Article: Bryce Harper Isn't the First Base Solution the Red Sox Need

[notin]

1 minute ago, Hugh2 said:

Some should pay for a future hall of famer because of what he did and not what he will do? Harper is heading into his age 33 season, and while he still might be a valuable player, why are we confident that a guy who hasn’t exactly been a shinning example of health in his career is going to play at an MVP level?

He was 28 when he last won an MVP, he’s likely never that good again. 
 

even if he is, the risk of paying a guy between the ages of 33-39 is different that 26-35….hence…my point 

Harper still might be better than Devers at any point in time.  Over the last 3 years, 30-32 year old Harper has been better than 26-28yo Devers.  It wouldn’t surprise me if that held up for the next few years.

Of course, it’s not an either/or choice.  Devers was given lots of money and chose to be a selfish prick.  And this started during negotiations; his insistence that he stay at third base should have been a huge red flag  .

But this started because folks are insisting the  Sox would never take on Harper’s contract, despite it being reasonable for the times.  Well, again, trading for a contract is NOT the same as signing a player to one…

 

[moonslav59]

55 minutes ago, notin said:

DD has repeatedly said Painter is not available.   As he normally has no issues making prospects available, I’m taking him seriously on Painter…

I doubt subbing Abel does the trick for MN.

BTW, it's not like DD is immune to disingenuity. Make it worth his while and he can come around. Besides, he might be high on a kid like Clarke, Valera or Fajardo- just don't give up Early or Tolle.

 

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

17 minutes ago, notin said:

Harper is a future Hall of Famer who has shown a willingness to change positions.  Can you substitute his name with Devers and still have a true sentence?  Can you do it with either half?

Here's a true sentence:

When he was 22, Harper led the majors in a major offensive category (OPS).

When he was 22, Devers led the majors in a major offensive category (Extra Base Hits).

Since XBH is basically half of OPS, does that count?

Wait a minute: did you mean your initial statement only? Can I substitute Sh for the F in Famer? Or can I buy a prefix and put an un- in front of willingness? Raffy just called and said substitute positions with teams and call it a post.

[Hugh2]

7 minutes ago, notin said:

Harper still might be better than Devers at any point in time.  Over the last 3 years, 30-32 year old Harper has been better than 26-28yo Devers.  It wouldn’t surprise me if that held up for the next few years.

Of course, it’s not an either/or choice.  Devers was given lots of money and chose to be a selfish prick.  And this started during negotiations; his insistence that he stay at third base should have been a huge red flag  .

But this started because folks are insisting the  Sox would never take on Harper’s contract, despite it being reasonable for the times.  Well, again, trading for a contract is NOT the same as signing a player to one…

 

And yet Devers isn’t even on the team anymore.

regardless it’s all about risk, I’d be willing to bet Bryce Harper will have more WAR than Roman Anthony by the time they both retire, but I’d rather bet on young talent.

 

Devers was given the money at the time because of his youth.  The possibility of a 26 year old maintaining his level of play and even improving it substantially as they go into their prime vs. paying for a guy 33 and up who has performed and expecting him to maintain the same level of play into their late 30’s are two entirely different levels of risk.

using Devers as an example as to why the FO would be open to taking on Harper’s years is a false equivalence

[Hugh2]

7 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

I doubt subbing Abel does the trick for MN.

BTW, it's not like DD is immune to disingenuity. Make it worth his while and he can come around. Besides, he might be high on a kid like Clarke, Valera or Fajardo- just don't give up Early or Tolle.

 

We know DD, also this is kinda where most of MLB is at these days…..he’s going to want MLB talent on the verge of MLB talent in return. Philly is trying to extend their window not rebuild.  Tolle/Early will go 100000x further in a trade than Valera/Clarke/Fajardo will

[notin]

34 minutes ago, Hugh2 said:

And yet Devers isn’t even on the team anymore.

regardless it’s all about risk, I’d be willing to bet Bryce Harper will have more WAR than Roman Anthony by the time they both retire, but I’d rather bet on young talent.

 

Devers was given the money at the time because of his youth.  The possibility of a 26 year old maintaining his level of play and even improving it substantially as they go into their prime vs. paying for a guy 33 and up who has performed and expecting him to maintain the same level of play into their late 30’s are two entirely different levels of risk.

using Devers as an example as to why the FO would be open to taking on Harper’s years is a false equivalence

There really is no case for stating why the Sox wouldn’t take on Harper’s contract.  In fact, at 6 years it’s likely we won’t see many superstar contracts this short.  It’s weird to me many think Schwarber will be settling for 3-4 year deals this time around…

[moonslav59]

1 hour ago, Hugh2 said:

We know DD, also this is kinda where most of MLB is at these days…..he’s going to want MLB talent on the verge of MLB talent in return. Philly is trying to extend their window not rebuild.  Tolle/Early will go 100000x further in a trade than Valera/Clarke/Fajardo will

True, but he might also covet Duran or Abreu. He's too smart to covet DHam, Wink, Sandlin and other marginal 26 man players. He may like one of these ML ready options- maybe not as much as Painter, but enough when combined with adding a more than capable OF'er:

Dobbins, Crawford, Harrison, Perales or Fitts.

[moonslav59]

41 minutes ago, notin said:

There really is no case for stating why the Sox wouldn’t take on Harper’s contract.  In fact, at 6 years it’s likely we won’t see many superstar contracts this short.  It’s weird to me many think Schwarber will be settling for 3-4 year deals this time around…

I think Schwarber might take a 4 year deal with a 5th year option and a hefty buyout. He turns 33 before the season starts, so he'll be 36 in year 4. Sure, someone will offer him 5-6 years, but at a significantly lower AAV. He may not want to count on signing one more deal at age 37, but who knows.

$140M/4 ($35M x 4) with an $8M buyout on a $25M 5th year option makes it an offer of:

$37M x 4 (Tax line: $29.6M)

or

$33M x 5 

 

[Hugh2]

1 hour ago, moonslav59 said:

True, but he might also covet Duran or Abreu. He's too smart to covet DHam, Wink, Sandlin and other marginal 26 man players. He may like one of these ML ready options- maybe not as much as Painter, but enough when combined with adding a more than capable OF'er:

Dobbins, Crawford, Harrison, Perales or Fitts.

I think every GM/POBO is smart enough to not covet DHam

[Hugh2]

2 hours ago, notin said:

There really is no case for stating why the Sox wouldn’t take on Harper’s contract.  In fact, at 6 years it’s likely we won’t see many superstar contracts this short.  It’s weird to me many think Schwarber will be settling for 3-4 year deals this time around…

The whole point of not signing these guys to these long term contracts is not pay for their past prime years.  You try to make 6 years seem like a bargain when we are paying for all of his past prime years.

 

no matter how convinced you’re that Harper will still continue to put up elite stats past his prime (which he’s not now) it doesn’t change the fact that you’re paying for his 33-38 year old years.  
 

heck why not find a guy who will sign for 4 years from age 35-38, or maybe 3 years from 37-39
 

the whole concept to giving guys in their mid 20’s these 10 year+ deals is even if they slow down and return negative value at the end you’re getting them in their prime years.  I’m not buying it a bargain when the deal is 4 years shorter but you’re getting all mid 30’s production

[moonslav59]

47 minutes ago, Hugh2 said:

I think every GM/POBO is smart enough to not covet DHam

He would probably make a few teams' 26 man rosters.

[Hugh2]

28 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

He would probably make a few teams' 26 man rosters.

A player that would make a few teams 26 man isn’t exactly a guy who holds much weight in a trade.  

[moonslav59]

5 minutes ago, Hugh2 said:

A player that would make a few teams 26 man isn’t exactly a guy who holds much weight in a trade.  

Exactly. He'd be claimed if DFA'd or traded for a borderline roster guy due to a positional need, only.

[moonslav59]

I've had this theory for a long time that really doesn't hold much water. It goes like this:

Find a team without good 40 man roster depth, and needs at so many positions, they may actually want guys like DHam, Grissom, Wink, Murphy, Kelly, Guerrero, Sogard and the like.

Offer them 2-4 of these guys for one player that is maybe just marginally better than any one of the guys given up. We would improve at one slot, maybe even be a guy who can start for us- the better team or be a player that fits a greater need for us than the guys we traded away. We also have like players in the system that can replace the depth we lost and barely be step downs. 

Of course, the reality is no team wants 3 scrubs for a slightly better than scrub player.

Since our 40 man roster is not really in crunch mode, this winter, this theory is not really something I'm looking at, but I do think we can look to trade 2-3 good/decent players for a better one (and maybe add one borderline player, if the other teams needs one.)

Duran is not a scrub, but I think offering Fitts and Crawford with him, might entice someone to give us the #2 SP'er we need (maybe a third team is involved.)

[Duran Is The Man]

8 hours ago, Hugh2 said:

We know DD, also this is kinda where most of MLB is at these days…..he’s going to want MLB talent on the verge of MLB talent in return. Philly is trying to extend their window not rebuild.  Tolle/Early will go 100000x further in a trade than Valera/Clarke/Fajardo will

unless you're Henry/ Brez, then you take garbage in return for guys like Devers and Sale.

[Duran Is The Man]

5 hours ago, Hugh2 said:

I think every GM/POBO is smart enough to not covet DHam

except for the obvious.

[notin]

9 hours ago, moonslav59 said:

I doubt subbing Abel does the trick for MN.

BTW, it's not like DD is immune to disingenuity. Make it worth his while and he can come around. Besides, he might be high on a kid like Clarke, Valera or Fajardo- just don't give up Early or Tolle.

 

Didn’t Minnesota already acquire Abel in the trade for Jhoan Duran?

[notin]

25 minutes ago, Duran Is The Man said:

except for the obvious.

We got him for Hunter Renfroe.  And since that trade, Hamilton has been much better than Renfroe…

[moonslav59]

2 hours ago, notin said:

Didn’t Minnesota already acquire Abel in the trade for Jhoan Duran?

Yup, soon after DD said he wasn't trading any young pitchers.

[Hitch]

If Phillies ate a lot of the contract or at the very least took Masa and Hicks off our hands, that would be something, but not sure I see either as very likely. He'd be a vast improvement on our 1st base for a few years, but it's still a risky contract to take on to say the least.

Really hard to judge what it would take to get him out of there. Phillies clearly want to parse some payroll though. 

It's not an uninteresting proposal.

[moonslav59]

8 hours ago, Hitch said:

If Phillies ate a lot of the contract or at the very least took Masa and Hicks off our hands, that would be something, but not sure I see either as very likely. He'd be a vast improvement on our 1st base for a few years, but it's still a risky contract to take on to say the least.

Really hard to judge what it would take to get him out of there. Phillies clearly want to parse some payroll though. 

It's not an uninteresting proposal.

Even if PHI loses Schwarber, I doubt they'd want Masas, and I can't imagine them losing Schwarber and trading Harper, but I do think forcing Hicks on them could be managed. We'd have to give more than without Hicks, but saving some AAV money on the tax budget would allow us to add another big signing or two.

[notin]

On 11/1/2025 at 10:26 AM, 5GoldGlovesOF,75 said:

Here's a true sentence:

When he was 22, Harper led the majors in a major offensive category (OPS).

When he was 22, Devers led the majors in a major offensive category (Extra Base Hits).

Since XBH is basically half of OPS, does that count?

Wait a minute: did you mean your initial statement only? Can I substitute Sh for the F in Famer? Or can I buy a prefix and put an un- in front of willingness? Raffy just called and said substitute positions with teams and call it a post.

I think you were limited to the sentence at hand and not free to add your own.  Otherwise lots of them work.  For example:

“Bryce Harper is a carbon-based bipedal life form capable of exchanging oxygen for carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.”

Yes, that statement also applies to Devers.  Although my understanding is Devers wanted Breslow to find someone else to exchange the gases…

[notin]

14 hours ago, moonslav59 said:

Yup, soon after DD said he wasn't trading any young pitchers.

I never heard him say it about anyone but Painter…

[moonslav59]

7 minutes ago, notin said:

I never heard him say it about anyone but Painter…

Matt Gelb of The Athletic hears that the Phillies “have signaled to other clubs that Andrew Painter, Mick Abel and Griff McGarry are not available.”

 

“The strength of our organization is our young starting pitching — it’s a very talented group of starting pitchers,” Dombrowski said.

“And the other thing I have found about talented young starting pitchers — and you can check back where I’ve been — [is that] sometimes they get to the big leagues very fast. I’m not saying this year, but there’s some people that could be competing for spots for next year that are youngsters. I’ve had no problem pitching guys who are 20 years old and having a lot of success with them at the big leagues. And they’re that good that some of those guys could be pitching here.

[Hitch]

17 hours ago, moonslav59 said:

Even if PHI loses Schwarber, I doubt they'd want Masas, and I can't imagine them losing Schwarber and trading Harper, but I do think forcing Hicks on them could be managed. We'd have to give more than without Hicks, but saving some AAV money on the tax budget would allow us to add another big signing or two.

No, Masa feels like a real stick in the mud, unfortunately. If they trade Harper, they can go back and get Schwarber no worries. I think they'd get out of that Harper contract given the chance. Whether they'd eat a big chunk of his contract, or take salary on in return is hard to say. It's a very difficult trade to judge. 

[mvp 78]

On 11/1/2025 at 2:34 PM, Hugh2 said:

I think every GM/POBO is smart enough to not covet DHam

Should have dealt him last offseason when he had more value. 

[mvp 78]

2 hours ago, Hitch said:

No, Masa feels like a real stick in the mud, unfortunately. 

Chaim's present to Red Sox Nation. 

[Old Red]

5 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

Chaim's present to Red Sox Nation. 

After he foolishly thought he still had a shot at resigning Bogey.🙈

[mvp 78]

3 minutes ago, Old Red said:

After he foolishly thought he still had a shot at resigning Bogey.🙈

I can't really fault Chaim for not thinking a dying owner was going to give Bogey one of the worst contracts in baseball. Good for Bogey though. 

[Old Red]

2 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

I can't really fault Chaim for not thinking a dying owner was going to give Bogey one of the worst contracts in baseball. Good for Bogey though. 

Yes Great for Bogey, but what Chaim gets blamed for was just offering to tack on 1 year to the contract Bogey already had.