Red Sox 2025 Season Review/Offseason Preview Thread

[Old Red]

9 minutes ago, Larry Cook said:

Something involving arenado and yoshida can work if cash or prospects is used to offset the payroll difference  

I don’t know if the Red Sox would want a 35 yr old 3B in decline for the next two years, and I don’t know if Bloom would want Masa for the 2nd time. 

[Hitch]

21 minutes ago, Larry Cook said:

Something involving arenado and yoshida can work if cash or prospects is used to offset the payroll difference  

It's just trading one bad contract for another however. And are we happy with an infield of 

Contreras

Mayer

Story

Arenado

Just so we can keep the 4 outfielders? Not for me.

[mvp 78]

31 minutes ago, Hitch said:

It's just trading one bad contract for another however. And are we happy with an infield of 

Contreras

Mayer

Story

Arenado

Just so we can keep the 4 outfielders? Not for me.

I'd rather have Hicks and Masa than Arenado. 

[moonslav59]

3 hours ago, Hitch said:

Don't put words in my mouth. I have never said we are overvaluing Duran. I think we should be holding out for maximum value and keep him if we don't get him. 

 

Who are we overvaluing, then?

Granted, when I include Cespedes and his whopping $9M BTV, I'm playing around, but I think most of my serious trade suggestions do not overvalue Sox players. I may get it wrong on what the other team needs or how much they value the return package, but almost all my suggested trades give more BTV away than we get back.

[Old Red]

20 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

I'd rather have Hicks and Masa than Arenado. 

Agree on that. I get the concept of trading bad contract for bad contract, but it has to be a fit for both teams. 

[moonslav59]

22 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

I'd rather have Hicks and Masa than Arenado. 

I'm not sure what Arenado gets paid. cots says $27M for 2026 and $15M for '27, and his AAV is 30.6 AAV for '26 and '27.

That's $42M/2 and $30.6M x 2 on the tax line.

Yoshida and Hicks both have 2 years left, also. They total:

$30.6M each year. That's $61.2M/2 and is way more than Arenado.

There is a difference is on the tax line. Arenado is $30.6 x 2, but Yoshida+ Hicks is $28.3M.

If it's about tax avoidance, Yoshida and Hicks are slightly better- moneywise.

If it's about actual salary paid, we could save almost $20M by doing the trade. (The tax would not be that much.)

We also save a roster slot in a two for one trade, and have a player than can at least play defense at 3B and 1B.

It's a close call, to me, but I think I'd trade Hicks and Masa for Arenado, but I wouldn't do it so Duran can DH. I'd still trade an OF'er and DH Casas/Romy/Campbell.

[moonslav59]

10 minutes ago, Old Red said:

Agree on that. I get the concept of trading bad contract for bad contract, but it has to be a fit for both teams. 

If we don't add an infielder, then I'd prefer Arenado over Masa & Hicks, but why would STL want to pay $20M more, when they are trying to dump a  bad salary?

[moonslav59]

Is BOS one of the teams Okamoto is visiting?

Anyone know?

[Old Red]

19 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

I'm not sure what Arenado gets paid. cots says $27M for 2026 and $15M for '27, and his AAV is 30.6 AAV for '26 and '27.

That's $42M/2 and $30.6M x 2 on the tax line.

Yoshida and Hicks both have 2 years left, also. They total:

$30.6M each year. That's $61.2M/2 and is way more than Arenado.

There is a difference is on the tax line. Arenado is $30.6 x 2, but Yoshida+ Hicks is $28.3M.

If it's about tax avoidance, Yoshida and Hicks are slightly better- moneywise.

If it's about actual salary paid, we could save almost $20M by doing the trade. (The tax would not be that much.)

We also save a roster slot in a two for one trade, and have a player than can at least play defense at 3B and 1B.

It's a close call, to me, but I think I'd trade Hicks and Masa for Arenado, but I wouldn't do it so Duran can DH. I'd still trade an OF'er and DH Casas/Romy/Campbell.

Sportrac has Arendo at $21M for 2026, and $16M for 2027, and LT is $25.5M.

[Hitch]

45 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

Who are we overvaluing, then?

Granted, when I include Cespedes and his whopping $9M BTV, I'm playing around, but I think most of my serious trade suggestions do not overvalue Sox players. I may get it wrong on what the other team needs or how much they value the return package, but almost all my suggested trades give more BTV away than we get back.

I can see what you get in long tiresome exchanges with people. What's this we talk? I am just talking about your valuations in your trades. It's difficult to take this question seriously when you add in either Hicks or Massa to virtually every trade suggestion because it might roughly balance out on BTV. 

BTV is a nice tool for trying to work out value, but is very limited and is virtually useless when it comes to nuance or taking into account teams needs in any trade that's lining up. An example of this was Chapman and his pitiful BTV value at the deadline. Despite the fact we could have gotten a huge haul for the best closer in the game last year off a contending team. 

 

[mvp 78]

6 minutes ago, Old Red said:

Sportrac has Arendo at $21M for 2026, and $16M for 2027, ad LT is $25.5M.

Luxury tax calc resets after the trade and it would probably be 18.5M.

[Old Red]

2 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

Luxury tax calc resets after the trade and it would probably be 18.5M.

Thanks for that knowledge.

[moonslav59]

10 minutes ago, Old Red said:

Sportrac has Arendo at $21M for 2026, and $16M for 2027, and LT is $25.5M.

It's all so confusing. No sites agree on almost any salaries and AAV numbers. I used to trust cots, but they seem to be wrong a lot.

If the money was even, I might think of the trade of Masa & Hicks for Arenado, as bad as his bat looks, but only because we free up a roster slot. Sure, a simple DFA could do that, and we will have Houck's slot open once he hits the 60 Day IL when the season starts.

I don't think we have a 40 man roster crunch, but we kinda have a 26 man crunch, especially if we add an infielder without trading an OF'er. One thing that works is starting the year with Casas and or Masa at AAA to see what we have with both. There is no hurry to trade one, now.

Even if we sign Bregman, Bichette, Okamoto or Suarez, we can easily DFA someone else.

[moonslav59]

9 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

Luxury tax calc resets after the trade and it would probably be 18.5M.

The tricky part is all the deferred money on many newer contracts.

If Arenado's AAV is $18.5, then I'd gladly trade the $30M AAV of Masa+Hicks for him. That gives us enough to make a bigger signing or trade that brings salary.

[moonslav59]

29 minutes ago, Hitch said:

I can see what you get in long tiresome exchanges with people. What's this we talk? I am just talking about your valuations in your trades. It's difficult to take this question seriously when you add in either Hicks or Massa to virtually every trade suggestion because it might roughly balance out on BTV. 

BTV is a nice tool for trying to work out value, but is very limited as is virtually useless when it comes to nuance or taking into accounts teams needs in any trade that's lining up. An example of this was Chapman and his pitiful BTV value at the deadline. Despite the fact we could have gotten a huge haul for the best closer in the game last year off a contending team. 

Masa or Hicks are not included in even half of my suggested trades. When I include one, it's the same as asking for cash, instead. Many of the trades I do include Hicks or Masa are for big salary players, some of whom are salary dumps, themselves or are slightly underwater.

I know the limitations to BTV, and you are correct in your points about it. I do try to see what needs the other team has...like PHI needs and OF'er...MIN does not. I fully realize my suggestions may be way off the mark, as I know I am not keen on what other teams need nor their budget limitations.

If I just said Cash, and not include Hicks, would that change your view, somewhat? If the other team has no use for Hicks, and most don't, then just add $18M cash going to BOS. (With Masa, add about $26M.)

BTW, they have Chapman as underwater, right now. They have Cespedes at $9M value and Harrison at $6M. I would trade 8 Cespedes for 1 Harrison. I try to avoid deals with players who have inflated value. Hell, BTV would accept DHam for Nate, but I won't suggest that absurd deal.

I know you and others see many of my suggestions as extreme or absurd. I would agree that some are, and maybe I should note the ones I am "just having fun" with.

[Larry Cook]

2 hours ago, moonslav59 said:

If I just said Cash, and not include Hicks, would that change your view, somewhat? If the other team has no use for Hicks, and most don't, then just add $18M cash going to BOS. (With Masa, add about $26M.)

I am good with this! 
with Anthony, abreau and Duran rotating at the DH, maybe none of them had a lengthy stay on the DL! 
 

I think arenado has a bit of a rejuvenated career stats wise if he is here with us! And the defense is still decent. 

[Kimmi]

On 12/23/2025 at 4:37 PM, 5GoldGlovesOF,75 said:

The someone who said it wasn't the Red Sox exec who signed Kluber.

Touche'.

I was actually really excited about that signing.  It didn't work out, obviously, but that's the kind of deal that I'd make any day of the week.

[Kimmi]

On 12/23/2025 at 4:54 PM, Hitch said:

I do fault people for thinking that on times. We've been in the top 3 spenders in the league for the majority of his ownership. I've argued that there is context and reasons why he wanted to hold off the spending the last few 4/5 years - mostly through terrible and costly decision making.

If we don't spend any more this winter I'll have problems with it myself, now that we're in entering the window. But I don't believe for one second we're done and believe we will spend more. And if being near $260m isn't enough for people, I don't know what to say to them, outside of - that certainly isn't cheap.

Thank you for this post.  This is pretty much the way I see things.  IMO, Henry is willing to spend, and he's proven so time and time again.  He's just opposed to handing out large contracts to aging players (rightly so), which makes it seems like he's being cheap.

At any rate, I am very pleased with this ownership group on the whole.

[Kimmi]

18 hours ago, Randy Red Sox said:

i could easily see the sox going with Mayer at 3B and Romy at 2B with Hamilton as backup.

Personally, I would be okay with this, excepting the fact that it would leave us thin, depth-wise.  That said, I am thinking that Breslow will add either a 2B or a 3B, with Mayer filling the other position.

[Duran Is The Man]

On 12/23/2025 at 3:54 PM, Hitch said:

I do fault people for thinking that on times. We've been in the top 3 spenders in the league for the majority of his ownership. I've argued that there is context and reasons why he wanted to hold off the spending the last few 4/5 years - mostly through terrible and costly decision making.

If we don't spend any more this winter I'll have problems with it myself, now that we're in entering the window. But I don't believe for one second we're done and believe we will spend more. And if being near $260m isn't enough for people, I don't know what to say to them, outside of - that certainly isn't cheap.

$260M isn't cheap....if that's all the organization can afford. the Sox are different, they CAN spend a helluva lot more than $260M as their revenue is close to $600M. so, yeah....Henry is being cheap.

[Old Red]

3 minutes ago, Duran Is The Man said:

$260M isn't cheap....if that's all the organization can afford. the Sox are different, they CAN spend a helluva lot more than $260M as their revenue is close to $600M. so, yeah....Henry is being cheap.

I believe the Red Sox are quite far down the list when it comes to payroll spending to revenue.

[Duran Is The Man]

1 hour ago, Old Red said:

I believe the Red Sox are quite far down the list when it comes to payroll spending to revenue.

apparently they are about 23rd. 

[moonslav59]

4 hours ago, Larry Cook said:

I think arenado has a bit of a rejuvenated career stats wise if he is here with us! And the defense is still decent. 

He'd need a resurrection not a rejuvination.

OPS by age:

.891 at 31

.774 at 32

.719 at 33

.666 at 34

He turns 35 in April.

If he was on our roster, I'd want him as a bench guy and late inning defensive replacement player, but then again, I don't even want Hicks on the 26, and only conditionally want Yoshida on the 26 based on Casas being on the IL or struggling and no OF'er traded, this winter.

If his AAV keeps us from adding someone else, no thanks.

[moonslav59]

1 hour ago, Duran Is The Man said:

apparently they are about 23rd. 

That is rather telling, but almost every team can easily afford to spend $30-50M more a year and still make a nice profit, so I don't see this as being the central argument for JH being "cheap."

From the time I became a Sox fan in the early 70's until JH came to won, we never came close to meeting the Yanks in spending.

To me, the reason the curse was broken and 3 more rings followed was the nice roster Dan D handed Theo and the spending increase by JH. That is a context being missed by harping on our 23rd ranking.

I'm pissed at JH, too. I'm not defending him, but the guy has not been "cheap-" just maybe cheaper or more selective in his spending habits, as Kimmi points out over and over.

[moonslav59]

I'm not a big Vientos fan, but I might give Crawford & DHam for Vientos & $2M. (BTV approves)

I'm not sure further depleting our rotation depth is a good idea, and we'd still have an extra OF'er and DH.

I doubt the NYM take Casas and DHam for Vientos, but BTV approves. This way, we'd give Masa a little more room at DH, but Duran would still be our DH- not Masa.

[JoeBrady]

11 hours ago, Old Red said:

I don’t know if the Red Sox would want a 35 yr old 3B in decline for the next two years, and I don’t know if Bloom would want Masa for the 2nd time. 

Probably not and probably not.  But at the right price, Arenado could be a positive addition.  Masa would likely be a positive addition (at the right price), but not to a team like the Cards.

[moonslav59]

2 hours ago, JoeBrady said:

Probably not and probably not.  But at the right price, Arenado could be a positive addition.  Masa would likely be a positive addition (at the right price), but not to a team like the Cards.

I just can't see how Arenado could ever be viewed as a plus as anything more than a back-up corner IF'er and late inning D guy.

[moonslav59]

Looking at BTV and the Phillies, and nothing against DD. I love the guy.

They have an interesting mix of values.

They have 9 contracts "underwater," including some high value players with higher contracts. Only Castellanos has zero skill value, but still 9 guys!

On the plus side, they have a surprisingly few very high value players beyond Christopher Sanchez at a whopping 198!

Their next two highest players are in the minors: Painter at 52 & Aidan Miller at 49.

Big drop off.... Only 5 guys between 9 and 28:

28 Bryson Scott (2 yrs left)

26 Jesus Lazardo (1 yr left)

19 B Marsh (2)

17 Jh Duran (2)

17 Justin Crawford (minors)

15 Orion Kerkering

Conversely, the Sox have 5 guys underwater (Story, Masa, Hicks, Chapman, Contreras & Houck)

The Sox have 25 players at 8 or more. (26, if you count Rivas at 7.5) Their top 10 are all in MLB: Crochet, Anthony, Mayer, Duran, Rafaela, Tolle, Abreu, Narvaez, Bello & Early.)

Arias is at 22 and Witherspoon 18 with Soto at 13.

Crawford, Campbell & Casas are between 18-22.

Romy, Gray, Slaten, Whitlock 10-12 w Oviedo at 8.

Lots of those plus value players are Brez guys. For just 2 seasons- not bad. 

[moonslav59]

Brez & BTV Values:

74 Crochet

31 Tolle

27 Narvaez

18 Witherspoon

13 Soto

12 Romy 

11 Gray & Slaten

10 Gonzales

8 Oviedo, Phillips & Rivas

7 Harrison

6 Bennet, Sandlin & Eyanson

5 Sandoval

4 Weissert & Godbout

3 Delzine, Y Rod & Cason

____________________

Bloom's '21 to '23 additions were nice, too:

61 Anthony

55 Mayer

27 Abreu

24 Early

22 Arias

19 Campbell

10 Whitlock

 

[Hitch]

17 hours ago, Duran Is The Man said:

$260M isn't cheap....if that's all the organization can afford. the Sox are different, they CAN spend a helluva lot more than $260M as their revenue is close to $600M. so, yeah....Henry is being cheap.

I'm hesitant to make this post as I hardly feel sorry for billionaires, and as a concept, don't think should even be allowed to exist, but nonetheless, I do feel fans need to wake up a bit and get real. 

Frist off all these are business men, The whole sport is a business. How often do you hear it from players, agents, managers, et al - "it's a business, man". Secondly you live in a capitalistic society. So why do sports fans complain when their owners make money? Isn't that the name of the game for everyone? And they're making money while delivering four WS in twenty five years - THE MOST WS in the sport in that time period. Could they spend more on times? Sure. Are they terrible owners or cheap? Not even close. 

Now let's look at their revenues. Yes they were at $574m in 2024. From that they made an operating profit $120m. This was earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization, so actual profit is quite a bit lower than this. Still, not too bad by anyone's measure. But in 2023 their revenue was 'only' $500m. In 2022 it was $513m, in 2022 it was $479m and of course during Covid, it was $147m (though expenditure was down too). What exactly do fans want them to do? Spend every penny they bring in? And then be at risk every season of down years and lower revenues? To swing wildly between a little green and a lot of red? What if they did that? Spent it all and loaded up on contracts that ended up bad, or terrible? An then we have a payroll wiping out every penny we make, yet revenue is trending down now because nobody wants to turn up and watch a s*** baseball team of overpaid rubbish. What then? 

Fans don't seem to realise that the Red Sox are only as rich as they are right now because of the owners business acumen. Because of their ability to make deals. Because NESN (who they own!) is sending them $100m a year in revenue alone. Why aren't these people allowed to have an organisation that is making money (and hardly ruinous amounts at that) and on a sound footing? What would be better? Fan ownership? Don't make me laugh, the payroll would be through the floor after ticket and merch prices crashed. Other ownership? Like who? Who can afford them? A lunatic like Musk? f*** that. Foreign ownership? A cursory look at European soccer and the waste land of broken clubs and whitewashing some of those investments have made should give you more than pause. Hedge funds? Possibly the worst option of the three.

These guys routinely put out a team that is in the higher echelons of pay roll spending. The last 4 or 5 years it hasn't been right at the top (though hardly miles off), but then it would seem obvious why. Several costly and idiotic mistakes were made that put the roster and organisation in a bad spot and take time to recover from. Spending money then would have likely been sending good money after bad, and I've already shown you that revenues were down across those years (in part because of the product on the field) and they had just come off a killer down year through Covid. Plus they're just too smart as businessmen to make that sort of mistake.

There's also the fact that the Red Sox are just not the biggest players in the pool anymore. To compare the New York Yankees revenue was somewhere between $729 and $800m in 2024 (estimates differ). The Dodgers revenue was $1 BILLION. These are insignificant amounts to Cohen's wealth, and even the Rogers family in Toronto.

People routinely say - "But, but Henry is a billionaire!" He's a paper billionaire. If he sold his stake in FSG, or his sports teams, he'd be a billionaire. But he's not the sort of rich that can dip into his own picket and take out hundreds of millions to throw around whenever he sees fit. 

Finally, they clearly would like (and need) to be a sustainably run organisation, for obvious reasons outlined above. To do that, they can't afford to continually smash through pay roll barriers and lose international money and drop back picks in the draft (or lose draft picks all together). We've seen how much stronger we are as a team when we have a great farm and those players start graduating or are moved for players like Crochet. Even losing a 2nd and 5th rounder for a player with a pick attached stings like hell when we're trying to be efficient and up against teams that can drop $760m and $800m (more than the majority of the sports' teams total revenue figures) on an individual players.

In short, fans have the right to ask for more of course, and on times when spending is down, demand it. But they also need to grow up and realise where the Red Sox are. Being in the top 5 spenders is realistic. Asking for anymore is not. Just thumping your fist on a table and demanding we be the highest spenders or the best because I want it, is idiotic, and utterly failing to understand that even despite these owners incredible business acumen - the landscape has changed and we aren't one of the 2/3 biggest bullies in the pool any longer.