch said:

Yeah, I posted the video on the last page. Not a good look at all 

The whole video is worth a watch.

People need to move on, especially Will Flemming. 

[Bellhorn04]

2 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

People need to move on, especially Will Flemming. 

It's kind of crazy that of all the people the Giants might choose to work out with Devers at 1B, they go with Will Clark, a man obviously still capable of saying incredibly dumb stuff.