A Realistic Look at the 2026 Red Sox: Part I

[mvp 78]

18 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

Sandoval had the internal brace procedure, not the full TJS, so his timetable was expected to be shorter. He failed to pitch in 2025 due to another issue, I believe, so I think he should be 100% over the surgery, now. Hopefully, he is working out to strengthen his arm and will be ready day one of ST'ing.

It's hard to keep hoping on these guys, because we've came up short on almost every one of these signings, but maybe he breaks the mold.

Gio had his March '24 and was back in 12 months. Sandoval had his June '24 and he wasn't able to make it back before the end of the season. He should be ready to go, but these things aren't 100%. 

[mvp 78]

17 minutes ago, notin said:

Technically only 25% of Sandoval’s have appeared in games for the Red Sox.  Patrick will need to make his Boston debut to allow the Sox to tie the Angels for tjis prestigious honor…

He will. 

[mvp 78]

14 minutes ago, notin said:

So the Sox could trade both, pay all but $11mill out of the $40mill-ish they’re owed, get nothing back and sign maybe one player?

Better off trading Duran and/or Bello, getting 1-2 useful players, and holding the cap space for inevitable mid year additions rather than paying $30mill to two more guys playing elsewhere…

If you are trading Duran and Bello, you are probably bringing salary back. 

[moonslav59]

21 minutes ago, notin said:

So the Sox could trade both, pay all but $11mill out of the $40mill-ish they’re owed, get nothing back and sign maybe one player?

Better off trading Duran and/or Bello, getting 1-2 useful players, and holding the cap space for inevitable mid year additions rather than paying $30mill to two more guys playing elsewhere…

I'm not saying we should or will trade them. I think I'd rather have Masa than $5M in savings to add to FA signings. I don't like Hicks.

If it's true we only have $22-26M to spend, and Alonso costs $28M, then we'd need to trade someone to afford him.

If we are able to trade Duran plus for KMarte, we's spend about $11M more. That would leave $11-15M to spend on a FA, so adding $5 (hicks), 7.5 (Campbell) or $12.5M (both) could mean we add a nother really good FA and not one for $10-11M.

[notin]

50 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

If you are trading Duran and Bello, you are probably bringing salary back. 

As long as it’s useful salary…

[Old Red]

50 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

Gio had his March '24 and was back in 12 months. Sandoval had his June '24 and he wasn't able to make it back before the end of the season. He should be ready to go, but these things aren't 100%. 

Which past stats led the Red Sox to sign this guy in the first place injured, or not injured?🤔

[notin]

2 minutes ago, Old Red said:

Which past stats led the Red Sox to sign this guy in the first place injured, or not injured?🤔

I think they signed him because he went to the same high school as Tanner Bibee and Boog Powell.

He might not have been there with Boog…

[moonslav59]

9 minutes ago, notin said:

As long as it’s useful salary…

Of course. The idea would be to minimize the budget hit, so a secondary signing or trade could be made to add that other key piece.

$21-25M is not enough to add two big bats via free agency.

[moonslav59]

12 minutes ago, Old Red said:

Which past stats led the Red Sox to sign this guy in the first place injured, or not injured?🤔

2021-2022: 41 GS + 3 Games in relief (235 IP is not a tiny sample size.)

3.17 ERA/ 3.44 FIP

75 ERA- (21st out of all SP'ers with 200+ IP)

132 ERA+

1.29 WHIP

5.4 fWAR/5.3bWAR

The guy was pretty good. It's questionable he can return to that form, but he just turned 29, which is about peak prime for many pitchers.

I'd put him as our #4, until we see what he's like in ST'ing. I'm fine with anyone who places him as our #6 or 7, until they see what he looks like in ST'ing.

[Old Red]

For all the talk of the budget that happens on here, and how much the Red Sox have to spend Sandoval was a Big Waste of $18M to me.

[mvp 78]

17 minutes ago, Old Red said:

Which past stats led the Red Sox to sign this guy in the first place injured, or not injured?🤔

He's a changeup, sinker, slider guy with a god awful 4 seamer. That's right in their wheelhouse. In his best seasons, he was a high groundball rate pitcher with low hard hit rate and induced a lot of whiffs. Similar profile to Bello, just with higher k rate. 

 

[Old Red]

6 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

2021-2022: 41 GS + 3 Games in relief (235 IP is not a tiny sample size.)

3.17 ERA/ 3.44 FIP

75 ERA- (21st out of all SP'ers with 200+ IP)

132 ERA+

1.29 WHIP

5.4 fWAR/5.3bWAR

The guy was pretty good. It's questionable he can return to that form, but he just turned 29, which is about peak prime for many pitchers.

I'd put him as our #4, until we see what he's like in ST'ing. I'm fine with anyone who places him as our #6 or 7, until they see what he looks like in ST'ing.

2021-2022 was a long time ago, and I noticed you left out 2023-2024. It still a waste of $18M to me.

[moonslav59]

4 minutes ago, Old Red said:

For all the talk of the budget that happens on here, and how much the Red Sox have to spend Sandoval was a Big Waste of $18M to me.

Could be. It looked that way for the $38M we spent on Gio, but he redeemed himself to some extent.

Henriks and Paxton were total busts in similar deals (less money.)

[moonslav59]

2 minutes ago, Old Red said:

2021-2022 was a long time ago, and I noticed you left out 2023-2024

You asked for the stats that made him look good.

Had you asked for the bad one, I'd have included 2024.

2024 was not bad. 109 ERA+ but with some bad numbers with that.

He's 29. He may bounce back.

I'm not happy with these kinds of signings- not at all. I'm hoping this one works.

[mvp 78]

1 minute ago, Old Red said:

For all the talk of the budget that happens on here, and how much the Red Sox have to spend Sandoval was a Big Waste of $18M to me.

Yes, they shouldn't get these types of guys going forward because (1) they are reducing your 40 man roster in offseason year 1, (2) wasting AAV on CBT in year 1 while not getting enough discount in year 2 and (3) the Sox have a bad history of grabbing these types. It's one thing to do it for a premier talent, it's quite another for guys with a limited ceiling to begin with. 

Matthew Boyd got 2/29 and Shane Beiber got 2/26 last offseason, which are much better deals than Sandoval at 2/18. Sandoval was a bottom of the barrel signing. Starters signed for less really didn't produce much of anything in '25. Better off just not signing anyone. The hope was that he'd come back in the 2nd half, but that didn't happen. 

[mvp 78]

10 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

Could be. It looked that way for the $38M we spent on Gio, but he redeemed himself to some extent.

Henriks and Paxton were total busts in similar deals (less money.)

I don't think they anticipated Giolito needing TJS at the time he was signed. 

[moonslav59]

I really don't see any reason why we can't spend up to the first or even the second tax line, but when you hear stories about a "limited budget," it makes me cringe.

I doubt we can find takers for Masa and Hicks, and at best, maybe we can save onl $10-15M combined. Adding players/prospects might increase the savings, but that seems counterproductive. The window is wide open, so maybe we need to get creative like this.

Other significant AAVs to trade might be...

9.2 Bello (but that just adds a new hole)

9.1 Sandoval

7.8 Duran

7.5 Campbell

6.3 Rafaela

2.8 Crawford

 

[Old Red]

5 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

Yes, they shouldn't get these types of guys going forward because (1) they are reducing your 40 man roster in offseason year 1, (2) wasting AAV on CBT in year 1 while not getting enough discount in year 2 and (3) the Sox have a bad history of grabbing these types. It's one thing to do it for a premier talent, it's quite another for guys with a limited ceiling to begin with. 

Matthew Boyd got 2/29 and Shane Beiber got 2/26 last offseason, which are much better deals than Sandoval at 2/18. Sandoval was a bottom of the barrel signing. Starters signed for less really didn't produce much of anything in '25. Better off just not signing anyone. The hope was that he'd come back in the 2nd half, but that didn't happen. 

It just seems to me that the Red Sox have wasted millions of dollars the past five years on pitches that did even throw 1 inning in a given season. Some they knew wouldn’t, and some they didn’t know.

[mvp 78]

5 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

I really don't see any reason why we can't spend up to the first or even the second tax line, but when you hear stories about a "limited budget," it makes me cringe.

I doubt we can find takers for Masa and Hicks, and at best, maybe we can save onl $10-15M combined. Adding players/prospects might increase the savings, but that seems counterproductive. The window is wide open, so maybe we need to get creative like this.

Other significant AAVs to trade might be...

9.2 Bello (but that just adds a new hole)

9.1 Sandoval

7.8 Duran

7.5 Campbell

6.3 Rafaela

2.8 Crawford

The tax hit on these contracts is so small that it's really embarrassing if the Sox feel they have to trade away players to take on new ones. JH can afford it. JH should afford it. The fans have put the money in his pocket. He should spend it. 

[Old Red]

1 minute ago, mvp 78 said:

The tax hit on these contracts is so small that it's really embarrassing if the Sox feel they have to trade away players to take on new ones. JH can afford it. JH should afford it. The fans have put the money in his pocket. He should spend it. 

In other words. Throttle Up!

[drewski6]

6 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

The tax hit on these contracts is so small that it's really embarrassing if the Sox feel they have to trade away players to take on new ones. JH can afford it. JH should afford it. The fans have put the money in his pocket. He should spend it. 

Its odd that there seems to be so much conflicting evidence on if we're serious about actually competing with the actual big boys

I honestly dont know if its a "too many cooks in the kitchen" thing, minds-changing, intentional deception , or just complete open-mindedness (we could sign everybody, but we are just as likely to sign nobody).

What they say isnt super important, but if the budget is indeed tight from here, e.g. 20m left to spend, and we're talking about flipping guys to save money so we can get that above 30m to spend, its hard to imagine that we are going to be truly competitive next year.

[drewski6]

You can hypothesize all you want about trading for guys and keeping them cheap, but most likely, if we trade for a bat or a pitcher who has 1-2 years left under a cheap contract, we'd prob extend them. And there goes the budget.

For example, I doubt we trade for Ryan and just let him pitch for the next 2 years then walk because this coming year he may be cheap, but if the budget is 20m above where we are now, even if hes cheap, all we can really do is combined him with a mid-tier bat like Polanco.  Because then hes arb3 the year after, due a big raise, and we're back in the same boat.

20m doesnt go very far, especially if you are trying keeping refsnyder and matz.

ANd Duran is a good deal for 8m so flipping him to save that 8m doesnt exactly help trying to cram as much talent in with such few resources available.

[mvp 78]

5 minutes ago, drewski6 said:

Its odd that there seems to be so much conflicting evidence on if we're serious about actually competing with the actual big boys

I honestly dont know if its a "too many cooks in the kitchen" thing, minds-changing, intentional deception , or just complete open-mindedness (we could sign everybody, but we are just as likely to sign nobody).

What they say isnt super important, but if the budget is indeed tight from here, e.g. 20m left to spend, and we're talking about flipping guys to save money so we can get that above 30m to spend, its hard to imagine that we are going to be truly competitive next year.

There ARE too many cooks. Start by counting the EVP's. We had the same problem last season when discussing Alex Bregman. We heard in the media that there were multiple sides in the FO about signing Bregman. One side wanted to go long on him and the other wanted to go short if at all. 

Sam/JH vs Werner vs Cora vs Breslow. It's kind of a free for all in there and it leaks worse than my last pool solar water heater.

[drewski6]

4 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

There ARE too many cooks. Start by counting the EVP's. We had the same problem last season when discussing Alex Bregman. We heard in the media that there were multiple sides in the FO about signing Bregman. One side wanted to go long on him and the other wanted to go short if at all. 

Sam/JH vs Werner vs Cora vs Breslow. It's kind of a free for all in there and it leaks worse than my last pool solar water heater.

Good point on Bregman. Dont forget theo, haha, didnt they add him to the braintrust?

 

[mvp 78]

7 minutes ago, drewski6 said:

Good point on Bregman. Dont forget theo, haha, didnt they add him to the braintrust?

He's been quiet quitting since the day he was hired. 

[moonslav59]

23 minutes ago, drewski6 said:

You can hypothesize all you want about trading for guys and keeping them cheap, but most likely, if we trade for a bat or a pitcher who has 1-2 years left under a cheap contract, we'd prob extend them. And there goes the budget.

For example, I doubt we trade for Ryan and just let him pitch for the next 2 years then walk because this coming year he may be cheap, but if the budget is 20m above where we are now, even if hes cheap, all we can really do is combined him with a mid-tier bat like Polanco.  Because then hes arb3 the year after, due a big raise, and we're back in the same boat.

20m doesnt go very far, especially if you are trying keeping refsnyder and matz.

ANd Duran is a good deal for 8m so flipping him to save that 8m doesnt exactly help trying to cram as much talent in with such few resources available.

You do have to consider that Duran has 2 abs left and might make $12M then $17M, if he does well.

Trading him for Ryan and then extending Ryan might end up costing more, but you can't really just subtract Duran's $7.7M x 3 years.

Good point, though.

[moonslav59]

39 minutes ago, Old Red said:

It just seems to me that the Red Sox have wasted millions of dollars the past five years on pitches that did even throw 1 inning in a given season. Some they knew wouldn’t, and some they didn’t know.

Indeed. I hate that idea.

I also hate trying to catch lightening in a bottle with signings like Richards, Kluber, Wacha and Hill. Buehler was in that boat, too.

The one "durable" guy they signed was not great to begin with and Gio ended up missing his full first year, so that plan has failed, as well.

We just seem jinxed on FA SP'er signings. Almost all of them. Even the ones that do okay have an asterisk. Gio missed year 1. Wacha and Hill missed key time down the stretch.

[mvp 78]

14 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

Indeed. I hate that idea.

I also hate trying to catch lightening in a bottle with signings like Richards, Kluber, Wacha and Hill. Buehler was in that boat, too.

The one "durable" guy they signed was not great to begin with and Gio ended up missing his full first year, so that plan has failed, as well.

We just seem jinxed on FA SP'er signings. Almost all of them. Even the ones that do okay have an asterisk. Gio missed year 1. Wacha and Hill missed key time down the stretch.

Is the last "good" FA starter contract John Lackey? Even that had 3 lost seasons. Since '04, they've been better off trading for starters (Beckett, ERod, Sale, Crochet, Porcello, Eovaldi) than getting a FA. 

[moonslav59]

2 hours ago, mvp 78 said:

Is the last "good" FA starter contract John Lackey? Even that had 3 lost seasons. Since '04, they've been better off trading for starters (Beckett, ERod, Sale, Crochet, Porcello, Eovaldi) than getting a FA. 

Schilling was also via trade.

Let's hope Sonny works out.

[mvp 78]

2 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

Schilling was also via trade.

Let's hope Sonny works out.

I wrote "since 04" because I wanted to go back to the 04 offseason when they had to replace Lowe and Pedro and it was very depressing looking at all the bad FA signings as I kept going and going.