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

[mvp 78]

1 minute ago, Bellhorn04 said:

Giants before trade: 41-31 .569

Giants since trade: 13-23 .361 

Can't believe Raffy's 101 wRC+ could do this. Must be the loss of Jordan Hicks! 

[Bellhorn04]

Just now, mvp 78 said:

Can't believe Raffy's 101 wRC+ could do this. Must be the loss of Jordan Hicks! 

He's been absolutely terrible for a $30 million DH/1B. 

 

[mvp 78]

1 hour ago, Bellhorn04 said:

He's been absolutely terrible for a $30 million DH/1B. 

Cool. I'm glad that you'll be posting about this for the remainder of his contract for ungodly some reason. 

[Hitch]

1 minute ago, mvp 78 said:

Cool. I'm glad that you'll be posting about this for the remainder of his contract for ungodly some reason. 

You also, absolutely cannot resist posting in reply about him. For someone who keeps telling people to let it go, you're not doing the best job yourself. 

[Bellhorn04]

4 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

Cool. I'm glad that you'll be posting about this for the remainder of his contract for ungodly some reason. 

You know the reason.  Trading Devers was a big deal for the franchise.  

[Bellhorn04]

4 minutes ago, Hitch said:

You also, absolutely cannot resist posting in reply about him. For someone who keeps telling people to let it go, you're not doing the best job yourself. 

Nobody can stop either of us. 😄

[Hitch]

1 minute ago, Bellhorn04 said:

Nobody can stop either of us. 😄

And nor should they.

[mvp 78]

19 minutes ago, Hitch said:

You also, absolutely cannot resist posting in reply about him. For someone who keeps telling people to let it go, you're not doing the best job yourself. 

This doesn't sound right at all! 🤔

[Maxbialystock]

37 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

Nobody can stop either of us. 😄

I actually think Devers continues to be a good discussion topic.  He was hitting .905 in the Sox lineup, and his first base defense can't be all that bad compared to Toro/Gonzalez.  Plus right now Yoshida/Ref stink as the DH.  

On the other hand, I see no real weaknesses in this Sox team.  The lineup is good at the plate and in the field.  Baserunning is good.  Starting pitching is the best in years now that Ferris has stopped taking all those days off.  In 4 starts this month he pitched 22.2 innings with a 3.57 ERA.   The Sox are 4th in MLB in quality starts.   Bullpen is not solid, but does have some pretty good pieces.  Whitlock has pitched in 10 games (9.1 IP) In July with an ERA of 0.96.   

Of course I would love to see Breslow get a good arm--starter or reliever--but not a "loaner."  I would like to see  one more lefty bat, but would be fine if Mayer's wrist got better.  

And let's not forget that 4 rookies have started for the Sox this season.  Narvaez and Anthony are standouts.  Mayer is my preference for 2b.  And Campbell is back at Worcester.  

[mvp 78]

Devers' best buddy: 

Xander 9.4 fWAR since '23

He's been worth the contract so far, but they better win a WS for the final 5 years of that deal to be worth it. 🤐

[Soxlover]

Did anybody see the great defensive play Devers made at 1B?

[drewski6]

5 hours ago, Bellhorn04 said:

You know the reason.  Trading Devers was a big deal for the franchise.  

he said ungodly not unknown

[SPLENDIDSPLINTER]

Yes, Yes, a million times yes 

[Nick]

4 minutes ago, SPLENDIDSPLINTER said:

Yes, Yes, a million times yes 

Giants in spiral since Rafael Devers trade as postseason chances dwindle...we are lucky not to have him on our team.....who will want to play with him? He went from friendly hitting ball park to spacious Giants Stadium.

[sk7326]

At the moment, the Red Sox have gotten zero big league value from trading Devers and the prospects have largely not made a dent.  So it is hard to call this a good deal.  And his replacements have been - for the most part - bad.  

That said, the Devers contract was likely to be a problem down the road - while he has been a terrific hitter, he has not been a consistent .900 OPS guy and he was destined to move to 1B/DH anyway. (of course he was DHing here).  I was shocked when the deal came, but I was not ready to picket Fenway either. 

It is nice to connect Devers trade to the team picking up the pace - but I don't think Devers made the starting rotation fall into place.   

[jad]

Getting rid of productive players and not replacing them is a GREAT idea for owners looking to save 20-30million/year.    Just like the Yankees got FLEECED trading for Ruth, and then went five years without a WS championship.

[Kimmi]

On 7/30/2025 at 10:50 AM, mvp 78 said:

Cool. I'm glad that you'll be posting about this for the remainder of his contract for ungodly some reason. 

I know that if Devers were tearing it up with the Giants, we would be seeing posts about that also for the remainder of his contract, not necessarily from you, but from someone.  It's what we do here.

I am still regularly reminded of how great Mookie is.  And he isn't even that great this year.

Personally, I'm enjoying Bell's updates.

[moonslav59]

Bashing Devers is doing JH's dirty work for him.

[Bellhorn04]

12 hours ago, moonslav59 said:

Bashing Devers is doing JH's dirty work for him.

Does bashing include posting the numbers since the trade?

[moonslav59]

1 hour ago, Bellhorn04 said:

Does bashing include posting the numbers since the trade?

IMO, no.

Just post them again, after he gets back near or over .900.

[Bellhorn04]

1 minute ago, moonslav59 said:

IMO, no.

Just post them again, after he gets back near or over .900.

Someone else will post them and I'll have to eat crow if/when it happens.  But in the meantime he's under .700 in his first quarter season with the Giants and they are in a skid that turned them from buyers to sellers, so there's damage already done.

[moonslav59]

Just now, Bellhorn04 said:

Someone else will post them and I'll have to eat crow if/when it happens.  But in the meantime he's under .700 in his first quarter season with the Giants and they are in a skid that turned them from buyers to sellers, so there's damage already done.

I'm fine with the trade. I just don't think we have to bash Devers to convince ourselves the trade was for the good of the team.

I also don't like doing JH's dirty work for him, even if we are just presenting facts not opinions.

The sample size of Devers since the trade is pretty small. The sample size of Hicks, Harrison and Tibbs is even smaller. The players we added with the Devers savings is at zero, right now. Let's talk again in a year or two.

[Bellhorn04]

22 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

I'm fine with the trade. I just don't think we have to bash Devers to convince ourselves the trade was for the good of the team.

I also don't like doing JH's dirty work for him, even if we are just presenting facts not opinions.

The sample size of Devers since the trade is pretty small. The sample size of Hicks, Harrison and Tibbs is even smaller. The players we added with the Devers savings is at zero, right now. Let's talk again in a year or two.

Sorry man, I'm a little more into the here and now than you are.

And a stretch of games that turned the Giants from buyers to sellers is not a small deal IMHO.

I have bashed Henry plenty the last few years.  But I think Devers instigated this trade himself.  I'm not doing dirty work for anyone.  

[moonslav59]

8 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

Sorry man, I'm a little more into the here and now than you are.

And a stretch of games that turned the Giants from buyers to sellers is not a small deal IMHO.

No, it's not, and I'm fine with bringing up how Devers has not helped SFG for almost a 2 month sample size.

I do not think Devers will keep playing like this.

I think he will be a decent defender at 1B and hit .850ish for the next few years. He's agreed to play 1B for SF. That sucks from our view in BOS, but he's finally doing the right thing on taht front.

I think we did well to rid ourselves of a player who was out to challenge our management team, and hopefully we will spend the savings, this winter and over the next 8 seasons.

The "selfishness" talk is valid, I suppose, but I never got any hint of that until the Casas injury and the push for him to play 1B. I think the whole move to DH was blown out of proportion, but maybe I'm wrong.

The talk of his getting fat, not being a top batter and being a bad teammate is not to my liking, but his last few months with the Sox put the bad teammate issue up for debate, to say the least. Before that, I think he was a great teammate. Being a Yankee killer makes anyone a good teammate.

[Bellhorn04]

Trading Devers was not something I wanted or expected going into this year.  It never entered my mind until the troubles started in spring. 

[moonslav59]

19 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

Trading Devers was not something I wanted or expected going into this year.  It never entered my mind until the troubles started in spring. 

Even then, with that contract, a trade never crossed my mind.

[Kimmi]

19 hours ago, moonslav59 said:

Bashing Devers is doing JH's dirty work for him.

Posting about how Devers and the Giants are doing is fair game.  It's not about bashing Devers.  It's about supporting one's opinion that trading Devers was the right move.  If Devers' OPS were .1000 and the Giants were 23-13, I can guarantee that we'd be hearing about it, ad nauseum I might add, and hearing about how the FO screwed up royally again.

We will continue to see posts about Devers, good or bad, for years to come, in an attempt to assess this trade.  For now, it looks like the FO did the right thing.  Even when Devers starts hitting again, I will think that the FO did the right thing.

[Kimmi]

5 hours ago, Bellhorn04 said:

Sorry man, I'm a little more into the here and now than you are.

And a stretch of games that turned the Giants from buyers to sellers is not a small deal IMHO.

I have bashed Henry plenty the last few years.  But I think Devers instigated this trade himself.  I'm not doing dirty work for anyone.  

Not that you need any help defending yourself, but you aren't doing anything wrong in updated us with Devers' or the Giants' numbers.  Carry on.

Might I add that since the Devers trade, not only are the Giants scuffling, but the Red Sox are handling themselves pretty well.

[SPLENDIDSPLINTER]

6 hours ago, Bellhorn04 said:

Sorry man, I'm a little more into the here and now than you are.

And a stretch of games that turned the Giants from buyers to sellers is not a small deal IMHO.

I have bashed Henry plenty the last few years.  But I think Devers instigated this trade himself.  I'm not doing dirty work for anyone.  

When the first thing Devers said when he put on the Giants' uniform is I'll play any position you need me at. IMHO, that was Devers bashing the Sox.

[moonslav59]

4 hours ago, Kimmi said:

Posting about how Devers and the Giants are doing is fair game.  It's not about bashing Devers.  It's about supporting one's opinion that trading Devers was the right move.  If Devers' OPS were .1000 and the Giants were 23-13, I can guarantee that we'd be hearing about it, ad nauseum I might add, and hearing about how the FO screwed up royally again.

We will continue to see posts about Devers, good or bad, for years to come, in an attempt to assess this trade.  For now, it looks like the FO did the right thing.  Even when Devers starts hitting again, I will think that the FO did the right thing.

I agreed that posting Devers numbers is fair game. (Just don't say Toro has done better.)

I agree the trade was the right thing to do, but I would not use small sample sizes to make it look like Devers sucks. (I'm fine that others post those numbers.)

I think Devers will hit well, again, and it will still be the right thing to do.