Boston Red Sox 2026 Win Total

[FredLynn]

17 hours ago, JoeBrady said:

So are you going to be the only one in here to not post a win total?

I don't mind letting everyone know how many wins the FLOPS will get this year. 90 wins, no playoffs. 

[notin]

4 minutes ago, FredLynn said:

I don't mind letting everyone know how many wins the FLOPS will get this year. 90 wins, no playoffs. 

You think they win 90 and miss the playoffs?

I want that wager.  Now! 

[FredLynn]

9 minutes ago, notin said:

You think they win 90 and miss the playoffs?

I want that wager.  Now! 

I don't want to take advantage of anyone here by betting with them on a fact I already know is true.

[moonslav59]

1 hour ago, 5GoldGlovesOF,75 said:

Home runs don't mean more wins in the regular season.

As a teen it was so fun watching the 1977 Red Sox blasting HRs all summer. Boston led the majors with 213 as the only team to hit over 200. Five guys hit at least 26 homers (more than team leader Story in '25), including AL champ Rice, Scott, Hobson, Yaz and FIsk. They didn't make the playoffs.

Flash forward 30 years later to the most underrated world champions in Red Sox history: the '07 SOX only hit 166 home runs. The MLB average was 165; 17 clubs went yard more than Boston. Ortiz cranked 35, but Mike Lowell and Manny only had 21 and 20. Other Sox legends: Varitek 17, Youkilis 16, Pedroia 8, Cora 3, Kevin Cash 0.

The '07 Red Sox also had the best pitching staff in the AL, leading in ERA and WHIP, and the best Defensive Efficiency with the lowest Runs Against Per Game. 

If the '26ers can replicate those standings, it's going to be ok. Btw: the '07 Sox also launched 18 more home runs in the postseason when they went 11-3.

That '77 team did finish 3rd in OBP- just .001 from 2nd and .003 from first.

Maybe it was the 18th place in ERA, that year. (However, just 8th in ERA-)

[Michigan Adam2]

I could see this as a year where they have 8 guys hit 15, 6 of them hit 20, 3 hit 25, and 1 hit 30. With top of the league pitching. And a super D I think it's enough IF...big IF...they get on base enough. 

[moonslav59]

12 minutes ago, Michigan Adam2 said:

I could see this as a year where they have 8 guys hit 15, 6 of them hit 20, 3 hit 25, and 1 hit 30. With top of the league pitching. And a super D I think it's enough IF...big IF...they get on base enough. 

So, that might look like...

30 Abreu

25 Story, Contreras, Anthony

20 Duran, Narvaez

15 Durbin, Casas?

[notin]

55 minutes ago, FredLynn said:

I don't want to take advantage of anyone here by betting with them on a fact I already know is true.

And historic.  That would mean three non-division winning teams have 91 wins or more.  That would be an MLB first…

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

7 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

So, that might look like...

30 Abreu

25 Story, Contreras, Anthony

20 Duran, Narvaez

15 Durbin, Casas?

An increase in home runs from guys with already bad K-rates (from trying to hit homers on sweepers that land in the dirt of the opposite batter's box) could also result in lower team OBP this year.

Except, hopefuly, for Durbin -- our Great Might Hope.

[moonslav59]

5 minutes ago, 5GoldGlovesOF,75 said:

An increase in home runs from guys with already bad K-rates (from trying to hit homers on sweepers that land in the dirt of the opposite batter's box) could also result in lower team OBP this year.

Except, hopefuly, for Durbin -- our Great Might Hope.

Abreu already averages about 28 HRs per 650. It's all about getting to 650 without sucking vs lefties for him.

Story hit 25 in 2025. That's not a big stretch. (650+ PAs, again might be.)

Contreras should hit 25 with help from Fenway.

Anthony is hard to project. He has added 15 lbs of muscle.

Duran & Narvaez hitting 20 might be the hardest ones. Maybe Durbin & Casas hit 20, and Narvaez and Duran 15.

[Hugh2]

18 hours ago, JoeBrady said:

So are you going to be the only one in here to not post a win total?

Posting a win total isn’t mandatory and Fred did vote in the poll.  So let’s give him credit here.

although he did vote less than 88 wins and then say they’d win 90 so I think he is a little indecisive 

[moonslav59]

18 minutes ago, notin said:

And historic.  That would mean three non-division winning teams have 91 wins or more.  That would be an MLB first…

So much for MLB parity.

Who are these 3 non division winning teams with 91+ wins?

I assume 2 come from the ALE (TOR/NYY/BAL). Who else? HOU/SEA from the West? DET/CLE from the Central? Texas?

[Hugh2]

1 hour ago, notin said:

You think they win 90 and miss the playoffs?

I want that wager.  Now! 

Has a 90 win team ever missed the playoffs? Maybe in the pre wildcard era.  Admittedly I didn’t go back very far after looking over the last few years.  I determined it abused and not worth exploring further 

[moonslav59]

3 minutes ago, Hugh2 said:

Posting a win total isn’t mandatory and Fred did vote in the poll.  So let’s give him credit here.

although he did vote less than 88 wins and then say they’d win 90 so I think he is a little indecisive 

You mean like saying we need an .820 bat, then moving the goal posts to .780?

[Hugh2]

26 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

You mean like saying we need an .820 bat, then moving the goal posts to .780?

Not that I agree with Fred, but I think the spirit of that argument is unchanged.  The Sox need to hit.

[moonslav59]

5 minutes ago, Hugh2 said:

Has a 90 win team ever missed the playoffs? Maybe in the pre wildcard era.  Admittedly I didn’t go back very far after looking over the last few years.  I determined it abused and not worth exploring further 

Pre-wildcard, yes- often. I don't think it ever has happened, except when it was just one wildcard team and the play-in games.

In 1995, the first full season of 1 wild card team, the Yanks were the WC team with 79 wins. A 78 win team missed out. In the NL, a 76 win team missed.

1996: AL- two 85 win teams missed/ NL an 88 win team.

1997: AL- 84 win team/ NL- 88 win

1998: AL-85/ NL 89 (close)

1999: AL-87/NL 96 (Cincy) YES

2000: AL- 90 (CLE)/ NL 86 YES

2001: AL- 85/NL 90 (SFG) YES

2002: AL- 93 (TOR)/NL 92 (LAD) YES & YES

2003: AL- 93 (SEA)/ NL 87 YES

2004: AL 91 (OAK)/ NL 91 (SFG) YES & YES

2005: AL 93 (CLE)/ NL 88 YES

2006: AL- 90 (CWS)/NL 85 YES (8 straight years but never 2 teams from same league)

2007: AL 88/ NL 88

2008: AL 88/NL 89

2009: AL 87/ NL 87

2010: AL 88/NL 90 (SDP) YES

2011: AL- 90 (BOS)/ NL 89 YES

2012 was the start of the play-in game, so before that there never was 2 teams with 90 or more wins from the same league miss out on the playoffs.

2012: AL 90 (TBR)/NL 86 YES

2013: AL 91 (TEX)/ NL 86

2014: AL 87/NL 82 (Wow)

2015: AL 85/ NL 84

2016: AL 86/NL 86

2017: AL 80 (WOW!) NL 86

2018: AL 90 (TBR)/ NL 88 YES

2019: AL: 93 (CLE)/ NL86 YES

2021: AL 91(TOR) & 90 (SEA)/ NL 82 YES (two teams from the AL)

9 seasons of the playin game: once 2 teams from the same league missed with 90+ wins. Never 3 teams.

2022 was the start of the 4 wild card teams.

2022: AL 83/ NL 86

2023: AL 82/NL 82

2024: AL 82/ NL 83

2025: AL 82/NL83

In the 4 years of the current format, the last team that made the playoffs had these win totals:

2025: AL: 87/NL 83

2024: AL 85/NL 89

2023: AL 88/ NL 83

2022: AL 83/ NL 86

Even at 88 wins, it seems unlikely we'd miss the playoffs, according to the 4 year record. No 88 win team ever missed out in these 4 years.

 

[moonslav59]

18 minutes ago, Hugh2 said:

Not that I agree with Fred, but I think the spirit of that argument is unchanged.  The Sox need to hit.

That is very likely- at least hit better than expected- or score runs more than expected.

I guess it's possible our pitching and defense do even better than the lofty expectations, but hitting seems like the easiest way to insure we make the playoffs. Agreed.

I do agree that we need one more big bat. That is our biggest hole in the roster, but many teams have a big hole or two or more.

[JoeBrady]

51 minutes ago, Hugh2 said:

Has a 90 win team ever missed the playoffs? Maybe in the pre wildcard era.  Admittedly I didn’t go back very far after looking over the last few years.  I determined it abused and not worth exploring further 

Not under the new format, and not in either league.

[JoeBrady]

47 minutes ago, Hugh2 said:

Not that I agree with Fred, but I think the spirit of that argument is unchanged.  The Sox need to hit.

The spirit of the debate was that he said we wouldn't add another infielder.  When I offered a wager that we'd add a 2.5 WAR IF, he changed it to the near- impossible .820 infielder.

[Hugh2]

13 minutes ago, JoeBrady said:

Not under the new format, and not in either league.

So if they win 90 games they’re a playoff team?

but yeah, it makes sense under the old format, when only 4 teams made the playoffs that 90 win teams missed the playoffs

[Hugh2]

9 minutes ago, JoeBrady said:

The spirit of the debate was that he said we wouldn't add another infielder.  When I offered a wager that we'd add a 2.5 WAR IF, he changed it to the near- impossible .820 infielder.

Ahh ok, gotcha.  I can’t not miss everything 

[FredLynn]

3 hours ago, Hugh2 said:

Posting a win total isn’t mandatory and Fred did vote in the poll.  So let’s give him credit here.

although he did vote less than 88 wins and then say they’d win 90 so I think he is a little indecisive 

Let’s settle on 89 wins and still no playoffs 

[FredLynn]

2 hours ago, JoeBrady said:

The spirit of the debate was that he said we wouldn't add another infielder.  When I offered a wager that we'd add a 2.5 WAR IF, he changed it to the near- impossible .820 infielder.

No, the spirit of the debate was that I claimed we wouldn’t add another QUALITY IF (which we didn’t) and you proposed a wager that claimed we would add SOMEBODY-a sucker bet. I simply didn’t allow you to control the framework of the wager. 

[JoeBrady]

2 hours ago, Hugh2 said:

So if they win 90 games they’re a playoff team?

but yeah, it makes sense under the old format, when only 4 teams made the playoffs that 90 win teams missed the playoffs

90 wins should be a playoff team.  It's close, so no guarantee

[JoeBrady]

9 minutes ago, FredLynn said:

No, the spirit of the debate was that I claimed we wouldn’t add another QUALITY IF (which we didn’t) and you proposed a wager that claimed we would add SOMEBODY-a sucker bet. I simply didn’t allow you to control the framework of the wager. 

I claimed we wouldn’t add another QUALITY IF (which we didn’t)

• But we did.  We added the #10 3B from 2025.  If you want to insist on someone with an .820 OPS, go ahead.  But everyone else will recognize that a top-10 3B is a quality player.

and you proposed a wager that claimed we would add SOMEBODY

• But I didn't.  My bet was an offer of an infielder that either had a 2025 2.5 WAR, or someone predicted to have a 2026 2.5 WAR.

[Hugh2]

20 minutes ago, FredLynn said:

Let’s settle on 89 wins and still no playoffs 

If the Sox win 89 games they’re very likely to be a wild card team.

if you think they’re going to win 89-90 games why are you so dead set on them not making the playoffs?

[Hugh2]

13 minutes ago, JoeBrady said:

90 wins should be a playoff team.  It's close, so no guarantee

I’m not sure if a 90 win team has ever not made the playoffs in the wild card era?

[notin]

4 hours ago, Hugh2 said:

Has a 90 win team ever missed the playoffs? Maybe in the pre wildcard era.  Admittedly I didn’t go back very far after looking over the last few years.  I determined it abused and not worth exploring further 

In the pre-wild card era, eight 100 win teams missed the postseason, most recently the 1993 Giants.   With 3 wild cards in each league, never…

[Hugh2]

8 minutes ago, notin said:

In the pre-wild card era, eight 100 win teams missed the postseason, most recently the 1993 Giants.   With 3 wild cards in each league, never…

That’s what I thought.

so saying the Sox will win enough games to make the post season every year in the 3 WC era and NOT make the playoffs…..is certainly a hot take

[UtahSox]

6 hours ago, JoeBrady said:

There are the OBP/HR rankings for our 4 recent WS teams.  Small sample size and all, but the disparity is incredible.  We finished 1st in scoring in three of those seasons.

• 	OBP	HR
  2004	1	5
  2007	2	18
  2013	1	6
  2018	1	9

I just re-watched game two of the ALDS vs Rays. Sale gave up 5 runs in the 1st (happens sometimes) but the offense just kept firing. Scored 13 runs over the final eight innings. One of my favorite games of all time.

I couldn’t help but think of this year‘s lineup, and that situation I don’t like our chances.. going to be running on tight margins this year I’m afraid. As for the regular season, I think we’ll be fine, if we can just strike out less with runners and scoring position, we should score a lot more runs, but postseason that’s a different animal. 

[FredLynn]

4 hours ago, JoeBrady said:

I claimed we wouldn’t add another QUALITY IF (which we didn’t)

• But we did.  We added the #10 3B from 2025.  If you want to insist on someone with an .820 OPS, go ahead.  But everyone else will recognize that a top-10 3B is a quality player.

and you proposed a wager that claimed we would add SOMEBODY

• But I didn't.  My bet was an offer of an infielder that either had a 2025 2.5 WAR, or someone predicted to have a 2026 2.5 WAR.

Again-you tried to unilaterally set the parameters of the wager you proposed without my consent. Of course I didn’t buy that scam. Instead I made a counteroffer without your consent. Fairies fair, right?

Who is the “top 10 3rd baseman “ we signed and by what measure is he “top 10”? I don’t see such a player on the roster-and the truth is, we didn’t sign what we needed to sign to compete for a ring. 
Do you think the team as currently constructed is a serious competitor for a ring this year?