Boston Red Sox Interested In Devin Williams

[drewski6]

7 minutes ago, Hitch said:

All fair questions and I don't know the answer because if someone is willing to go 7 at $210m for Bregman and Alonso (or anything approaching that), I don't want any part of it. But, we also badly need bats and they need to make it happen one way or another. Maybe then we look at your Marte's and do it that way. 

My dream is that they go and get Bregman, Alonso and trade for Marte and a #2. I'm also keenly aware that's got next to no chance of happening. 

I'd be very happy with Alonso and Bregamn/Bo and a #2 with some bullpen help. 

My guess is it'll be Alonso, plus another slightly lesser player and a trade for a #2 and some bullpen help. That's isn't hugely impressive, but it's definitely a step in the right direction with them being able to add in season. 

But yeah, if things get crazy price wise then it will really get hot in JH's and Bres' kitchens. 

Thats a lot of eggs in the Alonso basket and Im jsut not sure it wont turn into a bidding war. Prob beter to act fast before like Tudcker, Schwarber, Bichette are off ht eboard and teams looking to add start running out of options.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

45 minutes ago, drewski6 said:

 my point is that Boston is a major US city, and the red sox get it all to themselves.  Unlike most major cities, which are carved up among teams. And the red sox not only get boston to themsleves, but most of new england as well.  Granted dudes from maine arent particularly likely to come to fenway often

But my point is that we shouldnt be operating from a financial disadvantage.  I like MVPs point that they need to get back to top 5, or just outside of it, or we just arent seriously competing.  

I like the contrasts you describe with other MLB regions. Lived in New England all my life and while MLB isn't as popular as it once was -- anywhere -- baseball still thrives because growing up, everyone can play it, and still can as adults (in some derivative: softball, old-timers leagues etc)... of course, oldsters still play hoop or soccer, but contact sports take a toll sooner on flesh and bone.

As an area, the only big city north of NYC in the U.S. is Boston. Because of that, I've always considered New England more pastoral so maybe with more interest in a summer outdoor pastime (I know that's crap, because there are plenty of urban areas, including ones where I taught, that have little interest in baseball). 

The Red Sox are still very popular and exclusive to 5 or 6 states, so definitely worth investing in as a product for their owners. The Sox even have fans who type junk about them online 365 days a year...

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

1 hour ago, moonslav59 said:

If 2019-2020 winter is recent, okay.

Before 2019, they extended Sale and Nate, planned on trading Betts and let Kimbrel & Kelly go without replacing in kind. One could argue the trend started then, but they did still spend a lot.

They thought Barnes would inherit the closer role -- and once he made the All-Star team they extended him. 

Then MLB banned the sticky stuff.

[Hitch]

4 minutes ago, drewski6 said:

Thats a lot of eggs in the Alonso basket and Im jsut not sure it wont turn into a bidding war. Prob beter to act fast before like Tudcker, Schwarber, Bichette are off ht eboard and teams looking to add start running out of options.

I would like to see us act with haste and get things locked down, but that often isn't in the hands of a single GM.

[drewski6]

3 minutes ago, Hitch said:

I would like to see us act with haste and get things locked down, but that often isn't in the hands of a single GM.

Agreed, I was thinking that and dont know why it didnt make it into my post. The #1 reason why it would be hard to act on Alonso is because his agent is going to make you pay up if you want him now as theres no reason for Alonso or his agent to "settle" at this point in time.  So to ink him right now, you prob have to go that extra year and/or that extra couple mil/year 

[notin]

1 hour ago, drewski6 said:

New England has about 15m people, most of which live in Red sox territory.  The greater NY area is 20m, but the largest burough is Queens, which is mets territory.

Toronto has 3m people, double it if you include the suburbs. But baseball is far from as popular in toronto as it is in new england. Im sure most of canada roots for toronto and that helps

The cubs dominate the north side of the chicago, and granted thats where the high income fans are which helps, but they are still splitting half the city.

LA is big and I get that, and even with the Angels and really even the padres cutting into it, its still a huge market.  Keep in mind that LA is the most transient city on the planet though, and if youve been too la (you prob have) youd prob know that practically nobody in la is from la. THey are transplants, but most of them have adopted the dodgers , sure

Yes, my post did have some imperfections (e.g. my use of the word market vs population / geographical area) but my point is that Boston is a major US city, and the red sox get it all to themselves.  Unlike most major cities, which are carved up among teams. And the red sox not only get boston to themsleves, but most of new england as well.  Granted dudes from maine arent particularly likely to come to fenway often

But my point is that we shouldnt be operating from a financial disadvantage.  I like MVPs point that they need to get back to top 5, or just outside of it, or we just arent seriously competing.  ANd I understnad dont spend money to spend money, you have to have holes to justify spending money...But we do.

We'll see.

As a longtime resident of Chicago, I can tell you fandom is most definteLily not split 50/50 between the two teams.  More like 80/20 or 90/10 in favor of the Cubs.  Even when the Cubs struggle.  New York might not be as drastic, but the area is definitely pro-Yankee.  And New England isnt all Sox fans.  Most of CT is Yankee country, as is Vermont, where you can catch Yankee broadcasts but not Sox broadcasts.
 

Boston really isnt a large city.   25th largest city (2025 data).  11th largest metro area (2023 data). All of the larger metro areas also have teams.  Some (notably Miami) don’t seriously invest.  But most do, at least periodically.  

[notin]

17 minutes ago, 5GoldGlovesOF,75 said:

I like the contrasts you describe with other MLB regions. Lived in New England all my life and while MLB isn't as popular as it once was -- anywhere -- baseball still thrives because growing up, everyone can play it, and still can as adults (in some derivative: softball, old-timers leagues etc)... of course, oldsters still play hoop or soccer, but contact sports take a toll sooner on flesh and bone.

As an area, the only big city north of NYC in the U.S. is Boston. Because of that, I've always considered New England more pastoral so maybe with more interest in a summer outdoor pastime (I know that's crap, because there are plenty of urban areas, including ones where I taught, that have little interest in baseball). 

The Red Sox are still very popular and exclusive to 5 or 6 states, so definitely worth investing in as a product for their owners. The Sox even have fans who type junk about them online 365 days a year...

The Sox are exclusive in 3 states - Maine, RI, and NH.  They dominate broadcasting in Eastern and Central Mass, but as you go deeper into WMass, the Yankee folks start to emerge from their subterranean lairs..

[drewski6]

26 minutes ago, Hitch said:

I sometimes wonder if the age of our posters is significant in this mindset. I'm pretty sure I'm one of the youngest on the site outside of Thunder (and I'm still middle aged) and so I'm always thinking 5/6 years in advance. But I get it if some of the older guys are life F- that, I want success now when I can enjoy it.

Im 41, which may come as a surprise because I was on BDC over 15 years ago

[Hitch]

3 minutes ago, drewski6 said:

Im 41, which may come as a surprise because I was on BDC over 15 years ago

Oh, you've got me by 5 years you young scoundrel. 

[drewski6]

5 minutes ago, notin said:

As a longtime resident of Chicago, I can tell you fandom is most definteLily not split 50/50 between the two teams.  More like 80/20 or 90/10 in favor of the Cubs.  Even when the Cubs struggle.  New York might not be as drastic, but the area is definitely pro-Yankee.  And New England isnt all Sox fans.  Most of CT is Yankee country, as is Vermont, where you can catch Yankee broadcasts but not Sox broadcasts.
 

Boston really isnt a large city.   25th largest city (2025 data).  11th largest metro area (2023 data). All of the larger metro areas also have teams.  Some (notably Miami) don’t seriously invest.  But most do, at least periodically.  

The Red sox were passed last year by the cubs and now are 4th in revenue. But theyll prob climb back to third next year if they are good.  They own their TV broadcaster (remember the year everyone was cutting back because their TV broadcast partner folded and like 20 teams lost big dollars from TV contracts) - it didnt effect the Red sox , but they saw opportunity and pulled back because so many otehr teams were.  And thats when like the yanks/mets/dodgers really put themselves ahead.  But like the Rangers. Coming off the WS started trying to be super careful w payroll. But they had an excuse, their TV revenue went into jeopardy. That year was the worst becuase the other teams had a reason to dial back and we just did because ..... I dont know

There is simply no excuse to be okay with being outside of the top 6

[notin]

4 minutes ago, drewski6 said:

The Red sox were passed last year by the cubs and now are 4th in revenue. But theyll prob climb back to third next year if they are good.  They own their TV broadcaster (remember the year everyone was cutting back because their TV broadcast partner folded and like 20 teams lost big dollars from TV contracts) - it didnt effect the Red sox , but they saw opportunity and pulled back because so many otehr teams were.  And thats when like the yanks/mets/dodgers really put themselves ahead.  But like the Rangers. Coming off the WS started trying to be super careful w payroll. But they had an excuse, their TV revenue went into jeopardy. That year was the worst becuase the other teams had a reason to dial back and we just did because ..... I dont know

There is simply no excuse to be okay with being outside of the top 6

The best reason is getting too many big contracts that age badly simultaneously…

[drewski6]

29 minutes ago, notin said:

The best reason is getting too many big contracts that age badly simultaneously…

2 things

1. In that light arent we GLAD that Crochets contract isnt for 2 more years , its for more? Doesnt this illustrate that shorter isnt always better?  The best contracts are the ones you lock in right before they scale up. Thats something I try to identify.

2. When are you going to give your fans what they want.

(I dont know how, I responded to the wrong comment, meant to reply to your comment about how because we are a fw years into coles contract, skubal gonna be scary)

[drewski6]

cmon take the bait, take the bait

[notin]

On 11/20/2025 at 12:15 PM, drewski6 said:

Thats a lot of eggs in the Alonso basket and Im jsut not sure it wont turn into a bidding war. Prob beter to act fast before like Tudcker, Schwarber, Bichette are off ht eboard and teams looking to add start running out of options.

Act fast?  That’s not reality. Just something fans say when they h get impatient.  Players don’t hire agents so everyone can be impulsive.

Alonso and Schwarber will  sign when Alonso and Schwarber are ready…

 

 

 

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

26 minutes ago, notin said:

Act fast?  That’s not reality. Just something fans say when they h get impatient.  Players don’t hire agents so everyone can be impulsive.

Alonso and Schwarber will  sign when Alonso and Schwarber are ready…

Free agency will have the usual Domino's effect.

They'll all wait until one guy sets the market by getting overpaid to sign -- then the rest will order pizza.

[moonslav59]

On 11/20/2025 at 12:00 PM, Hitch said:

2015 - 3rd highest payroll

2016 - 3rd

2017 - 3rd

2018 - 1st

2019 - 1st

2020 - 3rd

2021 - 3rd

2022 - 6th

2023 - 13th

2024 - 12th

2025 - 11th

 

So I'll ask the question again, do you think it's more likely that an ownership group that was routinely in the top 3 payroll (and sometimes the highest spender), that brought unprecedented success to this fanbase, decided 3 years ago that they no longer wish to compete and instead want to sit around trying to swindle its fanbase with shams, or, that they believed the roster was in bad shape, with contracts that were hurting them, and needed to get itself back on track before they outlaid big sums again?

Because I know which seems most likely to me. 

If they don't go big this summer, they will deserve a hammering. Other than making stupid mistakes and comments/promises, I don't think they deserve all the ire they get on times.

I think they decided after the Sale & Nate, which was 2019, that they were not going to spend for a while. Maybe they convinced themselves they could still stay "competitive enough," but once they dumped Betts and half-Price, they must have know no rings were forthcoming.

The 2021 season gave them cover. It was hard to argue we were no longer competitive, and they ran with that while making some strategic moderate "buys" just when the fanbase seemed about to revolt.

If you look at the Sox spending trends under JH, you sill see several downturns in spending, but most did not last long. We seemed to be cycling our spending when ring seasons seemed more probable. 2013 was an outlier, as we cut spending and still won. 2019 was somewhat of an illusion as spending went up (Sale + nate deals) but we failed to return Kimbrel and Kelly and the roster was worse.

When you factor in inflation we have had a very long downturn and are still way behind our 2019 budget total. The actual total budget is higher than 2015, and the end of year budget in 2025  was slightly higher than 2016 and 2017, but that is no defense for JH.

Here are the years the Sox went over the lux tax line:

2004, 2005, 2006, 2007

under for 2 years

2010 & 2011

under for 3 years

2015 & 2016

under for 1

2018 & 2019

under for 2

2022 (over by 1.2 M- a mistake?)

under for 2

2025 (not over by much)

This shows a shift in "trends."

If we go over in 2025, it will be the first time back-to-back in 6 years.

There have been some ups and downs along these last 6 years- most significant from 2021 to 2022 (Story signing) and from 2024 to 2025 (several signings and the Devers extension.)

I know I have used the phrase "make or break" for JH a few times, in recent winters, and the big jump in spending last winter was an encouraging sign, but now that Devers was dumped and Bregman & Gio opted out, we are back in that familiar place again- wondering what JH will do.

The long extensions to young stars over the past 2+ seasons is nice, but we need to do better than last winter. To me, it's time for at least one large and long contract, and I'm not talking Trevor Story or Yoshida levels. We can't stop there. While one L & L deal is essential, we need to find a way to add at least 2 more significant players- somehow/someway.

The Sox are on the clock.

[moonslav59]

On 11/20/2025 at 12:35 PM, notin said:

The Sox are exclusive in 3 states - Maine, RI, and NH.  They dominate broadcasting in Eastern and Central Mass, but as you go deeper into WMass, the Yankee folks start to emerge from their subterranean lairs..

CT has some Sox lairs, too.

[moonslav59]

On 11/20/2025 at 12:41 PM, drewski6 said:

There is simply no excuse to be okay with being outside of the top 6

While I agree, there may be some maniac spender in a smaller market size than us, so it's not always such a clear delineation.

I will agree that top 6 seems reasonable, as there was a significant drop from #5 TOR ($255M) and #6 HOU ($232M,) and the 7 through 12 teams were all between #12 $203M (BOS) and  #7 TEX at $226M. We're talking $23M to go from 12 to 7. The #6 team (HOU) is saying they want to get under the tax line, and TEX is #7, so it seems doable to get to #6, if no other teams goes absolutely nutty.

The drop from 4 to 5 was about $37M, so I doubt we jump to #4 anytime soon.

We can spend more has been the mantra here for years. No doubt we can.

 

[notin]

8 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

CT has some Sox lairs, too.

But it’s not exclusive.  That was the point…

[notin]

On 11/20/2025 at 1:15 PM, drewski6 said:

2 things

1. In that light arent we GLAD that Crochets contract isnt for 2 more years , its for more? Doesnt this illustrate that shorter isnt always better?  The best contracts are the ones you lock in right before they scale up. Thats something I try to identify.

2. When are you going to give your fans what they want.

(I dont know how, I responded to the wrong comment, meant to reply to your comment about how because we are a fw years into coles contract, skubal gonna be scary)

Crochet signed his deal at 25.  How many 25yo free agents can you name?  Most are on the other side of 30, with careers that will start to wind down shortly.  Not remotely the same.  My views on free agency are not related to money…

 

[moonslav59]

8 minutes ago, notin said:

But it’s not exclusive.  That was the point…

Indeed. Yankees fans in MA, Sox fans in CT and NY and even TEXAS!

Hell, there might be more NYY+BOS fans in Tampa than Rays fans.

[moonslav59]

2 minutes ago, notin said:

Crochet signed his deal at 25.  How many 25yo free agents can you name?  Most are on the other side of 30, with careers that will start to wind down shortly.  Not remotely the same.  My views on free agency are not related to money…

 

Who could be our next Crochet?

I'd accept a 26, 27 or even 28 year old in a trade and extension.

Peralta turns 30 in June and has 1 year left- not two like Crochet had.

Ryan turns 30 in June, but he has 2 years left.

Lodolo turns 28 before the season and has 2 years.

Skubal just turned 29 and 1 year.

None of these guys come very close to the Crochet situation.

Skenes isn't even 24 and is pre arb (4 years to go) but PIT is not shopping him,

HOU is not shopping 28 year old Hunter Brown (3 arbs to go)

Ragans turns 28 soon. He has 3 years left. 

Hunter Greene is just 26 and is locked up for 3 years with options. I just don't see CIN trading him, unless we blow them away.

Kirby turns 28 and Gore 27  in FEB,  Bibee turns 27 in March. Woo turns 26 in Jan.

None of these guys will be easy to pry from their current teams. Is it worth making a massive overkill offer to get one?

[moonslav59]

Best ERA- of younger pitchers 2024-2025 (150+ IP)

46 Skenes

63 Greene

64 Yamamoto

72 Crochet

73 H Brown

74 Abbott

76 Ragans & T Myers

77 Woo & Schwell.

83 Olson

87 Priester

88 Gil

90 L Ortiz & G Williams

91 Roupp

93 Bello

94 Kirby & Burke

95 J Soriano

96 Bibee

97 Gore

99 Bellozo

 

[notin]

28 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

Indeed. Yankees fans in MA, Sox fans in CT and NY and even TEXAS!

Hell, there might be more NYY+BOS fans in Tampa than Rays fans.

It’s not just about fans, but broadcasting, too.

It was postulated at one point, Vermont was Sox country.  I’ve been to Burlington dozens of times over the years - Thats Yankee territory.  Sure there probably a few dozen Sox fans, but they can’t watch games.  Yankee games on the other hand are readily available. And this goes back to WINS days, long before the ubiquitous YES Network…

[Old Red]

13 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

Who could be our next Crochet?

I'd accept a 26, 27 or even 28 year old in a trade and extension.

Peralta turns 30 in June and has 1 year left- not two like Crochet had.

Ryan turns 30 in June, but he has 2 years left.

Lodolo turns 28 before the season and has 2 years.

Skubal just turned 29 and 1 year.

None of these guys come very close to the Crochet situation.

Skenes isn't even 24 and is pre arb (4 years to go) but PIT is not shopping him,

HOU is not shopping 28 year old Hunter Brown (3 arbs to go)

Ragans turns 28 soon. He has 3 years left. 

Hunter Greene is just 26 and is locked up for 3 years with options. I just don't see CIN trading him, unless we blow them away.

Kirby turns 28 and Gore 27  in FEB,  Bibee turns 27 in March. Woo turns 26 in Jan.

None of these guys will be easy to pry from their current teams. Is it worth making a massive overkill offer to get one?

Who’s to say it would be a massive overkill? Your Bible BTV?🤭 I could care less if it was a SO Called overkill, or not and that includes involving Anthony if it made the Red Sox better. 
 

[notin]

45 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

Who could be our next Crochet?

I'd accept a 26, 27 or even 28 year old in a trade and extension.

Peralta turns 30 in June and has 1 year left- not two like Crochet had.

Ryan turns 30 in June, but he has 2 years left.

Lodolo turns 28 before the season and has 2 years.

Skubal just turned 29 and 1 year.

None of these guys come very close to the Crochet situation.

Skenes isn't even 24 and is pre arb (4 years to go) but PIT is not shopping him,

HOU is not shopping 28 year old Hunter Brown (3 arbs to go)

Ragans turns 28 soon. He has 3 years left. 

Hunter Greene is just 26 and is locked up for 3 years with options. I just don't see CIN trading him, unless we blow them away.

Kirby turns 28 and Gore 27  in FEB,  Bibee turns 27 in March. Woo turns 26 in Jan.

None of these guys will be easy to pry from their current teams. Is it worth making a massive overkill offer to get one?

Next Crochet?  What happened to the first one?

This search for a #2 starter leaves me asking this.  What would you say to a pitcher that was worth 1.1 fWAR in a measly 14IP.  For some perspective, Brayan Bello was worth 1.9 fWAR in 166 IP.

This is starting to look like a bad 1980s RomCom.  Everyone wants the Sox to pony up and sign Leah Thompson.  And yet Mary Elizabeth Mastriantonio is. RIGHT THERE pitching deciding games in the postseason …

[notin]

28 minutes ago, Old Red said:

Who’s to say it would be a massive overkill? Your Bible BTV?🤭 I could care less if it was a SO Called overkill, or not and that includes involving Anthony if it made the Red Sox better. 
 

Dealing Anthony would be massive.  But sometimes that is the right answer.  
 

If not for his contract, I wonder if dealing Anthony for Nick Kurtz makes sense.  Gives the Sox a slugging  1b and eliminates their OF depth issue.  Plus it helps Oakland’s weak OF and eliminates their 1b logjam…

[Randy Red Sox]

On 11/19/2025 at 6:32 PM, JoeBrady said:

She's straight, hence the accusation of gay-baiting.  I never heard of the term before today, and I didn't write the articles.

who care less if she is gay or not?? 

[Randy Red Sox]

On 11/20/2025 at 10:06 AM, notin said:

The problem with signing Alonso and Bregman isn’t the money; it’s the years.

Alonso wants 7 years, but that’s not very likely.  But 6 is possible, and Bregman is looking at 5-6 years himself.

This would make for a great lineup in 2026 and 2027 and maybe even 2028.  But in 2030, Alonso is 35 years old and Bregman is 36.  And these two are still combining for some $60mill on the roster for two aging and very likely declining corner infielders that are untradable, potentially unproductive, and hogging up too much budget to replace.  How good will the Sox be then?

 

so your solution is what?? 

[Old Red]

6 minutes ago, Randy Red Sox said:

so your solution is what?? 

Mookie, and Raffy!🤔